Are Today's Golf Courses Unfair to the Average Golfer?

[KDMullins]

Just move up a tee? That's pure genius! I don't know why nobody thought of that in 14 pages.

[Sean2]

Well, sometimes the appropriate tee isn't enough. As I said in a previous post I played a course from the middle tees (there were only three tee boxes) and two of the par 3's were over 220. I played a course yesterday from the middle tees and the shortest par three was 170. There was also a par 4 where the carry on your drive was 220, if you layed up you had a 200 yard plus approach shot. No way, for the most part, the average golfer can get to this hole in regulation. The finishing holes, from the middle tees, were 420 yards plus. If the average golfer drives it around 200 yards...well, you do the math.

[Bulle Rock Golf]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355676226' post='6076591']
Well, sometimes the appropriate tee isn't enough. As I said in a previous post I played a course from the middle tees (there were only three tee boxes) and two of the par 3's were over 220. I played a course yesterday from the middle tees and the shortest par three was 170. There was also a par 4 where the carry on your drive was 220, if you layed up you had a 200 yard plus approach shot. No way, for the most part, the average golfer can get to this hole in regulation. The finishing holes, from the middle tees, were 420 yards plus. If the average golfer drives it around 200 yards...well, you do the math.
[/quote]

Okay -- so thats 5? 6? holes that, if said average golfer makes a par or birdie, it usually makes their month (maybe season). The other 12/13 holes Im assuming are fairly playable - where bogey is a real possibility. Say said average golfer bogeys 10 of those holes, doubles 2 -- thats 14 over the other 6 figure on average 2 over so thats 12.
26 over.

Right around 100 which is where they should sit as an average golfer~

Courses have hard holes & easy holes. It evens out as long as you are on the appropriate set of tees.

It's not like every, single hole is completely unplayable.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355680198' post='6076807']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355676226' post='6076591']
Well, sometimes the appropriate tee isn't enough. As I said in a previous post I played a course from the middle tees (there were only three tee boxes) and two of the par 3's were over 220. I played a course yesterday from the middle tees and the shortest par three was 170. There was also a par 4 where the carry on your drive was 220, if you layed up you had a 200 yard plus approach shot. No way, for the most part, the average golfer can get to this hole in regulation. The finishing holes, from the middle tees, were 420 yards plus. If the average golfer drives it around 200 yards...well, you do the math.
[/quote]

Okay -- so thats 5? 6? holes that, if said average golfer makes a par or birdie, it usually makes their month (maybe season). The other 12/13 holes Im assuming are fairly playable - where bogey is a real possibility. Say said average golfer bogeys 10 of those holes, doubles 2 -- thats 14 over the other 6 figure on average 2 over so thats 12.
26 over.

Right around 100 which is where they should sit as an average golfer~

Courses have hard holes & easy holes. It evens out as long as you are on the appropriate set of tees.

It's not like every, single hole is completely unplayable.
[/quote]

True, but what would possess a designer to have a couple of 220 yard par 3's? Why have a few holes that are essentially unplayable? These aren't hard holes...these are holes where the average golfer has virtually no chance of making a par let alone a birdie. What's the point? You don't see holes like that on the PGA Tour.

[Bulle Rock Golf]

There's absolutely holes on Tour that they set up that have over par & close to bogey scoring averages in certain tournaments.

A lot of it too is Superintendents / Maintenance that set both the middle & back tees further back together. When in reality the designer (who they most assuredly have never met or spoken with) meant for some of the middle tees to be more sprinkled.

[Sean2]

I have a hunch though that most touring pros can get to most greens in regulation. I also think that most touring pros can reach most par threes with one shot...and they don't need a driver to do so.

[Bulle Rock Golf]

I didn't say they couldn't - just said there are holes on Tour that are set up specifically to be anti-scoring holes.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355681546' post='6076871']
I didn't say they couldn't - just said there are holes on Tour that are set up specifically to be anti-scoring holes.
[/quote]

Those are rare exceptions though Bulle, and the pros can still score on those holes: birdies can still be had, pars can still be made. But, you won't see a par three they can't reach, or a par four they can't get to in regulation. That's all I'm saying.

[Bulle Rock Golf]

That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)

[Sean2]

[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.

[SurfDuffer]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355606264' post='6073799']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355603300' post='6073623']
[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1355488805' post='6067259']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355450255' post='6065693']
I can't argue with that Pepper. However, the game needs more people. You say you understand business. Isn't business about growth, not decline? Less people playing golf is not a good thing for the golf industry as a whole: courses close, people lose jobs, fewer people purchasing equipment, including the equipment that maintains golf courses, not just the equipment we put in our bags, etc.
[/quote]That report comparing 1970 to today appears to show that growth is decreasing, based on the current population of today vs yesteryear. Yet, leaves speculation to the "why is it happening" to the reader with finger pointing at the PGA. During this time, number of courses grew.

Here's the question I'd love to have answered: How would we know if the number of golfers in the 70s wasn't OVER-sturated and it's only normalizing today? At that, looking at the numbers...

1970: 200M/25M=12.5%
2012: 300M/26M=8.6%

Was 1970 the peak of golfing? I'd love to see the answer to that.

At what point does supply (number of courses) outweigh demand (players to play them) and cause saturation of the market? Who's problem is that? What If today we've normalized at under 10% of the population with the time, money, and desire to play? Then the market is simply dictating what should happen to the businesses. Get lean, or close. They're businesses. They have risks to operation, especially when they're more service oriented and less product. I understand that people call the course "a product", but it's not in the strict sense of the term. It's a service. Services fail when money is tight.

We hear time and time again "If you don't like it, don't use it. Let market sort it out." I think that's what's going on. Let them close. No one "owes" a less used course a dime to stay in existance. They assumed the risk by opening.

--kC
[/quote]

But if you supply a good product/service you have a better chance of staying in business. Restaurants close all the time because of a combination of poor service and/or poor food. Provide an excellent product/service you have a much better chance of staying in business.
[/quote]

You are right about Restaurants closing, but your perception overlooks contributing factors. Restaurateur friends say fickle customers that, for the most part, lack loyalty and willingness to pay for quality; not to mention lack culinary or restaurant expertise are deterrents to success. Kinda of like the guy that loves boiler makers critiquing Glenmorangie 18. If consumers are going to critique, they need to know more about the subject than "me don't like" or lets try these other places that offer discount coupons. Same goes for golf courses and shafts. People complain about cost and difficulty of exotic shafts. Reasoning... because someone can't benefit from a $300 shaft, they think companies should make more $50 dollar easier to hit shafts.
[/quote]

I open, run (and sometimes close) restaurants for a living. I wish it were that simple....sometimes there are other factors involved, people are fickle. I have also seen great courses/clubs go out of business because of location. I know of a great Ross course that was private but closed because it was in a neighborhood that went the wrong direction. It is now public and struggling, sports like golf are somewhat fad-ish, I remember when I was young everyone I knew at least dabbled in tennis, now I know hardly anyone who plays regularly. Because of the cost golf will always be for those who have some money, it's not like basketball where you can essentially play for free. You certainly don't have to be rich to play where I am from, but it does take time, and a little to a lot of money, not everyone is a die hard addict like most on this site. If you don't really want to play, it is pretty easy not to, I think golf has lost a lot of those who just never really got hooked, I personally know several people like this, they have just found other ways to spend their time and money, things they can do more easily with their family or friends who may not be interested in golf.

As far as those percentages go, the population of the country has changed, think of all the "immigrants" that have come to the country since the 70's, I have to believe factors such as this have lowered the percentage some.

[Sean2]

[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355702504' post='6078175']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.
[/quote]

It was a course I played on the Cape a couple of years ago. I don't remember the name. The course I played yesterday the shortest par three was 173 and the longest 185 (from the middle tees). The older courses I play usually see a couple of par threes in the mid-130s to 140s and maybe one long one in the 160s 170s.

[SurfDuffer]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355705428' post='6078411']
[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355702504' post='6078175']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.
[/quote]

It was a course I played on the Cape a couple of years ago. I don't remember the name. The course I played yesterday the shortest par three was 173 and the longest 185 (from the middle tees). The older courses I play usually see a couple of par threes in the mid-130s to 140s and maybe one long one in the 160s 170s.
[/quote]

But what is the front yardage on those holes????? How many potential tee boxes on these holes??? How big are the greens???? You guys keep trying to keep the myth alive that courses are too difficult and lack options for average players. I'm not buying it. We had one guy post a picture of an easy par 3 claiming it was unfair now your claim of a course with par 3s from 173 to 185. Please name the course so we can research it.

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Desert Golf' timestamp='1355668362' post='6076105']
Wow....you guys are really overthinking this. Authoritarians vs Egalitarians and culture war?

I have over 100 golf courses to choose from within a 20 mile radius. I can choose to play wide open resort courses with ratings under 115 or difficult tracks like Classic Club (slope 75.8/ rating 144) or PGA West Stadium (slope 74.3/rating 146).

Unless you are a slow learner, it doesn't take long to figure out what suits your game.

Just pick courses that give you the most enjoyment and play from the correct set of tees.
[/quote]

Yes, playing from the correct tees helps.

But not everyone has the luxury of being able to choose from so many courses----and such a variety of them----within easy driving distance.

That's the point some of us are trying to make. That there needs to be a wider variety of playing experiences (and difficulty) available to people.

My other point is that people respond to these kinds of situation in characteristic ways.

Egalitarians generally argue that the circumstances should change to fit the needs of people.

Authoritarians generally argue that the people should change to fit the demands of the situation.

[Desert Golf]

[quote name='kellygreen' timestamp='1355749892' post='6080147']
[quote name='Desert Golf' timestamp='1355668362' post='6076105']
Wow....you guys are really overthinking this. Authoritarians vs Egalitarians and culture war?

I have over 100 golf courses to choose from within a 20 mile radius. I can choose to play wide open resort courses with ratings under 115 or difficult tracks like Classic Club (slope 75.8/ rating 144) or PGA West Stadium (slope 74.3/rating 146).

Unless you are a slow learner, it doesn't take long to figure out what suits your game.

Just pick courses that give you the most enjoyment and play from the correct set of tees.
[/quote]

Yes, playing from the correct tees helps.

But not everyone has the luxury of being able to choose from so many courses----and such a variety of them----within easy driving distance.

That's the point some of us are trying to make. That there needs to be a wider variety of playing experiences (and difficulty) available to people.

My other point is that people respond to these kinds of situation in characteristic ways.

Egalitarians generally argue that the circumstances should change to fit the needs of people.

Authoritarians generally argue that the people should change to fit the demands of the situation.
[/quote]

Fair enough, I understand your point. I'll just consider myself fortunate that I have a large inventory of courses to choose from. To be completely honest, I never had an interest in golf until I moved to the Coachella Valley in my mid 30's. I played with coworkers about 10 years ago to see what all of the fuss was about, and ended up getting the bug.

If I had moved to the beach, I'd probably be surfing on the weekends

[Sean2]

[quote name='dlygrisse' timestamp='1355704884' post='6078371']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355606264' post='6073799']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355603300' post='6073623']
[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1355488805' post='6067259']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355450255' post='6065693']
I can't argue with that Pepper. However, the game needs more people. You say you understand business. Isn't business about growth, not decline? Less people playing golf is not a good thing for the golf industry as a whole: courses close, people lose jobs, fewer people purchasing equipment, including the equipment that maintains golf courses, not just the equipment we put in our bags, etc.
[/quote]That report comparing 1970 to today appears to show that growth is decreasing, based on the current population of today vs yesteryear. Yet, leaves speculation to the "why is it happening" to the reader with finger pointing at the PGA. During this time, number of courses grew.

Here's the question I'd love to have answered: How would we know if the number of golfers in the 70s wasn't OVER-sturated and it's only normalizing today? At that, looking at the numbers...

1970: 200M/25M=12.5%
2012: 300M/26M=8.6%

Was 1970 the peak of golfing? I'd love to see the answer to that.

At what point does supply (number of courses) outweigh demand (players to play them) and cause saturation of the market? Who's problem is that? What If today we've normalized at under 10% of the population with the time, money, and desire to play? Then the market is simply dictating what should happen to the businesses. Get lean, or close. They're businesses. They have risks to operation, especially when they're more service oriented and less product. I understand that people call the course "a product", but it's not in the strict sense of the term. It's a service. Services fail when money is tight.

We hear time and time again "If you don't like it, don't use it. Let market sort it out." I think that's what's going on. Let them close. No one "owes" a less used course a dime to stay in existance. They assumed the risk by opening.

--kC
[/quote]

But if you supply a good product/service you have a better chance of staying in business. Restaurants close all the time because of a combination of poor service and/or poor food. Provide an excellent product/service you have a much better chance of staying in business.
[/quote]

You are right about Restaurants closing, but your perception overlooks contributing factors. Restaurateur friends say fickle customers that, for the most part, lack loyalty and willingness to pay for quality; not to mention lack culinary or restaurant expertise are deterrents to success. Kinda of like the guy that loves boiler makers critiquing Glenmorangie 18. If consumers are going to critique, they need to know more about the subject than "me don't like" or lets try these other places that offer discount coupons. Same goes for golf courses and shafts. People complain about cost and difficulty of exotic shafts. Reasoning... because someone can't benefit from a $300 shaft, they think companies should make more $50 dollar easier to hit shafts.
[/quote]

I open, run (and sometimes close) restaurants for a living. I wish it were that simple....sometimes there are other factors involved, people are fickle. I have also seen great courses/clubs go out of business because of location. I know of a great Ross course that was private but closed because it was in a neighborhood that went the wrong direction. It is now public and struggling, sports like golf are somewhat fad-ish, I remember when I was young everyone I knew at least dabbled in tennis, now I know hardly anyone who plays regularly. Because of the cost golf will always be for those who have some money, it's not like basketball where you can essentially play for free. You certainly don't have to be rich to play where I am from, but it does take time, and a little to a lot of money, not everyone is a die hard addict like most on this site. If you don't really want to play, it is pretty easy not to, I think golf has lost a lot of those who just never really got hooked, I personally know several people like this, they have just found other ways to spend their time and money, things they can do more easily with their family or friends who may not be interested in golf.

As far as those percentages go, the population of the country has changed, think of all the "immigrants" that have come to the country since the 70's, I have to believe factors such as this have lowered the percentage some.
[/quote]

Yes, you are correct, there are other factors as well. But, with our president being an avid golfer, maybe that will change. :-)

[Sean2]

[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355747184' post='6080083']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355705428' post='6078411']
[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355702504' post='6078175']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.
[/quote]

It was a course I played on the Cape a couple of years ago. I don't remember the name. The course I played yesterday the shortest par three was 173 and the longest 185 (from the middle tees). The older courses I play usually see a couple of par threes in the mid-130s to 140s and maybe one long one in the 160s 170s.
[/quote]

But what is the front yardage on those holes????? How many potential tee boxes on these holes??? How big are the greens???? You guys keep trying to keep the myth alive that courses are too difficult and lack options for average players. I'm not buying it. We had one guy post a picture of an easy par 3 claiming it was unfair now your claim of a course with par 3s from 173 to 185. Please name the course so we can research it.
[/quote]
I didn't take exact measurements. Three tee boxes. I claim? Why would I lie? Here is link to the scorecard: [url="http://www.poquoybrook.com/course-information/course-tour"]http://www.poquoybro...ion/course-tour[/url]

16 and 17 are 426 and 428 yards from the white tees. Very, very long par 4's for the average golfer. I'm sure they aren't hitting mid-irons to these greens.

[Imp]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355705428' post='6078411']
[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355702504' post='6078175']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.
[/quote]

It was a course I played on the Cape a couple of years ago. I don't remember the name. The course I played yesterday the shortest par three was 173 and the longest 185 (from the middle tees). The older courses I play usually see a couple of par threes in the mid-130s to 140s and maybe one long one in the 160s 170s.
[/quote]I went through a couple of my cards from the Cape. Dennis Highlands, 17th, 219 from the Blues.
Most others I played are around 210 or less.

--kC

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355613725' post='6074235']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355607893' post='6073903']
When people feel little, possibly put upon or victims, they label people that disagree with their position or feelings. Sad reflection.
[/quote]

Indeed, and we've had lots of labeling: whiners, lazy, quitters, just to name a few.
[/quote]

Whiner, lazy, quitters are behaviors - NOT beliefs.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355759726' post='6080651']
[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355747184' post='6080083']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355705428' post='6078411']
[quote name='SurfDuffer' timestamp='1355702504' post='6078175']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355700431' post='6078045']
[quote name='Bulle Rock Golf' timestamp='1355682154' post='6076905']
That's why they are Pros =] and I know you have heard countless times "Par on that hole is like gaining a stroke on the field"

The amateur golfer can still score on a 220 yard par 3 - just exponentially more infrequently; chances are if every par 3 is set up 200+ yards its the Superintendent/Maintenance not the designer (although in some cases it is)
[/quote]

Ha ha! Yes, that is why they are pros. :-)
It could be the superintendent or maintenance, but someone had to put that tee box there originally.
[/quote]

I haven't seen these courses that lack tees for average people. Where are these courses you guys keep talking about? If there is a 200+ tee box there is also one at 175 or 150 on even the most difficult courses I've seen. My home course has two par 3s that can play as long as 235 if you go to the back of the back boxes but on each of those holes there are also boxes that play 130. Members typically are playing these holes from 150 to 175 yards.
[/quote]

It was a course I played on the Cape a couple of years ago. I don't remember the name. The course I played yesterday the shortest par three was 173 and the longest 185 (from the middle tees). The older courses I play usually see a couple of par threes in the mid-130s to 140s and maybe one long one in the 160s 170s.
[/quote]

But what is the front yardage on those holes????? How many potential tee boxes on these holes??? How big are the greens???? You guys keep trying to keep the myth alive that courses are too difficult and lack options for average players. I'm not buying it. We had one guy post a picture of an easy par 3 claiming it was unfair now your claim of a course with par 3s from 173 to 185. Please name the course so we can research it.
[/quote]
I didn't take exact measurements. Three tee boxes. I claim? Why would I lie? Here is link to the scorecard: [url="http://www.poquoybrook.com/course-information/course-tour"]http://www.poquoybro...ion/course-tour[/url]

16 and 17 are 426 and 428 yards from the white tees. Very, very long par 4's for the average golfer. I'm sure they aren't hitting mid-irons to these greens.
[/quote]

That course is easy from rating and slope perspective. Course, for a 25-40 handi and or 75yr old like my FIL, who can't carry 150yds, then yep, it's too difficult; reason he goes to easier - shorter, near executive courses designed for his ability. By the way, that course by design of "3" tee's is more old style, much like the rating and yardage of 6200yd White tees.

[b]Blue Tees[/b] - Rating 73.5, Slope 126
[b]White Tees[/b] - Rating 70.8, Slope 122
[b]Red Tees[/b] - Rating 73.1, Slope 121

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355765118' post='6081035']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355613725' post='6074235']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355607893' post='6073903']
When people feel little, possibly put upon or victims, they label people that disagree with their position or feelings. Sad reflection.
[/quote]

Indeed, and we've had lots of labeling: whiners, lazy, quitters, just to name a few.
[/quote]

Whiner, lazy, quitters are behaviors - NOT beliefs.
[/quote]

Actually [i]they are labels....generally resorted to in an effort to shame someone, and force them to behave in ways that meets with the approval of the person assigning that label.[/i]

Behaviors are actions: I can [i]whine[/i]. I can [i]rest,[/i] [i]sleep[/i], or ignore my work. I can [i]quit doing [/i]whatever activity I'm doing or supposed to be doing.

Behaviors are things that are done.

Labels are things that the[i][b] person assigning them has decided are PERSONALITY TRAITS[/b][/i]....and is therefore (covertly) making a value judgement about that person's character.

So saying that someone is a "whiner", that they are "lazy" or that they are a "quitter" is (in reality) a character attack upon that person, and an effort to hold them up as something worthy of contempt or derision.

Not a neutral observation about behavior.

[Pepperturbo]

@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355767685' post='6081261']
@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.
[/quote]

1. I never agreed to stop posting to you (I just don't find you that annoying). You insisted that you were going to ignore mine.

2. Your training to the contrary, my post to you is factually correct. If you won't accept a psychologic defense of it...then perhaps you'll accept a linguistic/grammatical one.

Behaviors are ACTIONS...therefore they are VERBS.

Labels and value judgements are nouns and adjectives.

So, wrong part of speech, my friend.

3. You don't need to change a behavior unless it is "wrong" in the eyes of someone who has power over the indivdiual in question....or unless they are maladaptive in some fashion.

Feel free to ignore my posts. I did this for the benefit of everyone else on this thread...not because I expected any reply (never mind any approval) from you.

Enjoy your day.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355767685' post='6081261']
@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.
[/quote]

Pepper, I thought you worked in business? By the way, Kelly makes some compelling and valid points. No need to ignore him simply because you disagree. That in itself is a "big tell".

This I find especially true:

[i]Labels are things that the[i][b] person assigning them has decided are PERSONALITY TRAITS[/b][/i]....and is therefore (covertly) making a value judgement about that person's character.

So saying that someone is a "whiner", that they are "lazy" or that they are a "quitter" is (in reality) a character attack upon that person, and an effort to hold them up as something worthy of contempt or derision. [/i]

With regards to our average golfer who doesn't have time to practice, or would rather play 18 holes than practice simply because it's either one or the other, making those kinds of value judgments is not only high-handed, but a bit short-sighted.

[mdgboxx]

Perhaps this could shed a light on this topic:


[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i_3G8_VNfPw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i_3G8_VNfPw[/url]

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355768549' post='6081327']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355767685' post='6081261']
@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.
[/quote]

Pepper, I thought you worked in business? By the way, Kelly makes some compelling and valid points. No need to ignore him simply because you disagree. That in itself is a "big tell".

This I find especially true:

[i]Labels are things that the[i][b] person assigning them has decided are PERSONALITY TRAITS[/b][/i]....and is therefore (covertly) making a value judgement about that person's character.

So saying that someone is a "whiner", that they are "lazy" or that they are a "quitter" is (in reality) a character attack upon that person, and an effort to hold them up as something worthy of contempt or derision. [/i]

With regards to our average golfer who doesn't have time to practice, or would rather play 18 holes than practice simply because it's either one or the other, making those kinds of value judgments is not only high-handed, but a bit short-sighted.
[/quote]

Thanks for your opinion in the matter regarding someone else, but you're overstepping your bounds, plus influence. I have no issues with differing views either; it's how people present them. I get annoyed by immature internet people that not only argue by repeating themselves, but argue as if they are an authority, yet have no subject experience.

What's found on the internet is NOT all ways fact; Wikipedia is a perfect example. Topics were I use the word whining (verb) is meant generically, making it a personality behavior when it's repeatedly done, an action if done once.. Personalizing it distorts. I am CEO of a company I founded that, in part, handles functions for corporate America that include psychological testing, and I practiced many years back.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='mdgboxx' timestamp='1355769423' post='6081411']
Perhaps this could shed a light on this topic:

[/quote]

Thanks for that... a good laugh. Worlds worse seems like a nice guy, but playing from the tips???? Talk about the wrong tees. Only problem I noted was because the rules official called him on his drop error, he questioned what kind of man the official was. I hope it was just for video????

Can't imagine building courses for the worlds worse golfers.

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355768549' post='6081327']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355767685' post='6081261']
@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.
[/quote]

Pepper, I thought you worked in business? By the way, Kelly makes some compelling and valid points. No need to ignore him simply because you disagree. That in itself is a "big tell".

This I find especially true:

[i]Labels are things that the[i][b] person assigning them has decided are PERSONALITY TRAITS[/b][/i]....and is therefore (covertly) making a value judgement about that person's character.

So saying that someone is a "whiner", that they are "lazy" or that they are a "quitter" is (in reality) a character attack upon that person, and an effort to hold them up as something worthy of contempt or derision. [/i]

With regards to our average golfer who doesn't have time to practice, or would rather play 18 holes than practice simply because it's either one or the other, making those kinds of value judgments is not only high-handed, but a bit short-sighted.
[/quote]

It's a "big tell" alright.

In the psychoanalytic tradition its called "[i]countertransference[/i]".

[kellygreen]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355769526' post='6081419']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1355768549' post='6081327']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1355767685' post='6081261']
@kellygreen - You just solidified you're not capable of sticking to your word...big tell. I have 8 years of psychology ed and thirty year of related practice. They are measured behaviors that can be changed. Back to ignoring your posts.
[/quote]

Pepper, I thought you worked in business? By the way, Kelly makes some compelling and valid points. No need to ignore him simply because you disagree. That in itself is a "big tell".

This I find especially true:

[i]Labels are things that the[i][b] person assigning them has decided are PERSONALITY TRAITS[/b][/i]....and is therefore (covertly) making a value judgement about that person's character.

So saying that someone is a "whiner", that they are "lazy" or that they are a "quitter" is (in reality) a character attack upon that person, and an effort to hold them up as something worthy of contempt or derision. [/i]

With regards to our average golfer who doesn't have time to practice, or would rather play 18 holes than practice simply because it's either one or the other, making those kinds of value judgments is not only high-handed, but a bit short-sighted.
[/quote]

Thanks for your opinion in the matter regarding someone else, but you're overstepping your bounds, plus influence. I have no issues with differing views either; it's how people present them.[b] I get annoyed by immature internet people that not only argue by repeating themselves, but argue as if they are an authority, yet have no subject experience[/b].

What's found on the internet is NOT all ways fact; Wikipedia is a perfect example. [b]Topics were I use the word whining (verb) is meant generically, making it a personality behavior when it's repeatedly done, an action if done once.. [/b]Personalizing it distorts. I am CEO of a company I founded that, in part, handles functions for corporate America that include psychological testing, and I practiced many years back.
[/quote]

1. You presume too much...at least where my level of expertise and experience in this matter are concerned.

2. You personalized it, once you stopped using it as a verb, and started using it as a noun and an adjective.