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

[Sean2]

Nice idea Imp.

[Johnny Biarritz]

As far as The Shoals goes, a 20 handicap player could probably have a decent time if they played the White tees, though that might be too long. They'd actually be better off playing something around 5900, combination set of White and Teal. But a lot of guys have too much pride to go up 4 sets of tees, to the "senior" tees.

[duffer987]

"All it costs is the printing of new cards, and you now have a course with 5-6-7 different lengths instead of 3-4 and you now have a slightly different course because the overall yardage has now changed."

And they need the folks to come out and rate the combo course as well, so it can be used for handicap purposes.
But absolutely I agree it's a good way to divide up tees on courses that maybe have too extreme of differences from one tee to the next.
I've actually played a few courses that have this option now and was going to try it in Palm Springs last month, but the people I was playing with played from the traditional set, so I just joined them there.

[Rosco1216]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354255260' post='5998771']
[quote name='Rosco1216' timestamp='1354228434' post='5997013']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354222953' post='5996521']
[quote name='Rosco1216' timestamp='1354221459' post='5996405']
If the average score and handicap is the same now as it was 20 years ago then the course designers are doing there job to keep up with advancements in equipment and technology. Play the correct tees and if people want to play an easy course then go play an easier course, there are many easy muni's out there for people who want the game to be "easier".

I don't buy in to the idea that people are leaving the game because it's too hard..golf is supposed to be hard, especially for a beginner. If anything they are leaving because of the cost to play is way too much.
[/quote]

You don't have to buy it Rosco. No one is trying to sell you anything. I think that's the case, Ted Bishop, president of the PGA thinks that's the case, as do many others. If the average score is still around 100 where is this "easier" you are referring to?

Yes, golf is hard, but just how hard is it supposed to be? Are we supposed to make it as hard as possible? It's a game, isn't it?
[/quote]

Well that about golf is too "hard"? Obviously golfers still have to swing the club and hit the ball..I'm looking at this in 2 ways..

1)Golf in terms of being able to hit the ball consistently in an intended direction and intended distance. In this way, wouldn't you agree that equipment innovation and advances have made this "easier" for the average golfer than 25 years ago?

2)Then there is golf in terms of playing a round and shooting a number. Are golfers leaving the game because it is too hard for them in terms of shooting a certain score? I don't think today's courses are unfair by any means, however of course there are some holes out there that many golfers would say are too hard where good shots may not be rewarded accordingly.

There are very easy courses and there are very difficult courses out there and everywhere in between. I was just stating that, in my opinion, if golfers want to simply shoot a lower score then they should play the easier courses.

Another way to look at it..My brother in law just started to play sudoku but gets so mad and frustrated when he can't figure them out. Why can't he? He is a beginner but was trying to complete the advanced puzzles. Or look at video games..that is why they have beginner through advanced levels..
[/quote]
Sorry I missed this post Rosco.

1) You would think so, but if that's the case, why are golfers playing just as poorly as ever? Has equipment made it easier? I honestly don't know.

2) I think today's courses are a bit unfair: forced carries, too many hazards, very long par 3's (from the appropriate tees even), etc. In my area there are only two courses I would term as easy, and there are a lot of courses to choose from. I also think it's more than just about shooting a low score, thought that's certainly part of it, e.g., losing golf balls, mucking about in the woods, etc.

For a beginner yes, golf is very hard indeed...then, to use your video game example, don't put him at the advance level. :-)
[/quote]

No worries..wasn't sure if you had seen it or not.

It really is a such debatable subject which is why so many people are passionate about it! I certainly believe that equipment has made the game easier in terms of being able to simply hit a golf ball more consistently and in the direction you want as opposed to 20 years ago. If courses really have become more difficult since but the average scores have remained the same then I would say that supports it.

If a 20HI only has time to play once on the weekends and doesn't have time to practice and the resources(courses) available to him are only difficult course then I'm not sure what to tell him..:/

Courses unfair? I don't think so. Courses overly difficult? maybe for some. Some ridiculous holes no matter who you are? Certainly

[cardoustie]

I think I read somewhere that Payne Stewart said there should no water on a golf course, brilliant in my opinion

As a guy with 35 yrs of playing experience .. the courses have gotten MUCH harder

All the courses I used to play were mostly tree lined and all holes but the shortest par 3's allowed run up shots. There was a pond or two sprinkled in but it was generally small and off to one side of the fairway or green

No you see lakes, creeks, marshes, and a proliferation oi hazards everywhere.


I am seeing a lot of the following:

Raised greens, severely elevated greens, fast surfaces, deep fairway bunkers, excessive greenside bunkering, forced carries, fescue, one whole side of a hole is a water hazard etc etc

I love challenges, and thrive on hard courses, but I am not the norm.

The new designs sure keeps the new players away.

There is a lot of architect and ownership and community home owners egos that go into some of these new tracks. Everyone wants to be the hardest, highest sloped. longest etc

[Imp]

[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1354286762' post='5999631']
"All it costs is the printing of new cards, and you now have a course with 5-6-7 different lengths instead of 3-4 and you now have a slightly different course because the overall yardage has now changed."

And they need the folks to come out and rate the combo course as well, so it can be used for handicap purposes.
But absolutely I agree it's a good way to divide up tees on courses that maybe have too extreme of differences from one tee to the next.
I've actually played a few courses that have this option now and was going to try it in Palm Springs last month, but the people I was playing with played from the traditional set, so I just joined them there.
[/quote]Yeah. Still, cheaper than re-designing a hole/course/teebox. (and when you do that, the rating/difficulty/handicap per hole might change and still have to have the ratings folks come out anyways).

--kC

[geoangus]

For the few "premium" courses in my neighborhood, I have a hard time getting friends to come along because of the difficulty factor. Forced carries a intimidating to many average players, even if the distance is manageable. Put a 120 yard waste area in front of the tee box and they throw up all over their FootJoys.

There is one expensive course that also offers some tricked up landing areas that absolutely penalize anyone with a left to right ball flight. With a 230 yard tee shot, you can hit the middle to right edge of the fairway and find your ball careening another 25 yards down a hill, across the cart path and into oblivion.

[Imp]

Here's the problem I have with many courses, it's a matter of perception of the course by the players.

There are many people out there that feel the driver is the club they have to use if it's not a par 3. 300 yard par 4? Have to use driver! 325? Have to use driver! 285? Have to use driver! 350? Have to use driver!

There have been many par 4s that I'll use 3w, 4hy or even 4-5 iron. Course management by a player, trying to keep a ball in play no matter if obstacles exist or not, is the biggest thing to overcome to your casual player, my opinion of course. The driver is arguably the club that offers the least amount of consistancy, yet, it's the club that people feel they HAVE TO use on short 4s.

I've always known this, and started putting it into practice last year (to stop having to use driver ever damned par 4/5). This year it was reinforced during one of my rounds. I had taken my Driver and 3W out of my bag (but still in my trunk) because I was travelling and had to pack the trunk a certain way. Returned home, and played a round the next day. Got to the 1st tee box, and realized I had forgotten to put my D/3W back in. No time to go back to the car, my distance club was now my RBZ 4 hybrid.

I hit more fairways and more GIRs in that round than I had on this course... ever. Why? I didn't have to worry about flaring the drive. I just hit it about 210-220 yds (Yeah, not my 7i...*sigh*) and then figured out what to do from there.

If you're only hitting 220 yd drives with a drive, you don't belong on any of the back tees.

--kC

[Sean2]

[quote name='Rosco1216' timestamp='1354291739' post='6000033']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354255260' post='5998771']
[quote name='Rosco1216' timestamp='1354228434' post='5997013']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354222953' post='5996521']
[quote name='Rosco1216' timestamp='1354221459' post='5996405']
If the average score and handicap is the same now as it was 20 years ago then the course designers are doing there job to keep up with advancements in equipment and technology. Play the correct tees and if people want to play an easy course then go play an easier course, there are many easy muni's out there for people who want the game to be "easier".

I don't buy in to the idea that people are leaving the game because it's too hard..golf is supposed to be hard, especially for a beginner. If anything they are leaving because of the cost to play is way too much.
[/quote]

You don't have to buy it Rosco. No one is trying to sell you anything. I think that's the case, Ted Bishop, president of the PGA thinks that's the case, as do many others. If the average score is still around 100 where is this "easier" you are referring to?

Yes, golf is hard, but just how hard is it supposed to be? Are we supposed to make it as hard as possible? It's a game, isn't it?
[/quote]

Well that about golf is too "hard"? Obviously golfers still have to swing the club and hit the ball..I'm looking at this in 2 ways..

1)Golf in terms of being able to hit the ball consistently in an intended direction and intended distance. In this way, wouldn't you agree that equipment innovation and advances have made this "easier" for the average golfer than 25 years ago?

2)Then there is golf in terms of playing a round and shooting a number. Are golfers leaving the game because it is too hard for them in terms of shooting a certain score? I don't think today's courses are unfair by any means, however of course there are some holes out there that many golfers would say are too hard where good shots may not be rewarded accordingly.

There are very easy courses and there are very difficult courses out there and everywhere in between. I was just stating that, in my opinion, if golfers want to simply shoot a lower score then they should play the easier courses.

Another way to look at it..My brother in law just started to play sudoku but gets so mad and frustrated when he can't figure them out. Why can't he? He is a beginner but was trying to complete the advanced puzzles. Or look at video games..that is why they have beginner through advanced levels..
[/quote]
Sorry I missed this post Rosco.

1) You would think so, but if that's the case, why are golfers playing just as poorly as ever? Has equipment made it easier? I honestly don't know.

2) I think today's courses are a bit unfair: forced carries, too many hazards, very long par 3's (from the appropriate tees even), etc. In my area there are only two courses I would term as easy, and there are a lot of courses to choose from. I also think it's more than just about shooting a low score, thought that's certainly part of it, e.g., losing golf balls, mucking about in the woods, etc.

For a beginner yes, golf is very hard indeed...then, to use your video game example, don't put him at the advance level. :-)
[/quote]

No worries..wasn't sure if you had seen it or not.

It really is a such debatable subject which is why so many people are passionate about it! I certainly believe that equipment has made the game easier in terms of being able to simply hit a golf ball more consistently and in the direction you want as opposed to 20 years ago. If courses really have become more difficult since but the average scores have remained the same then I would say that supports it.

If a 20HI only has time to play once on the weekends and doesn't have time to practice and the resources(courses) available to him are only difficult course then I'm not sure what to tell him..:/

Courses unfair? I don't think so. [b]Courses overly difficult? maybe for some. Some ridiculous holes no matter who you are? Certainly[/b]
[/quote]
Well, we can certainly agree on that!

[duffer987]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1354293518' post='6000185']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1354286762' post='5999631']
"All it costs is the printing of new cards, and you now have a course with 5-6-7 different lengths instead of 3-4 and you now have a slightly different course because the overall yardage has now changed."

And they need the folks to come out and rate the combo course as well, so it can be used for handicap purposes.
But absolutely I agree it's a good way to divide up tees on courses that maybe have too extreme of differences from one tee to the next.
I've actually played a few courses that have this option now and was going to try it in Palm Springs last month, but the people I was playing with played from the traditional set, so I just joined them there.
[/quote]Yeah. Still, cheaper than re-designing a hole/course/teebox. (and when you do that, the rating/difficulty/handicap per hole might change and still have to have the ratings folks come out anyways).

--kC
[/quote]

Oh ya, I agree completely... I was just being a pedant and couldn't stop myself from mentioning the ratings folks, which really was implied anyways. Must try harder to be less that way

Your point about course management impacting people's perspective on course difficulty is one I agree with as well. On my local, depending on wind, I might hit 5 3-woods/Hybrids amongst the 14 par 4s/5s and I invariably spend less time in trouble than my playing partners.

[Sean2]

[quote name='cardoustie' timestamp='1354293512' post='6000181']
I think I read somewhere that Payne Stewart said there should no water on a golf course, brilliant in my opinion

As a guy with 35 yrs of playing experience .. the courses have gotten MUCH harder

All the courses I used to play were mostly tree lined and all holes but the shortest par 3's allowed run up shots. There was a pond or two sprinkled in but it was generally small and off to one side of the fairway or green

No you see lakes, creeks, marshes, and a proliferation oi hazards everywhere.


I am seeing a lot of the following:

Raised greens, severely elevated greens, fast surfaces, deep fairway bunkers, excessive greenside bunkering, forced carries, fescue, one whole side of a hole is a water hazard etc etc

I love challenges, and thrive on hard courses, but I am not the norm.

[b]The new designs sure keeps the new players away.

There is a lot of architect and ownership and community home owners egos that go into some of these new tracks. Everyone wants to be the hardest, highest sloped. longest etc[/b]
[/quote]
And, if you look at it from a purely economic standpoint, who is going to come and play those courses? Where is your revenue going to come from?

As to your point about what your seeing a lot of, I see it too. If your a very skilled golfer courses like this are no doubt a lot of fun, but if your an average golfer, courses like this are a nightmare.

[Sean2]

[quote name='geoangus' timestamp='1354296659' post='6000477']
For the few "premium" courses in my neighborhood, I have a hard time getting friends to come along because of the difficulty factor. Forced carries a intimidating to many average players, even if the distance is manageable. Put a 120 yard waste area in front of the tee box and they throw up all over their FootJoys.

There is one expensive course that also offers some tricked up landing areas that absolutely penalize anyone with a left to right ball flight. With a 230 yard tee shot, you can hit the middle to right edge of the fairway and find your ball careening another 25 yards down a hill, across the cart path and into oblivion.
[/quote]
An enjoyable experience, no doubt. :-)

[Pepperturbo]

Another thread feeding the frailties of those that struggle with the game. Let's call a spade a spade for a change... There is no way changing the golf course difficulty is going make the average golfer into something he's either not, doesn't want to be or can't be due to lack of athletic ability or time. By design, the game demands physical abilities and time to improve.

I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

Except for one guy, further reality showed, the rest of them never practice to speak of and not one had golf as a priority activity in their life. Each said, golf is just fun and social, which is fine. Most said they don't play alone like I was. Each of the guys at most, played golf two days over that week, while I played five and wife played three. Difference, I play 2-3 times per week over the course of a year, plus take 3-5 golf vacations per year, add it up... and that doesn't include my 12 index wife's play. The words of each guy; I might play once a month/twice a month, then go months without play, and a day or two on vacation at most. Leaving the question, "who spends more on golf?", better golfers or casual golfers, or the faster or slowest ship in the convoy?

What this really comes down to is who architects design for... average Joe or better golfers like me. The answer is neither. They design and build what the developer wants; that being company outings, tournaments, and the possible reputation that comes from average golfers tackling a difficult course, getting beat up, moreover, the chatter afterwards. Even though they got beat up, they always want to come back at a later date. Courses don't need to be easier, internet DB people need to realize their issues are, by and large, NOT the issues of the real average golfer.

[Sean2]

^^^That's your opinion, Pepper. Many others feel differently. However, sarcasm: "Another thread feeding the frailties of those that struggle with the game." And, "internet DB people", are really uncalled for. You can state your opinion without so much, what? Anger? Not sure what to call it.

[Bubb]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354309406' post='6001617']
Another thread feeding the frailties of those that struggle with the game. Let's call a spade a spade for a change... There is no way changing the golf course difficulty is going make the average golfer into something he's either not, doesn't want to be or can't be due to lack of athletic ability or time. By design, the game demands physical abilities and time to improve.

I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

Except for one guy, further reality showed, the rest of them never practice to speak of and not one had golf as a priority activity in their life. Each said, golf is just fun and social, which is fine. Most said they don't play alone like I was. Each of the guys at most, played golf two days over that week, while I played five and wife played three. Difference, I play 2-3 times per week over the course of a year, plus take 3-5 golf vacations per year, add it up... and that doesn't include my 12 index wife's play. The words of each guy; I might play once a month/twice a month, then go months without play, and a day or two on vacation at most. Leaving the question, "who spends more on golf?", better golfers or casual golfers, or the faster or slowest ship in the convoy?

What this really comes down to is who architects design for... average Joe or better golfers like me. The answer is neither. They design and build what the developer wants; that being company outings, tournaments, and the possible reputation that comes from average golfers tackling a difficult course, getting beat up, moreover, the chatter afterwards. Even though they got beat up, they always want to come back at a later date. Courses don't need to be easier, internet DB people need to realize their issues are, by and large, NOT the issues of the real average golfer.
[/quote]
There are those who don't struggle with the game who still believe that some courses are too difficult. You have to acknowledge that it is possible to design a course that is borderline unfair in spots and way too difficult in general. Would criticism of a 9000 yard course with 18 elevated greens and water on every hole offend you? Would you necessarily assume that the critic of such a course is a frail hack?

For someone to get to a low single digit handicap, he would have to devote considerable hours to developing his skill. When that person is routinely beat up by a course designer who wanted to make a statement, the course is not well designed as far as being commercially viable. Even if you are good enough to handle the course, you don't want to be among a bunch of others who can't finish in four hours because they're looking for balls all day. And the 15+ cappers won't come back and keep donating a dozen balls each round.

We all take golf seriously here, obviously, because we're on a golf forum, but it's still a game played primarily for enjoyment. The greatest courses I've played are not overly penal.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1354311903' post='6001809']
^^^That's your opinion, Pepper. Many others feel differently. However, sarcasm: "Another thread feeding the frailties of those that struggle with the game." And, "internet DB people", are really uncalled for. You can state your opinion without without so much, what? Anger? Arrogance? Not sure what to call it.
[/quote]

Yes, it's my opinion. One that you and others can disagree with, even dislike. I am OK with that, as I expect it from certain people. Sarcasm and harsh, OK, I go with both. Its one thing to have physical limitations, it's another to just whine this or that is too hard, make it easier for me, cause I can't or don't want to, maybe don't have time to. The only viable solution, make courses and rules easier, and forgiving equipment so everyone feels better about their skill. Much easier then looking in the mirror. If left to that frame of mind, golf would be watered down so "people" could somehow better their scoring without hard work or having to improve skill; attitudes I can never respect. Before anyone says it, I am NOT, by choice, politically correct either.

How someone tackles 18 is a microcosm of their life. My golf success was NOT handed to me. I earn it through my desire to excel and hard work. And, I don't take much of whats said in these types of discussions seriously, nor do I get angry or lose self-control; that bothers people. The deeper problem with becoming a good golfer for many, they lack initiative, and self-confidence, that which many incorrectly label as arrogance.

I'll make it simple, its disappointment and disgust. When people should be challenging themselves to improve, they opt for complacency, expecting this or that to be made easier. Give that attitude an inch and they will destroy all that make America great. Thank God its Friday... lots of golf. Have a good weekend.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='Bubb' timestamp='1354314104' post='6001953']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354309406' post='6001617']
Another thread feeding the frailties of those that struggle with the game. Let's call a spade a spade for a change... There is no way changing the golf course difficulty is going make the average golfer into something he's either not, doesn't want to be or can't be due to lack of athletic ability or time. By design, the game demands physical abilities and time to improve.

I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

Except for one guy, further reality showed, the rest of them never practice to speak of and not one had golf as a priority activity in their life. Each said, golf is just fun and social, which is fine. Most said they don't play alone like I was. Each of the guys at most, played golf two days over that week, while I played five and wife played three. Difference, I play 2-3 times per week over the course of a year, plus take 3-5 golf vacations per year, add it up... and that doesn't include my 12 index wife's play. The words of each guy; I might play once a month/twice a month, then go months without play, and a day or two on vacation at most. Leaving the question, "who spends more on golf?", better golfers or casual golfers, or the faster or slowest ship in the convoy?

What this really comes down to is who architects design for... average Joe or better golfers like me. The answer is neither. They design and build what the developer wants; that being company outings, tournaments, and the possible reputation that comes from average golfers tackling a difficult course, getting beat up, moreover, the chatter afterwards. Even though they got beat up, they always want to come back at a later date. Courses don't need to be easier, internet DB people need to realize their issues are, by and large, NOT the issues of the real average golfer.
[/quote]

There are those who don't struggle with the game who still believe that some courses are too difficult. You have to acknowledge that it is possible to design a course that is borderline unfair in spots and way too difficult in general. Would criticism of a 9000 yard course with 18 elevated greens and water on every hole offend you? Would you necessarily assume that the critic of such a course is a frail hack?

For someone to get to a low single digit handicap, he would have to devote considerable hours to developing his skill. When that person is routinely beat up by a course designer who wanted to make a statement, the course is not well designed as far as being commercially viable. Even if you are good enough to handle the course, you don't want to be among a bunch of others who can't finish in four hours because they're looking for balls all day. And the 15+ cappers won't come back and keep donating a dozen balls each round.

We all take golf seriously here, obviously, because we're on a golf forum, but it's still a game played primarily for enjoyment. The greatest courses I've played are not overly penal.
[/quote]

Yes, there are those people, but their wish doesn't make it right. Heck, I've encountered difficult courses that beat me up. However, when I walked off I say my game needs improvement; I need to challenge myself. Not courses need to be easier cause I am getting old and soon to be loosing distance. As for your 9k course, sounds like a TX anomaly, that would only be visited intermittently, surely not a common example.

I disagree, the 15+ cappers do come back to those courses, and they join private clubs with difficult tracks, knowing they will get beat up. We had many of those 15+ cappers in my last club, slopped over 135 from the blue tees and over 75/140+ from the back. There is a course in south Riverside Cty that gets golfers from Orange Cty for the annual abuse we talk about. Also, people play golf for different reasons. What I'd like to honestly read is why golfers with indexes under 5 took up the game and what they get from it, moreover if they want their index based off a 68/123 type course. The greatest courses I've enjoy are sloped over 73/135 or greater. I only use that because it's easier then defining the abstract, not overly penal. Have a good weekend.

[duffer987]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354309406' post='6001617']
I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

[/quote]

Maybe you should quit taking golf vacations to wide open munis that have ratings that far below par (assuming 70-72)?

If those are you typically tracks, that's not much of a white whale you're chasing, but more a floundering carp.

[hoganfan924]

Pepper and I had a spirited debate on this very subject a while back. Here was one of my posts from that:

I saw the Fuzzy Zoeller interview with Feherty and he has it exactly right as a course designer, IMO. Course designs need to be playable and enjoyable for players of all ability levels. Too many designers went nuts in the 90's and 00's and designed courses with too many forced carries, too many hazards, crazy sloping greens and no bailout areas. Too many golfers bought into the notion that "championship caliber" courses were great courses [b][i]for them[/i][/b]. 20 handicappers losing 6 balls/round, not making any pars and shooting a bazillion is not fun. IMO, most holes need to have a bailout off the tee and on the approach that will allow an average player a fair chance at a bogey.

And look at the old stats. Fuzzy was a bomber in his day!

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1354317258' post='6002171']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354309406' post='6001617']
I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

[/quote]

Maybe you should quit taking golf vacations to wide open munis that have ratings that far below par (assuming 70-72)?

If those are you typically tracks, that's not much of a white whale you're chasing, but more a floundering carp.
[/quote]

Duffer - Maybe you should stop making assumptions to sound cute. I play that course because of a friend limited skill and he's a member there. I typically play courses in the 73+/133+ out to 6900yds.

[Johnny Biarritz]

Here is the thing that people are missing. Quality courses, the best ones, are the ones where the designer found a way to be playable and enjoyable for the 'beater' and challenging for the quality player. But with few exceptions, the best courses are those that are playable for average and poor players and still challenging for the better players. Oakmont and Pine Valley certainly come to mind as courses that aren't friendly to poor players, but what about the rest? Augusta National, Pebble Beach, Old Macdonald, Pacific Dunes, National Golf Links of America and the rest all find ways to be friendly and entertaining for hacks and yet sufficiently difficult for better players.

Take Old Macdonald and Bandon Trails. The US Amateur Public Links Championship was there last year. In stroke play, the guys played one round on each course. Only one player was under par and 11 over made the cut for match play. Some of the best Am's in the world there. Yet that course remains playable for hacks every day, especially when they play the proper tee. That is the mark of a quality course. A lot of local courses miss the boat on that. They are difficult for a good player and nearly unplayable for a poor one; Tobacco Road comes readily to mind.

However, the whole thing of courses overall being too difficult and running people away from the game is only partially true. Yes, some quite due to courses being too difficult. More quite due to children's activities, cost of a round, lack of time in general, and who knows what else. Yes, courses are generally too difficult and overly penal for poor players, but they always have been. But that is not the primary cause of people leaving the game.

Talking about courses again, courses in general SHOULD be both difficult for better players and playable for poor ones. That is not a terribly difficult balance to reach.

[Sean2]

Cool Pepper. So the poor guy who works his a** off during the week, who has a wife, kids and/or other obligations, who doesn't have the time to practice (even though he'd love to), and just wants to go out to the course with his pals and enjoy his round of golf without losing a dozen golf balls lacks some kind of "initiative"? I think you're being a bit harsh. My former drill instructors in the Marine Corps could take lessons from you and they did not let us go gentle into that good night, believe me.

Pepper, sure some of these guys may be complacent, but the vast majority aren't. The simply don't have the time necessary to elevate their game to the level where they'd like to be. This isn't about political correctness (a concept I personally abhore), or is it about allowing lazy people skate. It's about, what? Showing a bit of compassion? Empathy?

I like nothing more than seeing some 20 HI drain a putt for a birdie and seeing that big grin spread across his face. It made his day. No, it made his week. That bast*rd boss of his? He just drifted out his mind. Those chores waiting for him at home? Suddenly they don't seem so bad. Hey, let's give that poor sucker a chance to even have birdie putt!

Egos, you want to talk about egos? It's many of those course designers today that Cardoustie alluded to earlier: let's make our course big and bad!

You have a good weekend too Pepper. :-)

[Sean2]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1354317532' post='6002187']
Pepper and I had a spirited debate on this very subject a while back. Here was one of my posts from that:

I saw the Fuzzy Zoeller interview with Feherty and he has it exactly right as a course designer, IMO. Course designs need to be playable and enjoyable for players of all ability levels. Too many designers went nuts in the 90's and 00's and designed courses with too many forced carries, too many hazards, crazy sloping greens and no bailout areas. Too many golfers bought into the notion that "championship caliber" courses were great courses [b][i]for them[/i][/b]. 20 handicappers losing 6 balls/round, not making any pars and shooting a bazillion is not fun. IMO, most holes need to have a bailout off the tee and on the approach that will allow an average player a fair chance at a bogey.

And look at the old stats. Fuzzy was a bomber in his day!
[/quote]
You got that right! :-)

[Sean2]

ps: My home course from the 6000 yard tees has a slope of 127. You BETTER put in the fairway. :-)

[duffer987]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354317952' post='6002217']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1354317258' post='6002171']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1354309406' post='6001617']
I just got back from a five days of golf. One course 67/125 from the back tees, was wide open, easy by my standards. The three guys I played with played 69/123 White tees, and they worked hard, not one broke 90. Over five rds of golf, I met only two golfers that were 13/16 index, the rest were over 19. What got my attention though was, many had been playing the game for years. All it took was one look at them to see, they were sorely out of shape. I am sorry, but those people are not the backbone that supports golf.

[/quote]

Maybe you should quit taking golf vacations to wide open munis that have ratings that far below par (assuming 70-72)?

If those are you typically tracks, that's not much of a white whale you're chasing, but more a floundering carp.
[/quote]

Duffer - Maybe you should stop making assumptions to sound cute. I play that course because of a friend limited skill and he's a member there. I typically play courses in the 73+/133+ out to 6900yds.
[/quote]

I save cute for the laydees, chk chk but reading the Melville-esque hyperbole you use to describe golf and the disdain you have for some of the people you end up golfing with, of course I am going to take the piss.
Seeing as you typically play long courses with minefields and rabid honey badgers on them, it is good to hear you will mix it up with the rabble for your mate though.

Anyways you seem to be mixing up difficult and challenging, with unfair. Even at my modest levels I really enjoy a challenge (from the courses I listed earlier in this thread), but I do not enjoy tricked up amusement park golf.

If I take this definition of unfair (Not fair; marked by injustice or partiality or deception) I wouldn't attribute any of those things to the tougher courses I play. But I would attribute it to some silly contrived layouts I've played.

[Truman]

Maybe the equipment changes are more marketing than science.

[jdhallissey]

I love when PepperTurbo comes into convo's. Like him or not he is 100 percent correct. From what I have gotten to know about him he can hold his own on a course even if he is a bit older. He has played some of the hardest courses (stadium course PGA WEST) a ton of times. I am for one hating golf right now for the fact a lot of courses are changing and making there course/setup easier. If average golfers play courses that are easier two things always happen...... They get the big ego and think they are god and 2 they are actually getting worse. If you keep playing the same wide open layout you never learn to hit it straight, if you never hit it in a bunker you never learn to get it out.

Now I for one can hold my own and I play a ton of golf. Golf for me needs to be hard, needs to make me focus, if I am going to pay 50 dollars or more for a round of golf and I get to play a flat course with no bunkers, no water,no nothing it is a waste to me. I get bored with easy courses.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Truman' timestamp='1354329627' post='6002989']
Maybe the equipment changes are more marketing than science.
[/quote]
Sometimes I wonder.

[Sean2]

[quote name='jdhallissey' timestamp='1354330499' post='6003025']
I love when PepperTurbo comes into convo's. Like him or not he is 100 percent correct. From what I have gotten to know about him he can hold his own on a course even if he is a bit older. He has played some of the hardest courses (stadium course PGA WEST) a ton of times. I am for one hating golf right now for the fact a lot of courses are changing and making there course/setup easier. If average golfers play courses that are easier two things always happen...... They get the big ego and think they are god and 2 they are actually getting worse. If you keep playing the same wide open layout you never learn to hit it straight, if you never hit it in a bunker you never learn to get it out.

Now I for one can hold my own and I play a ton of golf. Golf for me needs to be hard, needs to make me focus, if I am going to pay 50 dollars or more for a round of golf and I get to play a flat course with no bunkers, no water,no nothing it is a waste to me. I get bored with easy courses.
[/quote]
Again, this isn't for the outstanding golfer such as yourself and Pepper. There are plenty of difficult courses for you and Pepper out there (the International I described earlier is 8325 yards from the back tees...I'm sure that might test your skills). This is about the AVERAGE golfer. I play a lot of golf with a lot of different people. The vast majority of them are very nice people. I don't see them getting big egos if they play a more benign layout. In addition, I never suggested the type of course you described. Everyone wants a bit of a challenge, but there's a bit of a challenge for the average golfer than there is absurd for the average golfer.

[jdhallissey]

I am not saying everything is not a test. I get tested plenty of times. I am saying is the average golfer (I play with a lot of them) i have found enjoy getting beat up a little to a lot. If you took a honest poll of golfers they have ego's and 99 percent of golfers have a bigger ego then any other sport. They want to conquer the beast. For example, TPC STADIUM Course at PGA WEST. There are guys who suck yes beyond the average golfer who come out there every year or twice a year on a golf vaca and want to see what they have. They get destroyed, yet at the end of the round they are still smiling and loving what they just did.

I honestly think the bigger issue is a price point for golf. A crappy golf course boring old still course over the summer where I am currently living is 70 bucks to walk on the weekend. The course is always in decent shape. In no shape way or form is it worth that much. Golf is not cheap and that is why people are leaving the game. Golf has gone up here in the past few years too......