Should Golf Courses Be Shorter?

Since Duval asked the question about how to increase/attract/retain golfers, the other side of the coin of walking courses is the distance of courses.

Here is the article from GD, i'm sure no self respecting golfer in GR would have missed and dissed.. hehe (link at bottom)

After reading the article, I really thought about teeing it up from the red tees for Par 4s and 5s, to see if I do score better and enjoy my game better.. but the thought of Blee and his thong and mini-skirt tease made me think twice. Dissing the article was an automatic survival response to Blee's and indeed other male egos of distance is macho.

I remember when Tiger first played and his drives were landing further than the landing zones the sand traps were strategically placed at. So now they had to Tiger proof their courses by making it longer.

In reverse thinking, wouldn't my playing up one tee put my drives' landing zone after the said sand traps? isn't that exactly negating the intent of the course designer, which is to catch my wayward drives?

Wouldn't that change the character of the way the course plays? Wait, but then that is exactly what the designer wanted... that I should play from the tee that best penalises me as my Driver distance is exactly in the middle of the sand trap zone. Thus preserving the character of risk reward for the course that the designer intended.

So here I am, thinking, that this article hit the nail on the head, but my other head is telling me to hit hard and look up!


____________________________________________________________

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/2011-05/golf-barney-adams-forward-tees#ixzz1No0rgIrP

I like the idea. Some of the most fun times I have ever had playing were days where me and my buddies would go out in the early evening and play and "emergency" 9 from the Red tees. Not only was it much faster, it was pretty sweet to be putting for birdie and eagle on every hole.

I would also do it prior to big tournaments that I was playing in as it got me thinking in red numbers. I expected to shoot several strokes under par. That mindset was huge going to the golf course.

I think I read somewhere that Faldo used to do the same thing when he was having trouble scoring. He would play from short tees to get into the mindset of making birdies.

I think the option to play a shorter course should always be there .... And is with the colored tee system .... However, for those who seek a more challenging experience, courses should not be made shorter.

TourSwing wrote:

. However, for those who seek a more challenging experience, courses should not be made shorter.

short courses dun mean less challenging..... try keppel

Mizzy, u can wear your dress and go for the red tee at you know where and see how the course marshals will react to you.

You are hitting beyond the bunkers and water already so whether blue, red or white, it does not matter to you.

Like what slinger says, not all short course easy. I have played once in Thailand where the course is rather short and all of played way way above our hcp. One guy even threatened to throw away his clubs and he is a much better player.

So next game, I expect to see you in a skirt?

blee2007 wrote:

Mizzy, u can wear your dress and go for the red tee at you know where and see how the course marshals will react to you.

You are hitting beyond the bunkers and water already so whether blue, red or white, it does not matter to you.

Like what slinger says, not all short course easy. I have played once in Thailand where the course is rather short and all of played way way above our hcp. One guy even threatened to throw away his clubs and he is a much better player.

So next game, I expect to see you in a skirt?

blee, you perv..

Golf courses need not be shorter as long as we speed up play....less practice swings, be ready to hit when it's your turn, less time reading the greens, pick up the ball when it doesn't matter, and the list goes on......

I played the white tees at mbgc recently (night golf) and it didn't make much difference to my score but it still took 4.5 hours to finish as we waited to hit on every hole....ridiculous...!!!!

As some on duval's thread intimated, walking courses play faster than buggy on track but buggy on course is still best......

As I've said before, some of my kakis are still aiming to hit below 100 but give us the first flight and we will finish less than 3.75 hours every single time.....fastest being 3.15 hours...we enjoyed the game, and we enjoyed being able to go home and enjoy the rest of our weekend too.....

The game of golf is losing players as most people don't want to spend so much time on the course or away from their families.....

I agree with GF on the time thingy.

I played my fastest golf in 2 hours! Nobody else on the course of course.

But back to the topic. Short course and Time spent are 2 independent factors.
In a round with full flights, at every hole, there will be 1 flight waiting to tee off, 1 flight on the fairway and 1 flight putting out except for Par 3s where there is no fairway flight waiting.

short or long, this will always be the case. and this means the time taken will be that much longer.

I've had times played behind Blee's flight where our flight was trying hard to catch up.. so that was good. but with some slow pokes... it dragged up till almost 6 hours!!!!!

And we can't over take because sometimes there are even more slow flights in front of causing a jam.

slinger wrote:

TourSwing wrote:

. However, for those who seek a more challenging experience, courses should not be made shorter.

short courses dun mean less challenging..... try keppel

I hate keppel, have to tee off with a 4-iron on most holes ... Its definately challenging, but a good course should be well balanced when it comes to distance risk/ reward. Oh, and did i say i hate keppel

The one and only time i played there, i lost count of my score ... Really tough course