Walking Only Courses?

[Argonne69]

It's not about the speed, but the added distance. Those crazy resort/subdivision courses that many claim can't be walked have cart paths far away from the greens for the most part. I hit my approach and walk straight to the green. My playing partners have to drive to the cart path, and then walk 20 to 50 yds from the cart to the green. After holing out I can head straight to the next tee in a direct line, whereas they have to walk back to their carts, and follow the winding path.

Again, over 60 rounds walked through your typical subdivision layout this winter. I'm not pulling data out of thin air. I walked the rounds, and it was rare for the cart players to be faster.

[cristphoto]

"Again, over 60 rounds walked through your typical subdivision layout this winter. I'm not pulling data out of thin air. I walked the rounds, and it was rare for the cart players to be faster."

From my experience these style courses favor the riders as the distance between holes can typically be equivalent to a par 3 or par 4 hole. Putt out on a green, go between two homes, cross a street, cut through two homes again, drive to next tee. Old school courses (no homes) are much easier to walk in my opinion. If nothing else there is more solitude from lack of kids in back yards, dogs barking, construction work, etc.

[davep043]

I'm not doubting you, a motivated and efficient walker can often keep up with players in buggies. But there's no question that players in buggies have the potential to go faster than any walker can. That potential is greater when the distances from green to tee become greater. But if we accept that in the US a reasonable duration for 18 holes is something like 4 hours (I know there are places where play is faster, but they're pretty rare), there are very limited cases where a walker can't play within the normally acceptable time. And unless you're in one of the first couple of groups off the tee, the groups ahead of you will prevent you from achieving the maximum possible speed, no matter if you're walking or riding.

[Argonne69]

That's a good point worth repeated. No matter how fast a walker or rider moves along, an efficient player's pace is going to be dictated by the groups ahead. The majority of the time when I was on the next tee first I had to wait anyway, as the group riding in front of me was still in the fairway, whether we were on a 4:30 pace, or 3:15 pace. I've walked solo rounds in 2:00 to 2:20, so it's quite apparent to me that my walking is never going to slow down a mixed group that's on a 3+ hour pace.

[Roadking2003]

And then at those "crazy resort/subdivision courses" you have to walk 200 - 800 yards from one green to the next tee at 3-4 mph while the carts go 15 mph.

 

Again, I play 140 rounds per year and both walk and ride. Riding is much faster.

[Roadking2003]

Exactly. Some of the rides between a green and the next hole are several hundred yards. Very few are less than 100 yards.

 

When I walk, I usually have playing partners who are riding. I jump on the back to ride from green to tee several times every round. Otherwise, my buds have already teed off by the time I get to the next tee.

[PuffyC]

A couple thoughts:

I do both and for me walking is probably faster but not by much. Whenever I have to wait it's always for people in carts, never for walkers, so pace of play isn't a factor assuming some idiot didn't design the course where it's 500 yards to the next tee (which I've actually seen).I always wear a step counter and riding is about as much exercise as walking. When I walk I usually hit around 12,000 steps and when I ride it's around 9,000. Make it cart path only and it's pretty even. I suppose you could argue that walking is technically 33% more exercise but in the grand scheme of things 3,000 steps in one day of playing golf isn't going to make much difference.To me a walking only course makes as much sense as a carts only course. Why not just let people do whatever they want?Getting back to the first point, I'd be all in favor of the USGA mandating that courses must be walker friendly. Maybe say that you can have no more than 30 yards from the center of the green to the tips of the next tee box or something like that.

[davep043]

"Getting back to the first point, I'd be all in favor of the USGA mandating that courses must be walker friendly. Maybe say that you can have no more than 30 yards from the center of the green to the tips of the next tee box or something like that."

Um...no, please, just no. First and foremost, the USGA and R&A have no interest in adding something new to their already extensive responsibilities to regulate. But even more importantly, topography often makes it impossible, and that doesn't start to account for the economic necessity for many new courses to be built in conjunction with housing.

[Roadking2003]

" I'd be all in favor of the USGA mandating that courses must be walker friendly. "

Why should you or anybody else tell golf course owners how they must build their facilities? Why not let the market decide? Millions of golfers prefer to ride. That is not a problem and has enabled millions to play golf who otherwise would not play at all.

[PuffyC]

Did you even read my post? Where did I suggest people shouldn't be able to ride? Walker friendly means making a course accommodating to people who choose to walk (didn't think I'd have to define that - my bad), and in addressing the question of making a walking-only course I specifically stated "Why not just let people do whatever they want?" As for telling course owners how to build courses, the USGA having general recommendations on golf course design is no different than the NFL dictating football field design or anything similar in virtually every sport in existence. You might as well ask why they should have a say in what equipment you can use. All I'm suggesting is that perhaps we don't make courses where it's 1500 feet to the next tee box so people can walk if they want to.

[Argonne69]

Is that actually true in the U.S.? How many new courses have broken ground in the past 10 years? How many are in new housing developments vs. standalone? I'm sure there are still courses being built around housing (e.g. Sun City Festival), but it seems the pendulum has swung the other way with courses such as Sand Valley, Big Cedar Lodge, Cabot, Streamsong Black, Stoatin Brae, etc.

[Roadking2003]

"All I'm suggesting is that perhaps we don't make courses where it's 1500 feet to the next tee box so people can walk if they want to."

 

And all I'm suggesting is that we let the course owners make that decision. If they want to build riding only courses, so be it. If they want to build walking only courses, go for it. Both are wonderful if customers buy in.

[Roadking2003]

Very few new courses are being built of any kind. I think the total was 12 last year.

 

The walking courses get all the publicity and ratings because the panels have a huge bias for that type of course. If the name says "Coore Crenshaw" it's a shoo in for one of the best new courses of the year.

[Chanceman]

The walking courses get all the publicity and ratings because the panels have a huge bias for that type of course. If the name says "Coore Crenshaw" it's a shoo in for one of the best new courses of the year.

Well yes, the best golf courses are designed for walking. And most C&C courses I have played are superb. Sand Hills, Lost Farm, WeKoPa in particular and I'll bet the Sheep Ranch will not be not far behind.

[teejaywhy]

"I'm not doubting you, a motivated and efficient walker can often keep up with players in buggies. But there's no question that players in buggies have the potential to go faster than any walker can."

Indeed. In my experience however, that potential is most often unrealized.

[Roadking2003]

"Best" is highly subjective. Thanks for your opinion.

[davep043]

Courses by big name designers built at big name resorts get most of the attention. Right now, that means C+C and Doak, Bandon and Sand Valley. Golf architecture goes through stylistic phases, and the current phase definitely leans toward designs where golf is first, and accompanying developments are second. It will be interesting to watch how styles change going forward, whether more and more walk-able courses are built. Even so, I don't expect that management will make the choice to allow "only walking" very often.

[doublehans]

I live in GA too, and its also the hilly nature of the courses around atlanta and north, combined with the humidity and little to no wind in the summer. Carts just make sense. Used to live elsewhere, always walked, but slogging around up and down hills in high humidity just takes a lot of fun out of being out there. The cart is just as useful for the breeze as it is for the travel! Plus, if you play late in the day in the summer, it's a little insurance if a tstorm comes up and you need to get in.

The problem is that its not just a 3-4mos thing because not only do golfers get used to riding, but courses have to buy carts to max out their summer schedule anyway so they want people riding the whole year to get that revenue. And many of the courses were built in that last 50 years or so when the course designers already knew people generally ride and because of all that a lot of designs arent really walking friendly (combined with the $$$ incentive of housing development), and thus there's more incentive to walk. Add in lots of blind tee shots in some newer courses because of the hills where its useful to have a cart to run up and see when the group in front as cleared. Its just a lot of things. In my experience, there's a big correlation to when courses were built and how friendly they are to walk.

I dont think its just a simple formula of walk or ride is better, it really depends on a lot of things and there some places where weather/terrain/course setup just make riding the obvious choice. If all things were equal, i would prefer walking, but things arent the same everywhere.

[Chanceman]

Pleased to be of service.

[Sean2]

I walk, so it's fine with me. However, a lot of people wouldn't be able to play this game without carts...older people, those with some kind of disability, etc. And it's great that these folks can get out, play golf, get some fresh air and a bit over exercise. Plus, as has probably been mentioned, golf courses derive a lot of income from carts and those who take them.

ps: I played Myrtle Beach one August and on two of the days the heat index was over 120º. Without a cart there would have been no golf.