Is it soon time to consider hitting balls on driving ranges as the dominant format to play the game?

[kthomas]

I find this an interesting topic, partly because I've been thinking a lot lately about some of the big problems that plague golf:

 

1. It's not always accessible. Some areas may have plenty of courses accessible to the average golfer, other places not so much.

2. It takes a long time to play. Especially on the weekends. I know many of us here have encountered 5+ hour rounds of golf. It's the only sport I know of where people participating ~4 hours before you can potentially dictate how slow your game is going to be. 

3. It can be costly. It's certainly not a cheap sport. 

4. Golf courses take up a lot of space and are resource intensive. It's becoming harder and harder to justify (to the general public) using large spaces for golf courses. A golf course is a lot of space dedicated to a single set of users: golfers. There's also an argument that they use up a lot of resources (water, fertilizers, etc.), which in the day and age of greater social awareness and consciousness of our impacts, is a tough one to overcome. Not much of a battle for existing golf courses, but in the future new golf courses may be harder and harder to justify.

 

For the above reasons, it's hard for many to get into the sport. The sport has recently seen a new influx of participants due to COVID-19, but prior to that the sport has seen a decline. How long are these new COVID-19 golfers going to stick with the sport? How can we attract further users, without overcrowding current courses and grow the sport? How can we eliminate some of the barriers facing golf, and make it more accessible and user friendly, not just to golfers but to all groups?

 

There's a lot of benefits to the sport of golf, and golf courses in general. But it can be a difficult one to get into, and a difficult sport to justify in some cases. As a current Masters of Landscape Architect student, I've been pondering ways to accomplish the above, by introducing the concept of low maintenance short courses that can be used by multiple different user groups (walkers, dogs, etc.), that can be placed in and around many communities. Similar concept to frisbee golf courses. The basic aspects of a golf course would remain (greens, flag stick and cup, fairways and hazards), but with some tweaks. Perhaps with just using a putter and some wedges, or maybe a larger array of clubs but with practice de-flighted golf balls. There's a lot of nuances and issues that would need to be overcome, but I don't think it's impossible. 

 

I really like the idea of an informal community short course that you can just walk onto with some friends and play a quick game of golf, one that still captures the spirit, challenge and essence of the game without the above barriers. The space would need to be multi-functional in order to be feasible, accommodating other activities simultaneously, perhaps in adjacent spaces to the holes. 

 

Driving ranges aren't the only solution to some of the problems facing golf, I think we can be creative and come up with a few different solutions that supplements (not replacing), the traditional game of golf. 

[Ironman_32]

39 minutes ago, RCGA said:

Going to a driving range and calling it "golf" is like shooting on a basketball net in your driveway and calling it basketball.

 

Can you improve? Sure, but it's not the same thing. 

Great point, you have to separate what you want out of the sports, meaning, some just want to see perfect swings or 3 point shots, but ultimately, we play the sports by how you judge a lie or with a defender in your face. 

 

at the OP, I took lessons from a guy back in college you use to say there are some golfers who just loved to practice, and others who just loved to play. But golf is a game of how many, not how. Sometimes the driving range turns it a little too into a "how" game. 

[FATC1TY]

If I could only hit on a range, I would give up golf. That isn't golf, that's just practice with no mental or enjoyable portions of enjoying it with friends/family or a complete stranger with a story to share.

[Blindsided]

I like playing obviously but I enjoy hitting the range/chipping area/ golf sim probably a little bit more. I personally enjoy practicing techniques and honing skills via rrepetition and practice. What I like about golf is how similar it is to skateboarding. 

 

In skateboarding you can practice by yourself as much as you want and learn new moves/techniques/tricks, and then eventually bring them to competitions. A skateboarder would never learn a new move in a competition though, they would hone it practicing on their own before they brought it out.

 

it's kind of interesting how many golfers just want to play and never practice, but i'm positive most of the really good ones practice a lot.

[Wormkiller]

23 hours ago, gioguy21 said:

i hate to say it but the question you've asked doesn't make sense -- while i understand the point you are trying to make -- golf is not a game held on a driving range; rather on a course.

regardless of whether or not parts of asia can or cannot play it on course, the other 80% of the world golfing population have access to courses and play them daily. in no way will 'range golf' dominate actual golf. 

80% of the world golfing population? You sure about that?

[Wormkiller]

16 hours ago, kthomas said:

I find this an interesting topic, partly because I've been thinking a lot lately about some of the big problems that plague golf:

 

1. It's not always accessible. Some areas may have plenty of courses accessible to the average golfer, other places not so much.

2. It takes a long time to play. Especially on the weekends. I know many of us here have encountered 5+ hour rounds of golf. It's the only sport I know of where people participating ~4 hours before you can potentially dictate how slow your game is going to be. 

3. It can be costly. It's certainly not a cheap sport. 

4. Golf courses take up a lot of space and are resource intensive. It's becoming harder and harder to justify (to the general public) using large spaces for golf courses. A golf course is a lot of space dedicated to a single set of users: golfers. There's also an argument that they use up a lot of resources (water, fertilizers, etc.), which in the day and age of greater social awareness and consciousness of our impacts, is a tough one to overcome. Not much of a battle for existing golf courses, but in the future new golf courses may be harder and harder to justify.

 

For the above reasons, it's hard for many to get into the sport. The sport has recently seen a new influx of participants due to COVID-19, but prior to that the sport has seen a decline. How long are these new COVID-19 golfers going to stick with the sport? How can we attract further users, without overcrowding current courses and grow the sport? How can we eliminate some of the barriers facing golf, and make it more accessible and user friendly, not just to golfers but to all groups?

 

There's a lot of benefits to the sport of golf, and golf courses in general. But it can be a difficult one to get into, and a difficult sport to justify in some cases. As a current Masters of Landscape Architect student, I've been pondering ways to accomplish the above, by introducing the concept of low maintenance short courses that can be used by multiple different user groups (walkers, dogs, etc.), that can be placed in and around many communities. Similar concept to frisbee golf courses. The basic aspects of a golf course would remain (greens, flag stick and cup, fairways and hazards), but with some tweaks. Perhaps with just using a putter and some wedges, or maybe a larger array of clubs but with practice de-flighted golf balls. There's a lot of nuances and issues that would need to be overcome, but I don't think it's impossible. 

 

I really like the idea of an informal community short course that you can just walk onto with some friends and play a quick game of golf, one that still captures the spirit, challenge and essence of the game without the above barriers. The space would need to be multi-functional in order to be feasible, accommodating other activities simultaneously, perhaps in adjacent spaces to the holes. 

 

Driving ranges aren't the only solution to some of the problems facing golf, I think we can be creative and come up with a few different solutions that supplements (not replacing), the traditional game of golf. 

I think this is an excellent post, and agree with everything you have said.

[Wormkiller]

9 hours ago, FATC1TY said:

If I could only hit on a range, I would give up golf. That isn't golf, that's just practice with no mental or enjoyable portions of enjoying it with friends/family or a complete stranger with a story to share.

Very subjective opinion.

[Wormkiller]

20 hours ago, Fellaheen51 said:

"We sitting in here talking about practice.  I mean, listen:  I'm the franchise player, and we in here talking about practice.  Not a game.  Not a game.  We taking about practice, man." - Allen Iverson (abridged).   Classic rant.  

 

Range time... mostly boring (see practice).  More so if I have to hit off mats.  Rather head to the local goat track and play a solo "practice" round.  Sim golf....boring.   Hitting into a screen 15' away is not golf.  Have to turn on 10' gimme putts because the execution is so wonky.  I'm not of the video game generation.  Top Golf....mildly entertaining.  Something to do in the dead of winter when one has the urge to whack some balls.  Play games.  Beers are too expensive.  

 

Thankfully, have a plethora of course options to choose from.  Never paying more than $50 to play (weekday senior rates).  Playing weekday mornings, do not have POP issues.  Be prepared to shoot and scoot (mostly) amongst the geriatric set.  Always get around in less than 4 hours.  Forget weekends.  Yeah, golf season is "only" ~ 9 months.  I don't mind the down time.  

 

I play golf out in the wild.  A key component to the game's appeal.  If it was no longer an option, would move on to my other recreational pursuits.  

 

 

Thanks for the autobiography.

[rgk5]

You also could practice fly fishing in your back yard but catching trout will be difficult.

[MtlJeff]

17 hours ago, kthomas said:

I find this an interesting topic, partly because I've been thinking a lot lately about some of the big problems that plague golf:

 

1. It's not always accessible. Some areas may have plenty of courses accessible to the average golfer, other places not so much.

2. It takes a long time to play. Especially on the weekends. I know many of us here have encountered 5+ hour rounds of golf. It's the only sport I know of where people participating ~4 hours before you can potentially dictate how slow your game is going to be. 

3. It can be costly. It's certainly not a cheap sport. 

4. Golf courses take up a lot of space and are resource intensive. It's becoming harder and harder to justify (to the general public) using large spaces for golf courses. A golf course is a lot of space dedicated to a single set of users: golfers. There's also an argument that they use up a lot of resources (water, fertilizers, etc.), which in the day and age of greater social awareness and consciousness of our impacts, is a tough one to overcome. Not much of a battle for existing golf courses, but in the future new golf courses may be harder and harder to justify.

 

For the above reasons, it's hard for many to get into the sport. The sport has recently seen a new influx of participants due to COVID-19, but prior to that the sport has seen a decline. How long are these new COVID-19 golfers going to stick with the sport? How can we attract further users, without overcrowding current courses and grow the sport? How can we eliminate some of the barriers facing golf, and make it more accessible and user friendly, not just to golfers but to all groups?

 

There's a lot of benefits to the sport of golf, and golf courses in general. But it can be a difficult one to get into, and a difficult sport to justify in some cases. As a current Masters of Landscape Architect student, I've been pondering ways to accomplish the above, by introducing the concept of low maintenance short courses that can be used by multiple different user groups (walkers, dogs, etc.), that can be placed in and around many communities. Similar concept to frisbee golf courses. The basic aspects of a golf course would remain (greens, flag stick and cup, fairways and hazards), but with some tweaks. Perhaps with just using a putter and some wedges, or maybe a larger array of clubs but with practice de-flighted golf balls. There's a lot of nuances and issues that would need to be overcome, but I don't think it's impossible. 

 

I really like the idea of an informal community short course that you can just walk onto with some friends and play a quick game of golf, one that still captures the spirit, challenge and essence of the game without the above barriers. The space would need to be multi-functional in order to be feasible, accommodating other activities simultaneously, perhaps in adjacent spaces to the holes. 

 

Driving ranges aren't the only solution to some of the problems facing golf, I think we can be creative and come up with a few different solutions that supplements (not replacing), the traditional game of golf. 

 

I agree with a lot of the things you are saying but many of these problems are years and years away from happening. Assuming we're all still around then of course (hey, fingers crossed on that one)

 

North America still has TONS of land. TONS of it. Living in Shanghai or NY city or LA or something, it's probably a different perspective. But almost any city in the the US or Canada, you can drive 20-25 minutes and have tons of space for courses. It's possible like 100 years from now this won't be the case, but this won't change any time soon. Population won't grow fast enough to sustain that kind of development.

 

Golf courses are arguably a poor use of land, i have said that in the past, but more than anything golf struggles with optics (as i said, to debate, in another thread that doesn't need to be rehashed, some people hate golf for reasons that have little to do with the sport. ). But everyone loves soccer, is soccer really a better use of land? You have to maintain it, and at 11 a side, maybe 6-7 games at most on the same field in the same day, that's ~150 people using that space. Golf courses can also hold 150+ players a day. Soccer isn't a much better use of land arguably, and no one will argue "the global game" is a bad use of land right now. In many places (Montreal being one) , Golf is also arguably less expensive than soccer when it comes to competitions for 10-15yr olds type thing. (Cost of membership, junior programs vs all of the travel and indoor/outdoor season costs for soccer). I think people don't hate golf as much as they hate the people they assume play golf, which in 2021 in most cities is probably misguided (some of the best players in cold weather cities are teachers--summers off baby)

 

I don't know about other countries , but i don't think golf is at any real risk in the Americas in the near future. We might just lose our courses that are very near to the cities

Edited August 20, 2021 by MtlJeff

[jomatty]

I can’t comment on the places in Asia where the range is the only option due to expense so I’ll direct my comments to the US and other places with similar golf landscapes.

 

I think everyone who is not getting paid to play the game should do whatever it is that they enjoy the most.  If you prefer hitting range balls more than playing at the course then by all means spend the majority of your time doing that.  If you prefer playing rounds and don’t like the range then spend the bulk of your time doing that.  Golf is a hobby that many of us, myself included, try to turn into something bigger.  I always feel slightly guilty that I spend so much time playing rounds of golf and very little time practicing.  The equation gets a little more complicated as doing something I don’t enjoy (practicing) may make my actual rounds more enjoyable in the future.

 

that’s a long winded way of answering your question but the short answer is “every golfer gets to choose what they want the dominant form of the game to be for them”.

[Fairway14]

9 hours ago, Blindsided said:

 

 

it's kind of interesting how many golfers just want to play and never practice

 

The correlation explains why the average player shoots 90 or worse.

[ChipNRun]

 

On 8/19/2021 at 5:15 AM, Wormkiller said:

I listened to a podcast called Local Knowledge where they talked about golf in Japan, and how there are literally millions of ‘golfers’ who never even get a chance to play on a course. ...

 

The same applies to many densely populated Asian countries - China, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand. Playing actual rounds is an absolute luxury to the overwhelming majority who enjoy the game. For this majority, there only access to the game is through driving ranges. And it’s only getting worse as population and urbanisation increases and climate change increasingly limiting the ability to maintain courses and play outside.

 

First of all, I take issue with the statement the "only access... is through driving ranges." It omits the phenomenon of golf simulators. Sports coverage from South Korea: the majority of golfers play on simulators, not on actual courses. And, the Korean simulator density is quite interesting. Lots of bars and coffee shops have two or three golf simulators in a side room of the establishment. Groups bring their golf bags and play on the simulator, a steady flow throughout the day.

 

As for Japan, the story for years has been that the average golfers spend most of their time on the driving range, and only play on-course two or three rounds a year. This was what I saw in Okinawa and Taiwan in 1973 while there in the Marine Corps. I stayed in the reserves, and military people who served in Japan told the same story to me during the 1990s.

 

 

Another thing to consider. A recent Golf Digest story on Matsuyama, The Masters, and golf in Japan doesn't mesh with the Local Knowledge commentary. It says the heydey for golf in Japan was the 1990s, and that post 2000 several courses have been closed. This article also mentions the popularity of simulators, making golf an indoor social event. Here in the USA, TopGolf and Its Rivals have formalized indoor golf with entertainment centers combining golf simulators and restaurants.

 

And, traditional St. Louis outdoor golfers flock to the simulators when weather gets cold. Even in January, you have to book simulator practice time a week or two ahead to find gaps amongst the league players.

 

On 8/19/2021 at 5:15 AM, Wormkiller said:

I played a round a few days ago and it occurred to me that I might actually get more enjoyment out of the game on the range than on the course. ...

 

So the range has typically been seen as a practice facility to work on your game to take to the course. Is it perhaps time to consider hitting balls on the range as an equal or perhaps even the dominant way to ‘play’ the game?

 

WK, for you personally the range offers idealized golf. We always hit a few super shots, and can forget those that fly poorly. On the the golf course, we don't get that luxury - we have to play the bad ones too. One way to get idealized golf on the course is to play a round without a ball. Just go out, swing, and imagine you had 12 GIR, and got heroic up-and-downs on most of the rest.

 

And, you could always join the niche of Americans who only go to driving ranges. They've been around since just after World War II. They plunk down their beginner's clubs on the bag rack, hit a bucket, and then go home.

Edited August 20, 2021 by ChipNRun
Troubleshoot story link.

[gioguy21]

2 hours ago, Wormkiller said:

80% of the world golfing population? You sure about that?

figured a quick estimate based off the stats posted by the R&A in 2019...but yea. the game isn't going to be relegated to the driving range because one country is having some wahburgers and frenchcries b/c they can't get on the golf course. 

sorry for being terse about it but...there's ZERO chance that the R&A and USGA/PGA would consider official events played at your local driving range/topgolf/etc.; because it's not golf. it's a range.  

[Tumbleweed_1968]

After almost 50 years of golf I have found that the game can be very cheap in the US if you want it to be. My average 9 hole greens fee is around $15. I don't play pricey clubs at pricey clubs. There are at least a dozen extremely well known courses within an hour in every direction here in east central Wisconsin that I don't play because I simply can't afford them and wouldn't find them enjoyable even if I did.

That probably comes from growing up on a 9 holes converted farm field / "goat track", so my mental stigma attached to expensive courses drives that.

Golf courses could be cheaper to maintain and play IF golfers were willing to turn the clock back a couple hundred years regarding condition and did not insist on fairways that look like putting greens and riding instead of walking. I don't agree that golf courses are a waste of land, since I play regularly on 2 courses that couldn't be built on anyway. One is surrounded by and winds through a subdivision, so...

If the norm were 9 hole rounds walking I think a lot more people would enjoy the game more. If you want to enjoy it more I think you have to think outside of the typical weekend crowd. And I have no problem sharing the land with dog walkers or hikers - in the off season. It's too dangerous for them otherwise.

The best time to enjoy the game is as near to sunrise as you can stand it, putting on your Dry-joys, and walking with a minimalist set. Most of the time I am off the course before 8-9 am. Once you get in the habit, it becomes quite nice to see wildlife of the natural variety and some really beautiful sunrises. Plus, you really haven't lived until you've played in fog so thick that you can only hear the ball land.

I have gotten better by playing the game, not by practicing at the driving range. I hate driving ranges to be honest. IMO, the only way to get better is to play the ball as it lies.

So I'd like to see more 9 hole municipal courses on reclaimed or "waste lands" of a rougher texture and more people walking. The first courses were like that, a lot of them fewer than 9 holes, and they shared the land with all kinds of people and activities. But there is probably too much money involved now to roll back the clock.

 

[MountainKing]

20 hours ago, kthomas said:

I find this an interesting topic, partly because I've been thinking a lot lately about some of the big problems that plague golf:

 

1. It's not always accessible. Some areas may have plenty of courses accessible to the average golfer, other places not so much.

2. It takes a long time to play. Especially on the weekends. I know many of us here have encountered 5+ hour rounds of golf. It's the only sport I know of where people participating ~4 hours before you can potentially dictate how slow your game is going to be. 

3. It can be costly. It's certainly not a cheap sport. 

4. Golf courses take up a lot of space and are resource intensive. It's becoming harder and harder to justify (to the general public) using large spaces for golf courses. A golf course is a lot of space dedicated to a single set of users: golfers. There's also an argument that they use up a lot of resources (water, fertilizers, etc.), which in the day and age of greater social awareness and consciousness of our impacts, is a tough one to overcome. Not much of a battle for existing golf courses, but in the future new golf courses may be harder and harder to justify.

 

 

On # 2 - it shouldn't take a long time to play.  The problem is guys go out there and just want to drink, screw around, or really just do whatever it is they want to do, which results in 4:30+ rounds for everybody else behind them.  There's two clubs in the Chicago area that are golf only clubs, no outings, no alcohol ect,on a packed weekend day you can get through in 3:30 or less.  This is because the people out there are there to golf, and not screw around. A group of 4 should be able to get around on most courses in under 3:30 if they're out there playing ready golf and focusing on golf.  If you're out there to do something other than golf, that's the group I think should be looking at Top Golf, and would probably have a better time at Top Golf.   

 

#4 - Most modern courses around this area seem to be built with giant banquet halls for events and weddings.  This tends to be the primary source of revenue for these places, and the course itself is just kind of there. You're right on the resources, but a lot of places the course has become secondary to the facilities. 

 

[Beavis1846]

I think OP real questions is, will China take over the world and therefore we cant play golf anymore when  that happens lol

[bassman1308]

I enjoy playing competitive golf BUT I enjoy hitting golf balls as much.   My dad owned a home on the edge of town with a small pasture surrounded by trees.  I could go out there, by myself,  on a sunny 40 degree day, even with the wind blowing 20, park my PU out of the wind,  and hit balls .  See Deer, foxes, etc occasionally.  Listen to the Chiefs on radio.  I got to were I enjoyed that as much as actual golf.  So peaceful. I followed Mike Maves (sevem1) at the time and would practice his teachings one step at a time.  That helped my iron game hugely and I was not bad before starting this .  

[aenemated]

2 hours ago, bassman1308 said:

I enjoy playing competitive golf BUT I enjoy hitting golf balls as much.   My dad owned a home on the edge of town with a small pasture surrounded by trees.  I could go out there, by myself,  on a sunny 40 degree day, even with the wind blowing 20, park my PU out of the wind,  and hit balls .

 

I grew up similarly. Outside a small rural town in NC, our house was on a 7 acre plot, half of which was a field for my horse. And SO much of my childhood was spend like this. 

 

There was a little creek that crossed our front yard about ... 30 yards out and on the other side was where the horse field started. I could hit all the balls I wanted out there so if I couldn't get a ride to the course, I'd just walk out to the field with my 8 iron (why an 8 iron? It was exactly an 8 iron from where I'd start to a big tree), my shag bag full of Top Flites and just knock 'em bath and forth. 

 

Which, funny enough, was a huge help with my irons game because when you have to walk around to pick up balls, you don't wanna spend a bunch of time walking around. So, ya know, if I hit them all close together, I wouldn't have to walk as much. Hell, I STILL do this at the range - wherever the first one with whatever I'm hitting goes ... that's my target. 

 

So yeah, I love being a range rat. But it'll never replace actually playing for me. 

[ChipNRun]

10 hours ago, MtlJeff said:

Golf courses are arguably a poor use of land, i have said that in the past, but more than anything golf struggles with optics (as i said, to debate, in another thread that doesn't need to be rehashed, some people hate golf for reasons that have little to do with the sport. ).

 

I agree that it's the optics rather than damage that's the problem. Some things to consider:

• Golf courses and country clubs are green space. The grass and the trees absorb carbon dioxide in high-population areas and give off oxygen. The green space also buffers noise pollution.
• Urban planners emphasize that public golf courses and often adjacent park area ensure everyday people have access to public green space. 
• Granted, golf industry applies fertilizers and weed-killers to the turf. But, golf techs have found ways to create barriers between the course structures and waterways and marshlands.
• Golf operations partner with the federal government to combine golf course creek and waterway realignment with area flood control.  

[bassman1308]

5 hours ago, aenemated said:

grew up similarly. Outside a small rural town in NC, our house was on a 7 acre plot, half of which was a field for my horse. And SO much of my childhood was spend like this. 

 

There was a little creek that crossed our front yard about ... 30 yards out and on the other side was where the horse field started. I could hit all the balls I wanted out there so if I couldn't get a ride to the course, I'd just walk out to the field with my 8 iron (why an 8 iron? It was exactly an 8 iron from where I'd start to a big tree), my shag bag full of Top Flites and just knock 'em bath and forth. 

 

Which, funny enough, was a huge help with my irons game because when you have to walk around to pick up balls, you don't wanna spend a bunch of time walking around. So, ya know, if I hit them all close together, I wouldn't have to walk as much. Hell, I STILL do this at the range - wherever the first one with whatever I'm hitting goes ... that's my target. 

 

So yeah, I love being a range rat. But it'll never replace actually playing for me.   

******************************************************************************

Aenemated:  I had enough room to hit up to a 5 iron.  After hitting my 40 balls, I'd drop my ball bag into the middle of them,  and with my 52*, chip them back to my bag.   and it cost me nothing...

 

[Soloman1]

15 hours ago, MtlJeff said:

Golf courses are arguably a poor use of land...

 

I think they're a great use of land. Being probably at least twice your age, you'd be surprised at how different the world looks to me in my lifetime than it looks to you in your lifetime.

 

Concrete, house, house, houses, apartments, apartments, shopping centers, strip center, fast food, Walmarts everywhere. Quebec City and Montreal are different, but if you got to most any city in the US, they look alike. The same damn franchises and chain stores everywhere. How many Starbucks can you have on one street? Relentless, boring, dismal. mind numbing congestion with cars and people crawling all over each other like ants.

 

Give me 250 acres of green space. Golf courses serve the greater good of bringing some sanity to an asphalt world.

[tatertot]

On 8/19/2021 at 7:31 AM, Dcohenour said:

If your not playing the ball as it lies, your not playing golf, even if you are on a golf course. Hitting balls off of rubber tubes and mats is not golf. Hitting a ball into a screen is not golf. Hitting balls into lighted circles on a range isn't golf. 

Call these pursuits something else, but don't call them golf.

Mr. Golf has spoken ... you are all excused.

[llewol007]

So driving range versus playing on a golf course. Which do you think most people will pick. Here you have choices and options. Cant compare if we have different situations.

[BNGL]

On 8/19/2021 at 6:15 AM, Wormkiller said:

I listened to a podcast called Local Knowledge where they talked about golf in Japan, and how there are literally millions of ‘golfers’ who never even get a chance to play on a course. Instead, they exclusively get their golf fix hitting balls on driving ranges. There is just not enough space for courses and the prices to play real golf is too high.

 

The same applies to many densely populated Asian countries - China, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand. Playing actual rounds is an absolute luxury to the overwhelming majority who enjoy the game. For this majority, there only access to the game is through driving ranges. And it’s only getting worse as population and urbanisation increases and climate change increasingly limiting the ability to maintain courses and play outside.
 

It might even be reasonable to even assume a very high percentage of ‘golfers’ actually rarely play rounds on courses - from a world wide context that is. Not to mention the millions of social golfers who would choose to hit balls with their buds having beers over hacking around on an actual course.

 

Lately I’ve been putting in solid hours on the range with the aim of getting technically better. I actually find it immensely enjoyable hitting buckets of balls. I don’t know how many can relate. 
 

I played a round a few days ago and it occurred to me that I might actually get more enjoyment out of the game on the range than on the course. I played ok, it wasn’t the standard of my  play that I was disappointed with, rather it was waiting on the tee for the green to clear, the pressure of making a good shot, the whinging of my playing partner, the time between hitting balls…

 

So the range has typically been seen as a practice facility to work on your game to take to the course. Is it perhaps time to consider hitting balls on the range as an equal or perhaps even the dominant way to ‘play’ the game?

Totally agree with you. I still love the game and play 3-4 times per week, but what I really loved was competing. And now between health and getting older I dont compete as much as I used to so the game is now just a match with friends for usually less than 50 bucks all in which is great and all, but I liked the excitement and nervousness of real gambling (Im a total degenerate I know) but now that I dont do that anymore the place for me is the range. The competition for me is against myself, its going back day after day and seeing the improvement feeling that perfect shot changing trajectories shaping it that is what is the most fun to me now. I love nothing more than hitting good solid golf shots and appreciate it in others as well. 

 

I learned the game on the range and as a kid and then by beating 1000s of balls a day into a net my dad built when we moved to a place with no golf courses or ranges close by, so I honed a swing that was built to hit the golf ball solidly since I couldnt really see the ball flight except into the net I had to go off of feel and knowing my swing. 

[MtlJeff]

11 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

 

I think they're a great use of land. Being probably at least twice your age, you'd be surprised at how different the world looks to me in my lifetime than it looks to you in your lifetime.

 

Concrete, house, house, houses, apartments, apartments, shopping centers, strip center, fast food, Walmarts everywhere. Quebec City and Montreal are different, but if you got to most any city in the US, they look alike. The same damn franchises and chain stores everywhere. How many Starbucks can you have on one street? Relentless, boring, dismal. mind numbing congestion with cars and people crawling all over each other like ants.

 

Give me 250 acres of green space. Golf courses serve the greater good of bringing some sanity to an asphalt world.

 

What I meant was more , rather than a golf course you could have a public access park, or the like...not necessarily more strip malls or Starbucks!

 

But at the end of the day I'm happy there's golf courses , since I like golf

 

Also there is no way you are twice my age!

[miamistomp]

On 8/20/2021 at 10:20 AM, Dcohenour said:

After almost 50 years of golf I have found that the game can be very cheap in the US if you want it to be. My average 9 hole greens fee is around $15. I don't play pricey clubs at pricey clubs. There are at least a dozen extremely well known courses within an hour in every direction here in east central Wisconsin that I don't play because I simply can't afford them and wouldn't find them enjoyable even if I did.

That probably comes from growing up on a 9 holes converted farm field / "goat track", so my mental stigma attached to expensive courses drives that.

Golf courses could be cheaper to maintain and play IF golfers were willing to turn the clock back a couple hundred years regarding condition and did not insist on fairways that look like putting greens and riding instead of walking. I don't agree that golf courses are a waste of land, since I play regularly on 2 courses that couldn't be built on anyway. One is surrounded by and winds through a subdivision, so...

If the norm were 9 hole rounds walking I think a lot more people would enjoy the game more. If you want to enjoy it more I think you have to think outside of the typical weekend crowd. And I have no problem sharing the land with dog walkers or hikers - in the off season. It's too dangerous for them otherwise.

The best time to enjoy the game is as near to sunrise as you can stand it, putting on your Dry-joys, and walking with a minimalist set. Most of the time I am off the course before 8-9 am. Once you get in the habit, it becomes quite nice to see wildlife of the natural variety and some really beautiful sunrises. Plus, you really haven't lived until you've played in fog so thick that you can only hear the ball land.

I have gotten better by playing the game, not by practicing at the driving range. I hate driving ranges to be honest. IMO, the only way to get better is to play the ball as it lies.

So I'd like to see more 9 hole municipal courses on reclaimed or "waste lands" of a rougher texture and more people walking. The first courses were like that, a lot of them fewer than 9 holes, and they shared the land with all kinds of people and activities. But there is probably too much money involved now to roll back the clock.

 

 More walkable goat tracks are a good thing and a great equalizer when you make holes challenging .

  No need for the 400 yard par 4s that run parallel and half the people are in the wrong fairway

  If you just want to bomb the ball, go to the range

[FATC1TY]

On 8/20/2021 at 6:31 AM, Wormkiller said:

Very subjective opinion.

 

very deep response.

 

 

arent all opinions subjective?

 

 

the range isn’t golf, period.  It’s like saying Kleenex and lotion is sex. 

Edited August 22, 2021 by FATC1TY

[pktaske]

I was going to reply to this thread with some meaningful comment. I read all the way through it and then realized it was just plain stupid. (And I do apologize for the harshness here but I really could not find another word).

 

 

[Pearson10M]

If I only played at a driving range, I would miss driving the golf cart over bumpy paths while trying not to spill my drink.