Possible LPGA Course Idea ala TPC Sawgrass

[ThinkingPlus]

https://golf.com/travel/brandel-chamblee-plans-golf-course-women-texas/?amp=1

 

While the idea is intriguing, the location is insane.  The community/area is a poor supporter of golf in general and would never attract top pros, women or otherwise.  I see this being a big bag of fail, but I suppose time will tell.

[Argonne69]

Lots to digest there. Recall that Sawgrass was basically a swamp when the Dyes got to work. Build it and they will come? With the Chevron moving to Houston, I really don't want to see three tournaments in Texas. Spread it out. 

 

'Not sure why they don't renovate the courses at LPGA International. Wasn't that supposed to be the "home" course for the tour? 

 

The 10th ranked LPGA player in scoring average is shooting 70. The median is 71.8. In the 20-21 PGA Tour season, the 10th best scoring average was 69.9. The median was 71.0. Can't say I'd get worked up about 0.8 shots. Having watched plenty of both tours for over a decade I'd say the putting is the biggest difference. 

 

6100 yds? Is he kidding? They're already shooting 20 under or better at 6300+ yds. They need longer courses, not shorter. I do agree that the women do get more than their fair share of courses that weren't really designed for their length. Also, many of the better privates are off the table. Having a new course designed for 6300 to 6800 yds wouldn't be bad as long as it's not toned down too much.

 

[KBong]

5 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

https://golf.com/travel/brandel-chamblee-plans-golf-course-women-texas/?amp=1

 

While the idea is intriguing, the location is insane.  The community/area is a poor supporter of golf in general and would never attract top pros, women or otherwise.  I see this being a big bag of fail, but I suppose time will tell.

LMAO...is it April 1 already?🤣

[KBong]

5 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

https://golf.com/travel/brandel-chamblee-plans-golf-course-women-texas/?amp=1

 

While the idea is intriguing, the location is insane.  The community/area is a poor supporter of golf in general and would never.......

They said the same when Keiser built Bandon Dunes at such an isolated location.....now look at Bandon...... 5 championship courses sold out for 2022 and getting ready to open reservations soon for 2023.

[KBong]

5 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

https://golf.com/travel/brandel-chamblee-plans-golf-course-women-texas/?amp=1

 

While the idea is intriguing, the location is insane.  The community/area is a poor supporter of golf in general and would never attract top pros, women or otherwise.  I see this being a big bag of fail, but I suppose time will tell.

LMAO

Is Chamblee trolling for attention or his latest crack pipe purchase really that good?

 

Yup.....golfers will spend $600 peak season (TPC Sawgrass rate) for a 6200 yd course designed for women....LMAO.

 

Unless there is a real estate play...many stand alone golf courses struggle to B/E.

This pandemic golf demand will eventually subside.

 

I know this won't be a favorable comment...but the golf industry is really fueled by avid male golfers...80/20 rule.

 

Ya...a big failure IMO.

 

The demographics on this forum is an indication of the interest in golf...there are 1000's of WRX members...I know of 4 female WRX members who post here....but I don't consider them frequent posting participants.

Yes, there are other female WRX members...but they really post infrequently.

 

 

[KBong]

31 minutes ago, Argonne69 said:

 

 

6100 yds? Is he kidding? They're already shooting 20 under or better at 6300+ yds. They need longer courses, not shorter.

 

Yup...the LPGA pros can demolish 6500+ courses at 71.5/130 ratings.

 

I want to see the gals at 6600+ with tough course set ups....I hate these low scoring women and men events.

 

For the guys...IMO...they should play courses at 8000+...but few courses are 8000+ yards...and not many courses want to host pro events.

[ThinkingPlus]

I'll update this thread if I hear any local news or info about this venture.  I have played Treasure Hills many times so stopping by periodically to check on Ramble's renovation progress will be easy.  Lots of course renovation going on in the area since city of Harlingen is spending $3.1 million to fix up their muni Tony Butler.  Our valley wide women's group have played both courses in the past and likely will again once they are spiffed up.

[Lobby]

Harlingen?    Jeez, the only time they have nice weather is January.   And maybe a bit of February.

Just kidding, but I'm not far from the truth.

[ThinkingPlus]

1 minute ago, Lobby said:

Harlingen?    Jeez, the only time they have nice weather is January.   And maybe a bit of February.

Just kidding, but I'm not far from the truth.

Triple digit heat index May thru September.  What's not to like.  It was a heat index of 99 today.  Downright chilly.  Might have to break out my winter shorts.

[KBong]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Triple digit heat index May thru September.  What's not to like.  It was a heat index of 99 today.  Downright chilly.  Might have to break out my winter shorts.

It was a lovely 13*C and raining here...WTF.....6" of rain last Fri-Sun....WTF.

 

Is South Padre Island nice?

I don't think they have the nice white beaches like Gulf Shores, AL or the FLA panhandle.

[ThinkingPlus]

8 minutes ago, KBong said:

It was a lovely 13*C and raining here...WTF.....6" of rain last Fri-Sun....WTF.

 

Is South Padre Island nice?

I don't think they have the nice white beaches like Gulf Shores, AL or the FLA panhandle.

SPI has very nice beaches.  The water is a very pretty blue.  Sand is light colored, but not white like upper west coast of FL.  The fishing is pretty good.  Redfish, speckled trout, flounder, and some snook in the Laguna Madre.  We also get summer tarpon, kingfish, and Spanish mackerel in the inlet.  The restaurant scene is fairly unsophisticated.  Mostly fried seafood and lots of boiled shrimp.  We have a place nearby with a boat so we spend a good bit of time down there (just got back home from a weekend installing an on board battery charger and LED nav light on the boat).

[Shilgy]

Sounds lovely….

 

With a crime rate of 53 per one thousand residents, Harlingen has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes - from the smallest towns to the very largest cities. One's chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 19.

[KBong]

4 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Sounds lovely….

 

With a crime rate of 53 per one thousand residents, Harlingen has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes - from the smallest towns to the very largest cities. One's chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 19.

So you're sayin Chamblee's an idiot?,,,,just askin for a friend. 🤣

[Shilgy]

10 minutes ago, KBong said:

So you're sayin Chamblee's an idiot?,,,,just askin for a friend. 🤣

Yes, and to expand a bit.  6100 yards?  When the weekly winning score is pushing -20 from 6600?
 

His idea has merit but it’s misguided imho.  There is nothing you can do to create more speed height and spin to the ladies game.  So unless you want a boring par snooze fest you cannot tuck pins like you do the mens. For the same reason long thick rough is also more penal for the women.  
 

The women play the game brilliantly. But different.  Their game is more the style Hogan and company espoused.  Fairways and greens rule.  The Brodie strokes gained mentality is a bit different for the women. Especially if thick green side rough is in play.  
 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

10 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Yes, and to expand a bit.  6100 yards?  When the weekly winning score is pushing -20 from 6600?
 

His idea has merit but it’s misguided imho.  There is nothing you can do to create more speed height and spin to the ladies game.  So unless you want a boring par snooze fest you cannot tuck pins like you do the mens. For the same reason long thick rough is also more penal for the women.  
 

The women play the game brilliantly. But different.  Their game is more the style Hogan and company espoused.  Fairways and greens rule.  The Brodie strokes gained mentality is a bit different for the women. Especially if thick green side rough is in play.  
 

 

Ramble is a bit too focused on distance for sure.  I have broken par from our white tees at 6150 yards.  I am an old, fat lady.  The best women in the world can surely handle 6500 - 6700 yards.  However, the rough needs to be managed.  This is especially true if its Bermuda.  The greens cannot be trampolines.  The bunkers cannot be 6'+ deep (especially fairway bunkers).  The green complexes need to be more old school, sloped back to front and not raised up to the moon.  The fairways don't need to be ultra-wide, but tree lined soft fairways even 30 yards wide make it tough on women.  Too many punch outs and not enough runout on lower flighted drivers (even LPGA pros don't bomb drivers ultra high).  Other folks more knowledgeable than myself could come up with more suggestions I am sure.

[Argonne69]

Do we want the scores to be major-like, or a few strokes lower without tumbling into birdiefest territory? Lots of ways to keep the scores in check without having to trick it up. We've seen some good golf on a few new courses these past two seasons. 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

26 minutes ago, Argonne69 said:

Do we want the scores to be major-like, or a few strokes lower without tumbling into birdiefest territory? Lots of ways to keep the scores in check without having to trick it up. We've seen some good golf on a few new courses these past two seasons. 

 

I think the sweetspot is -12 to -15.  Low enough to be entertaining, but challenging enough that it isn't a track meet putting contest.  JMO

[Soloman1]

I know I'm going to look stupid with this question, but why can't a design be equally challenging from different tee boxes? It isn't laser science to have bunkers, landing areas, penalty areas, etc., fluid so it's just as good of a course from any length.

[Argonne69]

8 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

I think the sweetspot is -12 to -15.  Low enough to be entertaining, but challenging enough that it isn't a track meet putting contest.  JMO

 

So basically we want Wilshire CC, host of three Hugel LA Opens. The winning scores were 16, 14, and 12 under par. Tricky greens. Enough trouble off the tee. 

 

Lake Merced also produces some great golf without crazy low scores. 

 

The Drive On at Inverness last year was also excellent. 

 

[Argonne69]

2 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

I know I'm going to look stupid with this question, but why can't a design be equally challenging from different tee boxes? It isn't laser science to have bunkers, landing areas, penalty areas, etc., fluid so it's just as good of a course from any length.

 

Let's take a typical par 4 of 410 yds. Put a fairway bunker 240 - 260 yds out. It'll come into play for the women averaging 255 yds. The back tees will likely have the men playing from 480 yds. The men are going to have no problem carrying that bunker, as they're now carrying drives 300+ yds. If the men do happen to find the bunker, leaving 150 yds, they'll be hitting a PW or 9i, whereas the women will need a 7i or 6i. A steep face will most likely require a layup short of the green. 

 

Of course one can design long fairway bunkers that catch everything, but unless the men start playing 7800+ yd courses, they're still hitting short irons out of them. 

[Soloman1]

I played courses overseas with 100 yard long bunkers down a side and the challenge was the same from different tees. Creeks are good at being long too. 🙂

[ThinkingPlus]

25 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

I know I'm going to look stupid with this question, but why can't a design be equally challenging from different tee boxes? It isn't laser science to have bunkers, landing areas, penalty areas, etc., fluid so it's just as good of a course from any length.

It can be done, but I am guessing it is rarely a design goal.  Certainly there is rarely any emphasis on the "afterthought" tees.  Otherwise known as the forward tees.

[Argonne69]

10 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

It can be done, but I am guessing it is rarely a design goal.  Certainly there is rarely any emphasis on the "afterthought" tees.  Otherwise known as the forward tees.

 

Heck, the forward "tees" often lack a real teebox. I've seen more than my fair share of forward tees simply planted in the fairway, or a patch of grass cut out of the rough. Pfffttt. 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

2 minutes ago, Argonne69 said:

 

Heck, the forward "tees" often lack a real teebox. I've seen more than my fair share of forward tees simply planted in the fairway, or a patch of grass cut out of the rough. Pfffttt. 

 

Yep.  Also frequently the forward tees will be offset to a convenient spot where the angle is dreadful and pointed at bad spots to boot.  Arrggghh!

[MagicClassic407]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Heck, the forward "tees" often lack a real teebox.

Yup, then there's the REALLY forward tees, aka the "Friendlies". I like 'em.

[KBong]

1 hour ago, MagicClassic407 said:

Yup, then there's the REALLY forward tees, aka the "Friendlies". I like 'em.

Friendlies???....never heard that one.🤣

[KBong]

This is not going to be a popular post...but it is reality.

 

As a business person with a goal to turn a great profit...why would one design a course for women when....generally speaking....women golfers are such a small target market.

 

Isn't it the most logical thing to do when creating a product or service to design something to attract a market large enough that will sustain the business model for a prolonged period of time.

 

Let's be honest...the golf industry is fueled by men not women...and it's the classic 80/20 rule where the AVID golfers are the one's generating the majority of the golf spends.

 

[Rapidcat]

There's a course I play that has multiple tee sets that are thoughtfully designed so that on appropriate holes the forward tees are set in positions that provide different angles from the back tees angles into fairways/greens to still provide a shot-making challenge for shorter hitters.

 

Norman-designed course, very cleverly done.

 

This is the sort of design that can be a multi-purpose usage applicable for men/women/longer/shorter hitters.  

[Golf Dino]

14 hours ago, KBong said:

As a business person with a goal to turn a great profit...why would one design a course for women when....generally speaking....women golfers are such a small target market.

 

Isn't it the most logical thing to do when creating a product or service to design something to attract a market large enough that will sustain the business model for a prolonged period of time.

 

 

The answer to your questions: 

 

1.   Substitute "Seniors" or "newer players" for "women";
2.   Market research indicated that the biggest market for growth of golf is in shorter courses . . . courses that allow the players that hit a 7-iron 150 yards or less, to enjoy golf through more scoring opportunities.  The recreational golfer loves to make birdies and many often celebrate with "birdie juice" particularly when playing with a regular set of playing partners.*  
    

If you think about it, shorter courses like Country Meadows and Mylora or the Savage Creek course (these are courses in the greater Vancouver area), often have some of the busiest traffic because they are short courses, take 3 hours to play, leaving many players time to enjoy a libation or two post round, where they can talk about the "what ifs", "should have's", "could have's" etc. . . 

 

That is where the business aspect comes into it . . . imagine a course that takes only 3 hours to play 18 holes . . . you will definitely get much more afterwork and twilight crowds, plus with appropriate tee box placements, can get more of the corporate social events as well . . . the customer appreciation events to thank customers (many of whom don't play golf or do not play regularly).  

 

Their intended market is not the player that hits a 7-iron 170 yards or a driver over 250 yards carry (although the LPGA women most certainly can).

 

 

* Don't ask for that market research, I have lost track of it over the past few years . . . and I cannot be bothered to go searching for it! 😛 

[Bad9]

9 minutes ago, Golf Dino said:

 

 

The answer to your questions: 

 

1.   Substitute "Seniors" or "newer players" for "women";
2.   Market research indicated that the biggest market for growth of golf is in shorter courses . . . courses that allow the players that hit a 7-iron 150 yards or less, to enjoy golf through more scoring opportunities.  The recreational golfer loves to make birdies and many often celebrate with "birdie juice" particularly when playing with a regular set of playing partners.*  
    

If you think about it, shorter courses like Country Meadows and Mylora or the Savage Creek course (these are courses in the greater Vancouver area), often have some of the busiest traffic because they are short courses, take 3 hours to play, leaving many players time to enjoy a libation or two post round, where they can talk about the "what ifs", "should have's", "could have's" etc. . . 

 

That is where the business aspect comes into it . . . imagine a course that takes only 3 hours to play 18 holes . . . you will definitely get much more afterwork and twilight crowds, plus with appropriate tee box placements, can get more of the corporate social events as well . . . the customer appreciation events to thank customers (many of whom don't play golf or do not play regularly).  

 

Their intended market is not the player that hits a 7-iron 170 yards or a driver over 250 yards carry (although the LPGA women most certainly can).

 

 

* Don't ask for that market research, I have lost track of it over the past few years . . . and I cannot be bothered to go searching for it! 😛 

 

I don't buy into the rationale that shorter courses=less time. Most guys would consider where I play short (par 71, 6300yds) flat, compact, easy to walk with no water on the course. Fairways are fairly generous but greens are small. I would say 2% play it in 3-3.5 hrs with most rounds being 4.5 and considered to be the norm. In my experience slow play is caused 99.99% by players independent of course length.

 

Edit to add there are already hundreds of courses too short for modern players, pros and amateurs of all levels (extrapolating from what I read on Wrx) so why the need to build more. Can't recreational golfers just fill up those that are being abandoned by what I guess we call non recreational players?

Edited October 22, 2021 by Bad9