Modern Course Architecture & Pace of Play

[deadsolid...shank]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390337089' post='8503301']
[quote name='deadsolid...shank' timestamp='1390312613' post='8500407']
Interesting Sean. I agree with course design having a big impact on pace, but I kind of see it in a different direction.

It seems to me that "modern design" now means the big, open courses like Bandon, Prairie Club, etc. They are open and windswept with little rough and few trees. Very open into the greens. And to me anyway, few forced carries off the tees, if the correct tees are chosen. Not as many opportunities for those lost balls and plenty of room off the tee to be a bit wayward. Where I see the slowness come into play on these courses is on the greens. Big, even huge greens with severe undulations mean many more putts for each player. But it seems to me that these newer style courses should actually move a bit quicker tee to green. In theory anyway.

It doesn't seem like there are many of the tight, parkland style courses being built now. My caveat is I haven't played many of these, so all my speculation is based off what I've read, so it's also entirely possible I have no clue what I'm talking about and am completely off base.
[/quote]

I haven't seen any of those Deadsolid, but they sound good. :-)
[/quote]

I guess the question that arises is what you consider modern. To me right now modern is the Bandon Dunes style, not the housing development course. That seems to be the in style course to build now.

I know we joked on the Dunes course at the Prairie Club that you would have to try real hard to miss a fairway, as long as you miss the fairway bunkers it was not too difficult to stay out of trouble. But the difficulty there lies in the greens. Getting a GIR really doesn't mean much because of the putt you can have left.

So you can move fairly rapidly tee to green, but when players are taking 40+ putts during a round that is what slows that group down.

[Sean2]

[quote name='deadsolid...shank' timestamp='1390347799' post='8504541']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390337089' post='8503301']
[quote name='deadsolid...shank' timestamp='1390312613' post='8500407']
Interesting Sean. I agree with course design having a big impact on pace, but I kind of see it in a different direction.

It seems to me that "modern design" now means the big, open courses like Bandon, Prairie Club, etc. They are open and windswept with little rough and few trees. Very open into the greens. And to me anyway, few forced carries off the tees, if the correct tees are chosen. Not as many opportunities for those lost balls and plenty of room off the tee to be a bit wayward. Where I see the slowness come into play on these courses is on the greens. Big, even huge greens with severe undulations mean many more putts for each player. But it seems to me that these newer style courses should actually move a bit quicker tee to green. In theory anyway.

It doesn't seem like there are many of the tight, parkland style courses being built now. My caveat is I haven't played many of these, so all my speculation is based off what I've read, so it's also entirely possible I have no clue what I'm talking about and am completely off base.
[/quote]

I haven't seen any of those Deadsolid, but they sound good. :-)
[/quote]

I guess the question that arises is what you consider modern. To me right now modern is the Bandon Dunes style, not the housing development course. That seems to be the in style course to build now.

I know we joked on the Dunes course at the Prairie Club that you would have to try real hard to miss a fairway, as long as you miss the fairway bunkers it was not too difficult to stay out of trouble. But the difficulty there lies in the greens. Getting a GIR really doesn't mean much because of the putt you can have left.

So you can move fairly rapidly tee to green, but when players are taking 40+ putts during a round that is what slows that group down.
[/quote]

What Tee described above, and what I responded to in his post. :-)

[Break81]

For what it's worth my favorite course is Coyote Hills in Fullerton , CA - Newish design by the late Payne Stewart. Never takes more than 4:30, usually less and they do space the tee times out a little and the course is very fair if you play from the correct tees. Perfect mixture of water, ob and forced carries. Nothing a 20 capper couldn't handle and enjoy.

If you ever in OC it's a must play in my opinion.
[url="http://www.coyotehillsgc.com/"]http://www.coyotehillsgc.com/[/url]

[backtees]

There are some very classic, traditional 18-hole courses very close to where I live. Courses that have been built decades ago (the oldest in 1891, the “youngest” in 1927).

Most of them are parkland-courses and the only thing they added over the decades was a bit of water – a creek here, a pond there. But all the rest remained the same and it is still the original layout and design you can find there.

The shortest course is only 5960 yards long (par 68, slope 130), the longest 6530 yars (par 70, slope 126). On one of them the even play a tournament of the European seniors tour.

All these courses are absolutely fantastic to play and the holes are varied, ask for more than just hitting the ball as far as possible from the tee. They all pose a challenge to score a good result.

And: It takes a foursome clearly less than 4 hours to play 18 holes. Including a break after 9 for a sandwich and a cool beverage, a quick rest to enjoy the landscape and the view to the mountains.

[Itsjustagame]

I have posted this before, but the biggest contributing factor to slow play is simply attitude. Too many people just don't care how long it takes to play.
If you expect to play in 4.5 hours- you can. If you don't care- you won't.
I know 30 handicappers that will play a hard course quickly, and good golfers who will take forever to play no matter where they are.
It's all about expectations.

[backtees]

[quote name='Itsjustagame' timestamp='1390388718' post='8507425']
I have posted this before, but the biggest contributing factor to slow play is simply attitude. Too many people just don't care how long it takes to play.
If you expect to play in 4.5 hours- you can. If you don't care- you won't.
I know 30 handicappers that will play a hard course quickly, and good golfers who will take forever to play no matter where they are.
It's all about expectations.
[/quote]

There you go - it's an attitude! And together with longer courses these are the two main time-thieves....

[Argonne69]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390262385' post='8497591']
[quote name='oldpalchamp' timestamp='1390261949' post='8497531']
I have played extremely difficult courses in less than 4-hours. Granted, most of them were private courses, but it can be done. Conversely, I have played short, open courses with unprotected greens and had 6-hour rounds. I know we have been discussing pace of play for a while, but I think the primary reason for slow play is over crowded courses.

Many, if not most of the newer designs, feature multiple tee boxes that affords the player lots of choices.
[/quote]

I am speaking in broad generalities. And, as I said in my original post, there are many other reasons as well...which have been discussed in a lot of other threads. However, if golfers can immediately find their golf balls and hit them again, as opposed to having to spend a few minutes looking for them, that would speed things up a bit. I'm not saying this is the sole reason, simply a contributing factor.
[/quote]

I think you have to add course maintenance to the list of potential issues. The architect doesn't dictate the length of the rough. We've all played plenty of courses where you spend ungodly amount of time looking for your ball in the rough, or in/under unpruned trees.

I believe many architects try to provide different tee boxes with various levels of challenges. The black/blue tees may require a forced carry, but the white/red may not. If people are playing from the wrong tees, it's not the architects fault.

I don't disagree that course architecture can be a factor. For example, blind tee shots that require the group to guess when the group in front may be clear generally increases the length of the round. Also, driveable par 4's are fun, but slow play for the most part, even more so that par 3's.

However, I'd say a) tee times too close together, b) players playing from the wrong tees, c) general lack of awareness, and d) not playing ready golf are the biggest contributors.

[Argonne69]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390310682' post='8500247']
My home course has water on every hole, very narrow fairways, and hardly any rough...basically you put your ball in the fairway or it is in a hazard, not to mention multiple forced carries. A couple of towns over is a local muni. The fairways are extremely wide...in many cases you can hit your ball two fairways over and still have a shot to the green. The slopes of these two course are radically different.
[/quote]

I don't believe water hazards in themselves contribute to slow play, but rather, the design of the water hazard. If they have clean banks, then it's very easy to determine if your ball is in the hazard. OTOH, if they let the grass/weeds grow, you may spend a lot of time looking for your ball. Also, on some hazards, if your ball is in, it's unplayable, so you quickly drop and go on. OTOH, some water hazards may allow for balls to be playable, which could increase the amount of time to decide/play.

In a nutshell, the design of the water hazard may or may not contribute to a pace of play issue. A well designed hazard should not.

[Argonne69]

[quote name='BamafaninKY' timestamp='1390322016' post='8501371']
Anyone else noticed that when you take a call from your wife, the next shot is horrible? It never fails.
[/quote]

'Played with a guy this past weekend that had Godzilla's roar as the ringtone for his wife's profile. His phone went off in the middle of his swing on one hole. I damn near pissed my pants I laughed so hard. :-)

[teejaywhy]

[quote name='Argonne69' timestamp='1390409257' post='8509091']
I think you have to add course maintenance to the list of potential issues. The architect doesn't dictate the length of the rough. We've all played plenty of courses where you spend ungodly amount of time looking for your ball in the rough, or in/under unpruned trees.
[/quote]

It's an unfortunate fact that many times course setup goes against or at least interferes with the designer's intent. Raise your hand if your course has "fairway bunkers" that are yards away from the fairway, surrounded by a sea of rough?

And those unpruned "Christmas trees" with branches to the ground are the worst. No competent designer would spec those trees, guaranteed that those were added after the fact by some misguided "course beautification" committee.

But we all agree that there many factors influencing the increasingly slower pace of play. The discussion of this thread should be focused on design factors that may cause for slow play.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Argonne69' timestamp='1390409600' post='8509125']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390310682' post='8500247']
My home course has water on every hole, very narrow fairways, and hardly any rough...basically you put your ball in the fairway or it is in a hazard, not to mention multiple forced carries. A couple of towns over is a local muni. The fairways are extremely wide...in many cases you can hit your ball two fairways over and still have a shot to the green. The slopes of these two course are radically different.
[/quote]

I don't believe water hazards in themselves contribute to slow play, but rather, the design of the water hazard. If they have clean banks, then it's very easy to determine if your ball is in the hazard. OTOH, if they let the grass/weeds grow, you may spend a lot of time looking for your ball. Also, on some hazards, if your ball is in, it's unplayable, so you quickly drop and go on. OTOH, some water hazards may allow for balls to be playable, which could increase the amount of time to decide/play.

In a nutshell, the design of the water hazard may or may not contribute to a pace of play issue. A well designed hazard should not.
[/quote]

Depends. If there are a lot of forced carries, or if your ball lands on the extreme left or right side of the fairway and still finds the hazard because of the slope of the fairway...hazards will have growth around them, it's the nature of pond/stream growth.

[lonestar48]

I agree with the premise of this thread, too many forced carries makes it extremely difficult for the average golfer. Next time you're paired with a high capper, try to notice how many tops and thin shots he/she hits. Now you have to look in hazard or wait until they play the drop...makes it painfully slow!

[Sean2]

I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

62% said penalize slow players.
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.

[lonestar48]

Slow golfers are slow because they lack the skill to hit the ball correctly, or at least repeat a certain shot. All courses are hard when you can't hit the ball somewhat correctly most of the time.

There are numerous other things that add minutes over a round but the biggest problem is and always will be the skill of the people who are playing. Put a foursome of high cappers or newbies together and get ready to wait...

[The Pearl]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390427724' post='8511419']
I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

62% said penalize slow players.
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.
[/quote]

Perhaps I missed this earlier, but how do you define pace of play? I think you would agree that each course has it's own "ideal pace". I have played several courses where it was literally impossible for a diligent 4some to play in 3/12 or 4 hrs. You get done and realize it took you 5 hrs but you did not wait on a shot or felt that you were playing slow.

[mr_divots]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390427724' post='8511419']
I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

[u][size=5]62% said penalize slow players.[/size][/u]
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.
[/quote]
Mmmmm... one in five, or two in three.
I come away with a different take. [b]Speed it up! [/b]

[deadsolid...shank]

[quote name='lonestar48' timestamp='1390428524' post='8511483']
Slow golfers are slow because they lack the skill to hit the ball correctly, or at least repeat a certain shot. All courses are hard when you can't hit the ball somewhat correctly most of the time.

There are numerous other things that add minutes over a round but the biggest problem is and always will be the skill of the people who are playing. Put a foursome of high cappers or newbies together and get ready to wait...
[/quote]

No, no, no. Slow golfers are slow because they are slow, not because they are bad. This has been discussed numerous times. But I'm giving my example again anyway.

One of the best players at our club, probably a +3 or +4, extremely meticulous about everything he does. He's slow, no two ways about it. Put four of him together and you're looking at a long round.

Then I'll use my father in law and my dad. Neither one is going to break 100 from even 6,000 yards. But they don't dink around. Find it and hit it, then do it again. Their group would leave the good players group in the dust. It's not about ability.

Should FIL 76, dad 73.

[Sean2]

[quote name='The Pearl' timestamp='1390428703' post='8511499']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390427724' post='8511419']
I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

62% said penalize slow players.
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.
[/quote]

Perhaps I missed this earlier, but how do you define pace of play? I think you would agree that each course has it's own "ideal pace". I have played several courses where it was literally impossible for a diligent 4some to play in 3/12 or 4 hrs. You get done and realize it took you 5 hrs but you did not wait on a shot or felt that you were playing slow.
[/quote]

I didn't define it, as I don't want to get into a discussion about time. This is about what slows the pace down...and I believe course design is a contributing factor.

[backtees]

[quote name='deadsolid...shank' timestamp='1390429280' post='8511569']
[quote name='lonestar48' timestamp='1390428524' post='8511483']
Slow golfers are slow because they lack the skill to hit the ball correctly, or at least repeat a certain shot. All courses are hard when you can't hit the ball somewhat correctly most of the time.

There are numerous other things that add minutes over a round but the biggest problem is and always will be the skill of the people who are playing. Put a foursome of high cappers or newbies together and get ready to wait...
[/quote]

No, no, no. Slow golfers are slow because they are slow, not because they are bad. This has been discussed numerous times. But I'm giving my example again anyway.

One of the best players at our club, probably a +3 or +4, extremely meticulous about everything he does. He's slow, no two ways about it. Put four of him together and you're looking at a long round.

Then I'll use my father in law and my dad. Neither one is going to break 100 from even 6,000 yards. But they don't dink around. Find it and hit it, then do it again. Their group would leave the good players group in the dust. It's not about ability.

Should FIL 76, dad 73.
[/quote]

+1 It's not necessarily higher handicapers that play slow.
I experienced often that a higher handicaper or novice even rushes too much because he/she doesn't not want to delay the group.

Based on my experience it's often the [u]overly ambitios and overachieving[/u] golfer

They might be close to break 100, 90 or 80 and want - at all events and at any price - belong to a more "illustrious circle".
So they want to make efforts, take care ........ and take their time. Which leads to slow play.

[Chris_NH]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390427724' post='8511419']
I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

62% said penalize slow players.
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.
[/quote]

I'd bet my bottom dollar that nearly every one of those 21% also has a shorter set of tees in front of them that they choose not to play ;-)

This is a good thread, Sean (despite the attempt of some to flip it on you).

My thoughts on new courses and architecture. We have an existing stock of golf courses in this country already that seems to be mostly sufficient for the golfing population. Many of those are older/easier designs than some of what you describe as newer with forced carries and other intentionally-difficult design features. In other words, the public isn't exactly clamoring for more of those. What the public wants, generally, is the next new shiny object (myself included btw) - so they want a course that stands out.

Building courses is expensive these days - so it requires a plan that will draw the golfing public to the course. Another easier design will not (IMO) do that. It takes something bolder, more challenging, visually stunning, etc - to get us to plunk down the relatively large money that will be required for a new course.

Having said that, the other thing that occurs to me is that new courses CAN be fresh and different without necessarily being overly difficult to the point where it affects pace of play. I know Bandon is unique, but I think it's instructive. I was talking to my (hacker) boss about the courses and he said that he'd heard they were very difficult. I disagree. They have wide generous fairways (albeit sometiimes with bunker smack in the middle!), large greens that are not overly fast, and one can generally find some way to run the ball up onto the green. In other words, they are different and unique (for the US) but they are PLAYABLE. So new interesting courses can be done - and perhaps we're seeing that shift in style (as someone else alluded to) being played out in a return to some more links-like routes.

Sorry for the ramble :-)

[Argonne69]

[quote name='Chris_NH' timestamp='1390477931' post='8515155']
Having said that, the other thing that occurs to me is that new courses CAN be fresh and different without necessarily being overly difficult to the point where it affects pace of play. I know Bandon is unique, but I think it's instructive. I was talking to my (hacker) boss about the courses and he said that he'd heard they were very difficult. I disagree. They have wide generous fairways (albeit sometiimes with bunker smack in the middle!), large greens that are not overly fast, and one can generally find some way to run the ball up onto the green. In other words, they are different and unique (for the US) but they are PLAYABLE. So new interesting courses can be done - and perhaps we're seeing that shift in style (as someone else alluded to) being played out in a return to some more links-like routes.

[/quote]

Keep in mind that Bandon is a seaside (links) resort, designed for the high winds that frequent the area. Thus the wide fairways and large greens. When the winds are down, you can really go low. However, with strong winds, it can be brutal, especially if you continuosly find the gorse. :-)

The Trails course is set back from the coast in the trees, so it plays more like a parkland course.

[Sean2]

[quote name='Chris_NH' timestamp='1390477931' post='8515155']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390427724' post='8511419']
I just received my SI/Golf Digital Edition 1/22/14. They did a poll asking what to do about increasing pace of play.

62% said penalize slow players.
[b]21% said make courses easier/shorter.[/b]

So apparently a number of golfers do think courses are too difficult.
[/quote]

I'd bet my bottom dollar that nearly every one of those 21% also has a shorter set of tees in front of them that they choose not to play ;-)

This is a good thread, Sean (despite the attempt of some to flip it on you).

My thoughts on new courses and architecture. We have an existing stock of golf courses in this country already that seems to be mostly sufficient for the golfing population. Many of those are older/easier designs than some of what you describe as newer with forced carries and other intentionally-difficult design features. In other words, the public isn't exactly clamoring for more of those. What the public wants, generally, is the next new shiny object (myself included btw) - so they want a course that stands out.

Building courses is expensive these days - so it requires a plan that will draw the golfing public to the course. Another easier design will not (IMO) do that. It takes something bolder, more challenging, visually stunning, etc - to get us to plunk down the relatively large money that will be required for a new course.

Having said that, the other thing that occurs to me is that new courses CAN be fresh and different without necessarily being overly difficult to the point where it affects pace of play. I know Bandon is unique, but I think it's instructive. I was talking to my (hacker) boss about the courses and he said that he'd heard they were very difficult. I disagree. They have wide generous fairways (albeit sometiimes with bunker smack in the middle!), large greens that are not overly fast, and one can generally find some way to run the ball up onto the green. In other words, they are different and unique (for the US) but they are PLAYABLE. So new interesting courses can be done - and perhaps we're seeing that shift in style (as someone else alluded to) being played out in a return to some more links-like routes.

Sorry for the ramble :-)
[/quote]

I agree, and I think someone mentioned that some of the newest designs are doing just that..."playable" but not "boring". :-)

[WalleyeDave]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390260895' post='8497401']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1390260642' post='8497367']
Sean please define 'modern course architecture' and 'old course design'.

Also you should go play some of those 124+ slope courses on a regular basis and see if the resulting pace of play and causes for it, jive with your preconceived notions.
[/quote]

I already defined them Duffer. :-)
[/quote]Just ignore the layer. He's hardwired to argue.

[Sean2]

[quote name='WalleyeDave' timestamp='1390513251' post='8518691']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1390260895' post='8497401']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1390260642' post='8497367']
Sean please define 'modern course architecture' and 'old course design'.

Also you should go play some of those 124+ slope courses on a regular basis and see if the resulting pace of play and causes for it, jive with your preconceived notions.
[/quote]

I already defined them Duffer. :-)
[/quote]Just ignore the layer. He's hardwired to argue.
[/quote]

I was wondering about that Dave. :-)