londonlewis
Tour Rookie
Can I get a tee time for this course for tomorrow please?
This sounds exactly like the type of challenge I would want to play.
Debate: would most of you get more enjoyment playin shorter courses?
- Thread starter JezzE
- Start date
Can I get a tee time for this course for tomorrow please?
This sounds exactly like the type of challenge I would want to play.
londonlewis
Tour Rookie
I agree with this.
I am not a fan of courses where you should hit driver off the tee followed by a 7 iron for the par 4s, and hit 7iron off the tee for the par 3s. Where is the variety?
S
Snelly
Guest
I agree with you. I think this sums it up perfectly really.
The West Sussex GC is a really good example of getting it right. Not an overly long course but the yardage is brilliantly utilised and you feel like it is a real test of skill.
Another example of excellent design without huge length is the Berkshire with 6 par 3's, 6 par 4's and 6 par 5's. Perfect.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Yep spot on about the Berkshire
Really enjoyed the whole layout and set up of that course
Hack-Man-Hob
Club Champion
As my ability improves my opinion may change but for now...
I suppose if it were a day out kinda course it would be fine, but I wouldn't choose a long course for a regular game. To have to stand over a few 450+ par 4's and 200+ par 3's could be pretty demoralising after a while I know my percentages of making par are less.
I love a challenge yes but could feel like a chore if I know there is little or no chance of me getting near a GIR.
Cost as well... seems the higher the number in the total yards box the higher the green fee in my experience, it's not the size of the ship dear boy it's the motion in the ocean after all
I suppose if it were a day out kinda course it would be fine, but I wouldn't choose a long course for a regular game. To have to stand over a few 450+ par 4's and 200+ par 3's could be pretty demoralising after a while I know my percentages of making par are less.
I love a challenge yes but could feel like a chore if I know there is little or no chance of me getting near a GIR.
Cost as well... seems the higher the number in the total yards box the higher the green fee in my experience, it's not the size of the ship dear boy it's the motion in the ocean after all
Jack_bfc
Challenge Tour Pro
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
I know I'm not the target audience for this question but I think I can comment in a relative sense rather than based on actual distances.
I'm in agreement with much that has been said. Interesting and varied course design are more important than overall course yardage. Even a shortish course can still have some long holes.
I play at a short course and, I must admit, it is less challenge playing a hole where you can hit 3 wood and wedge than driver and 5 iron. But on the other hand, I have played at several forum meets where I have been the only female and goaded into playing from the yellow or even white tees. That's fun once in a while but I do get frustrated playing the majority of approach shots with a long iron or fairway wood. On those rounds I often find myself wishing for a nice wee short iron approach ....
I believe a medium length course offers the best potential mix and, like Birchy, I often think back after a round to see how many of my clubs I actually needed to play the course and rate the course better the more clubs I used.
An important point, often overlooked however, for shorter courses is not to simply pander to the lowest common denominator (as is often the case for the red tees) and to ensure that each hole is interesting and challenging whichever tee a player is using. Western Gailes is a good example of a great course ruined off the forward tees due to the total lack of imagination in their positioning.
I'm in agreement with much that has been said. Interesting and varied course design are more important than overall course yardage. Even a shortish course can still have some long holes.
I play at a short course and, I must admit, it is less challenge playing a hole where you can hit 3 wood and wedge than driver and 5 iron. But on the other hand, I have played at several forum meets where I have been the only female and goaded into playing from the yellow or even white tees. That's fun once in a while but I do get frustrated playing the majority of approach shots with a long iron or fairway wood. On those rounds I often find myself wishing for a nice wee short iron approach ....
I believe a medium length course offers the best potential mix and, like Birchy, I often think back after a round to see how many of my clubs I actually needed to play the course and rate the course better the more clubs I used.
An important point, often overlooked however, for shorter courses is not to simply pander to the lowest common denominator (as is often the case for the red tees) and to ensure that each hole is interesting and challenging whichever tee a player is using. Western Gailes is a good example of a great course ruined off the forward tees due to the total lack of imagination in their positioning.
AmandaJR
Money List Winner
I've always viewed it that there is a maximum to how far I can hit a ball - with the best equipment and instruction it will still max out. There is never a maximum to how good I can get from 150 yards and in though. A long course just gets a slog whereas a shorter course that is tight and tricky really means good course management and a tidy short game. Our course, imho, is perfect at achieving that as a lot of long hitting guys hardly use driver but it is still a tough challenge.
USER1999
Grand Slam Winner
I don't get why people play off tees they won't enjoy. If the course is too long for you, play off the yellows. Why pay to not enjoy yourself?
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
Sometimes it's hard to tell just by the overall length.
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Good shout about the Berkshire. Length isn't the pre-cursor to great courses. I wouldn't want to play anything too short or bland but there again courses that are a slog, driver followed by fairway wood or long iron into every green isn't any fun, particularly for short hitters like me.
My own course comes in at 6294 but has a good mix of long par fours and short par fives although the par threes are the real key to scoring well on it. Not a monster but one that makes me think every time and play and that is all I look for really. Something that challenges me every time I go out
My own course comes in at 6294 but has a good mix of long par fours and short par fives although the par threes are the real key to scoring well on it. Not a monster but one that makes me think every time and play and that is all I look for really. Something that challenges me every time I go out
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Ego
People don't believe it's a true test of played of the yellows - it's not real
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
can't answer the poll question because I haven't a clue what most golfers think at all - and that's before the issue of it being relative to what people normally play!
I agree with the comments that an enjoyable course (for me) would have both longer and shorter holes, and that includes a good range of par 3 distances. The nature of the holes should dictate the relative risk reward of the tee shot; and even big hitters (obviously not forum big hitters!) should be tested to reach par 5s in 2.
The underlying issue has to be whether handicap golfers can enjoy playing holes that they can't reach in regulation; discussion at our club suggests that, in general, they don't ie a 14 handicapper playing a course with 4 par 3's he can reach will not enjoy things if he can't reach most of the other holes in gross regulation - that's reality. Many competent seniors move courses if and when such a situation develops. This is a real problem for course designers because, as already pointed out, many have egos that their swings can't match (we've moved on from the seniors now!).
Personally I found Blackmoor to be an excellent example of how a course designer can mix up the different challenges - and I have no idea what the actual length was; it just worked on most levels.
I agree with the comments that an enjoyable course (for me) would have both longer and shorter holes, and that includes a good range of par 3 distances. The nature of the holes should dictate the relative risk reward of the tee shot; and even big hitters (obviously not forum big hitters!) should be tested to reach par 5s in 2.
The underlying issue has to be whether handicap golfers can enjoy playing holes that they can't reach in regulation; discussion at our club suggests that, in general, they don't ie a 14 handicapper playing a course with 4 par 3's he can reach will not enjoy things if he can't reach most of the other holes in gross regulation - that's reality. Many competent seniors move courses if and when such a situation develops. This is a real problem for course designers because, as already pointed out, many have egos that their swings can't match (we've moved on from the seniors now!).
Personally I found Blackmoor to be an excellent example of how a course designer can mix up the different challenges - and I have no idea what the actual length was; it just worked on most levels.
fundy
Ryder Cup Winner
Variety is the spice of life and invariably the less enjoyable courses for me are the ones that have a lot of relatively straight forward par 4s in the 350-400 yard range. Not that long that you are tested on length that they need something else to them (hazards, dog legs, narrowing fairway etc) but have insufficient difference from several other holes of similar length.
Personally prefer a course to have more par 3s and par 5s (as per the Berkshire) but there are very few courses that fit this criteria. Have played courses in the past that have 12 or 13 par 4s on them, they just become way too samey. As do courses where the par 3s are all similar lengths (our course fairly guilty on this point for 3 of the 4). If I could design a course I would have 6 of each par type, and with each of those Id have 2 long, 2 short and 2 average length.
Also think many courses need more risk reward options. A good short par 4 where you can try and knock it on and get rewarded for hitting a great shot, but get penalised if you dont make it, or maybe a shortish par 5 where the 2nd shot has to carry water etc. Long par 3s where they give a bail out option for the shorter hitter and a decent chance for trying to get it up and down from compared to tougher options for those who try and hit the green and miss.
Personally prefer a course to have more par 3s and par 5s (as per the Berkshire) but there are very few courses that fit this criteria. Have played courses in the past that have 12 or 13 par 4s on them, they just become way too samey. As do courses where the par 3s are all similar lengths (our course fairly guilty on this point for 3 of the 4). If I could design a course I would have 6 of each par type, and with each of those Id have 2 long, 2 short and 2 average length.
Also think many courses need more risk reward options. A good short par 4 where you can try and knock it on and get rewarded for hitting a great shot, but get penalised if you dont make it, or maybe a shortish par 5 where the 2nd shot has to carry water etc. Long par 3s where they give a bail out option for the shorter hitter and a decent chance for trying to get it up and down from compared to tougher options for those who try and hit the green and miss.
gregbwfc
Q-School Graduate
This.
Enjoy courses that make me think about what club to use as opposed to just getting the driver out for each par 4 or 5.
G1BB0
Money List Winner
not long so dont like a slog, saying that I dont mind medium length 4's but anything that is driver good iron/hybrid & a wedge is too long
The worst thing imho is 210yd + par 3's, whats the point?
The worst thing imho is 210yd + par 3's, whats the point?
I like to visit a short course occasionally, but not mickey mouse short. My preference is a course with a spread of holes for each par.
Siren
Tour Rookie
Post of the year.
NorfolkShaun
Journeyman Pro
Used to play quite a short course, I felt it was poorly designed though, within reason most holes were a drive / long iron and a short iron / wedge in.
Some of the greens were tricky but really I feel a course should have a good mixture of holes some short par 4's some short par 3's and again some long and par 4's and 3's
I guess if there is a short par 4 it should be well protected and be risk reward.
This is a little bit that verity is the spice of life and too many similar holes makes a course boring after time.
Some of the greens were tricky but really I feel a course should have a good mixture of holes some short par 4's some short par 3's and again some long and par 4's and 3's
I guess if there is a short par 4 it should be well protected and be risk reward.
This is a little bit that verity is the spice of life and too many similar holes makes a course boring after time.
shewy
Journeyman Pro
All you need to do is play Cullen to see how much fun a short course can be,a driver and fairway to a par 4 is no fun for the average hacker.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
