Most people should be playing 5,500 yard courses with no rough.

[thecraw]

Sorry,

Golf and the handicap system at present favours the high handicap golfer, doing away with length and rough will only increase that advantage!


Rough, bunkers, water, trees bring it all into play.

 

[CrapHacker]

"Most people should be playing 5,500 yard courses with no rough. They’d have a lot more fun if they did."

I agree.

The idea of the OP is that most golfers aren't cat1 290 yard average driving superheroes, and that they should play golf for fun, not to torture themselves.

There should be some courses for you hunky chaps to punish yourselves around, of course. But most of us will never get much better, so why not just accept it and make do with what we have in plesant surroundings.

 

[Tommo21]

Sorry,

Golf and the handicap system at present favours the high handicap golfer, doing away with length and rough will only increase that advantage!


Rough, bunkers, water, trees bring it all into play.

Yes, I think Clayton was generalising in that the majority of golfers just want to go out and enjoy themselves. The parallel is the pro game where length is becoming the norm and courses are falling over themselves to extend holes. As he said, people look at that and think that’s how their course should be.

I personally don’t have any real ambition to play long or tough courses anymore, Dunbar is my stretch at 6600 and I’ll bet they toughen it up for next years open Q. Royal Musselburgh needs a bit more restraint with so many trees, many holes you have no room left. Even Dodgers place, The Hirsel, is a fair challenge without the need to smash the ball out of sight.

I think there is a balance to strike. I’ve seen guys near hack their way round Muirfield, they obviously have the right credentials but I really wonder if they are enjoying themselves just to say I’m a member. Archerfield from the full blacks was just too long for me to enjoy.

 

[backwoodsman]

Don't know if should is the right way to phrase it, but agree that a lot of people would enjoy shorter courses. Ours just scrapes over 6000 yds but there isn't hole where you don't have to think about where you want the ball. You can be wayward and get away with it - if you're lucky. As often as not though you're not lucky and there's another damn tree in the way meaning a half chip or whatever. But damn good fun to play.

And I guess it's sort of summed up by one of the older guys I was playing with at the weekend. Because the ground is wet & soft, there's no roll. And he's not enjoying it at all - too long in these conditions he says. Struggling to make the green in three. I see where he's coming from, and plenty of us would feel like that on the big long courses.

 

[garyinderry]

my course is long but you can get away with errand drives on quite a number of holes. its the lenght that makes it difficult. when i go to my brothers course i have to be more carefull off the tee but the holes are generally shorter. its good to have both challenges.

 

[Smiffy]

Some of the best golf holes I've ever played are the shorter ones...you know, you get to a course that you've never played before and look at the card. You see a short hole, say 345 yards and spot it's stroke index 1. Now I know that the SI is no "guarantee" of the difficulty, but it's usually a good pointer.
Why the hell is a 345yd par 4 SI 1????? And then you get to play it. And you all walk off with a blob. Bloody hole. Stick 12 of them on a course, with a few par 3's and 5's and Bingo!

 

[Tommo21]

Si is a good pointer.........at Dunbar it's the 6th. A straight forward hole, but, there is a burn runing across at one end and a sea bound river running across in front of the green. You cant go right or you're OOB over the wall, the wall starts right beside the tee and continues right up to the green. You tend to aim left of centre and there's two well placed bunkers waiting fot you. A great example of a tough hole without being overly long 386yds or even looking tough.

 

[DCB]

Good Post Tommo. I play over a shorter course of the length that the writer of the article talks about. I can nhonestly say, if you have an off day you'll get beaten up far more by a short course than you will by a long course. Secret to scoring well is getting the ball off the tee into the correct position. If you don't do that yo can't get the ball on the green in two. I'd say most of our regular players have very strong short games because they have to have a good up and down game to score well round a short course. Miss the green with your approach and you're in serious trouble.

As far as enjoyment goes, some of the best fun I've had playing golf would be at shorter courses around the country, Cullen, Lamlash, Shiskine, Stonehaven as examples. You do not need to play 7000+ to have a good time. Ask anyone who played at dalmahoy last year, 7000yds to wet fairways and crap greens... oh yes, bring it on

 

[Tommo21]

I forgot about your gaff Dave. I got beat up there all right. It would take a few rounds before I would work it out. The Hirsel is a great example, last time I played there I never used my driver for the first 8 holes..went round in 78 with a few missed putts.

 

[MashieNiblick]

A lot to be said for shorter courses.

Ours is about 6400 of the whites and that seems plenty long enough for me. Also a good test at 6100 of the yellows.

5,500 might be a bit short for many but if you aren't a big hitter you'll probably have more fun than battling round some 7200 beast (unless it's a classic). Even with the tees up some modern courses feel like a slog with elevated greens guarded by huge lakes or massive bunkers.

The good thing is that a lot of lovely old courses are shorter anyway so there is no need to compromise on quality.

 

[birdieman]

Disagree.

If there is no rough and 5500yds length it's just drive wedge, drive wedge all day long which is dull as.
I enjoy harder longer courses despite scoring much worse on them. Having to engage your brain, play for positions/laying upand planning every shot is what it's about.

Golf isn't supposed to be easy. You need only hit half a dozen good shots in a round to make it memorable.

 

[spawn_ukuk]

I play on a course its only 5,500, not very long
but if i miss the fairway im punished, Rough Trees Ditches
So even though its a fairly small course, its still pretty hard well for me

 

[CallawayKid]

My little course makes you think off of the tee, loads of internal OOB and hazards to catch you out. Rough is ok unless you're severly wayward. It's a fun little course that certainly brings course management into play.

I do love big courses but there is something boring about not having to think about which club to use off of the tee.

Each to their own I guess

CK

 

[bladeplayer]

I liked my last course mainly because you had to think your way around it & you had to play your way around it
1st par 5 . bout 490-500 you can open the shoulders off the tee & the fairway , 2nd is also a par 5 but you need to place you teeshot in r/h side of fairway to avoid trees & short of a stream that had a good downhill run into it..
4th was only about 350 par 4 , play up over a hill to a green protected with water 3/4 way in front & oob just out the back , iron off the tee & good wedge shot required ..
7th was the same, iron off the tee , 190-200 set up prefectly to for short chip over a stream to a sloping green . trees line on alot of fairways , internal OOB to protect the index 1 8th hole , bout 400 yrd par 4 needs 260 ish off the tee to have any shot in to the green .. 15/16 are long par 5's .. lovely mix of all sorts of holes .. so i think it down to course lay out rather than lenght ...

crikey .. just realised I miss my old place

 

[Dodger]

Yes, I think Clayton was generalising in that the majority of golfers just want to go out and enjoy themselves. The parallel is the pro game where length is becoming the norm and courses are falling over themselves to extend holes. As he said, people look at that and think that’s how their course should be.

I personally don’t have any real ambition to play long or tough courses anymore, Dunbar is my stretch at 6600 and I’ll bet they toughen it up for next years open Q. Royal Musselburgh needs a bit more restraint with so many trees, many holes you have no room left. Even Dodgers place, The Hirsel, is a fair challenge without the need to smash the ball out of sight.

I think there is a balance to strike. I’ve seen guys near hack their way round Muirfield, they obviously have the right credentials but I really wonder if they are enjoying themselves just to say I’m a member. Archerfield from the full blacks was just too long for me to enjoy.

Good post Tommo, you ask the Goswick lads which track they feel is easier between home and Hirsel and home wins every time even though it is 700 yards longer.They all routinely struggle at Hirsel due to the fact it's about placing yourself off the tee and not twating the big dog each and every tee shot.That coupled with the fact there are hazards that are well placed when you go off line makes it a tough wee track to rip apart.

 

[harvey4banger]

My course is 6460 off the yellows and 6885 from the white, so a good lenght and a good test for any golfer. I must say though, I rarely use my Driver, from the yellows on 6 holes, from whites 1 less 5

I'm thinking if you didnt have lots of hazards, trees, long rough, lakes, then it would just be like some of the American coarses I've played, unless you count someones swimming pool as a hazard

 

[garyinderry]

i dont buy into this dumbing down of courses. the simple rule should be - join a course that you are capable of playing around. when i started four years ago, it would have been silly of me (if money was no problem) to join a course like augusta where most of the holes are dog leg left. i couldnt draw the ball leaving me screwed. four years on i am better equiped to play a draw. i just would not have enjoyed it then. similarly if your a 28 handicap, do not attempt to play championship courses as they are set up to test the top golfers. if you do play them, then you cant complain that they are too long or hard.

even at long par fours, you worst you should be doing is a bogey. lay up to 100 yards. hit on and two putts. this is achieveable for everyone if they put their mind to it.

 

[harvey4banger]

.

even at long par fours, you worst you should be doing is a bogey. lay up to 100 yards. hit on and two putts. this is achieveable for everyone if they put their mind to it.

Agreed, there's a couple of holes at my place I hit 6 or 7 iron of the tee from the whites, because the landing area for a driver is too narrow, par them 85% of the time too

 

[Andr3w]

Inclined to agree with the original article. Played a course in Spain that had no rough at all, probably to appeal to all levels of holidaymaker and it made for a much more relaxing round. No one likes to be trapsing through rough after every ropey shot.

 

[garyinderry]

Agreed, there's a couple of holes at my place I hit 6 or 7 iron of the tee from the whites, because the landing area for a driver is too narrow, par them 85% of the time too

theres two par4's at my place where if the wind is into the face and i hit a short drive i am not making it to the green 9/10 times. ill just lay up and can still make par. i always keep in my head that i have two chances to make the par. stitch the approach or if that doesnt happen i need a good putt.