Pace Of Play - what can be done to improve it

[FairwayDodger]

Truth is we all do some aspects of the game faster than others and while we each might be reasonably quicker overall, groups of players with different characteristics can find their pace of play slowed down drastically.

For example, I don't tend to take practise swings for full shots and am generally ready to play when it's my turn so don't faff around much. I also walk quite briskly between shots and don't have to spend too much time looking for (my) ball in knee high rough. But I like to take my time on the green, I want to see my putt from in front, behind and side-on. I'm not great at reading greens so made a conscious decision to spend longer over putts to try and get a better read.

Pair me up with two similar players and pace is fast, no problem, but if I'm out with someone who doddles between shots but is quick on the greens and you get the worst of both worlds.

 

[TheCaddie]

And I disagree with you massively! Tour pros still hit bad shots, despite all the elaborate pre-shot routines. One Major Champion when asked what his secret was replied "I miss them quickly", meaning he didn't put too much pressure on himself. Major Championships are the showcase for golf, and if they seem massively slow and boring, they are not a good advert for the sport.

So if you were playing in a tournament for your livelihood, for millions of pounds, you're telling me you'd speed up your pace of play for the image of the game? Don't make me laugh!

But swingsitlikehogan has nailed it.... We aren't talking about the pro game, we are talking about our own and therefore, let's not be looking at the pros to speed up when to be quite honest amateurs need to realise it's a completely different situation for them.

 

[MikeH]

The answer to this bit has to be because every player has responsibilities to all others. And if only those who want to take their time would play in the PM - but they don't. So then you have to do something about it. And no matter how long we are each individually happy to take for a round of golf, we can still look to our own play to see if we are taking a bit longer than we need to over any aspect of it.

:thup:

 

[delc]

The pros speed of play may not be a great advert for the game - but we are not talking about the pro game. We are talking about us mortals - there is nothing about the pro game that means I have to emulate their actions and pace of play. For me it's all about self-awareness and consideration for other golfers (and maybe we are not so good at that these days). Matthew 7:3

The pace of play in pro tournaments DOES have an influence on the pace of play at club level though, because players, particularly younger ones, do tend to copy what they see on TV!

 

[bluewolf]

My tuppence, for what it's worth...

Having moved from one club because of the 5 hour comp rounds, to a club with max 4 hour comp rounds.. The 2 biggest factors I found were course design and the amount of players per group.. Limit rounds to 3 balls and try to ensure that the "snarl up point" is identified at your course, and actions are taken to remedy them..

 

[Piece]

The answer to this bit has to be because every player has responsibilities to all others. And if only those who want to take their time would play in the PM - but they don't. So then you have to do something about it. And no matter how long we are each individually happy to take for a round of golf, we can still look to our own play to see if we are taking a bit longer than we need to over any aspect of it.

I took responsibility a few years ago. I was seen as the slow player in the group. I didn't think I was, but anyway, I asked where they thought I was being slow on the understanding that I gave my opinion in reverse (even though they thought they were fast ). I quickened up by being ready, less pre-shot faffing, buying a GPS watch to take out yardage uncertainty, improved by knowledge on my club yardages so I knew exactly what to hit, etc.

Lots of people 'think' they are quick players, when in fact, they're not.

We certainly all play at different paces, but we can all improve to make the overall pace improve even more. There surely can't be any debate over that?

 

[Slab]

Starting to get the feeling there’s two (at least) sides to this and whoever blinks first will lose and have to carry their shame foreverrrrrrrrrrr

2. On one hand there’s clubs who want to maximise revenue (capacity/membership) on 1st rate, challenging courses with the minimum of outlay on maintenance & management etc
4. On the other side there’s players who want to enjoy affordable golf on 1st rate, challenging courses played at a reasonable pace with the minimum of delays & hassling

I’m not so sure that both those aims are aligned to the same ‘pace of play’ and to match will mean each admitting they have a problem and the players and the course will need to speed up together



I guess another way of saying it is that as players it’s easy to blame the course/club for causing slow play and vice versa.

Playing faster is the most cost effective way to improve overall pace but that just means the club will shorten tee times further to get more revenue and the problem comes back. Whereas many of the club/course changes will cost money but players don’t want to see fees going up faster than they need to

 

[pokerjoke]

One of the things reading this thread says to me is that the majority of forumers are on the ball when it comes to pace of play.

Those who have commented seem to all be established golfers who understand the factors that create slow play (and have sound ideas about how to deal with them) and would be unlikely to be the person stood in the middle of the fairway only just starting a long pre-shot routine when everyone has played

what about the rest of the golfing population? Whether its established golfers who are oblivious to what they are doing or newcomers to the game who don't have the knowledge most folk on here have. Both would benefit from a better understanding of what causes pace of play issues and how to be part of the solution not the problem

To think the time it takes to play a round of golf is not a key issue affecting participation is naive. The R&A survey results that have been quoted was, in our view, skewed in that the vast majority of golfers who were responded (especially the UK demographic) were ardent golfers who played an average of 74 rounds a year. My view is that type of golfer (essentially me and you guys) might get annoyed by having to stand there while some numpty marks his card on the green or is frustrated by having to look for yours or a partner's ball in long grass under trees (thereby doubly penalising you) but it isn’t going to stop us playing golf.

As I said in my editors letter (July 15 issue) ask the demographic wanting to get into golf or those who play but could only dream of playing 74 rounds in year what the key reasons that are stopping them playing/playing more and the time it takes to play a round of golf will be right up there with cost

To say that because slow play doesn’t affect your golf it's not an issue worthy of coverage is, in my opinion, an incredibly selfish outlook.

One of Golf Monthly's remits is to help inform and educate golfers on things like the rules of golf, etiquette and pace of play and to do what we can to help tackle issues that are affecting participation. Sorry if it bores you!

I must of missed the post where someone said its boring.

The only 2 times I have really come up against really really slow play 4/1/2 to 5 hours rounds were do to adverse weather conditions and a seriously hard golf course and another on the course where the design caused a serious backlog.

This is such a difficult subject because of every body different reason to play golf.

Some see it as a pastime and don't like to be rushed.
Some take it so serious they think they are playing for millions.

Course design is so key to all major issues.

Tees and Greens too close together
Blind shots waiting for a bell to be rung[sometimes it is sometimes it isn't.
Rough too penal.


In fact there are too many to write about.

Good luck on GM quest for faster play but imo it will never happen.

Mixed numbered groups are a killer there is nothing worse than walking on a course as a 2 ball when there are 2 fourballs ahead its demoralising before you start,golf clubs have to take notice.

I sometimes play in a 4 ball on a Wednesday club night and we all seem to be different paced.
Many times I have said we need to keep up with the group in front or let the group behind through only to be met with they cant go anywhere if we let them through.
It makes my blood boil listening to the crap that comes out for excuses.
This will never change because they do what they want and I don't think anything will change that.
Having a course marshall does help imo.

 

[Fyldewhite]

To think the time it takes to play a round of golf is not a key issue affecting participation is naive. The R&A survey results that have been quoted was, in our view, skewed in that the vast majority of golfers who were responded (especially the UK demographic) were ardent golfers who played an average of 74 rounds a year. My view is that type of golfer (essentially me and you guys) might get annoyed by having to stand there while some numpty marks his card on the green or is frustrated by having to look for yours or a partner's ball in long grass under trees (thereby doubly penalising you) but it isn’t going to stop us playing golf.

As I said in my editors letter (July 15 issue) ask the demographic wanting to get into golf or those who play but could only dream of playing 74 rounds in year what the key reasons that are stopping them playing/playing more and the time it takes to play a round of golf will be right up there with cost!

I would disagree here Mike, I don't think the pace of play is a serious issue to anyone thinking of taking up the sport. The two paragraphs above are comparing apples and oranges. The length of time it takes to play a round of golf in the context of someone taking up the sport is entirely different to an established players views. The latter is obviously a slow play issue. The former is just a general comment on what puts people off golf......the issue here surely is that it's half a day no matter how you package it and essentially pace of play is not relevant to that particular argument. It's about young people with families etc not wanting to sacrifice half their Saturdays and Sundays to a pastime which regardless of the pace of play takes either a long time or a slightly longer time!

 

[bluewolf]

It might also be worth finding out what constitutes a "slow round". I'm relatively happy to accept that a competitive round will take up to 4 hours. Anything over that feels slow.

I can knock it round 18 in 2 1/2 hours on my own. Anything longer feels slow. I've played 3 hour rounds that felt slow because of long waits on certain tees. I've played 5 hour rounds that didn't feel slow because of conditions and course design.

The problem is far more complex than simply how long a round takes.

 

[Slab]

I would disagree here Mike, I don't think the pace of play is a serious issue to anyone thinking of taking up the sport. The two paragraphs above are comparing apples and oranges. The length of time it takes to play a round of golf in the context of someone taking up the sport is entirely different to an established players views. The latter is obviously a slow play issue. The former is just a general comment on what puts people off golf......the issue here surely is that it's half a day no matter how you package it and essentially pace of play is not relevant to that particular argument. It's about young people with families etc not wanting to sacrifice half their Saturdays and Sundays to a pastime which regardless of the pace of play takes either a long time or a slightly longer time!

There's truth in that. I mentioned this on a different thread but for various (but not extraordinary) reasons my time taken to play golf this Saturday will be around 7 hours


So arrival about 45 mins before tee off
Coffee etc including meet & greet with other players
Warm up on range
Practice putting, chipping
Head to tee
Maybe 4hr:15 for the round (its a long course)
Hand score in and shower/change
Bite to eat, couple of drinks (don't want to be a car park golfer do we)
Few sleeves of balls dished out as prizes
Leave to head home

That's about 7 hours from the time arriving at the club to leaving the club, so that's the time someone thinking about taking up golf and playing beside me this weekend will need to consider as 'how long does it take to play a round of golf'... + travel

 

[Slime]

Ah c'mon now, surely we havnt reached a point where the ideal way to speed up a round is to stop looking at your FC's shot (perhaps to help locate it) & the player isn't even allowed to remain fairly static on the tee box while his ball is in motion for 9 seconds

I'm not saying it's the answer, but surely, every little helps.
I honestly don't believe there is an answer that eveyone would be happy with.

Slime.

 

[TheCaddie]

The pace of play in pro tournaments DOES have an influence on the pace of play at club level though, because players, particularly younger ones, do tend to copy what they see on TV!

Hence why lots of people are raising the point of education.

 

[Slab]

The pace of play in pro tournaments DOES have an influence on the pace of play at club level though, because players, particularly younger ones, do tend to copy what they see on TV!

I really don't see this out on the course

How young are these highly impressionable players that actually copy what they see on tv & how many are at your club


Do they do media interviews at the clubhouse afterwards too


Edit: I do see players who are clearly going through a PSR for a few seconds that a teaching pro has taught them to do but you can tell its not copying any TV pro

 

[GB72]

I would disagree here Mike, I don't think the pace of play is a serious issue to anyone thinking of taking up the sport. The two paragraphs above are comparing apples and oranges. The length of time it takes to play a round of golf in the context of someone taking up the sport is entirely different to an established players views. The latter is obviously a slow play issue. The former is just a general comment on what puts people off golf......the issue here surely is that it's half a day no matter how you package it and essentially pace of play is not relevant to that particular argument. It's about young people with families etc not wanting to sacrifice half their Saturdays and Sundays to a pastime which regardless of the pace of play takes either a long time or a slightly longer time!

I think that this is a really good point. For someone looking to take up the game it probably makes no difference at all whether the rounds are taking 3 hours or 5 hours (and they probably do not know this in any event) it is the game of golf in general that takes too long. More 9 hole comps or more options to play 9 holes may attract a few more but would put off the established member who wants proper 18 hole competitions.

Thinking about it, I actually think it is time spent on the green that holds me up more than most other aspects. I have been behind plenty of of groups that are like lightening from tee to green but then are slow as anything on the green as every putt is checked from every angle, every missed putt is marked irrespective of proximity to the hole and some people stand over a putt for so long you could think that they had fallen asleep. One simple rule may be that any putt within a foot of the hole has to be finished off rather than marked, oh and remove all markings from golf balls to stop people taking an age moving the line a milimeter or 2 before putting.

 

[delc]

I think that this is a really good point. For someone looking to take up the game it probably makes no difference at all whether the rounds are taking 3 hours or 5 hours (and they probably do not know this in any event) it is the game of golf in general that takes too long. More 9 hole comps or more options to play 9 holes may attract a few more but would put off the established member who wants proper 18 hole competitions.

Thinking about it, I actually think it is time spent on the green that holds me up more than most other aspects. I have been behind plenty of of groups that are like lightening from tee to green but then are slow as anything on the green as every putt is checked from every angle, every missed putt is marked irrespective of proximity to the hole and some people stand over a putt for so long you could think that they had fallen asleep. One simple rule may be that any putt within a foot of the hole has to be finished off rather than marked, oh and remove all markings from golf balls to stop people taking an age moving the line a milimeter or 2 before putting.

I agree that watching a four ball group putting out on a green ahead can be rather like watching paint dry! That was one of my reasons for suggesting a bigger hole (sorry for hijacking another thread on this subject!).

 

[wonga]

We found that by putting players on the clock the time taken to complete a round went down on average from 5 hours to just over 4 hours for a 4 ball in both senior medal & Stableford comps.

 

[TheCaddie]

I think that this is a really good point. For someone looking to take up the game it probably makes no difference at all whether the rounds are taking 3 hours or 5 hours (and they probably do not know this in any event) it is the game of golf in general that takes too long. More 9 hole comps or more options to play 9 holes may attract a few more but would put off the established member who wants proper 18 hole competitions.

Thinking about it, I actually think it is time spent on the green that holds me up more than most other aspects. I have been behind plenty of of groups that are like lightening from tee to green but then are slow as anything on the green as every putt is checked from every angle, every missed putt is marked irrespective of proximity to the hole and some people stand over a putt for so long you could think that they had fallen asleep. One simple rule may be that any putt within a foot of the hole has to be finished off rather than marked, oh and remove all markings from golf balls to stop people taking an age moving the line a milimeter or 2 before putting.

Agreed. The Greens are where I see the longest delays as well. People who believe they can read a green and actually can't, or think the greens they are on require an extremely complicated read, when again, they don't.

 

[Sybez]

Streamline the rules and get rid of all the stupid ones from the dark ages. Simples!

I do like the US Junior idea though - first to finish putting heads off to next tee whilst others putt out....

Personally it can take as long as it has to depending on course, conditions and ball hunting. As long as any groups are not standing around waiting between shots then is fine, but is hard to keep to as we all walk differently!

 

[delc]

Streamline the rules and get rid of all the stupid ones from the dark ages. Simples!

I do like the US Junior idea though - first to finish putting heads off to next tee whilst others putt out....

Personally it can take as long as it has to depending on course, conditions and ball hunting. As long as any groups are not standing around waiting between shots then is fine, but is hard to keep to as we all walk differently!

I thought it was considered poor etiquette to leave the green while others are still putting out!