Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Bob_Huntley on December 26, 2002, 11:00:23 AM
-
The Oxford and Cambridge Golfing Society has alerted its competitors that they should not enter its annual event, the President's Putter, unless they they are capable of completing a round of golf in less than three hours. The match-play competition is held on the links of Rye Golf Club each January and two rounds are played during the severely resticted daylight hours.
Phew, can you imagine that happening here?
-
Bob:
The subject of slow play is an old one on GCA. I have taken the position that the reason why Americans play slow is because management at many of these facilities permits it. The inmates do run the asylum!
Yes, players can more to be prepared to play, however, it's management that bears the greater responsibility -- for most courses the issue of slow play is just a talking point -- nothing more! Management controls, or I should say or should be in control, of what takes place. Players will gravitate to whatever is enforced but it needs to be consistent and on a daily basis to have any real consequence.
-
Never has made any sense to me that owners of courses wouldn't want to speed up play to get more golfers on and increase revenue. There are so many mercenary courses that do their best to maximize profit I'm amazed they leave so much money on the table by allowing 5+ hour rounds! Even if they didn't put tee times a minute or two closer together they could start twilight rates later. In midsummer in northern states you might be able to have an hour's worth of tee times for 18 holes after work on a weekday!
Would it really be bad business for them to give people the boot if they can't keep a four hour pace? Seems to me that slow players would be pissed off, but players who don't want a round of golf to take most of the day would hear about it and make up for any lost business. Am I overestimating the number of golfers in the US who hate five hour rounds?
-
Sounds like proper use of psychology, to me. I doubt that the afformentioned press release included a penalty for failure to do so. ?
Glad to see someone taking a stand but with the litigious nature of our society, here, someone would probably sue saying that they were being discriminated against because they like to smell the flowers.
How about this for reality, there should be places where people can not only smell but eat the roses too(favorite far side reference). Places like Bob's all time favorite, Pebble Beach, should be the first place to encourage molassis play and charge accordingly. Oh they alread do, nevermind. Can anyone imagine hurrying up their round on a beautiful day, there?
What a waste :'( :'(
-
Doug S:
The reason why courses don't do what should be so obvious is that they place higher priorities on other areas. For starters -- all the GPS nonsense and all the rituals in having people "meet & greet" you when you arrive.
Enforcing slow play is not easy -- you will, in all probability, be forced to approach some people and let them know that crawling like a turtle is not in the spirit of the game-- that may also mean escorting them off the property which very few courses will ever do.
Unfortunately, many of the resort type courses are populated by management types who don't want to "disturb" the patrons after having their pockets picked for $150+ green fees. They've been told to avoid any conflict even if that means others suffer behind the slow play crawl.
One other point -- when management at a facility INSISTS that carts must be used and you are MANDATED to stay on paths at all times you have an absolute gross misunderstanding on how to keep the game moving for the enjoyment of all players.
Doug -- when you mention the idea about people wanting to play less than five hours just keep in mind this -- there are plenty of people who have experienced nothing less than five hours on the golf course and they want to meet and greet the cart girl, buy the 64 ounce drink at the turn and stuff their face with nothing less than a Dodger dog at the turn. The mindset in America is more than just playing the game -- it's about all the connected "show" items and how they have been fed into the golfer's "experience." In simple terms -- management has added all the "show" items because there are plenty of players who insist upon them. The playing of the game is not the purest form of enjoyment -- it must be connected to all the hoopla.
-
I've told this story so many times I don't remember if I've told it here or not. I played two rounds at Dornoch in May or 2000. The first round was with three other Americans--two of whom could really play and there father who kept the ball in play. I was the weak link in the group but I found myself waiting, waiting, waiting. There were obviously no mandatory carts, no halfway house, no beer cart, none of the often cited distractions that contribute to slow play. It took us nearly five and a half hours to finish.
Two days later I played with two Scots from Tain who were exercising their right to a reciprocal round. I was the youngest player in the group, by at least two decades over one of them. I was also having the best and slowest day. But we still finished in three hours and fifteen minutes. Even allowing for a threesome versus for a foursome, where the hell does all the time go. I know that I can manage a three hour round in a twosome and that's the pace I like for that leaves plenty of time for more golf or for other activities.
Is there a difference between those of us who want to play golf and those who want a "golfing experience."
I used to attend football and baseball games with a friend who never made less than two trips to the concession stand and usually more than that. I went to see the game, he obviously went for the haute cuisine. I think there is a similarity there. I was there for the game, he was there for the experience.
I have heard people offer the explanation that they play golf to relax and they don't like to be rushed as that destroys the intent of the activity. It's got to the point that I think I may take some light reading material--Gibbons "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" with me.
As for why courses don't catch on to the fact that they can make more money with faster rounds--I'm clueless. Can it be that course management can't do simple multiplication. There are courses I avoid because I know that a five or six hour round is the best I can hope for and by the time I finish I'll be thinking more about how long I've been there than I'll be thinking about golf.
-
Going through some old threads and came across this one on pace of play. I think owners would love golfers to play faster, but as said, it is a fine line they walk in pushing their customers to move quicker. That said, I am working with a course offering ideas for improvements and one of the marching orders is "don't do anything that will slow up play". The owner thinks adding bunkers for example will cost him money as they make rounds take longer!!
-
Matt Ward:
I'm curious about how you feel management might address one of the worst exmples of slow play I've experienced.
The location is Recreation Park in Long Beach, California where many times I arrived at the third tee with 2 or 3 groups waiting.
Holes #1 and #2 do not strike me as cause for slow play. #1 is short par playing about 315 yards downhill. Most players, even long hitters tend to lay up for position due a bunker that guards the right side of a green angled sort of like #10 at Riviera. Other than missing near pin high on the right, there really isn't that much trouble to be found. It should be an easy hole for almost every class of player.
The second hole presents even less trouble, playing back uphill maybe 360 yards to a wide open green without too much in the way of bunker protection. Looking at the hole, its hard to imagine anyone finding much challenge or reason for delay.
Truthfully, I never saw much reason for delays on #3 either or #4 and so on.
Nonetheless, it could easily take 45-60 minutes to play 2-3 holes.
Other than sending off groups with greater interval, I couldn't see that much could be done.
Have you encountered a similiar situation? Do you have any thoughts on situations where the course design can not possibly acccount for the slow play?
-
I would rather not play then take 4 or 5 hours. I try to play most of my golf during the week in the spring and fall. I also like to play twilight.
I think Steve has it about right. Players want an experience. I would rather just play.
My most enjoyable rounds have been in the fall on a run down muni at twilight. No one ahead of me and no one behind me. I
am done with 18 in well under 3 hours.
I am constantly amazed at how folks endure slow play. My theory about the younger players is that they simply do not know any better.
I've told this story so many times I don't remember if I've told it here or not. I played two rounds at Dornoch in May or 2000. The first round was with three other Americans--two of whom could really play and there father who kept the ball in play. I was the weak link in the group but I found myself waiting, waiting, waiting. There were obviously no mandatory carts, no halfway house, no beer cart, none of the often cited distractions that contribute to slow play. It took us nearly five and a half hours to finish.
Two days later I played with two Scots from Tain who were exercising their right to a reciprocal round. I was the youngest player in the group, by at least two decades over one of them. I was also having the best and slowest day. But we still finished in three hours and fifteen minutes. Even allowing for a threesome versus for a foursome, where the hell does all the time go. I know that I can manage a three hour round in a twosome and that's the pace I like for that leaves plenty of time for more golf or for other activities.
Is there a difference between those of us who want to play golf and those who want a "golfing experience."
I used to attend football and baseball games with a friend who never made less than two trips to the concession stand and usually more than that. I went to see the game, he obviously went for the haute cuisine. I think there is a similarity there. I was there for the game, he was there for the experience.
I have heard people offer the explanation that they play golf to relax and they don't like to be rushed as that destroys the intent of the activity. It's got to the point that I think I may take some light reading material--Gibbons "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" with me.
As for why courses don't catch on to the fact that they can make more money with faster rounds--I'm clueless. Can it be that course management can't do simple multiplication. There are courses I avoid because I know that a five or six hour round is the best I can hope for and by the time I finish I'll be thinking more about how long I've been there than I'll be thinking about golf.
-
Hello everyone,
I solved the slow play problem by joining a private club that I have played several times as a guest in under or around 3 hours. My father had always said that you will know when its time to join a club and for me that day was on the 17th of November when there were only 10 cars in the parking lot at a semi private and it took 2 ½ hours to play the front. It was a Palmer course and people dropped down good money and they took all the time in the world they wanted. When we went ahead of them at the turn a fist fight almost ensued.
The pro actually called me at work a few days later to make sure that the course handled everything correctly, but the call was as big a token as the kid taking our clubs at the car. I think everyone on this thread has nailed it, there are two types of players, the people there for the game and the people there for the polish dog with extra mustard.
Next year will be at a proven golf club, so in other words the war is over for me now.
Jason
-
Matt_Ward writes:
I have taken the position that the reason why Americans play slow is because management at many of these facilities permits it. The inmates do run the asylum!
Why should daily fee courses give a damn about slow play? Unless it affects how fast golfers get off the first tee, it doesn't make a bottom line difference how long the patrons are out on the course. Courses collect fees before the round starts, not as you are finishing up on the 18th green.
Financially it makes sense for a course to want to keep customers at the course as long as possible. No way to sell them anymore beer once they leave the course. Keep them long enough, you'll end up feeding them breakfast, lunch and dinner, not to mention keeping the cart girl busy.
The only way to fight slow play is to stop patronizing courses that allow slow play. Only then courses might see a monetary difference and finally do something about pace.
Dan King
"There is not the slightest doubt in my own mind that golf as played in the United States is the slowest in the world."
--Henry Longhurst
-
Dan K:
The reason why daily fee courses should care about slow play is as simple as can be -- MAKE MORE $$$$! If you can knock down total time frame for rounds just 30-40 minutes you can squeze in several additional groups. At high end places that can mean an extra $600 or more depending upon the green fee.
Many high end daily fee courses place a great deal of emphasis on "customer service," but the reality is dealing with slow play is a talking point. You can get even more $$ out of people Dan if you dealt with the issue directly instead of pssing away a ton of dough on such silly shit as GPS systems and the like!
Dan -- I've seen golfers come into a clubhouse and have a "frank" discussion with impotent Polo wearing staff who simply pose as window dressing "customer service representatives." How about realizing that slow play is just dead wrong!
You're right Dan -- eventually people stop going to those places because as Jason Hinez correctly points out he doesn't need the lame post mortem call from the pro "AFTER THE FACT" when something proactive should have been done when he was there.
Tim W:
Based on the facts you presented I'd have to ask does the management at the facility have staff at the key holes where these back-ups occur? Too many times rangers are either busy looking to pocket someone's balls or hang out near the pool where the babes are swimming. Having a staff person who is visible and actively monitoring the situation at hand is critical to get the cows moving. If you fail with the first few groups the whole situation collapses like a house of cards!
Also -- does the course provide adequate and reasonable intervals for play? Too often on a short par-4, in this case it's the opening hole, you have people just walking onto the green and the next group is firing away from the tee. It's important that pace of play start right at the 1st hole. Why not have the first group putt out before the next group hits from the tee?
As far as the other holes are concerned I'd have to ask if the beverage cart routinely makes stops in these early holes? Are players going directly to their ball or do they have to trudge to each player's ball and jawbone about the ball game that was on the night before?
Many of these courses have the same people playing them time after time and it's important for course personnel to chart the amount of time and if the groups can't reasonably improve their pace of play then access to tee times should be denied for certain preferred times (i.e. morning ones especially).
Tim, the message starts at the top. If a facility consistently and aggressively deals with pace of play issues eventually the cattle (i.e. slow pokes) will either pick up the pace or go to another pasture and do their moooooooooing over there.
More often, from my personal experiences, the management at many places has an easy time on identifying juniors or women as slow players, however, fails to go after the regulars who believe they are special to the game and that if it takes them five minutes to line-up a putt then so be it.
When cozy relationships develop you then have a situation where management sees their role in protecting the existing power groups at that facility.
-
Matt_Ward writes:
The reason why daily fee courses should care about slow play is as simple as can be -- MAKE MORE $$$$!
Let's imagine a course charges $100 a golfer, and has seven minute tee times and rounds that take five hours, and a full tee sheet.
Let's imagine there is another course in the area that charges $100 a golfer, has 10 minute tee times, round take three hours, and has a full tee sheet.
One course will have appr. 172 golfers on it at any one time, the other only 72. Which course do you think will have higher beer cart sales?
Assuming the first course can continue the seven minute tee times (the slow down is somewhere other than the first hole) which course is going to bring in more money? This isn't a trick question. There is an easy answer.
However, if the five-hour-round course starts losing customers, and their tee sheet stops filling up, then the equation should change. Suddenly the policies of the second course look more appealing. That's why it is up to us as golfers to convince course operators by boycotting those with poor pace-of-play policies. We can't blame the courses and wait for them to go against their bottom-line instincts. We have to give them financial incentive to want to improve their pace of play.
Dan King
"They ought to invoke the same-day rule."
--Paul Azinger (on the slow play of the Langer/Faldo team at the 1995 Ryder Cup)
-
It is hopeless.
Play is excruciatingly slow for one principal and intractable reason - MOST PLAYERS DON"T REALLY MIND.
Course managers can't fix this nor can efficient designs, routings and procedures.
Slow Play has become the norm and socially acceptable. It will take great sociological forces to undo it.
The best analogy I can think of is illegitimacy. Bearing children out of wedlock is socially acceptable and so is a 5 hour round of golf...........
To most everyone but me and maybe a few of you.
-
Matt Ward:
Thanks. In the situation I described rangers WERE frequently present, but they really didn't do anything except stand there. What's more, I'm not sure what they could have done.
Once players went off the first tee right behind the proceeding group, all seemed to be lost. Dan King speaks to the economics of increasing the starting interval. I'm not sure I have a rebuttal to Dan's point.
Being raised to move along on a golf course, I'm far more at home in Ireland than here in the States. By Ireland I guess I really mean Ballybunion where I frequently visit. The locals rarely play anything other than no fuss, match play with players out of a hole quickly picking up and getting out of the way.
I'm not optimistic we could ever bring that spirit here to the States. It would just be nice if we Americans would stop exporting our slow play bad habits.
-
Dano
Didn't you used to be a NASA rocket scientist? I think all this Japanese Poetry stuff has mushed your brain, or perhaps you were just trying to spoof us when you implied that slow players could accommodate narrower tee time intervals that fast players. If you make such ridiculous assumptions, of course your "math" will work!
Let's get back to reality.
If you have 3 hour rounds you can get people off the tee at 5 minute intervals (180/18/2). Assuming 12 hours of daylight and having everybody able to play 18, this allows for 9 hours of tee times, with 48 players per hour (60/5*4). Total rounds = 432. At $100/round this is $43,200 in revenue.
If you have 6 hour rounds you can get people off the tee at 10 minute intervals( 360/18/2). Assuming 12 hours of daylight and having everybody able to play 18, this allows for 6 hours of tee times, with 24 players per hour (60/10*4). Total rounds = 144. At $100/round this is $14,400 in revenue.
Now I know this is all theoretical and exaggerated (of course, so was your straw man!), but it seems to me that you would have to sell one helluva lot of beer to make up that gap in income.
By your logic, airlines should just circle airports for an extra hour or two in order to increase their beverage sales.........
-
Rich Goodale writes:
Assuming 12 hours of daylight and having everybody able to play 18
Now that you are in Scotland, you forget about the Bay Area. In the land of the full tee sheet, the courses don't care that everyone finishes, they just care that everyone starts. The reality is the faster you send groups out, the more bottlenecks, and the slower the round will go. There is nobody around here getting people out in five minute intervals.
I've never played anywhere that gave refunds for those that didn't finish before sunset. Many give a twilight rate after a certain time, but no money back when it is dark and you are only on the 12th hole.
Your example is comparing people who finish, not people who start. The course gets money when you start your round. What is the financial incentive for a course to try and get golfers off their course fast?
Dan King
"If four players are ranged in line across a wide fairway there in no earthly reason why each of them should not be calculating the shot, selecting a club and taking up a stance more or less simultaneously. The setting up of a golf shot can be as ponderous as the loading of a Roman siege catapult, with interminable adjustments to range and aim before finally the carcass of a dead horse is hoisted into the middle launcher. Lobbing four dead horses over the parapet takes an age, which is how it works in golf if three crews of loaders and launchers sit down and watch while the fourth goes into action."
--Peter Dobereiner
-
Dan
The financial incentive of getting players off the course fast is that you can get substantially more revenue from the course for little additional expense. In the real world (which even includes the Bay Area, at times) this is what economics is all about.
-
Rich and Dan,
In comparing the rates of play and its effect on revenue one has to hold other variables constant for the comparison to have any validity.
When you do that it is simple - courses benefit from faster rates of play.
In fact, most courses encourage faster play for this reason.
If you don't hold other variables constant it gets complicated in a hurry and one needs to employ sophisticaed models such as regression analysis.
What I find most interesting in this thread is how some would suggest that slow play is a technical problem that could be cured by the golf course managers. Cicero and Charlie Brown had it about right - we have met the enemy and it is us.
The root cause for slow play is simple - most players like to play slow!!
It is really not about optimizing routes or adding procedures.
By the way I have seen several studies that concluded that the practice of "calling up" on par 3s actually had a net effect of slowing play. I often point this out when I am standing in a par 3 tee box to my partners and they think I am nuts and bordering on the sacrilegious.
-
Jack
You said what I said, which is the obvious, that faster play = more revenue. Of course, that is all other things being equal. You are also right that the reason we don't have faster play is because the great majority of the players don't want to play fast. Those of us who do just try to find ways of end-running this lathesome fact--even to the extent of moving to Scotland!
PS--it was Pogo who first said "We have met the enemy and he is us." This was a clever reconstruction of a quote from Admiral Perry, not Cicero. Cheers.
-
Hey Rich,
Thanks for the info on Pogo - I need to stop saying Charlie Brown. I do think Cicero had something to do with this but I was unaware of the Admiral Perry connection. This may all be an urban legend and the real source of this quote may turn out to be Professor Vinnie Boombatz. ;)
Anyhow I absolutely agree that the current best cure for slow play is avoidance. I avoid it like the plague and like others have gotten fairly creative in my avoidance schemes. One of my favorites is to carefully watch the forecast and get to a muni right after the inclement weather passes.
-
Jack writes:
In comparing the rates of play and its effect on revenue one has to hold other variables constant for the comparison to have any validity.
When you do that it is simple - courses benefit from faster rates of play.
I'm confused. Maybe you'll need to use smaller words.
Course A has seven minute tee times, has a full tee sheet, and gets everyone off the first tee in time, charges $100, and rounds take five hours.
Course B has seven minute tee times, has a full tee sheet, and gets everyone off the first tee in time, charge $100, and rounds take three hours.
How does course B make more money than course A? Maybe I'm missing something, but both seem to take in exactly the same amount in green fees, but course A has a fuller course and can sell them more things.
Dan King
Cyril Walker played so slowly they asked him to hurry up, and he became abusive. He said, "Who the hell are you? I'm, an ex-U.S. Open Champion." This was about 1931, he won the Open in 1924. He said he came out 3,000 miles to play in their diddy-bump tournament (L.A. Open), and they couldn't kick him out, he'd play as slow as he damn well pleased. Well, when he came to the ninth hole, they told him he was disqualified and he said, "The hell I am! I came here to play and I'm going to play." So these two officers picked him up by the elbows and I can still see him being carried up the hill, kicking his legs like a banshee -- he was a small man.
--Paul Runyan
-
Let's let the lemmings run the asylum. People want to play slow? Bullsheee. They just don't know any better is the real truth. A course can take charge of the lemming by not only asking nicely but having a real emphasis on pace.
The first time I was introduced to the managment wanting fast players was basically a threat, that if you didn't, you wouldn't be given the 5;20 am tee time on Sundays the following year. It was a very effective use of leverage and the results were 3 hr rounds.
I received my invite from the USGA yesterday and it included all the hyperbole of how the USGA is out there with me for me and by me. BUllsheeee. I don't think I have ever seen a public service announcement that emphasises slow play and if I have I haven't seen enough.
Courses need to institue the "new cruelty" and for the very few, who don't want to respect the rest of us, they can tee it up elsewhere. ;D
-
Hi Dan
The concept is rather simple. The premise goes like this - courses make most of their money from greens fees. If the average rate of play is faster they then have more capacity. More capacity , more greens fees. It is that simple.
Increased capacity would not always equate to more revenue but it often would.
Rich said all of this very well I thought.
Hi Clay Man,
I think you are partly right. I agree that many players have been brought up on slow play and have not learned to appreciate faster play. Cause and effect is a bitch. Do they like slow play because that is all they know or are they just genetically predisposed to liking it? ;)
I don't know the answer but I do believe that most players are much more tolerant of slow play me and you are.
Jack
-
Jack writes:
More capacity , more greens fees. It is that simple.
It's not a restaurant with a maximum seating capacity, it's more like a large amusement park. The amusement park doesn't need to get you through the park quickly, just through the admissions line quickly. Once you are in the park, they are in no hurry to have you leave. Turnover is not the important element to improving capacity. Getting people through the turnstile is important.
Courses get money for everyone who starts playing from the first tee. As long as they ensure everyone gets off the first tee in a timely manner so they can then get the next group out on the course, they have no financial incentive to see you finish quickly. The only critical hole financially is the first. After that, the more golfers they can fit on the course, the more they can sell them things.
The only financial reason is from customer service. If the course is too slow, people start to boycott the course, and the tee sheet stops filling. Amazingly, American golfers have proven to be willing to put up with incredibly slow golf before boycotting.
Dan King
You must remember this;
A kiss is just a kiss,
A sigh is just a sigh --
The fundamental things apply
As time goes by.
--Herman Hupfeld
-
Rich -
Your circling airplanes analogy is witty and hysterical! I can just see the captain's take-off announcement. "Welcome aboard Pub Airlines, in just a few minutes the bar will be open and....
JC
-
Hey Dan,
I absolutely disagree with you. Your amusement park analogy is a bit off. A better analogy would be a a single ride at the amusement park where getting them on and off the ride as quickly as possible is in the park owners' interests.
I hereby suggest the following:
We sponsor you to attend a course at Stanford on queue theory. ;)
I respect your right to dissent.
I am glad we all disagreed without any name calling.
Your friend from the right coast.
Jack
-
Dan King:
Without a serious overall mindset change, I'm skeptical that the pace of play for golf in America will ever improve.
Still, I wonder if your amusement park analogy makes sense. If a person enters an amusement park, they can look around and decide what ride to go on. Sure, the length of each ride line will be influenced by the popularity of the ride. But, people can decide to take other rides and, in so doing, even out the demand on various park facilities.
A golf course is a little different. The holes must be played in sequence. So, a delay on a couple holes must limit the overall throughput for the course, I would think.
Isn't a pipeline a better analogy? If you have a faster pump, can't you move more product through?
P.S. I would acknowledge that the pipeline/pump analogy probably isn't perfect either. On a golf course, you don't just need one pump. You need everyone cooperating........which takes us right back the slow play mindset that has overtaken golf in the States, unfortunately.
-
I have to agree with Dan that Rich and Jack's theory has a flaw. They say we can have players taking 10 min. per hole (10x18=180, or 3 hr.) for a 3 hour round. They would require players to tee off at 5 min. intervals to accomplish this. That would mean that 48 players (4x12) would tee off in the first hour. Within 3 hours there would be 144 golfers on the course. Hey, that's exactly how many golfers are included in a full field shotgun (8x18=144); did anyone ever finish one of those in less than 5 hours? The conjestion factor is the fly in their ointment, as soon as one group doesn't play the hole in 10 min. or less everyone behind them pays the price. The brisk pace of play in GB&I is more a factor of uncrowdwed courses than anything else. I remember most starters in Scotland instructing us to wait until the group had cleared the first green before teeing off. This would indicate their golfers typically are teeing off in 10 min. intervals across the Pond.
I totally agree however, that there are cultural factors at work that seperate the USA and GB&I contingents. Most cousres over there are provided by the community as a service to the general public, at a reduced cost to the local golfer. He therefore feels a need to the respect the rights of other golfers who are sharing the course with him. Typically in the USA, golfers are buying their round from someone who wants to make money, not make his customers happy, and that can create a whole different mindset. We have a long way to go to establish their mindset here in the States.
-
Time out.
If your point is that a saturated course has limits to the speed of play I would agree. A roadway is a good analaogy.
But I don't believe that was the discussion. The discussion was about turnover. Does a course benefit from having faster rounds. This is undoubtedly true in terms of increased capacity and a chance for greater revenue.
I am flawed but my theory isn't. What theory? ;)
I have to agree with Dan that Rich and Jack's theory has a flaw. They say we can have players taking 10 min. per hole (10x18=180, or 3 hr.) for a 3 hour round. They would require players to tee off at 5 min. intervals to accomplish this. That would mean that 48 players (4x12) would tee off in the first hour. Within 3 hours there would be 144 golfers on the course. Hey, that's exactly how many golfers are included in a full field shotgun (8x18=144); did anyone ever finish one of those in less than 5 hours? The conjestion factor is the fly in their ointment, as soon as one group doesn't play the hole in 10 min. or less everyone behind them pays the price. The brisk pace of play in GB&I is more a factor of uncrowdwed courses than anything else. I remember most starters in Scotland instructing us to wait until the group had cleared the first green before teeing off. This would indicate their golfers typically are teeing off in 10 min. intervals across the Pond.
I totally agree however, that there are cultural factors at work that seperate the USA and GB&I contingents. Most cousres over there are provided by the community as a service to the general public, at a reduced cost to the local golfer. He therefore feels a need to the respect the rights of other golfers who are sharing the course with him. Typically in the USA, golfers are buying their round from someone who wants to make money, not make his customers happy, and that can create a whole different mindset. We have a long way to go to establish their mindset here in the States.
-
Jack writes:
I absolutely disagree with you. Your amusement park analogy is a bit off. A better analogy would be a a single ride at the amusement park where getting them on and off the ride as quickly as possible is in the park owners' interests.
Okay, lets go with your single ride analogy. Isn't it only important to get people off the ride to get others on once you hit capacity? As long as you aren't at capacity, why would it make any difference to the ride operator to get people off the ride?
Let's use the pipe. Isn't it only important to get fluid through the pipe when you are at capacity? As long as there is still room in the pipe, things can go in the pipe much faster than they come out. The flow only is consistent when you reach capacity.
Lets' say I operate a toll road. I charge cars at the entrance of my toll road. Excluding customer service concerns, why would I care how fast people drive on my toll road, up until the traffic jams affect the entrance?
What is the capacity of a golf course? How many golfers do you think you could fit on a golf course before it affects them playing from the first tee?
I'm not arguing here in favor of slow play. Few people hate slow play more than me. But I don't understand this concept that says it is in the course operators best interest to speed up play. The only place that matters to him is the first tee. The operators aren't charging people on every tee, or for how far they proceed in the round. They only charge on the first tee and it is financially the only bottleneck they would care about (excluding customer service concerns.)
Dan King
"The Future is something which everyone reaches at the rate of sixty minutes an hour, whatever he does, whoever he is."
--C.S. Lewis
-
Dan King:
Once a course reaches a saturation point the word will get out very quickly that course "x" is just not worth going to. That was my initial point -- there is a financial interest for the club(s) to move people along. The benefit? It's called repeat play! Which translates into more $$$$.
Look, I don't doubt that there are people who play golf who are interested in the "show" -- the cart girl, the hoopla about smoking the biggest cigar, and all that other crap. But, there is a market in which people want to play golf and will reward their future business to those facilities that cater to that specific need.
You're right -- getting to the 1st tee is a short-sighted management's emphasis. Mine's a bit different -- it's playing the whole round. If management at any establishment is that stupid to think that people will come back time after time to a facility that does nothing to attack the issue they are in major league denial.
Many courses in America are haphazardly managed from my personal observations. They have more personnel running around the clubhouse but few, if any, really are involved with speeding up play.
Management has only itself to blame for the bottle-necks that take place. And I know many players, myself included, who will bypass those facilities that turn a deaf and dumb ear to the issue. Case closed.
-
Matt_Ward writes:
Management has only itself to blame for the bottle-necks that take place. And I know many players, myself included, who will bypass those facilities that turn a deaf and dumb ear to the issue. Case closed.
But somehow in a wee bit more than a couple generations, we've gone from a typical 3 hour pace to a typical 4½ to 5 hour pace. It's easy to blame the course management. But we allowed it to happen. We continued to pay green fees to courses that did nothing to discourage slow play. We continued to buy more beer, chips, cigars, etc... while we waited on tee after tee.
Now we suddenly expect course managers to no longer look out for their own interests and do something about slow play. I agree with you, it is up to golfers to make course managers interested in picking up the pace. You have to boycott so that they will care, so that it will affect their bottom line.
The list of courses I refuse to play is a constantly growing list. I'd rather drive two hours to play a four hour round, than go down the street to play a five hour round. Part of this is because I do not intend to give money to course operators that allow slow play. If enough golfers did this then course management would notice. But I see plenty of slow courses with full tee sheets.
I sincerely hope a boycott will happen and work. But it is wrong to blame management. They are in the business of making money. If they thought speeding up play was going to make more money, they would do it. But until courses reach saturation that affects the first tee, or golfers boycott their course, there is no financial reason they have to speed up play.
Dan King
"Time wounds all heels."
--Groucho Marx
-
The list of courses I refuse to play is a constantly growing list. I'd rather drive two hours to play a four hour round, than go down the street to play a five hour round. Part of this is because I do not intend to give money to course operators that allow slow play. If enough golfers did this then course management would notice. But I see plenty of slow courses with full tee sheets.
Dan King
Dan, I'm of a very similar mind and attitude - certain courses I won't play due to pace or cart rules (i.e. Eagle Ridge).
However, what do you think of Shoreline? - a place where management is very interested in pace of play. In fact, the course has had many changes to the layout to improve the pace of play. Many of the changes lack integrity, architecturally and sacrifice challenge or strategy, but I think they are working.
In all the pace of play is better, but the course suffers.
-
Shivas, Rich, Matt and Jack:
Have you heard the one about the two physicists and the economist, stranded on a deserted island with nothing but canned beans? The first physicist had matches, and wanted to heat the beans until the cans exploded. The second physicist had a rope and wanted to build a pulley system to crush the cans open. The economist couldn't believe how stupid the physicists were. He had an easy, no-mess solution: "Just assume we have a can opener."
My problem with your position is that you have have your golf cart before your horse. You cannot lower the pace of play unless golfers have room to play without constantly waiting for those in front of them. The more golfers, the more waiting, the slower the pace. How do you propose we get from Point A (low concentration of golfers) to Point B (high concentration of golfers) without clogging the pace of play?
To use the ferris wheel example, you can stack 400 people on a 100 person ferris wheel at one time, but you will end up with some mighty pissed off customers.
For those that really think courses should aspire to fast play so they can stick more golfers on the course, come join me one day at my neighborhood course, Rancho Park in West L.A. But only if you've got ALL day. Rancho uses 6 minute tee times, and fills up every spot all day long (under $30.) If you are very lucky and can get out before 8 a.m., you just might finish in under 5 1/2 hours. Sure, part of the problem is that people don't play fast enough, but a larger part of the problem is that they are dumping too many golfers onto the course, with no place for them to play.
I don't play Rancho unless I tee off in the dark; lest I risk finishing in the dark.
-
For those who prefer numbers to anecdote, I will try it quantify it (Please pardon any errors or misconceptions, I am a liberal, so my calculations and conceptions are always suspect):
Pete L's analysis was on the right track, but I don't think it goes far enough.
Let's still assume that on a perfect day, everyone plays at 10 minutes a hole (3 hour round.) This day is not a perfect day, however. The wind and rough are up and money is on the line, and the course is packed, so everyone is playing at a respectable 12 1/2 minutes per hole (3 hour 45 min. round). That is the unencumbered pace, with no waiting. Any waiting time must be added on to get an accurate total. So if a group waits 10 minutes, their pace would be 3 hours 55 minutes.
On this windy day, golfers tee off every 5 minutes, but finish every 7 1/2 minutes. The Second Group would have played in 3 hrs 45 minutes, but they had to wait 2 1/2 minutes for the First Group at some point during the round (because of the "pace deficit" of 2.5 minutes). Doesn't seem to be much of a problem but look what happens as the day progresses, especially with regard to Shivas' late-afternoon "highest incremental margin" profit makers.
Tee time: 6:00 a.m. Round Finishes at 9:45:00 a.m. 3:45:00 per round, Already 184 golfers on course.
Tee time: 6:05 a.m. Round Finishes at 9:52:30 a.m. 3:47:30 per round.
Tee time: 6:10 a.m. Round Finishes at 10:00 a.m. 3:50:00 per round.
Not bad so far, under 4 hrs. per round. But let's skip ahead a little . . .
Tee time: 7:00 a.m. Round Finishes at 11:15 am. 4:15 per round, pace of play now over 14 minutes per hole, 212 golfers on the course, almost 3 foursomes per hole.
Tee time: 8:00 a.m. Round Finishes at 12:45 p.m. 4:45 per round, pace a little over 14 min. 50 sec. per hole.
Tee time 10:00 a.m. Round Finishes at 3:45 p.m. 5:45 hour round.
"Welcome to Rancho Park. Enjoy your round . . ."
Tee time 11:30 a.m. Round finishes at 6 p.m., IN THE DARK. 6 1/2 hour round.
Tee time 3:00 p.m. Last "full round" at 3 hr. projected time. Dark before foursome reaches 7 green. If they tried to finish, they would do so at 11:15 p.m. An 8 hour 15 minute round; Par 3's backed up 5-6 groups deep. "FOOOOOUUUUUURRRRRRRR."
As you can see, if you underestimate your pace, you have quite a problem by the afternoon. Not good for business.
Even with only a 1 minute pace deficit per hole, the pace would slow by 12 minutes per hour (5 minute projected pace). Over 5 hours, you are an hour off.
So, back to Rich's hypothetical. $ 100 dollars per round, everyone finishes in the light. First time 6 am; last time 11:30 a.m. 264 paying customers [(5.5hrs)(12grps/hr)(4 plyrs/grp).] $26,400 revenue, and plenty of pissed off golfers.
Now compare at 10 minute intervals but use the same unencumbered pace (Rich, I am not buying every group at 6 hrs-- with no one in front-- Americans are not that slow, are they?) No pace deficit because the potential round (6 hrs) is higher than the actual round (3 hrs 45 min.) So the last tee time is 2:20 pm. So there are 216 paying customers [(8hrs.20min)(6grps/hr)(4plyrs/grp)]. And a revenue of $21,600. There is a $4,800 difference in revenue (less than 20%), but everyone plays relatively fast and goes home happy.
All else being equal, which course do you think will be more financially successful over time?
Does my analysis work and do my numbers check out? (As if you would not tell me if I did not ask.)
-
I am an idiot......
for joining this discussion again. ;)
The facts as I see them.
Courses have increased revenue from number of rounds played.
Green fees are their principal and most important source of revenue.
Speed or pace of play is an important variable in increasing number of rounds played. (not the only one ).
I'll go away now.
-
Well it's easy to see why so many turn green after crunching numbers like these.
I always thought cart revenue was way more important than the green fee. After all, there are plenty of folk who get comped.
-
Dave M:
I used to be a ranger at my local county golf course in Northern New Jersey. Many, if not all, of the staff there, and at any number of other courses across the country, have no training / orientation for their personnel on this topic. How many courses really monitor the pace of play? I've said this before -- it's a talking point -- nothing more.
You can move the tortoise type players, but when you add other elements to the golf course and make the event a "show," then yes, Dan King, I blame management big time. Management runs the course -- don't they? Management sets the terms and conditions -- don't they? Is management interested in advancing their bottom line? I would hope so. Is management being smart in the manner in which they space players? Any course that goes below 10 minutes per group must be sniffing major league clue.
Dan, I agree with you -- I'd much rather spend time hitting balls then going through all the BS and sit behind some village idiot foursome that's plumbing 10-foot putts for a triple bogey because they're engaged in a two-dollar nassau. My question is simple -- who's watching the players when they're playing. Many times you have rangers / player assistants (whatever else they are being called today) and they simply roam back and forth and are utterly C-L-U-E-L-E-S-S on what's happening.
Many of these birds are retired types who come from the Marine school in talking to the public -- they bark more than most German sheppards!
You can cut down time when you show people a consistent approach in dealing with the issue. I can remember a group giving the finger and a hard time to an elderly gent some time ago. It was all well and good for them to be macho with four guys against one old dude. A few moments later a squad car went out onto the course and pulled the whole foursome off. They also were unable to play the course for the remainder of the season and told if such behavior happened again they would be cited for such nonsense. I know that sounds drastic but when you have Jersey attitude, as we do at some of our facilities, it becomes necessary to send a message not only to that group but to others that etiquette and pace of play are critical.
I can tell you this that a great number of people will gladly play even the half-ass layout of a course if they knew they could play in a reasonable time. If you want to grow golf then cutting down on-course time is one way to do it. Management has the keys on this issue -- I do agree with Dan that clearly management sees there's more to the investment of golf as "show" rather than the "game" it was meant to be. That's sad -- but the players will gravitate to what is permitted and encouraged by those running the show. It's as simple as that.
-
Management must be out front when it comes to eradicating slow play. There are many techniques to control the pace of play but none work if management is not vigilant as players will not always police themselves and there is no sense in trying to educate them once they are on the course.
One policy that works well is to make players aware that after two warnings they will be escorted from the course. A rain check is given that allows them to finish their rounds later that day or on a slower traffic day.
The best analogy to slow play comes from the transportation industry which has studied traffic jams. They have found that tie-ups can still occur for several hours after the problem has been cleared up. The slowdown is accumulative and affects those well back on the road. The same holds for the golf course. After a certain number of slow play minutes are reached this spreads back throughout all the groups and compounds as it goes.
That is why the only effective way to deal with slow play, as it is happening, is to speed up or remove the offenders early before compounding happens. This is management's responsibility.
-
I'm not convinced that all courses truly care about slow play. If they did, would they really make all carts stay on paths? Would they really have large expanses of land between holes? Would they really hire rangers who just drive past you with a wave when you're waiting on every shot?
I can deal with the beer carts, I can deal with people stopping at the turn for a sandwich and I can even deal with a few spots where I have to wait. But I hate mandatory carts and mandatory cart paths more than four-putts. It turns a four-hour round into close to a five-hour round immediately. And if you're playing behind a group that has guys in it that aren't smart enough to take more than one club to their ball and they go back and forth, it's really frustrating.
I sometimes think all a golf course is is a vehicle to sell high-priced lots for high-priced homes. Once that happens, it seems there are more than enough people to drop $100 on greens fees.
OK, that's enough of a rant.
-
On last week's trip to Orlando, I found myself as the third person in each round. As there are no/very few walking courses, I always had the cart to myself. Many people simple do not understand how to play as a twosome with a cart. I had a twosome with me at Mystic Dunes, and they constantly drove each other to each shot. It was only when they got very close to the green that one would grab the cart. We were the first group off, so it was an open course in front of us, and while we finished in under 4 hours, it should have been 3:30. Nice guys, they just did not know. As the visiting New Yorker, I don't want to tell them to hurry up as we were well under the GPS suggested time of 4:15. Thus I agree that it is management's responsibility, and it has to be set up before the round, and maybe even when you make the tee time. Will it happen, probably not.
-
Guys,
Let me help here. Owners and management companies absolutely DO NOT want slow play. To think otherwise is insane. The formula is this: slow play equals fewer rounds per day and more pissed off customers and therefore, even fewer rounds. Fewer rounds equals less revenue. End of story.
Every management company I know has entire books and training manuals devoted to the subject. If it really was management, don't you think that one course out there would get it right? There's over 10,000 daily fee golf courses and you're telling me that every one of them is run poorly? That's why golfers should never run golf courses: they don't get it.
The problem is that the entire field must play as slow as the slowest person that day. And since, at a public course, there's always going to be one foursome taking 5 hours, that means EVERYONE plays in 5 hours after that guy. You can have 15 minute tee times, and if the guy two groups ahead of you is taking 5 hours, so do you. Most people aren't like the people on this board. They shoot over 100, they like waterfalls, and they eat hot dogs and drink beer on their 1 day a month away from their wives. Most people think a 4 hour round is FLYING, and after 5 is when it's a problem. Sorry, that's public golf life.
Why can't the course stop the guy taking 5 hours? Two problems: At a muni like Rec Park, anyone can play - it's owned by the taxpayers. That's where people learn to play golf. It's going to be a 6 hour day. Suck it up. At a high end facility, like it was pointed out earlier, the customer paid the money, they get the benefit of the doubt. That said, courses do move people along, they do give people their money back, and we've got freaking signs EVERYWHERE (also ridiculed on this board).
Here's another thing: 5 hour rounds do not suddenly appear. They build to that point. The first round of the day finishes in 3 hours, and each time someone has a bad hole it adds to the problem. Your foursome sticks 8 balls in the water on the 8th hole? You just added to the problem bigtime, even if you have to wait on 9 - becuase now there's a backup on 8 AND 9.
To avoid it, You've got 2 options: Join a club, or play really early.
-
Golf Course Owners are interested in maximizing the number of rounds played on their courses. There is a strong inverse relationship between the average time taken to play and the number of rounds played ( that is, faster playing time correlates with more rounds ).
This is true ( I swear it ) ;)
The mechanics and statistics associated with actual playing times gets a bit complicated and involves queue theory.
There are many Internet sites that give a lowdown on queue theory. This is one of them:
http://www.eventhelix.com/RealtimeMantra/CongestionControl/queueing_theory.htm
I think we need to print out these formulas and bring them to our starters and golf course managers so they can introduce new procedures ( this was a lame attempt at satire ).
I think the basic reason for slow play is two fold:
Saturation of courses ( kind of like the roads are slow cause there is just too many damn cars on them)
Greater tolerance for slow play
These reasons are inter-related. Each helps to create the other.
Which came first?
Slow play or a greater tolerance for it.
I don't know.
I think it all started when Hubert Green's waggles got televised. Have you ever noticed how the incidence of waggling increased after he won his first event.
Maybe it was Fat Jack's studying every putt from every conceivable angle.
We know who the slowest players on tour are but who are the fastest?
I pray that the moderator bans me from any further discussions of slow play. I am really starting to get tedious.
I am just gonna continue to avoid playing during prime hours - like weekends, and maybe weekdays and holidays and .....
I am just gonna continue going to the most run down municipal course I can find after a heavy rain in November on a weekday an hour or 2 after twilight rates have started.
-
I have encouraged my friend, Bill Yates, to jump in to this threah. I hope he does. You might, in the meanwhile, check out Bill's website at:
<www.pacemanager.com.
-
Have to agree with a lot of what S. Busch stated.
He also hits on another point, "Your foursome sticks 8 balls in the water on the 8th hole?"
For faster play to occur the type of game played has to change, which isn't likely.
Stableford is the game in the developing golf nations of central and northern Europe. When you can't earn a point, you pick up. This is a quick game even when played by novices. The great thing is players can blow a hole and still be in the game having fun. It also encourages aggressive play (and allows for bolder designs). When the same players compete in their rare stroke play events (club championship), they take four-and-a half to five-and-a half hours over a course which takes four with stableford.
Even on a not so punishing course, I find it difficult to see stroke play rounds taking less than three hours...or even four hours. So long as it's an all stroke play mentality the rounds will take longer than they should...unless the patrons know the game, can play or both.
The idea of using GPS to issue carrots (cash rebates or an earlier shot at preferred tee times) for faster rounds, and get slow players to move faster is a great idea. At troublesome courses GPS would be a valuable tool to empower course rangers and make golfers accountable. Stats could be kept on customer performance to the operation's and individual golfers benefit.
-
Dan, I'm of a very similar mind and attitude - certain courses I won't play due to pace or cart rules (i.e. Eagle Ridge).
However, what do you think of Shoreline? - a place where management is very interested in pace of play. In fact, the course has had many changes to the layout to improve the pace of play. Many of the changes lack integrity, architecturally and sacrifice challenge or strategy, but I think they are working.
JK - can you elaborate on these changes at my former home Shoreline? Haven't been there in a long time - I am very curious. Send by email if you don't want to post here. Thanks!
BTW, I'm with you on Eagle Ridge... but dammit, I am still too addicted to this game to participate in Dan's boycott. If I want to play and it's the only place I can get a decent tee-time (which occurred ER recently), I'll play. Damn this addiction!
TH
tom.huckaby@clorox.com
-
Awesome thread, much better than previous discussions on the pace of play. I was inspired to do some more research on this topic, and found this article -
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/12/budiansky.htm
with this thesis -
"The eeriest thing that came out of these equations, however, was the implication that traffic congestion can arise completely spontaneously under certain circumstances. No bottlenecks or other external causes are necessary. Traffic can be flowing freely along, at a density still well below what the road can handle, and then suddenly gel into a slow-moving ooze. Under the right conditions a small, brief, and local fluctuation in the speed or spacing of cars -- the sort of fluctuation that happens all the time just by chance on a busy highway -- is all it takes to trigger a system-wide breakdown that persists for hours after the blip that triggered it is gone. In fact, the Germans' analysis suggested, such spontaneous breakdowns in traffic flow probably occur quite frequently on highways."
Perhaps the traffic analogy is flawed because, as a couple of you have pointed out, golf holes are one way and one lane.
But is it possible that slow play is caused by chaotic events that are far too subtle for us to understand or even observe ?
-
???
So, some observations.
IN the past 5 years I have played a numbers (~20??) courses with Kirby Markers (there are some other equivalents out there) http://www.kirbymarkers.com/ To my memory they all have played faster than average.
The reason becomes clearer as you examine it (pay attention Kirby) as I'll detail in a moment. First what is it? These are dish shaped markers typically placed in 25 yard increments. They should be color coded (most of the time they are) and on both sides of the fairway about a yard out into the short stuff.
It's the regularity that sets it apart from sprinkler heads. Even if you have a "map" or yardage book, which has dots denoting the sprinkler heads you still waste valuable time circling to find them. Then you step off the yardage, sometimes from more than one direction. Now with the Kirby markers you should never be more than 12.5 yards between tehmm right (25/2 dummies). Many times you can see the yardages from the cart path (if you are using a cart and have to stay on the paths) or at least as you cross into the fairway. Amazingly simple. AND you know they are there. For me, a 13 handicap, I usually just eyeball it. You can tell pretty close if you're at 185 or 190 if the Kirby Markers are at 175 and 200 respectively. This fall I played a round from carts on the path (with 2 senior golfers) and I only recalled stepping off one yardage amonst us during the round (we discussed it at the end!). That round took less than 4 hours from the paths at Forest Greens GC just south of DC.
Its better than GPS, which if you're allowed on the fairway (useless if you are not right??) promotes waiting for your partner to play then have them drive over for a reading!
SO, I am boldly suggesting that we all promote to the USGA and everyone the use of "Dual 25 yard markers"
Comments???
-
Can't change personallities, their are many deliberate people in this world, I am not going to change world, are you? If you have any ideas, I am all ears.
-
Yes, Headpro, I have a few without even having to think too much:
-- Follow the USGA pace-of-play guidelines to rate your course so you know how to manage it better, even slighgtly
-- Consult with your golf course architect on tee markers + pin position combinations, signage, etc.
-- On busy days require match play formats and educate golfers on how to close holes quickly dueing match play formats
-- Send golfers out so the pace does not seem slow (i.e., at regular intervals with realistic gaps)
-- Don;t let golfers hit on #1 tee until their time, regardless of whether golfers are clear
-- Mow roughs to avoid hunting parties
-- Create fun days where the course is set to executive-length and reduce rounds by 20% or more
Not all these will work all times at all locales. In fact, none will work if there is no buy-in by those in charge. But, ther are all ideas, and ideas are hard to kill.
-
I find it interesting that nobody has mentioned "ready golf" in this thread.
Unless the whole course is jammed, I usually find that if I'm always waiting for the group in front of me, it's because they're hung up on "who's away." It's usually especially bad on the greens where short 2nd puts are always marked and people don't study their lines while others are doing their thing. Nothing is more infuriating than watching a guy with a 3 foot putt wait on another who just chipped on to walk all the way to the cart and back to get his putter for his 15 foot putt. Well, perhaps worse than that is a fourseome who all hit their first putts close to the hole, mark each ball, then have a discussion as to who is away.
Ready golf really doesn't take anything away from the game. If busy courses did a better job of encouraging and educating people on ready golf, more people would be comfortable playing that way.