[James Brown]

I think firmness is just as important as overall length.  Dornoch is a great example of the roll effect for women making the game much more fun.  If you watch the first tee at Dornoch, you notice pretty quick that the ladies pretty much all hit rolling balls that you never ever see in the US.  Then you see an American in bright colors hit a drive as hard and as high as possible that goes the same distance as the ladies...


I think firm conditions can resolve a whole lot of this debate about multiple tees and proper length. 


I wonder if the California drought has given us any new data on firmness and distance?


Would love to see comparisons of carry and roll for the average men's and women's driving distances that have been cited for different degrees of firmness. 

[Doug Siebert]

While many women can hit it 160, according to Jan Beljan, they only do it about half the time, with other shots shorter.

Tom Fazio crew study the old line clubs they work with, and say the average female member there hits the ball about 125 (obviously older, etc.)

Here's the problem I have with the figures you've given. If you target a women who drives it 160 on a good drive (i.e.  half their drives) but averages 130 (because of the other half of drives that average 100) I think you should base the distance off that 160 yard shot. If you target having the holes reachable in regulation for good shots (let's say max 300 yards for a par 4) versus average shots (let's say max 240 yards) that's a pretty big difference.

There's nothing wrong with a bad drive leaving a hole unreachable. If I'm playing a really long par 4 and hit a bad drive, and can't reach the green, well that's the penalty for hitting a bad drive. I should have saved that drive up for a 400 yard hole where it doesn't make much difference!

[Duncan Cheslett]

I'm puzzled by the notion that ALL golfers should be able to hit greens in regulation, and that they should play from a tee that allows them to do this.

Surely the inability of shorter hitters of either gender to reach long par 4s in two is simply reflected in their handicaps?

Most recreational women's handicaps appear to fall in the 20 - 36 range and many holes which play as par 4s for men are designated as par 5s for ladies. If the average woman gets onto the green of a 400 yard hole in four shots she is delighted and stands a good chance of holing out in six - often one better than her handicap would suggest.

Move the average woman player forward to a tee that allows her to hit "greens in regulation" and half the hazards on the course will be in the wrong place, not to mention strategy, challenge, and aesthetic appeal being compromised. If my wife is anything to go by, she would feel that she was being treated as a second-class golfer.

Most ladies in my experience are perfectly happy hitting driver and then pootling the ball 120 yards down the middle of the fairway with a wood or hybrid a couple of times before chipping onto the green.

Argue that this is something that should be changed at your peril! 


Edited to add;  There is strong argument that when ladies get down to single figures they should play the men's tees. Our best woman player is off scratch, the current County Champion, and drives the ball 280 yards+. Why should she be off forward tees?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Doug,

In fact, that is what we do, although I think I meant to type 140.  There are many women who regularly hit it 160, and many find playing from the men's senior tees fits them, but it is a course to course thing.  I agree we don't need to make greens reachable after a poor tee shot, only the good ones.

Duncan,

Yours sounds like a very unenlightened view!  It echoes the "that's good enough for them because I say so" attitude most men in golf have.......

Please tell me that you would be pleased as punch to hit driver, 3W, 3W, 7 iron to every par 4, and then tell me why I should condemn anyone to do that via design?  Or subject them to the wrath of angry golfers behind them for slow play? Would you even play? 

I agree some women may "accept" what is offered because of the lure of golf, but in my experience, when given a better alternative, the gravitate to a more fun layout where the repetition of what you suggest is eliminated.  I sincerely doubt that they are as happy as can be.

Now I do agree its hard to actually accomplish, having tried, and there are going to probably be some holes on any course where they just have to accept the long par 4 as a par 5, like many senior men do.  But, I set a goal of all 18 being reachable in regulation because I know I am going to fall somewhat short.  If I set it at 50%, I might end up with no holes reachable in regulation.  And, the next level of design goes beyond pure yardage reduction to making sure those playing the forward tees have some interesting challenges, too.

BTW, while most women (and men) have handicaps of 20-36, stats show that the majority who are worse than that simply have no handicap at al, driving up the numbers of the poor golfer way up, and suggest more design consideration for them, as opposed to placing it all on the 0.1% at the top, as so many do.

[Tom_Doak]

PS - I know there are some women who post herein. It would be nice to hear their thoughts on this thread.

Thomas:


The problem is that pretty much all the women who post here [or who are respected enough that you'd listen to what they say] are very good players who generally play from the men's tees themselves.  So it's like asking Jack Nicklaus what are the best tees for you and your dad to play.

[Doug Siebert]

I'm puzzled by the notion that ALL golfers should be able to hit greens in regulation, and that they should play from a tee that allows them to do this.

Surely the inability of shorter hitters of either gender to reach long par 4s in two is simply reflected in their handicaps?

Most recreational women's handicaps appear to fall in the 20 - 36 range and many holes which play as par 4s for men are designated as par 5s for ladies. If the average woman gets onto the green of a 400 yard hole in four shots she is delighted and stands a good chance of holing out in six - often one better than her handicap would suggest.

Move the average woman player forward to a tee that allows her to hit "greens in regulation" and half the hazards on the course will be in the wrong place, not to mention strategy, challenge, and aesthetic appeal being compromised. If my wife is anything to go by, she would feel that she was being treated as a second-class golfer.

Most ladies in my experience are perfectly happy hitting driver and then pootling the ball 120 yards down the middle of the fairway with a wood or hybrid a couple of times before chipping onto the green.

Argue that this is something that should be changed at your peril! 


Edited to add;  There is strong argument that when ladies get down to single figures they should play the men's tees. Our best woman player is off scratch, the current County Champion, and drives the ball 280 yards+. Why should she be off forward tees?

Nothing stops those women who are happy to pootle their ball down the fairway 120 yards at a time from playing tees further back that allow them to continue doing so, nor as you suggest stops better female players from playing there because shorter tees lead to a round of all wedge approaches. No one should care where someone plays from as long they keep up the pace. Those women that pootle it 120 yards at a time tend to just walk up and hit it, you never see a lengthy preshot routine or discussion about what to club to hit!

Many courses have gotten away from referring to "women's" tees and call them forward or identify them by color but there's still a bias that keeps golfers who should move up from doing so, and probably some worry on the part of women who wish to move back but don't because they worry about the reaction they'll get from others - and not just men!

Some time ago I had a girlfriend who was a college basketball player and all around good athlete. She'd drive the ball maybe 240 on a well hit drive - and that was before the big headed driver and Pro V1. She played the men's tees, and we'd sometimes overhear some pretty interesting comments from bystanders when she'd tee it up on the men's tees of the first hole. The worst were actually from the women - she was told on more than one occasion that she was on the wrong tee by other women! The men tended to make passive aggressive comments 'to each other' about being ready for a slow round, presumably because they were playing behind a woman. They tended to shut up pretty quickly once they saw her drive the ball further than any of them probably would. The women on the other hand would sometimes make their comments to her about playing the wrong tees AFTER seeing her hit the ball. We never could figure that one out...other than maybe small town thinking about women knowing their place or something.

[Paul Gray]

Duncan,


I hear you and, within reason, agree. There was a long thread a while back where both Mucci and I were suggesting this. There were equally a lot of people who refused to accept the notion that not everyone should be able to shoot 68. It's a recurring theme.


Personally, I grew up unable to reach many of the holes at Hayling in regulation and I look forward to the day when I can play off 12 or so and regard my own personal par as something like 78. It'll be easier with all those low running 3 woods!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Playing an appropriate distance is not going to allow most players to suddenly shoot a 68, thus make the game too easy.

For everyone talented and motivated enough to use their lack of distance to improve, there are literally 1000 who don't care enough or have time enough to practice to get any better.

If you don't care that some folks move back, you shouldn't care if some folks move forward.  In fact, you should enjoy it, as it cuts ten strokes off their score, and your wait time.

[Duncan Cheslett]

What guys in the US don't seem to appreciate is that here in the UK virtually all golf is competitive golf, whether a club competition, inter-club match, or informal 4-ball better ball for £1 stake each. The basic requirement in any competition or match is that everyone plays from the same tee.

So if a 20-year old +3 handicapper is drawn against a 78- year old 26 handicapper in a club knock-out match they must both play exactly the same course from the same tees. The handicap system is designed to ensure that neither has an advantage.

There is no system in the UK for allowing play from different tees. This goes both for men and women. Generally men play off white or yellow tees depending upon the competition that day, while ladies always play off reds.

Even in an informal social game it is completely unheard of for players to play from different tees. It might well be a good idea for this to change, but I can't see it happening. It is just not in the culture of the game.

I would suggest that the inability of influential senior members to make 200 yard carries from tees is a major reason why most British courses have not grown to become 7000 yard monsters, even if they have the space and funds so to do.

[Brent Hutto]

Duncan,


That's a good description of UK golf culture but for the most part in the USA there is an equally established and accepted culture of players using different tees.


At my club in our daily walk-up games there are often players using all four sets of tees as well as a fifth "combo" set comprising a mixture drawn from the #3 and #2 sets. That's players competing together from tees that range from 4,500 to nearly 6,500 yards (Par 70). On a usual day only a couple guys use the most forward #1 set or the longest #4.


During formalized club tournaments the handicapped flights also play from whatever tees each player wishes to use while the Championship Flight, plays at scratch from the longest #4 set. Certainly not every club here is as open to mixing tees in tournaments but it is absolutely the norm in daily competitive play. The only informal restriction is that you should play your tournament rounds from your usual tees (since USGA handicaps are based on all rounds played).


Outside of my club, one of my best golf buddies and I use different tees to handicap our head to head matches. He hits his 5-iron the same distance as I hit my driver and his handicap is also 10 shots lower than mine. So we usually play tees about 800-900 yards apart in course length, play straight up and use "Sunningdale Rules" to handle the remaining difference.

[Ken Moum]

Duncan,


I hear you and, within reason, agree. There was a long thread a while back where both Mucci and I were suggesting this. There were equally a lot of people who refused to accept the notion that not everyone should be able to shoot 68. It's a recurring theme.


Personally, I grew up unable to reach many of the holes at Hayling in regulation and I look forward to the day when I can play off 12 or so and regard my own personal par as something like 78. It'll be easier with all those low running 3 woods!
[/quote

I completely understand the point you are making, looking forward to a personal par of 78 doesn't get anywhere near the real point.

A typical woman golfer playing my home course from the forward tees at 5400 yards has a personal par closer to 100 than to 80.

Use my my wife, whose handicap puts here in the same percentile among women as a 6-handicap male as an example.

At 5400 yards there no more than 5 holes where she has a decent probability of reaching the green in regulation with her best swings, and two of them are par threes.

The "average" female with a handicap might be able to reach the two shortest par threes with a driver, every other hole has one, two or three shots with no intrigue or strategy.

Women will say they don't mind it, but talk to any of them who've played a Pete Dye course with 4800-yard forward tees and you'll hear a different story.

K

[Thomas Dai]

The "average" female with a handicap might be able to reach the two shortest par threes with a driver, every other hole has one, two or three shots with no intrigue or strategy.

Women will say they don't mind it, but talk to any of them who've played a Pete Dye course with 4800-yard forward tees and you'll hear a different story.
K

Perhaps we shouldn't be collectively surprised that only circa 15% of players are female! How many men would continue in the long-term to play golf on this basis - and just imagine how long a 4-ball of males would take to play 18-holes! Nightmare time!


However, it would be interesting to know how Rory and Co would score if they had to hit driver on every par-3 and were only just able to reach most par-4's and par 5's by hitting pretty much their 'Sunday best' shots.


There's probably some data out there showing how Rory and Co historically score on short par-4's where they attempt to drive the green. If we assume such a hole were actually designated as a 'par-3' then I reckon their average score would more than 3, if you get my drift, and there wouldn't be many 2's. The 'bleating factor' would probably be pretty high as well, plus it would need to be a 9,000 yd or thereabouts course, or using a very significantly rolled-back ball.


Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Thomas,

That data is out there, and the most birds come on par 5, then par 4, then par 3 holes come in at near or over par, in general. In other words, the longer the approach shot, the lower birdie average, typically.

Ken,

That is my experience with women and new, shorter tees.  Some resistance at first, due to tradition, or whatever, then they like it, much like I like golf better having moved from 67-6800 down to 61-6300. Its nice hitting clubs to greens.  And nicer to be hitting mid irons and short irons some of the time.

At La Costa, a female player on opening day said she could have hit 13 of 18 at the 4400 yard length.  She wondered why we didn't do all 18 that way.  I will say there is more than pure length. Jan Bel Jan played it at ASGCA this year.  She said the course wasn't repetitive or boring, but that some shots could have been designed better, considering uphill downhill, etc., and "just missed" some opportunities for some fun golf for her.

[Mark_Fine]

I am actually heading out tomorrow to visit a course I have been working on for several years.  The primary purpose of this trip is to layout some new forward tees.  The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that we WILL be shorting up the golf holes.  There is no question in my mind that most golf courses would benefit from a shorter set of forward tees.  The forward tee players (whether they are women, seniors, kids,..., almost anyone) will have much more fun. 

[Ken Moum]

Jeff,

I'll tell you an interesting story relevant to this.

Just this Thursday, a friend of my wife stopped by to pick something up and we were standing in the driveway talking about golf. She's a 32.7 handicap, which is equivalent to a male at ~18 index.

She asked had just played Firekeeper and asked us what we thought of it. My wife turned up her nose as expected, which made her feel better.

She said several interesting things. One was, "How do they manage to make all those holes play uphill without any downhill ones?"

She reserved special distaste for no. 7. She tried to make the carry over the marsh a couple of times and gave up. (FWIW when the Kansas Womens Amateur was there a couple of years ago, the Super Seniors played off the back of no. 1 tee there.)

She also said she was glad she had a freebie to play it.

I know they dont seem to have any trouble filling the tee sheet but I'm reasonably sure that it's because almost no one around here plays by the ROG. In fact, none of the guys I play with could get around it playing by the rules.

We discussed the phenomena recently the thread started by Jason Thurman (IIRC) .

The kind stuff that makes my wife crazy happened the last time she played Colbert. On 10 she hit an okay drive, but wasn't confident in making the carry so she laid up.

Then she caught a downhill lie and had to hit a shorter club over the creek, which meant she had to lay up AGAIN. So she's now hitting five off a downhill lie, over a creek and bunkers.

So even though they both CAN play short, total yardage isnt the only factor.  Actually, I don't think Firekeeper plays at the 4500-yard number much, because I've never seen five sets of markers out there.

[MCirba]

A great thread.

Any man who thinks that women enjoy piddling the ball 4 or 5 times to get within reach of the green needs to talk with my wife!!

She plays with me several times per year and it's given me a whole new appreciation for how little the games of women and weaker players are considered by most architects and courses.

It's ridiculously irritating when I drive about 260 or more some days and she gets maybe 130 or so and the red tee is up 10 yards ahead of mine.

Since I'm firmly convinced that women are the key to the future health of the game, we'd better get on the stick here folks.

My wife plays a maximum of 9 holes when we go out but she just told me in the car that if she could play a 4300 yard course where regulation figures were attainable on most holes she would play 18 without question and would also be encouraged to play much more frequently.

Right now, she feels like the tees are where they are simply to discourage women from playing at all.

[Ken Moum]

Mike, that's funny, because my wife says the same thing.  Some of atrocities she sees from forward tees would be funny if they weren't so stupid.

Trees in front of the tee, tees set off to the side and aimed directly at hazards, tiny tees crowned so much that there's no remotely flat spot or so small that there's no room for a 2-club length deep area.

OTOH, she doesn't think it's worth loading up her stuff for only nine holes.  She's fine playing a nine-hole course twice, but likes to go 18.

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks all for responding. Some interesting points here.


I have recently seen coloured tee blocks placed at various spots on fairways but way up from the usual formal teeing ground. I have seen this on par-3's, par-4's and par-5. I believe they were placed to be used by very young juniors but would this approach help other players too? You could have several sets positioned to make holes at various different lengths (no formal teeing ground though, just on the fairway).


Any thoughts?


Atb

[Ken Moum]

Thomas, that approach can work, but it depends a lot on attitudes and appearances.

Here in the US nearly every course has built elevated tees so just putting markers out on the ground for "women's tees" can sometimes (usually?), make it look like the women are the second-class citizen they already feel like.

In the U.K. it's much more common for the "regular" tees to be low to the ground so,I'd guess the appearances would be less of a problem.

One funny thing is that it is very common is complete resistance from the women who already play the course.  At my mother's in AZ, the forward tees are 5800 yards. So they built some new tees.

The active women refused to play them. They love their high handicaps... My brother, who lived there, says they've never been beaten in an interclub match. (Which is an indictment of our handicap system, not the club.)

Here in Topeka, Craig Schreiner renovated the county course in the 90s and added a set of tees at 4800 yards instead of 5400. The existing "women's" tees got new gold markers and the red markers got moved up.

The women's group refused to play the new reds so the gold and reds were swapped.

Now, when events are held there, it's common to let men over 70 play "senior" tees at 4800. And there's a local 85-yo who is still a 10 index and can drive it within ~50 yards of all but one par 4.

The whole thing is stupid.

[Ken Moum]

I think firmness is just as important as overall length.  Dornoch is a great example of the roll effect for women making the game much more fun.  If you watch the first tee at Dornoch, you notice pretty quick that the ladies pretty much all hit rolling balls that you never ever see in the US.  Then you see an American in bright colors hit a drive as hard and as high as possible that goes the same distance as the ladies...


I think firm conditions can resolve a whole lot of this debate about multiple tees and proper length. 


I wonder if the California drought has given us any new data on firmness and distance?


Would love to see comparisons of carry and roll for the average men's and women's driving distances that have been cited for different degrees of firmness.

Mind you, there are FIVE par fives on the back nine at RDC.  And there's a reason the women play Struie... and Golspie.

My wife has even suggested that it's that way to discourage women from playing at all.

Even if it's not intentional, it certainly has that effect.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ken,

Colbert Hills was in my "pre-enlightenment" period, and the forward tees are almost 5K yards.  I will check with Firekeeper to see if they are using the shorter forward tees. If not, it won't be a first, as I know two other courses that the old white guy pro refuses to put out forward markers.  And, I agree, even some women start out against them, although most seem to prefer them when they actually get used as directed.

As to Colbert Hills 10, I agree it is preferable to be able to putt the ball from tee to green, and any full cross hazard will affect someone negatively.  But, with wetland preservation requirements, we just can't pipe all the streams we may want to from purely architecture POV.

You have mentioned how hard Firekeeper is in your opinion in the past, but the three forward tees have eliminated the forced carries on most holes, if not all,  and the playing area flares out to about 80 yards wide between natives on most holes.  Again, using Audubon's 90 acres of turf to reduce irrigation (and we did, even though we didn't have to on a reservation simply because we didn't think the wells were enough to water more) the architect has some decisions to make about how to allocate turf.

I can only imagine your group hits a lot of 100 yard shots pretty far off line, since that would still be in the narrow area. I grant, the Kansas winds, in connection with the cross winds on much of the front nine make the 80 yards play a bit less.

[Greg Smith]

Thomas:
There are two courses near my home where the kids and I play.  One has a nice set of short "forward" red tees.  The other doesn't have a good set of "forward" tees, so they set up tee blocks for juniors at strategic spots in the fairway.  The placement of these fairway teeing areas is usually pretty thoughtful IMO.
The kids by FAR like playing on the course with the "real" red tees.  These tees add up to a very nice 4700 yard course.  The kids do cite the "second-class citizen" effect when speaking of the fairway tees. 

[Thomas Dai]

That's a good point about the 'second class citizen' effect of formal tees vrs informal 'fairway tees', indeed of forward tees generally. Guess it's also related to why so many men are attracted to the back tees.


One aspect to consider of folks in the same 4-ball playing from multiple tees is the, say it quietly perhaps, safely aspect. I've seen a few balls hit from back fly past the head of folks waiting to play from a forward tee.


I wonder generally if the length issue is why way back in the early days of the game clubs with the land/money available had two courses, a Men's Course and a shorter length Ladies Course? Some still do.


Atb

[David_Tepper]

"Any man who thinks that women enjoy piddling the ball 4 or 5 times to get within reach of the green needs to talk with my wife!!

She plays with me several times per year and it's given me a whole new appreciation for how little the games of women and weaker players are considered by most architects and courses.

It's ridiculously irritating when I drive about 260 or more some days and she gets maybe 130 or so and the red tee is up 10 yards ahead of mine."

MCirba -

Your comments are spot on. One reason my wife (and several other women I have spoken with) enjoys playing Castle Stuart so much vs. the traditional courses in the Highlands (Dornoch, Brora, Golspie, Tain, etc.) is that the forward tees are anywhere from 20 to 50 yards or more in front of the standard tees.

Despite all the talk here about how "par shouldn't matter" and the shortcomings of the pencil & card mentality, the pleasure and satisfaction of reaching a green "in regulation" every once in a while is undeniable, especially for a high-handicap golfer.

DT

[MCirba]

Why would the landing area for the drive (and presumably its associated features) need to be the same from every set of tees?

Wouldn't one of the challenges for the architect be how to create a course with enough variability and interest to appeal from every set of tees?   

Yesterday I played a course that I think does it close to right, although if I were king of the world I'd reduce their 5 sets of tees to at most three, or adopt the Scottish model of not placing markers on the tournament tees unless indeed a competition was taking place.

In either case, the variability of the tees went from just over 7000 yards down to about 4200, which seems about right.   I'm looking forward to going back with my wife.    I'm not sure if the multi-tee system is the product of the original architect or something that was developed internally over time, but it's a very good public golf course (just down the road from another very good public golf course, Donald Ross's "Mark Twain")  with some creatively shaped greens as well.

http://nysparks.com/golf-courses/3/course-information.aspx

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()