It seems like a classic no-brainer.
The fact is, recreational golf is struggling. A spate of recent reports lament course closings, fewer rounds being played and Golf businesses battling with the bottom line and a shrinking customer base.
There are numerous reasons given for the decline, but most will agree that at least one of three major factors: cost, time and difficulty can be found somewhere in each and every story of golf's current woes.
That said, a clear path to increasing participation would logically be to create and promote a golf "option" that is less expensive, less time-consuming and less difficult. Ironically the basis for that option already exists: par three, nine hole and executive courses... shorter layouts.
These types of courses actually can offer a more accessible golf "option", but they have to be made available, which would mean retrofitting longer courses into shorter courses and... equally important... promotion of such courses and the kind of golf they lend themselves to. Because as equipment technology has allowed for more and more distance... and golf carts have became ubiquitous... the recreational game has been taken over by a certain breed of
A piece by Jeff Neuman in today's Wall Street Journal addresses this topic and points to the promising development of a 12 hole par-three course on the ocean at the Bandon Dunes complex in Oregon. The course is being designed Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw with strategy, creativity and ...shockingly, fun... in mind. It seems many of the area's golfers are delighted with the idea. ~ I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in hoping this might be a trend.
Photo: Vail's Grove Golf Course is a friendly 9-hole track in Brewster, NY, where I played last week. It was fun and challenging round that took less than two hours.
I regularly play my local Par 3 course. It's great, takes less than a couple of hours, only costs £5 (7 dollars), just take four clubs; 5 iron, 7 iron, pitching wedge and putter and you can play in old jeans, t-shirt nad trainers without feeling like an alien.
ReplyDeleteThis argument makes sense logically but economically the challenge is real. There has been conversation about changing current 18-hole layouts into 3 six-hole components rather than 2 nine-hole courses.
ReplyDeleteWhile that seems to be a wonderful suggestion consider what would have to be done to re-route golfers on and off the course. Course ratings and slopes would need to be adjusted as well to go into a new formulation for handicaps. In a healthier economic environment perhaps these would be no-brainers, but to insert the capital for those kinds of changes just isn't there today.
This is the ultimate catch-22...you need more revenue so you want to make the game more accessible but you don;t have the necessary capital to implement the change.
On the other hand, promoting the ease of play on par 3 and executive courses by addressing time constraints and budgets is something that needs to be made fashionable so more golfers view it as an acceptable and viable option.
Simply put, let's work with the tools we have and show the advantages of these types of facilities.
Thanks, Patricia for bringing this topic to the forefront.
It's so logical... and that's why it's going to be such a hard sell. But it definitely makes sense.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt about it, the cost of transforming current "supersized" courses would be huge... and for that reason, as I mentioned in my comment on the WSJ story, the USGA... and local golf associations... would need to be 100% behind the concept.
ReplyDeleteThey would need to buy into the idea that for golf to thrive in the 21st century there has to be a sort of parallel game. ~ No, I don't mean putt-putt!!! I hear that reactionary response already.
I'm talking about a game that would still be highly challenging and multifaceted, a game that would still require club selection and inspire players to be creative with their shots and with the equipment they use. It may include more sandtraps, narrower fairways, more sever rough, it just wouldn't be as dependent on distance. It would be designed/re-designed & maintained in a more "links-like" - less manicured/lush/costly manner... which as an added benefit is more environmentally friendly.
If the powers that be gets behind it 100% and begins seriously promoting it I think it could become the trend that grows the game. Up till now though, the philosophy still seems to be that anything less than the most draconian course PGA is really no better than minigolf.
A beautiful course out here closed a month ago. It used to be a private club then opened up to outsiders but remained perfectly groomed, and very expensive. In the end the reason they gave in the paper was that family responsibilities have changed and people don't have time to play golf anymore. How's that for ironic?
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff Patricia, very timely for me as I am working on building a nine hole par three attached to a state of the art practice facility. I live in a resort destination and there are many great golf courses in the Baja however the cost is extremeely prohibitive for casual players. Cabo San Lucas is also the second highest cruise ship destination in Mexico and virtually none of the more than 2 million tourist play any golf at all due to cost and time resrictions. Having been the Head Professional at a 54 hole facility that included a Nine hole par three I am very aware of the potential for the "non" avid golfer in resort destinations.
ReplyDeletePatricia, I agree that's part of the problem... but the flipside is that we've made golf too hard, period.
ReplyDeleteI mean, if you learn how to play softball, you don't feel you need several hours of practice a week to play in a league over the weekend. And when you learn how to play tennis, you don't feel you need several hours of practice a week to play a decent match on Saturday.
But we've convinced the average person that golf is a major time investment just to be a duffer. Add in long courses and high greens fees... well, we're talking about a massive overhaul of how we market the sport.
Shorter, less expensive courses will help, but they're only part of the problem.
.
ReplyDeletei took up this issue myself among prominent archies as my initial post on GolfClubAtlas some years ago
my suggestion was the 12 holes as a complete round become the standard since this could be done in about three hours as an answer to pace of play being the number one reason golf was less enjoyable
additionally i reasoned the clubhouse would then become what it used to be - a place to really enjoy a post-round lunch or a beer afterwards thereby creating potential revenue for the club - since nowadays people have to run since the golf round itself cost way too much time
what i learned was the birth of the British Open was initially contested at Prestwick which was a twelve hole course and subsequently that standard lasted some twenty years
the archies also indicated costs to maintain the course would be similar on the big ticket items
i also discussed the topic with ron whitten then of golf digest and his solution to limit the time on pace of play was to replace stroke play with match play (whereas the match typically ends in less than the full eighteen holes being played)
hence the obvious solutions as they exist today are not implimentable as readily as one might suspect
but as it remains my last chance to consistenly shoot in the seventies or at least eighties i am fully in support of the twelve hole golf course as the standard
frankD
ft lauderdale
.
ReplyDeleteas for courses closing, in my analysis this seems to be more in order of what is happening to real estate in general, as the planned urban GOLF development communities and all the promised amenities cannot be financial supported in this economic climate
as for private clubs in jeopardy well IMHO they have only themselves to blame for not seeing the daily fee golf experience as democratizing the game and historically limiting memberships based socially unacceptable criteria being bad for long term survival
as much as i love siwanoy i can never in good conscience become a card carrying member
frankD
ft lauderdale
.
ReplyDeletein defense of SHORT courses i would direct anyone of the idea that they are not relevant because they are "too easy" to look at westchester country club - home of the shortest course on tour for about thirty years - and find a competing pro who played there who got quoted as saying that layout was "too easy"
frankD
ft lauderdale
.
ReplyDeleteneanderthals did in fact play a game similar to GOLF they called UGH and proof is if you look really close at those cave drawings you will see for yourself
frankD
ft liquordale
.
ReplyDeleteactually here is my actual post back then -
frank_D
Guest
new gold standard
« on: January 15, 2003, 10:17:36 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
is it time to have a new gold standard ? what i am suggesting is golf course design to address the two top barriers to the game today - time and cost. my proposal is to change the current standard of eighteen holes to twelve holes with six holes per side - time to play would go from 4 plus hours to 2 1/2 hours per round - a $75 round would cost $50 - par would be 48 instead of 72 - a bogey player would score in the 60's instead of the 90's - there would be sufficient time available before the round to warm up and after the round for the "thirteenth" hole imbibing - and land maintenance costs, water consumption, chemical usage, etc being lower would further reduce operating costs. i do not mean an executive lenght course but twelve full lenght holes. i realize this is heresy to the religious in which case a third side of six can complete an eighteen for the purists and three sixes can allow the "rush hour" times to start from three tees. let's make a real break from the royal and ancient !
Golf has become a power game, and really that is a shame, albeit always satisfying to soar along with the flight of one's ball the reality is that the finer points and distinctions of golf are lost... when hitting fairway woods with persimmon woods was a skill learned and savored today's technologies have made airborne a foregone conclusion... difficulty now is brute strength and distance not so much ball striking and shot shaping. The difficult of the game now is cost, time, length of course rather than technique, course management and finer skills.
ReplyDeleteChuck Hilliard
I love courses that have a par-3 and 18-hole course--especially 'destination' courses as it provides a great warm-up loop and helps younger golfers develop. A great one also has a couple sets of tees to challenge all golfers.
ReplyDeleteHere's the practical & simple answer to quick, affordable & less frustrating golf on shorter courses.
ReplyDeleteYou just described the new easy play, hi-performance Hybrid Golf Ball, developed for executive and par-3 golf courses. Makes the smaller course play like a big course, without the time, cost & difficulty.
It's all in the Hybrid golf balls distance-to-weight tecnology that creates a new design standard for enjoyable golf... where less is more.
No expensive course design/construction or reconfiguration needed!