Pace of Play

A couple rounds ago we had three, threesomes go off and some guys that were a twosome were stuck behind all of us. There was a foursome in front of our first group and they were slow so it made us slow. My group was the only one not to hit the range so we hit two off the tee box on one and keep going. The twosome behind us called and said we were playing multiple shots. When the marshal drove out to us we were sitting on the tee box with the group in front of us because that foursome had everything slowed up. He said you guys playing multiple shot and we said no. He looked at the back up and said well hell you should, you have time. He went back and told the twosome that we were all backed up and they got mad and left after 9.

Fourputt said:

This is the thing. Good pace of play isn't about rushing around the course. If you understand and follow a good pace of play procedure you will never feel rushed, but you will never have to worry about falling off the pace or being pushed from behind. Playing ready golf is a lot more than just playing out of turn in the interest of speed. It's about being ready to hit when it's your turn to play. Not standing around watching your buddy hit, then starting to get your distance and looking at the wind and starting to think about what shot to hit and what club to use. All of that should be done in most cases before it's your turn. If you follow that sort of process, then it's easy to play at a good pace and still feel relaxed and have a good time.

Click to expand...

Fourputt's quote is exactly what needs to be taught to golfers. It drives me crazy when I see guys on totally opposite sides of the fairway and one has their club and is ready to hit but waits on their partner who hasn't even got to his ball yet because he is 2 yards further away. My biggest complain is slow people on the greens. If you like to read putts from both sides of the hole then do that while your playing partners are lining up their putts. Doing this can save 2+ minutes a hole which becomes 36+ minutes for the round. Simple things save huge amounts of time.

The lining up putts thing is huge. Do you take your time? That's fine, but keep it in perspective. If you're furthest away, you either hit a terrible shot or the other two hit great shots. Could you not figure out some of it while walking to your ball? Try to rule out some things in advance if you're close.

If you're far away, your odds aren't that great, why not just lag it close and then you have plenty of time to get your read?

TheWoo said:

Nobody has the right to claim "righteousness." But in a civil discussion about pace-of-play, I think there's a huge difference between 3:40-4:00 and 4:00-4:20. Not in one round, but in expectations. One reason round times have continued to escalate is a mindset that continues to accept slightly longer round times. I believe 4 hours is an acceptable time - but that's at the long end. Doesn't mean I can't enjoy a 4.5 hour round, but that's a long round and makes golf more difficult to justify in a busy life.

Click to expand...

Excellent point. If you are used to playing at 3:45, and the average creeps up to 3:55, it's easy to accept. Then 3:55 becomes the standard, the time creeps up to 4:05, and it's hardly noticed. This is how it happens, then fast forward to 2010 and a new player taking up the game sees 4:30 as an average round. That player will resist any attempt to roll back because he has never seen a faster round and feels that too much emphasis is placed on pace of play. When I started playing regularly in 1974 the average round in the 3 or 4 courses we were playing was 4 hours or less, walking. We weren't hitting 300 yard drives, playing driver wedge on most par 4 holes. We played blades because that's what was available. Wound balls. A monster drive was 250 yards. The advantages offered by modern equipment should allow even faster rounds, not slower. The difference is the mindset.

Slow play is accepted, and in many cases it's not even recognized as such. When we in the US hear guys talking about 3½ hour rounds in the UK, we scoff at them, but that is where the game was here 40 years ago, and that is where it should still be today. We have become too complacent. American players resist making any effort to improve.

I think some put way too much stock in actual time when discussing pace of play. 3, 4, or 5 hours for a round is meaningless in a vacuum. Pace of play is all about keeping up with the group in front and not holding up the group behind. I would argue that one would be holding people up even if the round ended up taking 3 hours if the people behind were backed up because no one let them play through while the groups in front were gaining distance. If you're not holding people up behind you, I see no reason for a ranger to get involved even if the time elapsed is longer than normal.

Secondly, if you're the one being held up, you really should ask to play through instead of just passive aggressively rolling up on a group still on the tee. Should they know to let you play through? Probably. It doesn't change the fact that you should ask if only out of simple courtesy. Drive ahead and ask to play ahead on the next hole. They may not even be aware that you are having a problem. If you get upset that no one let you play through but you never even asked to, I think that's on you.

Also, some courses are set up for getting around quickly (easy and tough courses) and 4 hours may be unacceptably slow. While some are spacious and spread out that 4:30+ is about as fast as you can reasonably go (like some of the Branson courses I play recently - I swear it took us 30+ minutes in total transit time between hole to hole for the round).

As for time commitments, no one is forcing anyone to play 18 at certain courses that are known to take longer. If you just play 9 and are smart about course selection, you can shave a lot of the time required. I used to only be able to squeeze in golf in the waning sun after work, I would play executive 9's or faster tracks that I know I can be door to door in about 2 hours. a 6 hour commitment is definitely not a requirement to play a lot of golf.

Fourputt said:

Excellent point. If you are used to playing at 3:45, and the average creeps up to 3:55, it's easy to accept. Then 3:55 becomes the standard, the time creeps up to 4:05, and it's hardly noticed. This is how it happens, then fast forward to 2010 and a new player taking up the game sees 4:30 as an average round. That player will resist any attempt to roll back because he has never seen a faster round and feels that too much emphasis is placed on pace of play. When I started playing regularly in 1974 the average round in the 3 or 4 courses we were playing was 4 hours or less, walking. We weren't hitting 300 yard drives, playing driver wedge on most par 4 holes. We played blades because that's what was available. Wound balls. A monster drive was 250 yards. The advantages offered by modern equipment should allow even faster rounds, not slower. The difference is the mindset.

Slow play is accepted, and in many cases it's not even recognized as such. When we in the US hear guys talking about 3½ hour rounds in the UK, we scoff at them, but that is where the game was here 40 years ago, and that is where it should still be today. We have become too complacent. American players resist making any effort to improve.

Click to expand...

The "acceptable" time for a round of golf has gone up since I took up the game in the 1970's. Until I joined a private club 4 years ago, my number of rounds each year had dwindled from 60+ to 30 because I simply couldn't take a 6 hour chunk out of Saturday or Sunday to play golf. Now that my average round takes about 3:15, I play about 8-10 rounds per month during golf season. Even on a Friday or Saturday when every tee time is booked, I rarely have a round that takes more than 3:50. If I get a tee time before 7:30 on Saturday or Sunday, I can easily finish in 3 hours walking a very hilly course.

I have a lot of golf buddies that would play twice as often if an average round took 3:45. Unfortunately, one or two slow foursomes can, and often do, slow down an entire golf course. Pace of play is a serious problem that thankfully the USGA is trying to address. It's sad that pace of play in many cities only allows members of private clubs to enjoy a fast round of weekend golf.

TheWoo said:

I disagree - the hour is big. And if the average round is 3.5 instead of 4.5 and especially 5.5 it's huge. Leave the house at 7 and be home for lunch and afternoon ballgames or leave after lunch and be home for dinner and kids time is a game-changer for many people. But, leave at 7 and be home at 2? That's a whole different deal. Leave at 1 and not home until 7:30? Also no good for many.

I've got a great friend who simply can't justify the time right now - it's just too long. If he could count on a 4 hour or less round, he'd play a dozen times a year instead of 3. But with 5 being common and longer possible, he doesn't take the chance.



I definitely agree with this and like the USGA's new emphasis on 9-hole rounds.

Click to expand...

But in the case of your friend, right, wrong, or indifferent, if he would really love to golf and really had the desire to do so then he can easily play 9 holes and if 4 hr rounds would allow him to play a dozen rounds instead of three vs the 5 hour rounds then he can also play probably 12 to 16 holes on a slow course depending on pace instead of 9. My point is that he can get in quite alot of golf and do it way more than a dozen times if he really wanted to. He would golf a dozen. He's basically playing casual golf for fun and interest and relaxation. If he really had the desire to play and it really meant that much to him he can get a ton of golf in by playing 9 and/or less than 18. This is why i think the idea that an hour give or take is not whats stopping people from flocking to golf courses.

And the if golf always took 4 or less he says he'd play? But then he would be pressed for time at that rate too should it take an extra 10, 15 minutes that day. Then where does it end? No matter how we try to slice it golf will take up a chunck of ones day regardless and one will require a chunck of ones time. I dont advocate for long rounds and i like to play in 4 hrs too and i dont golf as much as I would like due to time (also money but another topic) but if i truely want to get out and time doesnt allow then I'll just play 9 (or more if I can). If i chose not to play at all vs playing 9 (or even more holes than that) then i just didnt really have that burning desire to play.

Golf does take too long for many to get involved but the idea that very many more would take it up and flock to golf courses because of an hours difference? i dont believe so. Golf will ever be that quick enough to make that much a difference. It never was and never will be where one can leave home and return home in just a couple/few hours regardless. There is only ever going to be one way this can be done. How? By playing 9 holes.

If all the people who say they dont take up golf because it takes too long really wanted to play, they would simply play 9 holes. But truth is they really just dont have the desire to play. If you asked them, Most their answers would be "nah, I'm not leaving and comming back in 3 hours just to play 9 holes". They would expect to play 18 and be back home in that time. but thats never going to happen. As said before, one can leave home and return in 2 plus hours just to go to the driving range. I bet many these people will not take the time to do that either. It sucks that golf is very time consuming but it always was and always will be. And most the people who dont play at all will not be flocking over due to an hours difference. If that was the case and the really wanted to play then they would all be going out to play 9 every chance they get.

tahoebum said:

I have a lot of golf buddies that would play twice as often if an average round took 3:45. Unfortunately, one or two slow foursomes can, and often do, slow down an entire golf course. Pace of play is a serious problem that thankfully the USGA is trying to address. It's sad that pace of play in many cities only allows members of private clubs to enjoy a fast round of weekend golf.

Click to expand...

3;45 vs what? If you talking 5 and 5 n1/2 I might believe that. But like i said above if your talking 3:45 vs 4 n1/2 I dont think for a minute (with due respect) your buddies would all be golfing twice as much. The reason i say it is because if they had the desire to really golf twice the amount they curently do then that means they are pretty passionate about it. If one hours time difference (even 2 hours) is all they required to play twice the amount and thats what is stopping them from playingtwice the amount of golf then they can simply go out and shoot 9 holes probably more times then they can shake a stick at. End up playing even more holes than twice the amount by years end. But they dont. Why?

I would say that 4:10 is an extremely slow round if you have smooth sailing in front of you. There are exceptions, but as long as the group behind you never had to wait to hit a shot, I don't see what the big deal was. Bored ranger?

Slow play threads are awesome. The mythical guy that gets mad at anything more than 3 hour rounds always seems to appear. He may exist, but he's used far more as some sort of way to rebut the fact that slow people are a problem than he really shows up at the golf course.

If you're taking longer than the course designates as proper pace (and not being held up), you are out of line. Take your time and enjoying the scenery is what slow inconsiderate people say to excuse their actions. Classic case of entitlement or just plain ingnorance. Just like a slow driver in the left lane or a person with 20 items in the express lane. At the same time, if you're getting all huffy that a round is taking as long as the course designates, you should probably get over it, slow your pace down, play in a foursome, or get up at 4:45 on Sunday like I do.

Busy courses that are difficult can easily accomadate a 4 to 4:30 round of golf. We proved that without any issues that I'm aware of at the IL Invitational. I wasn't rushed. I just didn't act like a girl trying to get ready for a date when it was time to hit my ball.

Common sense and courtesy is an easy thing. It should be at least.

I agree Hawk. 4-4:30 is definitely an attainable pace for just about any course. However, with lots of hacks out there and people that aren't as aware of the pace of play "problem", on a busy weekend morning or afternoon, it's just not reasonable to expect. Like you said, if you can't handle being out there for 5-6 hours, don't play when it's busy.

It's entirely reasonable. That's just an excuse.

My point was not to expect to play a 2.5 to 3 hour round as a solo or twosome on a busy day. Playing outside 4:30 is ridiculous.

My thoughts:

1) I don't think the fact that a round exceeds 4 hours is keeping people from playing. The folks who say that simply aren't interested in playing. If the round was 4 hours they'd say they can't go because it's not 3 hours.

How do I know this? Because they could play 9, but don't.

2) Why is it that we're assigning macho points to have fast we can zoom around the course? While I like to be sure I keep up with the group in front, and not hold up the group behind, I like to enjoy being on the course. If nobody is on the course it's not my goal to finish as quickly as I can, making skid marks as I stop the cart, hopping out, taking a slash and hopping in. I'm going to play at a good pace, and enjoy the heck out of it.

I'm annoyed as the next guy by the people who take forever to play. I don't like them in front of me, and I don't like them in my group. Be ready to play and then play. However, you don't have to jog or power-walk to your ball. If you want to tell a (short) joke on the tee and there's time, go ahead. If you're not feeling right about your chip and you need to take 5 little practice swings, go ahead (just don't do it every time).

3) I do think the USGA's emphasis on pace of play is a good thing. In my experience, the biggest reason for pace of play problems is not the skill level of the golfer, but rather it's the little things. It's the guy who stands over his ball for 40 seconds on every shot. It's the guy who takes forever on his read and forever to pull the trigger. It's the guy who sits in his cart by the green writing down scores. It's especially the 4 guys who spend 8 minutes looking for a ball. Not because they're concerned about having to return to the tee - they'd never bother themselves with doing that. It's because the guy doesn't want to give up his eighth $5 Pro-V1. (I don't like losing expensive balls either, but my search will be very brief if there's people behind)

Damaikis said:

I agree Hawk. 4-4:30 is definitely an attainable pace for just about any course. However, with lots of hacks out there and people that aren't as aware of the pace of play "problem", on a busy weekend morning or afternoon, it's just not reasonable to expect. Like you said, if you can't handle being out there for 5-6 hours, don't play when it's busy.

Click to expand...

we should people that know how to keep up the pace of play have to relegated to odd hours of play. Those that can't play in 4:20 need not come out. That is taking your time, chatting and having fun. It doesn't take more than that to play. If you are making 8,9 and 10 as well as holding up play. Save your money get lessons and then come out.

Tadashi70 said:

we should people that know how to keep up the pace of play have to relegated to odd hours of play. Those that can't play in 4:20 need not come out. That is taking your time, chatting and having fun. It doesn't take more than that to play. If you are making 8,9 and 10 as well as holding up play. Save your money get lessons and then come out.

Click to expand...

I dont agree with one not being allowed to play. First off most people shoot in the 100's especially on weekends and there are sure to be 8's and 9's and even 10's. The key is for that person to work harder than others at keeping up. That may mean not looking long or even not at all for lost balls. Getting to your ball quickly, short if any pre shot routine, poicking up ocassionaly, etc, etc.. I can go on and on. Its not easy but one can still maintain decent enough pace. Just simply must make sacrifices , work harder and make great effort but thats the price to pay for not being decent enough at golf.

However, with that said i dont think its fair at all to tell one not to be on the course. You may want to tell that person what to do in order to help keep up but thats al. And if that person requires the extra 15 or 20 minutes what makes anyone else so righteous. They should not cause a 5 hour round and must do what is necessary in order to not cause such a round but if they take 4:20 or even 4:30 vs 4 I dont think that they are so 100% in the wrong.

One can practice and take lessons and become a decent striker but we all know too well when out on the course things are very different and hardly ever goes as well. They do have a right to learn the game and experience the game and play the game. There are also plenty beginers who cant afford lessons but can afford to ocassioanly pay to golf a round. They shouldnt be dictated to and be forced to save up money for a lesson instead of playing. Sure, they should at least be able to strike balls before being on the course but that doesnt always translate well on the course vs the range. Heck, even plenty of us who play for years and have had lessons can still go out and hack it up all day.

No one magically becomes good at golf. This idea that people shouldnt be allowed to play is rediculous. There is a feeling of entitlement here and that is not correct either. Everyone has to start somewhere somehow.

Like I said, as long as it's in the pace of play guidelines the course sets, have at it.

I do think that it is up to the course to determine a reasonable pace of play and then to enforce it. The reasonable pace will most likely vary from course to course and that's fine.

But for me, if anybody writes their daily schedule in stone around a quick 18 holes, is taking a very big gamble. I do everything I can to not let slow play bother me. I do think that is a skill that needs to be learned more than shot shaping.

rollin said:

3;45 vs what? If you talking 5 and 5 n1/2 I might believe that. But like i said above if your talking 3:45 vs 4 n1/2 I dont think for a minute (with due respect) your buddies would all be golfing twice as much. The reason i say it is because if they had the desire to really golf twice the amount they curently do then that means they are pretty passionate about it. If one hours time difference (even 2 hours) is all they required to play twice the amount and thats what is stopping them from playingtwice the amount of golf then they can simply go out and shoot 9 holes probably more times then they can shake a stick at. End up playing even more holes than twice the amount by years end. But they dont. Why?

Click to expand...

3:45 vs. 4:45-5:00 on an average weekend around here. Part of it is the frustration of watching people doing stupid/unecessary things that causes them to be slow. Some avid golfers will just stay home or hit balls instead of risking a 5 hour round. If that wasn't the case, the USGA wouldn't be concerned about it.

It's the same reason my wife and I both passed on promotions at work - we didn't want to deal with sitting in San Francisco traffic. Slow golf is like 4 cars blocking all lanes of traffic driving 40 in a 65 zone, with nobody in front of them. Put another way, if my average round so far in my life took 4:45 rather than 3:30, I would have played about 1,000 fewer rounds of golf. I'm glad I got the extra 1000 rounds in!

I'd take a ranger watching over 4hr rounds vs no ranger and 5 hr rounds on the weekends; which seems to be the case lately; which is odd right now given we are in the "off-season".

tahoebum said:

3:45 vs. 4:45-5:00 on an average weekend around here. Part of it is the frustration of watching people doing stupid/unecessary things that causes them to be slow. Some avid golfers will just stay home or hit balls instead of risking a 5 hour round. If that wasn't the case, the USGA wouldn't be concerned about it.

It's the same reason my wife and I both passed on promotions at work - we didn't want to deal with sitting in San Francisco traffic. Slow golf is like 4 cars blocking all lanes of traffic driving 40 in a 65 zone, with nobody in front of them. Put another way, if my average round so far in my life took 4:45 rather than 3:30, I would have played about 1,000 fewer rounds of golf. I'm glad I got the extra 1000 rounds in!

Click to expand...

I do agree that each golfer has a responsibility to be conscience of their pace. But each course is different. Two weeks ago thp was in Elgin illinois at a course with a strictly enforced pace of 4:20. There were clocks in the carts showing where the group was relative to the pace. In that case, is the 4:20 pace unreasonable.

Tadashi70 said:

we should people that know how to keep up the pace of play have to relegated to odd hours of play. Those that can't play in 4:20 need not come out. That is taking your time, chatting and having fun. It doesn't take more than that to play. If you are making 8,9 and 10 as well as holding up play. Save your money get lessons and then come out.

Click to expand...

So if someone likes playing but doesn't want to take lessons and isn't good they shouldn't play golf? My dad isn't good at golf, and he doesn't want to take lessons because he only plays a couple times a year. He hits the ball really short and loses his fair share of balls. He definitely takes a good bit of time to play because of it. He shouldn't be allowed to come out then? I completely disagree.

Sure he should be able to play, but if he can't keep up with stated pace of play he needs to find a different course or speed up. That might mean picking up, but so be it. We've all been there. Hell, I was there a week and a half ago.

In my experience, pace is rarely determined by skill. It is usually determined by poor etiquette or common sense.

If you are keeping up with the course's acceptable pace of play guidelines then there shouldn't be any problems. None of us like to be standing and waiting on every shot or to have someone behind you standing and waiting on every shot. but sometimes that happens.

When I go out mid week in the late afternoon to play as a single...I don't finish in 2 hours or even 3, I take my time and work on my game...hit multiple shots sometimes...as along as I am not holding anyone up it shouldn't be a problem...if I group behind me gets within a hole...then I pick up my pace to give them plenty of room....it's one of the reasons I enjoy playing late afternoons mid week is so that I can play multiple balls and work on shots.

On the weekends I expect to play at a certain pace....my brother has just really taken up the game...he played a few times here and there, but never seriously...he and I have played several times lately...he makes 8's or 9's on par 4's and par 5's...but if there is a group waiting on us, he knows to pick up and move on to the next hole.

4:10 is not slow for a 4 some at all...most courses in the Houston area and shooting for 4:30 rounds right now.