We've launched the new forums! Read more here

9000 Yard Courses

JB

JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
283,235
Reaction score
432,653
Location
THP Experiences
9,000 yards is a little extreme. I can see an 8,000+ yard course being necessary, though. When guys are playing an ordinary par 5 with driver, wedge there is a need for lengthening the golf course. It is also no fun in my opinion to watch a tournament that ends with a winner at -21 like we saw at the canadian open. We need more courses keeping these guys around par where it is a struggle to get into the 60's

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 
If it were designed properly, it would be fun to watch the pros take a shot at a 9,000 yard course. If you took a 7,000 yard course and just added 110+ yards to every hole, it would just be a nightmare and pace of play disaster.
 
I don't see 9000-10000 yard courses happening simply due to the maintenance side of things, water conservation and cost of chemicals/fertilizers. Even long carries over "native grass" areas needs to be maintained properly so it doesn't get overgrown with weeds.

Personally, I like watching low scores.
 
And building a course specifically for tour use? What a waste of land and resources.

Agree with Canadan also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Initially it feels "gimmicky" to me. I am not sure lengthening courses is way to challenge the current talent on the tour. If anything it will severely dilute the talent, because while it may seem like the tour pros are bombing drives, the reality is only a handful are challenging courses off the tee with wreck-less abandon.

I think you have 35 or so players averaging over 300 yds, but how many are in contention week in and week out?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #9
Im curious if anybody has read the article or seen his take?
While I am not sure I agree with it, the reasoning and examples are fairly sound.
 
If they could take an existing course that plays normal lengths for Amateurs, and somehow set up tees to get the course up to those yardages, I'm all for it.
 
2008 PGA at Oakland Hills was really tough for the pros. Oakland Hills is not long. I personally think this trend of tracks getting longer and longer is a major detriment to the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have not read the article but would't it be simpler to have "pro only", flight restricted golf ball. Save a lot of land and money!!
 
Completely ridiculous in my opinion. I do not believe longer is the answer.
 
JB said:
Im curious if anybody has read the article or seen his take?
While I am not sure I agree with it, the reasoning and examples are fairly sound.
Click to expand...

I read the article last Friday and I certainly would rather see courses lengthened then make the tour players use limited distance balls. But I guess I'm in the minority in that I don't see the problem with the game right now with low scoring and hitting wedges into the green. Just like "chicks dig the long ball", I dig the long ball too. Watching a big hitter like DJ pulling out a long iron to lay up over and over off the tee is not as exciting as a 350+ yard rip over the 320 yard bunker.
 
JB said:
Im curious if anybody has read the article or seen his take?
While I am not sure I agree with it, the reasoning and examples are fairly sound.
Click to expand...

Just did and fantastic points are made. I lean to narrow FW's and more challenging rough as the answer. It'll make some put driver away and force them to play longer clubs in putting a premium on shotmaking and short game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I believe most of the older courses are outdated design wise against the modern player based on driving distance. In order to combat that, future courses and redesigns need to keep that in mind. I've seen plenty of par 4/5's that can't be bullied by length. Crossbunkers, streams, fairway runout are a good deterrent against longer hitters and place a premium on shot making ability. I can't remember which event it was last year but it was a shortish par 4 with canted fairway that ran out at 280, then a ravine, then a green that was raised and undulated. Score average was like 4.3 for 4 rounds. Just a tough, well thought out hole.
 
JB said:
Im curious if anybody has read the article or seen his take?
While I am not sure I agree with it, the reasoning and examples are fairly sound.
Click to expand...
I have and I believe he has some good points. Unfortunately, these tournaments are too reliant on the weather to play defense for the course. When the weather softens up a course like Erin Hills and the wind doesn't blow, 7,800 is no big deal to those players. That's why you see a guy like Koepka shoot -16.

While 9,000 yards is just not feasible with maintenance, property constraints, watering etc... it has gotten to the point where tour players are just not challenged like they should be. All they're really doing is showing how much better they are compared to hackers like us.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 
Merion at 6900 yards with the rough up and greens slick seems to do a fine job of keeping par honest
 
#Cookie said:
Just did and fantastic points are made. I lean to narrow FW's and more challenging rough as the answer. It'll make some put driver away and force them to play longer clubs in putting a premium on shotmaking and short game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I agree with this but would also add more water and bunkers in strategic locations. Look at how much harder the travelers was this year after the us open. Those last 3 holes made some butts pucker for sure. Tight fairways with water, penalizing rough and firm greens put a premium on shotmaking rather than bomb and gouge.
 
Is it a test of skill, or how far one ca hit a ball ... as mentioned you can create courses without the length, that could challenge different aspects of a player.
 
jdtox said:
I agree with this but would also add more water and bunkers in strategic locations. Look at how much harder the travelers was this year after the us open. Those last 3 holes made some butts pucker for sure. Tight fairways with water, penalizing rough and firm greens put a premium on shotmaking rather than bomb and gouge.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. My line of thinking was what could be done on a temporary basis as opposed to a long term (and costly) solution.

Interesting discussion for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RNG said:
I have not read the article but would't it be simpler to have "pro only", flight restricted golf ball. Save a lot of land and money!!
Click to expand...

He touches on that as well in it. So maybe reading the article is helpful haha.
 
It may or may not be correct, but I'd argue that we quite simply don't have the land or water availability to make 9000-yd courses, let alone making them essentially tour-only courses. And if they're not tour only courses? Can you imagine the distance between holes? The idea of walking would be dead.

If you want to roll back the game at the highest level, there need to be tighter limits on equipment at that level.
 
jdtox said:
I agree with this but would also add more water and bunkers in strategic locations. Look at how much harder the travelers was this year after the us open. Those last 3 holes made some butts pucker for sure. Tight fairways with water, penalizing rough and firm greens put a premium on shotmaking rather than bomb and gouge.
Click to expand...
One thing we have to keep in mind with this concept is the average player. Yes this would be great for a tour event but that is only one week per year. The rest of the time the course is played by hackers like us. If they add more bunkers and water then that might take away from the average joe's experience and that would be a problem. Of course the prestige of playing a PGA tour caliber course would still be there, but I worry that it might get too difficult for Mr. 15 handicap and that might diminish their experience.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 
It's an interesting argument for sure.

In all honesty though I think the lack of penal rough is the biggest thing to blame for all these low scores.

I'm not necessarily suggesting going to US-Open-style-pitch-out-fests every week, but when the guy leading the tour in driving accuracy would be 70th on the LPGA tour it tells me that the course setups aren't placing enough of an emphasis on accuracy off the tee.

I don't think golf at either of the extremes is much fun to watch (bomb and gouge, or irons & wedges out of the rough) but it's definitely a hard balance to achieve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top