Opinion & Analysis
Barney Adams: Stop calling golf “fun”
Industry ads aimed at promoting participation have the same theme, “Play Golf Because It’s Fun.” I disagree with the presentation, but admittedly it takes explanation. Fun is considered, light, enjoyable among other adjectives. Golf hasn’t been around for centuries evoking a unique passion because it’s “fun.” It’s hard and frustrating yet we come back sometimes—even ignoring weather we wouldn’t otherwise be outside in.
Why?
Because it’s rewarding! Not on the whole, that’s reserved for the very few who are excellent players. “Rewarding” for the masses will be a well-played hole, even a singular shot. We are rewarded in small victories, not mastery.
How then do we focus on the concept of reward? The answer falls into what we call course layout and must be championed by those organizations promoting the game—the PGA of America and the USGA. I’ll proceed with some typical examples with real data, not opinion.
This is data-centric: Years ago, the former Technical Director of the USGA reported that his study revealed an average driving distance of 192 yards. Who are the 192s? The short answer is they are the overall majority of players who play and financially support the game. Their brethren are not coming on board in numbers, and pure age analysis shows that they are a declining population, albeit with a huge reservoir that is retiring and could decide to play.
They love to watch the 300-yard drives of Tour players and marvel that the average iron into greens is an 8—albeit some 170 yards. Further, these iron shots are struck consistently, high, landing with spin allowing them to shoot for targets within the confines of the green.
The 192 group doesn’t hit 170-yard 8-irons. If they make that good swing, their 8-iron goes roughly 120, and rather than a spot on the green, they are trying to get on the putting surface.
What does this have to do with rewarding? I was recently asked to analyze a course that had installed forward tees, but something was off. The overall yardage was 5,900 par 70, which seemed perfect.
However, there were six holes in various forms of what follows: yardage 354, a 192-yard drive leaves 162 and in each case, it was a forced carry of 162 yards. The 192s don’t have a high soft shot that carries 162 plus yards. They may have an occasional low bullet that doesn’t hold, but the sensible play is to lay up.
This gets old and it’s not rewarding. If their second shot on forced carry holes was, say, 125 yards they would have a chance to hit a solid shot onto the green, and that’s rewarding. We 192s aren’t good enough to hit center face solid shots every time. Give us the chance that we’ll be rewarded with a birdie putt just some of the time and the experience is one that keeps us playing (“fun,” if you will, but more accurately defined).
Further, a 370-yard par 4 with a slightly downsloping fairway into a green wide open in the front—and again we have a chance to be rewarded.
It isn’t a simple distance issue: It’s an understanding of the concept of reward and setting one set of tees accordingly. Golf courses are fairway width, firmness, elevations, hazards and the list goes on. That’s why I say the good folks who promote the game need to embrace the concept. Produce guidelines on how to make courses rewarding.
Years ago, I was very fortunate to be able to play a few rounds with Lee Trevino, arguably one of the greatest ball strikers of all times. He didn’t play “the tees” he picked the ones he wanted, some forward, some back. I asked why and he said, “Barnyard, I just want to be able to hit shots to the green. I always did.” I never forgot his comment, but I didn’t appreciate the genius behind it until I came upon the concept of rewarding golf. It’s exactly what Lee was doing!
Of course, I’m just one small voice. The PGA of America and USGA are the leaders and it’s up to them to turn the concept of rewarding golf into a movement designed to increase participation.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Adams fan
Sep 12, 2019 at 3:33 pm
Why does this bitter old man still have relevancy or a platform? He created a one-hit infomercial wonder 20 years ago. He doesn’t need a platform like WRX to keep pontificating….waiting for his next “get off my lawn” moment.
Barney Adams
Sep 12, 2019 at 6:08 pm
My goodness it’s my brother Harry. Never got over my eating his ice cream.
JimmyD2
Sep 10, 2019 at 11:23 am
Wow! We should stop calling the game of golf fun because what the scorecard shows as par on some holes may be too difficult for our skill level… Maybe a better recommendation would be to forget about the scorecard and “Just Have Fun”. When I was in the military I used to love visiting family and getting out to PLAY golf together! My father, who only played during these rare visits (and never practiced!) had more fun than any of us. My “happy place” for the past decade+ has been playing a round of golf with my son, especially when we get to play as a twosome. Golf is and should be Fun! As the great philosopher Tin Cup once said, “Sex and golf are the two things you can enjoy even if you’re not good at them.”
Dave r
Sep 9, 2019 at 8:08 pm
My wife tells me I’m having fun so I guess I’m having fun.
Todd Dugan
Sep 9, 2019 at 6:03 pm
I think of golf as an OPPORTUNITY to achieve a sense of accomplishment by doing something well which is not easy to do well. If it were easy to do well, then the reward would not be nearly as great. But there is a risk, as doing something poorly is disappointing…for me, anyway. There is also a nice social element to playing. I also think of playing golf as a sort of ritualistic “life exercise” in doing things correctly.
scott
Sep 9, 2019 at 7:28 am
I think i have fun.
Only really know when I take the winnings off my playing partners.
Hempy Hill
Sep 9, 2019 at 4:34 pm
well said Barney. Best Golf article I’ve read in years
Prime21
Sep 8, 2019 at 11:40 pm
I’m still confused. Are you saying in order to be fun it has to be easy? EVERYONE on the planet has to have the ability to access a pin? I could counter by saying I can hit high, soft shots and easy courses that allow for run up on every shot are no fun at all. Everyone has a different opinion, whether they are in the AVG or not. Simply because you have an opinion, which is “supported” by numbers doesn’t mean you have the support of the others in your “average” group. Everyone has ‘em, apparently you just get to share yours.
JThunder
Sep 9, 2019 at 5:43 am
The key point is “average” is meaningless. If you compile “average” in anything, those specs will only fit 1% of the people involved (see: height, weight, etc).
I know PLENTY of golfers who drive 200 and can hit a high soft shot from 162. I know low handicappers who hit mid-trajectory irons with low spin who would have more trouble (eg, to elevated greens).
I think the article misses it’s own point; it’s about bad golf course architecture and management. In my experience, those kind of courses alienate golfers, and have to drop prices to compete with better designs. Or they get turned into townhouse sites. I suppose there are areas with fewer choices, so golfers are stuck. Ultimately, courses should be designed around some variety; not all tee shots should require a fade, not all par 3s should be long, not all greens should be elevated. (Just ask the pros about Dubsdread!)
Barney Adams
Sep 9, 2019 at 12:48 pm
That’s just the point. It’s NOT about easy it’s about a reasonable challenge for the 192s. Courses throw out front tees with no thought so you get 400 yd par 5 holes ( which I call dumb) instead of 390 yd par 4 s
Look up Moe’s poem by Paul Bertholy. I almost included it in the story.
No Thanks
Sep 8, 2019 at 7:03 pm
I’m sorry, but this isn’t “backed up with data”. You have an AVERAGE distance. That average is not the MEDIAN. Those are two different things. But let’s say “192” is the median. We’ll imagine that for a moment, and then say you found one hole, on one course, unnamed, and site that as why things are failing?
A 5900y Par-70 was mislabeled, and should have been a 5900y Par-71.
Barney, I don’t even disagree with your premise that it isn’t easy, and maybe should avoid the term “fun”. But you’re way off here calling this “data-centric”. This is literally the opposite of “data-centric” — it’s cherry-picking.
Barney Adams
Sep 8, 2019 at 9:22 pm
Sorry but I disagree completely and it’s really my fault for not describing the situation better. It isn’t a case of all the holes having to fit the premise though that would be great. Given that we’re working with existing facilities I’m saying “ fix” as many errant holes as you can. Don’t throw out Forward tees that create unrewarding holes by being too easy , dumb holes. Recognize the power of rewarding and react in kind
As for median vs average. Of course some will catch one and roll out others will pop up short. All you can do is use 192 as a reference point and know what that means in terms of second shot requirements.
Last; I’ve written about this in various forms for 8 years now. I’m not smart enough to give it up , I believe it will add enjoyment to the game
No Thanks
Sep 9, 2019 at 11:59 pm
You can disagree completely, but it doesn’t change the point.
If your example was labeled a Par-5, you wouldn’t have a complaint, would you?
If that’s the case, then it goes back to the “what is par” question. Are you basically saying that you want shorter approach shots for high handicappers? Because if that’s the “challenge” you’re looking for, that risks the integrity of the course… those hitting from 50-100 further back are still aiming for that approach landing area, and they’ll be looking to put up a second shot the same as the HH.
This seems like tilting at windmills.
Bob Jones
Sep 8, 2019 at 2:38 pm
Sorry, but if you don’t enjoy your leisure time pursuit, if you don’t have fun doing it, then why bother?
Barney Adams
Sep 8, 2019 at 11:10 pm
Lost my bowling ball
Acemandrake
Sep 9, 2019 at 10:49 am
Bob Hope: “I’d quit the game but I have too many sweaters.”
cc-rider
Sep 8, 2019 at 9:45 am
I did something that I had meaning to do for years over the holiday weekend. I played a nine hole round with wood woods and 1980 hogan apex 2 irons at a classic shorter course. It was a refreshing change of pace hitting the small headed woods and blade irons. I went on eBay afterwards and could not believe how little these real woods sell for second hand. They were literally pennies on the dollar compared to modern equipment. I am not saying that going back to old equipment is the answer, but it provided a very affordable and alternative take on golf in 2019.
steve
Sep 8, 2019 at 12:41 am
For the past 10 + years, my handicap has fluctuated between three and six. Obviously, that is better than some and worse and others. That being said, the better I play, the less fun I seem to have as i tend to expect more from myself than i should. It’s a tough explanation to my wife when I am in a bad mood coming home from golf.
Walt Pendleton
Sep 7, 2019 at 11:58 pm
Mr. Adams…enjoyed your angle on courses matching age to holes, new tee boxes and relative to the majority of the game’s largest supporters. As you know, most public clubs don’t have the money to build all new boxes but building 3 to 5 new tees on the hardest holes per year would surely help. I have but one question: Why doesn’t the game ask The PGA Tour to help financially or ask the Euro public tracks what they have done to reduce course closings?
Larry Brown
Sep 7, 2019 at 4:16 pm
Golf only becomes “fun” when you have put in enough work to have a reasonably consistent swing. Until then, it’s just work. Unless you just play as an excuse to get out with the buddies and drink.
s
Sep 7, 2019 at 2:20 pm
A lot of you readers are missing the point. My wife is a decent player but having a birdie opportunity is a rare event.. Most of the course we play, the women’s red tee is only about 30-50 yards closer than the men’s white, where I feel “rewarding”. The GIR rate for her is almost 0% in theory. I give her one shot every single hole just to make her feel fun, rewarding, or whatever you call it. Some even say those courses do it because they don’t want women to come because of the slow play… If not, let me ask you a question. Is it a lot more expensive to maintain the teeing grounds farther apart?
rex 235
Sep 7, 2019 at 1:11 pm
Barney-
Wasn’t it Roger Cleveland who in the Cleveland ad- “wanted to make golf more fun?”
And aren’t you the guy who wrote the Golf World article saying “The wood wood is dead?”
And now the company you sold out to- TaylorMade- makes a different Driver model every 3 months?
Especially when the NEW models featured by every company each year are exclusively RH Only?.
And having a subscription to Golfwrx featuring “New” equipment models you can’t ever get?
No..that isn’t fun.
Geoffrey Holland
Sep 7, 2019 at 4:00 pm
The new models are not exclusively right-handed. And I’m a lefty so I pay attention to these things. You never get the full range that righties get for obvious reasons so stop whining.
Jake
Sep 7, 2019 at 5:09 pm
The “TM releases a new driver every three months” is going on 5 years since they actually did stuff like that.
Gerald Teigrob
Sep 7, 2019 at 6:28 pm
Take a chill pill or two and call your doctor in the morning! Get your facts straight before you comment next time! Did you know that Acushnet bought out TM since your dinosaur comment?
Bill
Sep 7, 2019 at 11:23 pm
Might want to check that. Adidas bought then sold TM. Achusnet once owned Titlest but it’s now owned by Fila. Acushnet never owned TM.
The dude
Sep 7, 2019 at 11:03 am
Fun…rewarding …= semantics
Doug McManus
Sep 7, 2019 at 10:54 am
Completely useless article, Golf is great fun with some highs and lows.
I can think of a better game. It is what you make of it!
Sebastien
Sep 7, 2019 at 7:07 am
Me and my dad have much more fun since I let him play front tee instead of giving him ‘shots’ in our family competition….
NoTalentLefty
Sep 6, 2019 at 9:42 pm
The peripherals of golf are fun. Fellowship, equipment wh0r1ng, etc. Barney has a point on the game itself. The challenges of well played shot is not about fun.
JThunder
Sep 9, 2019 at 5:27 am
Tiger says you missed a comma after “equipment”.
Scott
Sep 9, 2019 at 2:58 pm
LOL!!!!
Jeff
Sep 6, 2019 at 8:44 pm
Golf is what you make of it. If you suck and still have fun, then that’s great. I’m usually mad when I play bad, but its a fun game. IMHO of course.
Rick
Sep 6, 2019 at 11:18 pm
Yes it is what you make it…after I hit 70 instead of moving up another tee box I just added a stroke to every par 4 and 5 and played them as 5 and 6 keeping even the longest par 3 still a 3. I took about a year for my mind to settle in but it did and I now an happy as heck hitting those numbers not maybe as a par but as what I can still do and have a fair chance to do on every hole.
Ben Black
Sep 6, 2019 at 5:59 pm
This a lot of what I’ve seen in golf course set up for Amateur players.
Every week I play with two friends who are 30 years older than I. We play from forward mens tees. The Par 5s play like long par 4s for me and I’ll hit 4 iron and wedge to the par 4s. Why don’t I hit driver on the par 4s? Because the course will EAT YOU UP if you miss the fairway.
The two older guys hit it 160-180 yards (I GPS’d them on their asking – they were very disappointed it was not 220 yards.) The approach shots, if they hit the fairway,make it almost impossible for them to hit shots that are rewarding. On a 350 yard hole they hit a driver 180 then will have to hit another wood to an elevated green that has a deep bunker at front, bushes behind and scraggly rough all around.
Even hitting a wedge in from 60 yards can be hazardous with where they put the pins. Some are three paces off the edge of a bunker…
And the Par 3s for these guys are brutal. Three of them can measure 160-190 yards. Yes, that’s not long if you can hit your mid irons that far, but when can these guys play a fun par 3 that doesn’t involve their driver?
Sometimes I think the greenskeeper has watched golf on Sunday TV then decided to emulate it.
I’d rather have a short course with excellent greens than extra tee boxes and longer fairways to maintain. I can play from the back tees, but what’s it worth when your putts wibble wobble on bad greens?
Simms
Sep 6, 2019 at 11:25 pm
The over 50 women have the same problem all the time once a course hits 5,200 or more they just cannot reach the greens in 2 on 4’s or 3 on 5’s…I have a very smart wife (over 65) she found a great Callaway wedge she hits 50 yards almost without fail and now has learned to play as close to that number then trying to run a 3 or 5 wood to roll a ball onto the green with the front bunker a real factor on those shots. It alone cut her handicap form 21 to 16 in less then 6 months…because women can one putt 100% more of the time then they can get out of a green side bunker.
Barney Adams
Sep 8, 2019 at 11:15 pm
I wrote from a male perspective because they are the majority and I have relevant data. There is actually a very interesting story on women’s tees and their location.
ChipNRun
Sep 9, 2019 at 4:56 pm
My wife is 4-foot-9. Barney, she got a boxed set of Adams Ideas about four years ago. Custom fit by the woman in local GG shop, aided by two on-phone sessions with Fort Worth factory to ensure right flavor of petite. (Adams Golf – gone but not forgotten!)
Anyway, she likes the clubs – especially those things call hybrids which were not available for her last fitting in 1989. (Nancy Lopez Square 2 Petites, FYI).
So, when we prepare for vacation I purposely look for courses which are less than 5,000 yards from the women’s tees. This gives her some sub-300 yard par 4 holes and hopefully a couple of 95-yard par 3s. Something that gives her a chance to make bogies or an occasional par.
As a caddie in the previous century and a player up until today, I was take aback by how little a distance break the women got on many of the courses. And of the courses built in the early 2000s, the 5400-yard women’s tees got augmented with shorter boxes about 5000 yards. But, these shorter boxes were merely a semi-flat place in the short rough with a couple of markers spiked into the ground. Not usually a true golf tee that others got to use.
At our home course, a new greenskeeper came in two years ago. The original layout featured lots of exotic “splash” bunkers which were hard to play AND hard to maintain. Senior golfers and those below average height could injure themselves trying to climb down into these sand pits. I used to have to lower my wife into some of the bunkers, and then hand her a club to hit. The rebuilt bunkers for the most part are flat-bottom. The bank and lip may be several feet high, but at least you can walk in without spraining an ankle.
Before the redo, rainy season made for tough bunker play, as soil pollution was a problem. In past seasons, the safest play was to pick the ball off the “sand” with a PW rather than blast out. Now, we have true bunkers to play from.
So, golf goes from being challenging to grating when…
* Course developers think the local public links can be the next Bethpage Black, and design it for US Open rather Wednesday morning seniors league.
* So that golfers don’t exploit the lob wedge too easily, new layouts tend to have outlandish bunkers that the average person can’t handle.
* Too aggressive a layout leads to… that scourge we dare not speak of out loud… SLOW PLAY!
* The greens crew accidentally sets up the Thursday pins for a scramble, forgetting that it’s a medal play tournament for the local amateur circuit. The #13 hole gets thrown out of scoring because most golfers have a 3- or a 4-putt going after the funhouse cup. (Replay hole #1 and use it as a replacement)
Geoffrey Holland
Sep 7, 2019 at 4:03 pm
Obviously these guys should be playing from the forward tees. Don’t call them ladies tees. But they’re obviously not long enough to play where they are playing from.
Tim
Sep 6, 2019 at 4:59 pm
People who hit it 200 are not hitting the ball with the middle of the face. Well struck, an 85mph swing can result in 212+ yard drive. 90mph can result in 225+.
Golf is more fun when you hit the ball further. Learn to hit the ball further.
Barney Adams
Sep 8, 2019 at 11:18 pm
Dear Tim
I have one word for you; age ! Ps your numbers are off!
Bruce
Sep 6, 2019 at 4:26 pm
I play at an RTG facility in Mobile,Al., where the courses host many tour level events and Barney is very right about the design aspect as a big detriment to the 192’ers of the world. This is a quality layout but the local muni, Azalea City, is on older design and is booked solid with 192’ers and not because of cost. The 2 courses are virtually the same money when riding a cart. The reason is at RTG one is required on virtually every approach to hit a high shot with spin to an elevated green. On not one occasion will there be an opportunity to run a shot on the green. Not one. This is a choice in design and as a result the course is under subscribed while the muni is over run with play and conditioning suffers as a result. This parallel is endemic in golf. We are building courses for the most skilled players while ignoring those that are the majority.
JP
Sep 6, 2019 at 4:22 pm
Playing good or bad, it’s fun for me. It’s not a frustrating game unless that’s what you make it. For me, it’s a social game and I play with close friends that are awesome to hang out with. I can shoot 150 and I’d still have fun. Again, for me, it’s more about the company I keep than the score I shoot.
darrell
Sep 6, 2019 at 4:04 pm
Absolutely agree. Most players never break 90, some never break 100. Is that fun? Most play the wrong tees, ( if you’re not breaking 80), so how much fun is it, to never have a putt for a birdie? Of all the course designers, I prefer Arnold Palmer courses. In most cases, he leaves a “run up” option on most holes…..even the par 3’s. This helps players of all abilities……even pro’s might want to play a low running shot on a windy day.
BobbyG
Sep 6, 2019 at 3:25 pm
Adams golf products made the game fun for me.
Ryan
Sep 6, 2019 at 2:41 pm
The “fun” aspect of “playing” golf comes from shooting low scores and hitting solid shots. However, that isn’t the only aspect of the game. The true “fun” aspect comes from being outside on beautiful days playing a round with your buddies where you are constantly ribbing each other over the smallest things. Seeing a buddy duff a putt and everyone cracks up laughing. Winning a few skins on them and then treating them to a round at the 19th. Its the friendships that make the game fun for us averages. We aren’t trying to play on tour.
Shallowface
Sep 6, 2019 at 3:20 pm
When I started as a youngster in the 1970s no one laughed at another player’s poor shots and there was no such thing as ribbing. It simply wasn’t tolerated. Fact is, it’s cruel and disrespectful, and just like when you point a finger at something and you have three pointing back at you, when it’s your turn to be ribbed it hurts three times worse than the amount of “fun” you got from whatever it was you inflicted on someone who alredy feels bad enough. I’ve had a number of young men tell me that the reason they stopped playing the game was that they could no longer tolerate the so-called good natured kidding from “buddies.” It’s unseemly, immature and it needs to disappear from the game. Grow up, kids.
Herman
Sep 7, 2019 at 4:52 pm
This made me laugh … hope I dint hurt your feelings
JThunder
Sep 9, 2019 at 5:33 am
If you can’t take “good natured kidding” from your buddies during a leisure activity in which you are not a professional, and this forces you to quit the game, then you need psychiatric help. You’re taking a leisure activity WAY too seriously, and you’re heading for high blood pressure and other stress-induced illnesses.
JThunder
Sep 9, 2019 at 5:35 am
I grew up in the 70s too, and kids could be brutal to each other. Teasing each other on the golf course would have been the least of anyone’s worries. Maybe you’re thinking of the 1950s, when kids weren’t allowed to speak without adult permission?
StatGrad
Sep 6, 2019 at 1:53 pm
Just because one person sees it as rewarding doesn’t mean it’s not fun to others. Or some may even see it as both. No need to “Stop Calling It Fun.”
Fergie
Sep 6, 2019 at 1:47 pm
You bait people to play golf by saying it’s fun. The rewarding aspect doesn’t kick in until you’re hitting reasonable shots. It’s then that the rewarding aspect kicks in.
JThunder
Sep 9, 2019 at 5:24 am
I hit the golf ball almost 100% of the time that I swing at it, and it usually stays in-bounds. The same cannot be said for the majority of people in a batter’s box, or playing tennis. The success rate of shooting a basketball or completing a pass are likewise much lower. Are we questioning whether all sports are “fun” or not?
“Rewarding” being all about the score is akin to “success” being defined entirely by money.
JThunder
Sep 6, 2019 at 12:28 pm
The real problem is not defining golf, but defining “fun”. “Fun” – like most everything else – has been relegated to lowest-common-denominator pursuits. A large demographic would define “fun” as attending Nascar and getting hammered; I would not.
Webster’s defines fun as “what provides amusement or enjoyment”… A lot of people find challenges “enjoyable” – bearing in mind, golf is 100% voluntary for most people who play it. But, yes, if you don’t enjoy this particular challenge, you’ll likely not play the game. (Most video games are challenging and mostly you die before you win; that doesn’t seem to hurt sales…)
Raise the next generation to view “enjoyment” differently. And to define words correctly (eg, “literally”).
Declines in golf participation have the most to do with money and time – in that order. The middle class has pathetically little of the first and a decreasing amount of the second because of it. A challenge is one thing; an expensive 4-6 hour challenge is another.
Acemandrake
Sep 6, 2019 at 11:56 am
A lot of older courses were designed with wide openings in front of the greens.
This allowed the option of playing a low, running approach shot; an option appreciated by us slower swingers.
DB
Sep 6, 2019 at 2:49 pm
The old parks-style courses are great. Not only are they designed for an easy walk, but as you say most greens are wide open from the front. The only time you find a front bunker is maybe on a Par 5 or a short Par 3. There are no forced carries off the tee, it just wasn’t a thing. Slower swingers are free to play their 180-yard worm burner down the fairway on every hole.
Tom Duckworth
Sep 6, 2019 at 10:37 am
When I come home from a round my wife asks if I had fun. I am never sure how to answer.
GD
Sep 6, 2019 at 12:28 pm
So true.
Dennis
Sep 8, 2019 at 1:02 am
So true