A Big Hole

the greatest game

interesting article in Yesterdays Irish times about moves in America, to big the golf hole bigger , four times the size , to attract more beginners, and stop people leaving the game, essentially the game is too hard , and too many leaving the game, also plans to bring footballs in to the game ? dont know how that works ?
but generally , their trying to dumb it down..it has the backing of Adidas/Taylor made.
Not enough young people playing the game..

personally ..I think they would ruin it..

FixdePitchmark

We are obviously talking hypothetically.
This has potential to be funny or angry.

The hole is too small. (imo) - if you look at snooker and the scales , golf makes no sense.
I've never had a hole in one on a golf course - been close over 10 times.

But at the same measure the pros have rounds in 60s.

There is something wrong with the game - when fully normal looking men. Are winning competitions off a handicap of 26.

Two issues - 1) There should be no 26
or
2) the game is just too hard.

The handicap system is the ultimate defining aspect of the game. Because the sport is neutralised - the hole could be the same size as the ball - would make no difference.

If you give somebody a tennis racket and a ball for 10 minutes - they will be able to hit it - but a golf club and ball. Not much progress.

But what is wrong with something being hard.

That sounds like the marketing gang and the z- why ? or whatever generation losing the run of themselves. I'll be blacking Adidas and TM if true.

Not changing - go ahead with your crazy golf - Bungee jumping and whatever fad you come up with next, because you are not willing to actually improve at something.

the greatest game

15 inch hole - 4 times the size of the present, would have advantages for kids.

My own course does not have junior tee boxes, and some of the holes are very long par 4's for your average 11 year old , they should play half the size of that hole.

is the game too hard ? possibly yes,
My uncle.. playing it about 3/4 years, and invested a lot of time to the game, he has a handicap in the high 20's, But if you gave him another 10 shots he would not still win anything at present, he is just going through the horrors in the game at present, mis hits, toppping the ball, lifting the head, all the basic mistakes, saying that he could turn around next week and get 40 pts ,
I know a few golfers who took up the game late enough - have had their highs but the lows have been far more frequent.

Myself, I have given it blood sweat and tears and wondering how to move to the next level...

m r c

Maybe I'm wrong here but I always understood that technically you only ever had two putts on the green irrespective of your handicap.
3 putts = bad
The given SI of a hole referred more to the level of difficulty in gir

If that's true then really people just should just miss fewer short putts, that's hardly going to make or break people with regards to golf.

Another thing people forget too IMHO is that with golf it's far more about being out there playing and way less about going low esp for the people they are trying to encourage back or keep.
Tigers win percentage is around 25, right now he's about the best and when he times his form on cherry picked courses he gets it done historically about one quarter of the time. Nobody is saying joe soap should match that I hope.

Here is where this comes from IMO.
There are/were way too many courses built in the states for the demand which puts pressure on the owners and tm are backing it because more golfers = higher sales.

Felexicon

Have to say I really don't get why people want to make everything easier these days. I started last year and obviously I find the slow progress extremely frustrating but the sense of pride when you get a string of good holes together and you realise all the hard work is paying off is incredible.
At the moment my putting is below average but with a hole about 10 inches wide I don't think I'd miss many putts inside 30 feet

mike12

They are using it as a way of speeding up play they players trialing it shot around 10 strokes less and took 40 mins less for the round. In the same artical they send players out in 2balls at 4 mins intervials you have to pick up after u hit treble bogie again they knocked around a hour off the time of a round but still managed to get the same amount of golfers out per round.
Rose and Garica played in it both shot 6 under.

snaphook

There are multiple tee boxes for differing levels of play.
Why not have two holes (with a blue pin for the normal hole size aor White/Yellow for the bigger hole size) on a green for differing levels of play?

This would apply for recreational golf.
Making the hole bigger for the better golfers will just make it easier for the best putters to win more easily. :pac:

moycullen14

SnowDrifts

Saw a clip on youtube the other day about this. *shakes head* - TaylorMade take your silly gimmicks and f**k right off. You actually think this would bring more people to the game? Now that's just silly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_s9HKnVjd48

John Divney

Am I right in thinking Americans all tee off from the back tees?

mister gullible

More pathetic dumbing down from America. If folks want faster golf they should stop feckin around and just hit the shot. If they want better scores they should practice more. Doesn't take much time or money to throw down a little putting mat at home and develop a putting stroke.... for flip sake!!!

HB2002

the greatest game wrote: »

plans to bring footballs in to the game ? dont know how that works ?

I know of one course in Dublin... used to be Ballinascorney golf course... chnaged name after that but can't remember to what... who have turned into a football based golf game....

http://footee.ie/about-us

alxmorgan

HB2002 wrote: »

I know of one course in Dublin... used to be Ballinascorney golf course... chnaged name after that but can't remember to what... who have turned into a football based golf game....

http://footee.ie/about-us

That looks pretty cool

dan_ep82

If they wont allow belly putters because they think it harms the tradition of the game I highly doubt they'll actually allow any of the other stuff.

Sounds ridiculous anyhow. Having bigger holes would take out the frustration of putting but anyone can be a good putter with effort and time. If they get frustrated ao easily putting im sure they'll look for concessions off the tee too.

FixdePitchmark

**** Off Taylor Made.

Never buying from them again.

Golf Industry ****.


I had a hole in one with that hole today

ArielAtom

Jaysus,

I thought this was going to be about Laura Davies!!!!!

alxmorgan

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

**** Off Taylor Made.

Never buying from them again.

Golf Industry ****.


I had a hole in one with that hole today

To be fair to TM this is not their idea. They, along with PGA, started a thing called Hack golf (http://www.hackgolf.org/hackathons/golf/about) to try to re-invigorate the game.

Are they doing it for altruistic reasons ? Of course not. The more that play the game the more stuff they sell. But I think we all want to see a strong game worldwide. I don't agree with the enlarged hole idea (sounds painful ) but this is just an idea that came from this initiative.

Telecaster58

The way I'm playing at the moment I couldn't get the ball in the hole from 3 feet if the whole was the size of a bin lid.

dan_ep82

Never understood the hate with TM, genuine hate as opposed to dislike.

I know they bring out more products per year than most but I've never seen a review saying the clubs are bad in anyway, just not a major leap from the product before.

gman127

An amazingly negative response here to this!

I think it looks like great fun. If my course or any nearby course ran this I'd definitely give it a go. Not all the time though, maybe just once or twice a year for a bit of a change.

Barnaboy

The idea is just pure silly in my opinion. It's the equivalent of getting rid of goalies in soccer because it's too hard to score.

Norfolk Enchants_

A big hole says it all!. Most winning thread title of the year ever!.

hrigsby2

mister gullible wrote: »

More pathetic dumbing down from America. If folks want faster golf they should stop feckin around and just hit the shot. If they want better scores they should practice more. Doesn't take much time or money to throw down a little putting mat at home and develop a putting stroke.... for flip sake!!!

Americans are awful! They all play from the back tees like they're freaking Tiger Woods (he's not American, right?) and they still shoot astronomical scores because they can't putt to save their lives! I saw one 5 putt, 5 putt I say!

In other news, Taylormade has now merged with the U.S. government and the country will now be called the United States of Amerimade. That way, the company and the country will be synonymous moving forward!

m r c

hrigsby2 wrote: »

Americans are awful! They all play from the back tees like they're freaking Tiger Woods (he's not American, right?) and they still shoot astronomical scores because they can't putt to save their lives! I saw one 5 putt, 5 putt I say!

In other news, Taylormade has now merged with the U.S. government and the country will now be called the United States of Amerimade. That way, the company and the country will be synonymous moving forward!

Ya and Tiger has a horrific slice too :-) just like your typical American lol

FixdePitchmark

Hrigsby - was telling a friend of mine that it was all Americans in Royal County Down the day I was there. He was saying, they would be lost around there. I said to him , "sure there are millions of Americans, 300 million or something, they are the ones with the most important tour in the world" - "sure your man Phil and Tiger are handy at golf, your man Cabreria is cool too "
Have to say , was a bit funny to see each of them with a caddy - 8 people walking down a links fairways is a bizarre sight.

As I said - If aliens came down and looked at 8 men walking around after 4 small balls - there would be a good bit of explaining to ET.

Was talking to a few of them after - out of 8 of them (the players) one had a 76 and the other a 77. Class golf around there.

Then caught up with next 8 balls - very slow, the slowest I'd seen. Catch up with them - English lads. They were very apologetic about their slowness - I asked did any of them break 90 - Answer back " On the front or back nine ? "

:D

I said to them - " Ah well you got value for money ".


So maybe it is the crazy Irish - who need to relax a bit - me included.

I still believe 4 hours for a 4 ball
3 1/2 for a 3 ball
3 for a 2 or 1 ball.

hrigsby2

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Hrigsby - was telling a friend of mine that it was all Americans in Royal County Down the day I was there. He was saying, they would be lost around there. I said to him , "sure there are millions of Americans, 300 million or something, they are the ones with the most important tour in the world" - "sure your man Phil and Tiger are handy at golf, your man Cabreria is cool too "
Have to say , was a bit funny to see each of them with a caddy - 8 people walking down a links fairways is a bizarre sight.

As I said - If aliens came down and looked at 8 men walking around after 4 small balls - there would be a good bit of explaining to ET.

Was talking to a few of them after - out of 8 of them (the players) one had a 76 and the other a 77. Class golf around there.

Then caught up with next 8 balls - very slow, the slowest I'd seen. Catch up with them - English lads. They were very apologetic about their slowness - I asked did any of them break 90 - Answer back " On the front or back nine ? "

:D

I said to them - " Ah well you got value for money ".


So maybe it is the crazy Irish - who need to relax a bit - me included.

I still believe 4 hours for a 4 ball
3 1/2 for a 3 ball
3 for a 2 or 1 ball.

I'd take a 70-anything at RCD! Having a caddy would be helpful there but it is always entertaining seeing 8 guys in a group. Think about your alien scenario at a football match!

"You mean that there are 60,000 people watching 22 guys chase a ball around that field?"

"Well yeah but they also put it on TV so that millions of other people can watch around the world." :P

FixdePitchmark

Only thing with golf - nothing happens 90 % of the time.

Hrigbsy - say a lad off 9 in US - what do you think he would be off here ?

Also - a friend of mine 5 years ago was off about 12 - he is now a pro , was shocked , he obviously improved , but what sort of handicap do you need to be to be a club pro there ?

Sorry , maybe you don't know answers.

But back to US golf - remember going around 9 holes in US in a cart (Alone) in about 50 minutes. amazing.

hrigsby2

There are different factors at play really...each system has pros and cons.

We use a course rating and slope measure, which is supposedly indicative of the overall difficulty of the course. It's like a hole index system, but for the course as a whole in comparison to others. It also includes tees. Super complex system to explain, but essentially the course rating is what a scratch golfer should shoot, and the course slope is the effect of the course on the parody between scratch golfers and bogey golfers (studies show that scratch golfers tend to play close to par no matter the course difficulty, while bogey golfers are much more affected by conditions and playability).

Moral of this is that the course I play most often, which is the school golf course at Clemson, The Walker Course, is rated (and sloped for that matter) fairly highly. The rating is 72.5 from the tips (which is where we play from, because we're Americans!, and because competition requires it) but to me the course is pretty tame. So, looking at my player report, if I shoot an 82 there (theoretically a 10 handicap), it shows up as an 8.0. If I shoot an 89 (17 handicap) it shows up as a 13.9.

Another local course, Boscobel, has a Rating of 68.7 and a slope of 125. So my 80 there (8 handicap) shows up as a 10.2.

So to answer your question it depends on the players home course. I don't think that I typically shoot 4-5 strokes better at Boscobel than I do at the Walker Course, so since I play Walker more my handicap is probably a bit low. If I played Boscobel more (and maybe then I would get used to the quirks and shoot lower...) I would probably be a bit artificially high from the start.

Another contributing factor is that the system takes all of your low scores (by adjusted handicap), not a mix of the two. So while I have 16 scores on this report, ranging from an 18.1 handicap to a 6.3, the 6 that are used to calculate are 6.3, 8.0, 8.0, 9.3, 10.2, and 10.5. So that keeps it low if your inconsistent as I am currently.

I'm off 8 (8.3 officially) back home but without adjusting it I'd say that I'm probably playing at more like a 10-12 here. So long explanation, but if I'm the norm then our handicap is artificially low.

On the other question, pros have to play in a tournament that is 36 holes and stay under a 7 (adjusted handicap) total. So basically (depending on the course), they have to stay around 14-15 over par for 36. And then it's as much about personal/social skill as it is about how good you are honestly. Unless it's an academy or a top level course, it's just a line on the resume I'd assume.

Touring pros have to go to Q school, which is a whole different beast. You have to apply for that (and rumor is the handicap requirement is +1.5...but that is probably wrong). Then there are multiple qualifying rounds to get your card. I think the +1.5 is wrong, because I know that Phil's handicap in 2010 was a +5.2. Interestingly enough, his caddy Bones was off 1.9 at the same time. Seems hard to believe that there would only be a 4.5 handicap difference between the best players in the world and those attempting to qualify as a touring professional...but maybe it's accurate.

A + handicap is essentially a golfer who plays under scratch. Odd nomenclature, but a +5 is 10 strokes better than a 5. Maybe that's common knowledge but I know it was odd to me.

Hope all this helps! Lots of info.

Senecio

I would welcome a larger hole, maybe not 4 times though.

I say this because I'm a woeful putter and I'd like to see more emphasis placed back on the tee to green component of the game.

razorblunt

For anyone that says it's a tough game to learn, of course it is, all sports are. Tennis not just hitting a ball with a racket for 10 minutes until you're Sampras. You still have various levels, yes it's easy to hit a ball over a net on a court when youre on holidays, but for a lot of people playing golf and shooting 100 is still enjoyable if they feel they've played to the best of their ability i.e. no lost balls, no topped mi****s.

I find with golf you start off enjoying once you get the yips out of your system i.e. those shots above but then when you start putting pressure on yourself for want of a better sore (lower handicap whatever) the enjoyment reduces. I'm at my happiest now when I finish a round, knowing there were no "poor" shots like complete duffs, leaving putts behind, not carrying water and not getting out of a bunker in one whilst incredibly frustrating gives the motivation to go work on those things.

For anyone picking it up especially kids I always, always recommend half a dozen lessons, they'll have so much less heartache from this and that, to me, is the key to retaining involvement.

Also, this might be controversial, but golf is a sport that has different lifecycle. You start off young, playing with your dad, uncle, mother whatever the case is and may find yourself drifting away from it as you go through teenage year (schoolwork, other sports, college work, part time jobs all take precedence) you get older and can't commit to other sports as much as you would like to and golf comes back into a mix once more.

denishurley

There was a feature on this in Golf World a few years ago. Massively reduces the skill of reading puts

bustercherry

It would reduce the skill of reading/making short putts. This in turn "should" speed up the pace of play on greens. It's a concept which won't appeal to the serious golfer but it's aimed at attracting more casual golfers to the game.

One of the biggest gripes casual ( and most ) golfers have is it takes to long to play a round. I'd be happy to play the larger hole in non competitive rounds if it was proven to significant increase in pace of play; not 2 mins a round but more around the 20/30 mins mark. Radical initiatives (maybe not this particular one) are probably the only way we will solve the slow play issue rather than arguing over the 5/10 seconds extra it takes the person putting out to replace a pin.

GreeBo

bustercherry wrote: »

It would reduce the skill of reading/making short putts. This in turn "should" speed up the pace of play on greens. It's a concept which won't appeal to the serious golfer but it's aimed at attracting more casual golfers to the game.

One of the biggest gripes casual ( and most ) golfers have is it takes to long to play a round. I'd be happy to play the larger hole in non competitive rounds if it was proven to significant increase in pace of play; not 2 mins a round but more around the 20/30 mins mark. Radical initiatives (maybe not this particular one) are probably the only way we will solve the slow play issue rather than arguing over the 5/10 seconds extra it takes the person putting out to replace a pin.

Why not just end the hole once you hit the green then?

Difficulty is what makes golf attractive to a lot of people, if it was simple who'd care? I dont think you'd have people playing all their lives if it was easy.

bustercherry

GreeBo wrote: »

Why not just end the hole once you hit the green then?

Why would you? It's still takes skill to get a 20 ft putt close regardless of the 2 hole sizes. You could still be 40ft away from the pin on the some of the US greens despite being on a green in regulation.

Unless we are all firing at the pins and finishing in that 6/8ft scoring range then I doubt it would make much difference in your (long) putting stats. Again proper stats will prove/disprove my assumption.

bustercherry

GreeBo wrote: »

Why not just end the hole once you hit the green then?

Difficulty is what makes golf attractive to a lot of people, if it was simple who'd care? I dont think you'd have people playing all their lives if it was easy.

So you think by increasing the hole size in casual rounds, it would become dramatically easier? You believe your putting stats would dramatically change?

Like I say if it sped up the game dramatically FOR CASUAL NON COMPETITIVE ROUNDS, then I have no problem as I believe the small decrease oin skill for short putts would be outweighed. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING FOR COMPETITVE GOLF.

spacecoyote

Read an article on it myself.

The guy writing it was essentially saying that, yeah, everything inside 10ft is essentially a gimme.

It is a gimmick, but I don't mind the idea of it as a way of getting more people involved. Golf playing numbers are down pretty massively in the last few years, so why not try something to generate some interest. If its a flop, then so what, at least its making an effort to bring extra bodies into the game who you would imagine would transition to the correct sized golf hole once they are hopefully bitten by the bug.

The writer was a golf fanatic. He said he was skeptical, but when the players all had a great chance to make a couple of chip-ins, & were stroking in mid range putts, everyone was enjoying themselves.

I'm assuming that they are not talking about changing golf so that there is a 15 inch diameter hole on every course, but rather that there will be courses available that will offer the possibility to play that game.

I would definitely see it as a great tool for getting young kids involved.

GreeBo

bustercherry wrote: »

Why would you? It's still takes skill to get a 20 ft putt close regardless of the 2 hole sizes. You could still be 40ft away from the pin on the some of the US greens despite being on a green in regulation.

Unless we are all firing at the pins and finishing in that 6/8ft scoring range then I doubt it would make much difference in your (long) putting stats. Again proper stats will prove/disprove my assumption.

Making the hole bigger removes a lot of the skill requirement for putting.
A bigger hole makes long putting easier, ball can travel at much more speed and still go in, thus less worries about lagging it up etc. Also you know your next putt is easier, thus less pressure on the long putt.

bustercherry wrote: »

So you think by increasing the hole size in casual rounds, it would become dramatically easier? You believe your putting stats would dramatically change?

Like I say if it sped up the game dramatically FOR CASUAL NON COMPETITIVE ROUNDS, then I have no problem as I believe the small decrease oin skill for short putts would be outweighed. I AM NOT ADVOCATING CHANGING FOR COMPETITVE GOLF.

Then you have two different sports essentially though, with the casual round being significantly different than the competitive round.
If you want casual golf to be quicker and easier, use the appropriate tee to your skill level, dont go digging up greens.

And its a lot more than a small decrease in skill for short putts...think of the difference when they made the ball marginally bigger.

bustercherry

spacecoyote wrote: »

Read an article on it myself.

The guy writing it was essentially saying that, yeah, everything inside 10ft is essentially a gimme.

It is a gimmick, but I don't mind the idea of it as a way of getting more people involved. Golf playing numbers are down pretty massively in the last few years, so why not try something to generate some interest. If its a flop, then so what, at least its making an effort to bring extra bodies into the game who you would imagine would transition to the correct sized golf hole once they are hopefully bitten by the bug.

The writer was a golf fanatic. He said he was skeptical, but when the players all had a great chance to make a couple of chip-ins, & were stroking in mid range putts, everyone was enjoying themselves.

I'm assuming that they are not talking about changing golf so that there is a 15 inch diameter hole on every course, but rather that there will be courses available that will offer the possibility to play that game.

I would definitely see it as a great tool for getting young kids involved.

I'd like to see the stats to back it up first on that. Lucan's greens can be unreal at times, even with the 15 inch holes I wouldn't be saying anything under 10ft is a gimme :P

Ultimately it's about increasing the profile of the game to attract new bodies so I'd say it has been a success so far if you look at the amount of coverage it has had in the press.

Golf can be a very negative game at times. I sometimes wonder why certain people play when you spend 4 hours plus listening to them bitch and moan their way round a course. Certainly when the are giving out about misses when statistically the odds are way against them making it. I don't find it any way enjoyable and cannot see how anyone taking up the game would be bothered listening to this tired old rhetoric. It is a gimmick but I can see how it could inject more fun into a round.

bustercherry

GreeBo wrote: »

Making the hole bigger removes a lot of the skill requirement for putting.
A bigger hole makes long putting easier, ball can travel at much more speed and still go in, thus less worries about lagging it up etc. Also you know your next putt is easier, thus less pressure on the long putt.

That may be so but I would like to see the stats to back it up rather than base it on assumptions. I'd be of the opinion the stats wouldn't be dramatic people think they would be. Also you won't attract new people to sport if it's not fun.

GreeBo wrote: »

Then you have two different sports essentially though, with the casual round being significantly different than the competitive round.

Complete over reaction as usual. No one is advocating it's enforced that all casual rounds are played using the larger hole. I'd be happy for it to be in play on a course I was playing if it meant a significant increase in pace of play. It just means I focus on something else on my casual/poractice round.

GreeBo wrote: »

If you want casual golf to be quicker and easier, use the appropriate tee to your skill level, dont go digging up greens.

Surely the same argument can be made for the choosing the appropriate hole?

Or maybe it's a dig at me?

GreeBo wrote: »

And its a lot more than a small decrease in skill for short putts...think of the difference when they made the ball marginally bigger.

[/QUOTE]

In your opinion. I'd like to see the stats from this across a wide range of player levels. IMO I don't think the stats will be as dramatic as everyone thinks they will be.

hrigsby2

Some of ya'll are hilarious...you nitpick the hell out of why the game is too slow, but when something comes along that could actually make a difference in speeding things up, you are completely against it for the integrity of the game.

Funny enough, the size of a golf hole was an arbitrary decision from the start. It's 4.25" because the first ever hole cutter, which was used at Musselburgh, just happened to be 4.25". What if they'd made it 15 cm (it's currently 10.8) from the start? Would there be complaints on a daily basis that the hole should be smaller because the game is too easy?

Just some food for thought. Personally, 15" is way too big, but I wouldn't mind a move to a 5" or 6" cup. The disparity that is being created by longer equipment between good golfers and mediocre ones is something that no one discusses when they look at the extra 10 yards on their drive rather than the fact that it's 10 yards further off-line...so a larger hole would be a decent way to counteract that.

And bustercherry, you should consider not coming into every discussion so hot! Not everyone is out to take shots at you...they're just trying to get their point across, relax!

What we really need to do is regulate the hell out of golf balls. Golf club technology is actually not doing near as much to change the game as balls are. People are still going to use and lose golf balls, so why are we continuing to allow manufacturers to make them longer and longer just to take command over the market, when it's making the game take longer and making some historic golf courses obsolete?

Dayor Knight

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

**** Off Taylor Made.

Never buying from them again.

Golf Industry ****.


I had a hole in one with that hole today

Is that really you, Fix? Sounding a bit more angry than is normal for you!