Point / Counterpoint: Drawing a line in the sand / How has the golf ball harmed golf?

Golf Course News, Jun 2002 by Pascuzzo, Damian, Uihlein, Walter

POINT

Drawing a line in the sand

By DAMIAN PASCUZZO

As golf course architects we are trained to be problem solvers. Given a piece of land, along with a list of development constraints and the client's goals and budget, we set out to design the best course possible. That's our job and we'll continue to do it the best we can. But how about a little help from our friends making all of these new high-tech clubs and balls?

Has anyone seen how far people are hitting it today? No, I'm not talking about the tour pros. We all know how they pulverize the ball. I'm referring to the high school kids, the 20-somethings, and all those other flat-bellied golfers to whom a 280-yard drive is the rule, not the exception. No doubt about it, it's fun to watch even a recreational golfer catch one on the sweet spot and send it sailing off onto the fairway. But its downright ugly when that same player hooks or slices. We're no longer concerned only about the houses that border the fairways. Now we have to worry about the houses that sit across the street from the houses that border the fairway.

Over the last 30 years, designers have gradually increased the width of corridors for a safe golf hole. Where will it end? Left unchecked, how far will players be hitting the ball in 10 years? How about in 20? It is not unusual for the planning and permitting process for a new golf course to take 10 years, not to mention at least two years for construction and grow-in. If today's focus on power golf continues, it is conceivable the acreage allotted for that golf course will be insufficient the day it opens.

One of our ASGCA members prepared a detailed analysis on the effects of increased distance, and the results are disturbing. If the architect must provide more land (at least 10 percent) for safety reasons then construction, growin and maintenance costs increase up to 17 percent. How many developers will be discouraged from including a golf course in their future projects if acreage requirements continue to escalate?

Wally Uihlein's comment recently that the golf industry is flat and "mired in the same recession as the rest of the U.S." is true, but the primary problem is cost. It is a simple equation. The farther players can hit the ball, the more length and width we need for safe and enjoyable golf courses. This additional acreage means more development costs and greater maintenance budgets. These additional expenses are most likely going to be passed on to the golfer in the form of higher greens fees.

We are not attempting to roll back the clock on the game. We just want to keep it affordable so golfers of all ages can enjoy it. Making golf more expensive, time consuming, and more intimidating is not the way to grow participation rates.

'Doesn't it seem logical that a modern course would be the best test of the modern player and the modern power game?'

Damian Pascuzzo is the president of the American Society of Golf Course Architects and is a partner in Graves & Pascuzzo, Ltd., a golf course design and development firm in El Dorado Hills, Calif.

Walter Uihlein is the president and chief executive officer of the Acushnet Co.