Golf Monthly

No

- Jeremy Ellwood

Many club members relished whizzing round in three hours or less as golf resumed for two-ball play only, and there was a real buzz about speedy round times on social media.

But we were in a honeymoon period then – just relieved to be back out there – and great though it was, two-ball-only golf just wouldn’t be universall­y sustainabl­e, or desirable, going forwards. Clubs that were finding it hard before lockdown wouldn’t be able to maximise revenue, and bustling clubs would struggle to meet demand and keep all members happy.

Yes, some nomadic golfers might be tempted back into the membership fold if round times really were three hours maximum, but the likelihood is that this would be negated by those for whom club membership would become less appealing if they could no longer play their regular three- or four-ball with their best mates.

Perhaps clubs should consider providing a few more dedicated two-ball-only slots on their tee sheets to satisfy those for whom speed really is of the essence, but anything more would prove counterpro­ductive, I fear.

Little Aston was one club to announce something along these lines, going for two-balls until midday and three- and four-balls after that from early June, but of course, even this won’t suit everybody. Therein lies one of golf’s greatest challenges – trying to keep hundreds of people with different wants and needs all happy, a herculean task for any club administra­tor.

So, let’s not make two-ball golf the new norm, but rather provide a little more opportunit­y for it for those for whom it really does make a big difference.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom