Thailand is undoubtedly one of the best Golf Paradise in the World with more than 200 affordable golf courses throughout the country.
Numbers of Thai golf courses designed by well-known golf legends such as Seve Ballesteros, Sir Nick Faldo and Arnold Palmer. just to name a few. This make Thailand one of the most visits destination for Golfers from all around the World every season, but on top of that, green fees here in Thailand are much cheaper than anywhere else. You can spend less than $25 to play in 18 holes in a standard golf course without any additional charge, how good is that!
If you are planning to have a golf tour in Thailand in the upcoming vacation, Golfisthathai.com proudly present ‘Top 10 Best Cheap Golf Course in Thailand’ for your information and don’t forget to bring your golf bags next time you come to visit Thailand or you can shop your new clubs here, Thailand has many good and reliable used golf clubs store which we already have reviewed in ‘Top 5 Best Used Golf Club & Equipment in Thailand’
1.Dragon Hills Golf and Country Club, Ratchaburi
– Weekday: 440 Thai Baht ($14)
– Weekend: 650 Thai Baht ($21)
Golf Cart: 600 Thai Baht ($19)
Detail: Par 72, Designed by Jim Engh, ranked in the Top 100 Best Golf Course in Thailand by top100golfcourses.com
Location: 192, Tambon Ang Hin, Amphoe Pak Tho, Chang Wat Ratchaburi 70140
Contact: +66 322 40504-5, +66 83 988 0775
Website/Facebook: Dragon Hills Golf
Comment: Scenic but challenging. High – handicap golfers should be aware.
2.Kantarat Golf Course, Bangkok
– Weekday: 400 Thai Baht ($13)
– Weekend: 700 Thai Baht ($22)
Golf Cart: 500 Thai Baht ($16)
Detail: 18 Hole Par 72, Legendary and the 2nd Oldest Golf Course in Thailand. Kantarat has been known as the only Golf Course in the World surrounded by taxi lanes of Don Mueang International Airport.
Location: 171 Kantarat Golf Club, The Royal Thai Air Force HQ, Vibhavadi Rangsit road. Don Mueang, Bangkok 10210
Contact: (66) 2534-3842 , (66) 891177483
Website/Facebook: Kantarat Golf Club
Comment: Affordable and unique. You will never forget that once in your life you afraid to hit the airplane that’s going to take off with your driver!
3.Hillside Country Home Golf & Resort, Prachin Buri
– Weekday: 470 Thai Baht ($15)
– Weekend: 700 Thai Baht ($22)
Golf Cart: 500 Thai Baht ($16)
Detail: 18 Hole Par 72 Designed by Akadej Bijaphala
Location: 81/25 Moo 12, Nonsi, Kabin Buri District, Prachin Buri 25110
Contact: +66 81 734 5915
Website/Facebook: Hillside Country
Comment: Peaceful with the beauty of nature and wildlife of Prachinburi. Drive away from busy Bangkok you find a gem hidden in the jungle at Hillside Country Club.
4.Mountain Creek Golf Resort And Residences, Nakhon Ratchasima
– Weekday: 590 Thai Baht ($19)
– Weekend: 1,250 Thai Baht ($40)
Golf Cart: 600 Thai Baht ($19)
Detail: 27 Hole Par 72, one of the masterpieces of legendary Seve Ballesteros.
Location: : 99/9 Moo 3 Mitrapab road, Lat Bua Khao Sub-district, Sikhio District, Nakhon Ratchasima Province
Contact: 08 8885 3782, 08 5773 9773
Website/Facebook: Mountain Creek
Comment: One of the best-designed golf course in Thailand. Mountainous, tricky but scenic with the breathtaking view of Nakhon Ratchasima city, Lamtakong Dam and Khao Yai.
5.Chom Bueng Hill Ratchaburi Country Club, Ratchaburi
– Weekday: 270 Thai Baht ($8.75)
– Weekend: 400 Thai Baht ($12.96)
Golf Cart: 600 Thai Baht ($19)
Detail: 6,900 Yards Par 72 formerly known as Woo Sung Castle Hill, with their unique and famously haunted building behind the 18th Hole.
Location: 79 Moo 12 Tambol Jombung Amphur Jombung Ratchaburi 70150
Contact: 032 -228-050-51
Website/Facebook: Chom Bueng Hill
Comment: About an hour drive from Bangkok, peaceful and fresh. The layout is a bit tricky but weekend golfers will love the birdie opportunities here.
Top 10 Best Cheap Golf Course in Thailand - Golfistathai
Golf Courses, play golf, Thai Golf courses, Golf courses in Thailand, best golf courses in Thailand, affordable golf courses, cheap golf courses, golf course deals, golf resort, 9 hole golf courses,
Not only is Brooks right, but I think it's only a matter of time before someone finally gets DeChambeau to pick up the pace and knock off the intentionally gamesmanship that he displays against his playing partners, by intentionally waiting to start his conversation with his caddie about whatever it is they talk about, until after the other guys have finished hitting. I mean, if you want to talk about air density and a thousand other things no one ever thinks about, fine, but all I think anyone is asking here is that you abide by the pace of play guidelines that the Tour has in place. Eventually the Tour has to buckle to the pressure if enough outside influences keep this topic as alive and well as it has been for some time now. I'm just surprised we have such a blatant horrible penalty on a non-issue with Haotong Li that gave him no advantage whatsoever, when pace of play actually does affect the other golfers on the course, not only in your group, but also behind you, as they wait on every shot because you are too busy crunching numbers on things no one besides you has a clue about or could care less about.
Everyone complains about pace of play, and it's a seemingly never ending conversation. And in all my years (40+) of playing golf, I have yet to have someone say to me, "I sure do like playing golf in 5 or 6 hours; the slower the better."
Everyone I have ever talked to always says that they hate slow play. Yet, once again, I found myself in the bowels of despair this weekend as I was playing in a "tournament" where both my Saturday and Sunday rounds were met with a 5 hour round, where we waited on the group in front of us on every hole and every shot. In the defense of the group in front of us, they were waiting too, as was the group in front of them, etc, etc, etc.
I emailed the tournament director about this, and as kindly as I could put it, simply said that I doubt that I would return to play with this group ever again, simply because of pace of play.
I mean, pace of play is probably the most talked about subject in golf, and yet no one seems to ever be able to fix this "problem."
Now, I realize that pace of play could be a subjective term as well. Because if you give me a cart and an open course in front of me, I am done as a single in 90 minutes tops. I grew up playing as a threesome with my Dad and my brother, and we'd finish 18 holes in 2 1/2 hours.
But I'm not even suggesting those times as what anyone should realistically expect on a golf course. But I know for a fact that the standard for pace of play on a fully loaded golf course at St. Andrews is 3:22. See http://www.popeofslope.com/paceofplay/pace.html
Is your normal round and expectation for a foresome for 18 holes about 4 hours and 30 minutes? Is it 4 hours?
I'll just end this by saying that I refuse to be the group in front of me's gallery for 18 holes. If I have to wait on every shot, I'll quit the game first.
OK -- there have been several threads / discussions on pace of play .. and some strong opinions on the matter .. and there have been many suggestions put forward on possible methods on how to handle pace of play issues.
But here, I'd like discuss the Tee It Forward idea.
Personally I practice it myself, and it is not directly related to pace of play (although that dovetails in) but more about....
* developing my game;
* having more confidence with my tee shot;
* working to hit more fairways.
As one example of _not_ teeing it forward .. and I'm pretty sure you've all witnessed examples of this .. are the players who go all the way back to the tournament / championship tees and then either... 1. barely make it past the forward tees, or 2. lose most of their drives off the fairway.
Yes, both those scenarios may have a negative impact on the pace of play for all groups behind, but -- HOW DOES THIS IMPACT HOW THESE PLAYERS ARE DEVELOPING THEIR GAME???
What say you?
By Kenny B
Last week on Tuesday and Wednesday I observed the Washington State Golf Association (WSGA) process for rating golf courses. Why did I do this? Well, I was curious why I could shoot certain scores on some courses, but not fair that well on other courses with similar ratings and slopes. I'm still not sure about that, but at least I now know (sort of) the process used to come up with those ratings.
The team was led by the WSGA Director for Handicapping and Course Rating who is a WSGA employee. The five other team members are volunteers that have gone through a training program to learn the process. Each member has a USGA book that provides a number value for different features of the course for the scratch golfer and the 18-handicapper; for both men and women. All the number values for the holes are crunched to come up with the values we see on the scorecards. I didn't get into that, so how that works will be left up to those who want to volunteer and take the ratings course. The team can either break up and rate alternate holes, or they can all stay on the same hole and rate the different teeing grounds. We did the latter; maybe that was for my benefit so we could all be together.
The criteria for rating courses assumes a scratch male golfer hits a drive 250 yards and a second shot 220 yards, whereas the bogey golfer hits a drive 200 yards with a 170 yard second shot. For the female scratch golfer, the drive is 210 yards with a 190 yard second shot, and the drive for the bogey female is 150 yards with a 130 yard second shot.
These numbers are important because what we did on each hole is drive to the spot in the fairway where the scratch and bogey players would end up and measure fairway width, observe types of hazards and distance to them, and distance to OB is any. If a bunker on the course was not within 20 yards of the landing area, it is not considered for that player. From the tables in their book, a number is assigned for the scratch and bogey players. Also considered are number and coverage of trees and the fairway stance difficulty. Around the greens the team measures the green size, coverage of bunkers and bunker depth with women getting a more difficult value depending on depth. Again, distances to hazards and OB is recorded and the tables in their book assign the number for both scratch and bogey. Of course green speed is measured as is the depth of the fairway rough. The team does these ratings in pairs, and after the hole has been evaluated, the pairs get together and compare numbers and if they don't agree, they resolve it immediately. We did that a couple of times by going back to the spot on the course and re-evaluating the landing zone.
The first course that we rated was Horn Rapids GC in Richland, WA. This course is the only all desert course in the state. There are houses on part of the course with more being built every day, but they don't come into play except for the really bad shot. The team is measuring the green on this short par 4 #1 with bunker in front and mounding left and long. These houses are the closest of any on the course.
Check out the sagebrush that comes into play on this par 5 #5.
The desert also comes across the fairway off the tee that is reachable by the scratch golfers and very close for the bogey golfers. For scratch it is considered a forced layup. The USGA book has a section specific for deserts.
From the tips this 220 yard par 3 #8 plays downhill. The team also measures elevation change which also translates into a number from USGA table.
The short par 4 #9 is difficult because the water is right next to the green on the left with a drop off on the right about 10 feet to a bunker. That tree comes into play if your are on the left side of the fairway.
This course is hilly and quite long between greens to the next tee box, and while walkable, carts are recommended. Rating this course took all day, but after the data was gathered, some of the team members played the course; one of the perks of being on the committee.
On day 2 the team went to the West Richland GC in West Richland, WA. This was my very first course that I played in town, and where I learned to play. My teacher is still the pro there. We played the course this last Sunday and with a sore rib muscle, I still managed to shoot 78. It's an easy, flat course in a flood plain, and it floods most every year. The Yakima River borders the right side of the course which is the back nine and a canal runs through the middle of #1, #9, #10, #11, and #12. Since it floods, maintenance is difficult and as such the course is usually pretty rough.
This is a picture this winter looking out at the #18 fairway from the clubhouse. The canal is actually above water, about 150 yards from the green.
The water is all gone, but the grass has not fully recovered in some spots on the course. Here is the team on the short par 4 #10 green.
Standing on the 190 yard #11 tee box looking through the grass bordering the canal. The river is left of the green.
After going through the process, I understand what they are looking for to determine difficulty of a course, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily agree with the ratings and slope they come up with. It's not a perfect model, but I think it is at least consistent in the application. The Director said that the USGA course rating system will undergo some changes in 2018 in an effort for the all rating systems worldwide to conform to one process. THAT ought to be interesting.
To sum up my experience, I now appreciate what the rating committee goes through to rate our courses. The Director has personally rated every course in Washington State, some many times. But it would not be possible without the help of non-paid volunteers. One of the volunteers was local, but the others all came from the Seattle area which is over 200 miles away. It's a constant process given how many courses there are in the state. Most volunteers are retired, which is how they are able to contribute as much as they do. Do I want to do this? Ahhh, NO!
Latest from the Blog
Happy Birthday Today!