Rich and Tom,
I had hoped that this thread would evolve into a broader, more theoretical look at strategy vs. challenge, but I will go with the flow. I always enjoy discussing Rustic.
Tom and Matt, I believe that you greatly overestimate the ease and effectiveness of throwing darts at Rustic's greens. Sure it is sometimes possible to throw up a high spinning iron and hold certain portions of greens. But the margin of error of so doing is inversely related to the accuracy of the tee shot. As far as the course playing soft, I just don't see it. The greens may not be as firm or as fast as Wildhorse, but if certain greens were much firmer or faster, the approaches would be more comparable to shuffleboard than to darts. There are already 6 or 7 greens where I regularly aim at a point off the green to let it roll or bounce on, and 5-6 more where I sometimes do, depending on my angle and the pin position. You guys are better, so maybe you would try to stick it on every green, but I havent seen anyone be successful doing that yet. Shivas wrote:
I've said again and again that a 7,000 yard course (in years past, the benchmark for a brutally long course) requires the long player to hit little more than PW's irons in for approaches, on average (14 drives x 250 = 3500 yards; 4 second shots on par 5's at 200 yards each = 1000 yards; 4 par 3's at 175 average = 700 yards. That's 5200 yards for 22 shots, leaving 1800 yards for 14 shots, or 128 yard approaches on average to the par 4's, with less than that into the par 5's).
Shivas, you've got to come out here and play. Fairway for as far as the eye can see. You can swing yourself silly. To make it interesting I will buy you a beer for every par four you approach with a PW or less. (Not one of your closed face running draw PWs-- ala the famous 4I, 2I, 7I at Olympic. A normal PW distance.) You buy me a beer for everyone you approach from 9I or more, or go for from the tee. It will be a fun game -- I am a happy drunk! Here are the par 4s: 457, 319, 330, 435, 340, 480, 479, 460. Shivas wrote:
Take a course with 100 yard wide fairways. Two players: A, who hits it 300 and is pretty wild (he hits maybe 4-5 fairways a round on a tight course but can hit 12-13 on THIS course); and B, who hits it dead straight off the tee 260 and never misses a fairway on any course (Iron Byron). Assume they both hit their approaches with equal accuracy for the clubs they are hitting in. They have equal short games and putting skills. The both play the aerial game and the greens are receptive. [A] wins every time.
Okay, I'll bite. Provided that Mr. Byron knows the course and chooses the correct lines off the tee, my money is on Mr. Byron at Rustic. Shivas, don't overestimate Rustic's susceptibility to the whack then attack approach. The greens aren't your typical flat, boring greens. They have lots of fun angles and kickers. I don't care how much spin you put on a ball, its not going to spin back if it hits on a steep downhill slope.
Shivas wrote:
The problem is that for many years, we've thought of "angles" in a two-dimensional way. Aerial golf is three dimensional, unfortunately.
The greens at Rustic are three dimensional also.
Ben Dewar wrote:
David Moriarty can attest to the relative firmness the day we played.
Ben, the day we played the greens weren't exceptionally firm, probably about average.
Tim Weiman wrote:
Maybe Rustic Canyon can't be all things to all people. Pine Valley can't either.
Tim I agree with your discussion of strategy, but I dont think Rustic is quite ready to surrender on the "challenge" front quite yet. The only long bombers that I have heard of who have brought the course to its knees have all been playing the longest, most accurate ball yet, the new
Titleist Hypothetical. Has anyone had success trying to overpower the course with a "whack then attack" style (bombing down the middle off the tee, then firing at the pin)? Has anyone one even seen anyone whack then attack the course into oblivion? Matt, what did you shoot the day you played with us? How about you, Tom? Mr. Wigler? If any of you didnt score as well as you expected, what happened? Miss all of your 8 foot uphill birdie putts?
I've heard a lot of good golfers finish then say "this course is too easy." I ask "how did you play?" They usually say something like, "Well, I had an unusually bad day, but I could just tell the course is way to easy." I havent heard anyone say, "Wow a 67!" I guess Lynn might have heard one guy say this, but I think he is the only one.
Lou Duran wrote:
It seems to me that a course like Rustic Canyon, which I haven't played, would favor a Tiger Woods and penalize a Corey Pavin. A tight course off the tee, be it through rough, trees, hazards, sharp angles, etc. would clearly help the short but straight driver, and penalize the long, crooked knocker. A short and crooked player may find a wide open course more playable, though such a course would have difficulty holding the interest of the longer, low handicap player.
I've never understood this reasoning. If I am short and accurate off the tee, I want to play a course that puts a premium on proper decisions and placement. When the long crooked hitter does hit the fairway on a tight course, he's got a great chance at birdie because he is close. Even if he is in the rough or in a bunker, he is still close, so he can still knock in on and go at birdie. If the long hitter can stick it on a downslope at Rustic, I am sure he can knock it on a flat green from 145 out of a bunker or rough. At Rustic, the short hitter can gain relative advantage even if he hits it substantially shorter, by properly placing his ball. Look at Riviera, some narrow holes but generally a very strategic course. It is rarely if ever overpowered, and some smart, shorter hitters can think and execute their way into contention. Of course, smart, long, and straight will always win anywhere, but we can't all be Lou Duran.
Matt Ward wrote:
David, next time I'm at RC I want you hit your approaches from where I land my drives from the extreme back tees and for you to compare what you score with your drives from the middle tees. I bet you'll shoot lower from the former. Just think about it
Sounds great! I don't think that I've ever had a chance to play the first hole from the ninth fairway. Wait . . . come to think of it, I have. Seriously, if your distance was typical the day we played, I think I have played from your approach distance on almost every hole (maybe not the 9th.) I will still take angle over length at Rustic.
Matt, I am sorry if I mischaracterized your position. I recall that shortly after you played the course you had general criticism about the tee game. You also had specific comments about 1, 2, 9, 10, if I recall correctly. As far as me agreeing that certain holes could be improved, that is true, but I think the improvement would be a negligible plus to the overall quality of the course. As to 3, I would not like another fairway bunker or moving any of the existing fairway bunkers. If, anything, I'd tweak the green. As to 12, I have come full circle on that one. I think it is a truly fantastic hole and I don't think they should touch it. A fairway bunker would add little or nothing to the strategy of the hole, and would take away from the terrific feel of the course.
___________________________
You guys are looking for every shot to be a "test," presenting some question your game must answer. But it seems the test you guys are looking for is "True or False," or maybe "Multiple Choice." Each shot is graded seperately, if you get it correct you get a point, incorrect and you lose a point. And then, after that shot is played, you move onto the next question, which may have absolutely nothing to do with the last.
To me, playing Rustic Canyon is more like trying to write an essay. Anyone who has graded essays has seen numerous students who knew the material as well or better than the rest, but they just couldnt pull it all together. In successful essays, each point leads you to the next and each has bearing on the other. The author must think ahead and plan his attack, usually starting at the conclusion and and then figure out a plan to get there. Otherwise he might not like his final grade. Maybe it is my law school training, where 3 or 4 hour tests often consist of one question that would be impossible to completely answer in 10 hours, but I find essay tests more challenging than multiple choice or true/false.
Jeff Forston said
. . . to say that you need trouble off the tee to make a tee shot more challenging or interesting is a complete lack of imagination, in my opinion. If anything, the less trouble and framing there is for a tee shot, the more difficult and deceiving that tee shot becomes. Nothing plays into a golf course's pocket more than sedating and deceiving the player.
I competely agree, Jeff. This can really raise a problem for the architect, though, if he is concerned with garnering praise and ratings, for he might just sedate and deceive the raters so that they totally miss what the course is all about. Maybe this is why architects who spell it all out generally do well in the ratings.