News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff Goldman

  • Karma: +0/-0
The to-do on bunkers has led to this thought:  

I think most golfers could be characterized as "less skilled", maybe handicap of 13 or so and up.  As the game has become marginally more playable for these folks, aren't they more able to appreciate golf course architecture?  If technology has allowed us to have at least some ability to direct the ball where we want it to go, doesn't this bring in features of a course we previously would have ignored?  I don't think I am talking about distance gains, but more cavity-backed irons, large headed drivers, better sand irons, etc. etc.

Is it really that bad that a course like Shoreacres may have lost some interest for folks like Shivas, but many, many more golfers (this one included) can appreciate the cool features?  

Jeff Goldman
That was one hellacious beaver.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Your example of Shoreacres and shivas is not a good one.  The man reveres the course, as do I.

To the extent that technology seems to have a hugely disproportionate favorable impact on the better, stronger player, I would be tempeted to argue that it has not.  However, beliefs often being the function of perception as ooposed to objective results, it could very well be that technology has helped the 'less skilled' bloke to better enjoy GCA.  Maybe if he is more confident, he would attempt some shots that he would not otherwise, and we know that even an intermittent reward (pulling off the shot to some degree occasionally) can be pretty powerful.

Jari Rasinkangas

I don't think that better equipment has nothing to do with understanding architectural features.

The average player just wants to hit the ball as far as possible and try to keep out of hazards.  Then on the green he hopes to hole it and that's it.

If the players would think about why this bunker is here or what is the perfect angle to approach the green they would score much lower.  But this is too analytical way to play the game for most of the players.  And maybe it is better because it makes it more fun for them.

Jari