News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2005, 09:34:56 PM »
Not having played Vancouver golf courses but knowing that Capilano is considered a better course raises the question - Why wasn't the Open played at Capilano?  Do they not have the space to hold a PGA event?

Robert Thompson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2005, 09:36:56 PM »
Capilano has no real range and is very short.

RT
Terrorizing Toronto Since 1997

Read me at Canadiangolfer.com

Tyler Kearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2005, 09:44:45 PM »
Capilano has no real range and is very short.

...and the membership does not have a strong desire to host the event.

TK

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2005, 09:51:44 PM »
Ian,

Again, I'm in the process of doing some in-depth research about Macan's original design at Shaughnessy. I look forward to sharing the results with you.

As you know, Hamilton is an excellent golf course; definitely one of the top-100 in the world. However, you must admit, the course's current state (including the most recent Canadian Open set-up) doesn't live up to its full potential. Not even close.  

Sames goes for Shaughnessy.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2005, 09:52:25 PM by Jeff_Mingay »
jeffmingay.com

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2005, 10:15:52 PM »
Rick:  Mr. Singh is just playing the courses to best advantage, which is a Tour pro's job.  That doesn't mean he endorses the architecture of "blast away."

I've been told by a couple of sources that Vijay has taken all the Tour officials around the TPC at Sawgrass and pointed out multiple places where he thinks the course should be tightened up ... where he can blast away without caring whether he gets in one of the waste bunkers, because he knows he'll have a good lie and a good angle to the green.  He is a long and straight hitter, and he'd like the course to reward BOTH aspects.

I'm also told that the only unanimous opinion on architecture from the Tour players is that they want to reward straight driving.  The short hitters want it because they think it's their only chance against the long hitters; the long hitters want it because they think they're straighter than the other long hitters.

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2005, 09:42:39 AM »
Tom: That sounds great in theory but does it really work in practice?  Let's take a 475 yard par 4 and Vijay hits a 325 yard drive.  From 150 he's hitting a nine iron which means he has no problem spinning the ball- what do you do to make it really difficult for him if he misses the fairway? Are you going to build deep fairway bunkers, are you going to plant trees, what are you going to do - there doesn't seem to be much you can do other than to grow 8" rough which isn't going to happen at Sawgrass.  You might trying firming up the greens but weather conditions may not allow for that unless you have the manpower of an Open or a PGA.  They didn't tear up Shaughnessy but you didn't have the strongest field of the year and in that climate they were able to make the rough very penal.  

Chris Perry

Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #31 on: September 13, 2005, 02:43:38 AM »
Chris,

You can take any mediocre, heavily treed golf course with tiny greens, narrow the fariways, grow the rough to 4-6 inches and it'll be tough. Even for the PGA Tour pros. That kinda set-up doesn't showcase fine golf architecture though.  

I'd have to say I've never been the biggest fan of bowling alley courses myself, but that begs the question, why don't they do this instead of constantly moving tees farther and farther back all the time?

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #32 on: September 13, 2005, 08:59:32 AM »
Better yet, why don't "they" do something about the ball?!
jeffmingay.com

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #33 on: September 13, 2005, 09:08:13 AM »
Re-reading what I wrote yesterday, a light went on in my head.

What most pros want is for the guy who hits it the best that week to be rewarded for doing so.

They don't really care about interesting architecture; they figure that whatever strategy there is to the holes, everyone will understand and play them the same way come Thursday.  They don't mind getting penalized for a bad shot of their own, but they just hate it when other guys get away with what they consider to be a bad shot.

There is also a surprising faction (as much as 1/3 of the guys with Tour cards) who haven't benefitted much from the new technology and think they are in a death struggle with those who have, and with all the new 7400 yard designs.  They love places like Shaughnessy because they are part of a dying breed (from the Tour player's perspective anyway).

One other interesting thing I learned last week ... the Tour pretty much has a moratorium on lengthening any holes on the TPC courses.  They can't control places like Torrey Pines going out and changing things around, but they don't want to be a part of the trend.

Chris Perry

Re:Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2005, 12:01:51 PM »
Better yet, why don't "they" do something about the ball?!

That too, or at least for the pros.

Juiced balls can actually help the average mortal player play from the back or blue tees on a "normal" course and still not get too beaten up.

I like the way a Pro V1 (whenever I happen to find one, hehe) flies off the face personally, but I still don't hit it over 300 yards off the sweetspot.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back