[Doug Siebert]

Brent,

Upslopes in landing areas have lost much of their dilemma for longer hitters because the longer hitters hit their drivers very high, with a long carry and little roll today.  Unless the flat areas the shorter hitters are maintained to a high TEP F&F quotient so they can make up a lot of the difference, the upslopes won't hurt the long knocker.  Plus, if you are also using the firm and tricky greens defense, hitting off an upslope to allow stopping the ball more quickly could be advantage enough to cause me to pull driver and play for it on a narrow hole I might otherwise pull my 1 iron for.

I'd say sideslopes are much better than upslopes as a defense.  They'd require the longer hitters to work the ball into the slope to negate its effect and/or play to the high side if they want to take full advantage of their length.  Though I think the FLOG strategy probably means that a wedge from the rough isn't going to be seen as bad so I'm not sure they'll be induced to work the ball by much of anything these days.  But whether in the fairway or rough, if the sideslope is significant it might overcome the FLOG urge and result in restraint.  I'm pretty good at ball above my feet shots, but there are few shots that are more of a problem for me than a PW with the ball several inches below my feet so I'd avoid that situation like the plague!!

[Dan_Callahan]

Doug,

That limitation is true if there is a single upslope that can be carried. If, instead, the faiway consists of multiple upslopes—i.e., undulating—everyone is impacted. There is still a distinct advantage to the person who can carry the ball a long way versus the line drive player who is used to getting some roll. But I don't have a problem with that—different courses suit different players' games. Take the same two players and add some wind and suddenly it is the low-ball hitter with the advantage.

[john_stiles]

Classics,  smash-ics

I think many of the classics have been lengthened, bunkers moved, greens moved, fairways narrowed, etc. etc for the modern game.  And then the conditioning helps some too with extra deep rough, firm greens, etc.

Hence, I do not think any of the classics have withstood the the modern power game.  

Consider what has been done to all the classics through the years.  ANGC and Oakland Hills would be the case studies to see what has to be done to a classic to withstand the modern power game.

Usually, for the 'modern power game', a USGA approach at the classics seems to work including very narrow fairways, very deep rough, and very firm greens.   That seems to work for the most part.

Granted that some such as Shinny, Oakmont, maybe Pinehurst have withstood the modern power game better than ANGC, OH, etc.

I would have to go with very firm greens, 'narrowish' fairways, and deep rough.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()