[John Kavanaugh]

Nicklaus has taken crap for years over his designs that favor the high fade...how comes Gentle Ben gets a pass for the difficult lag putting built into his designs..

[Joe Hancock]

Does Weiskopf get a pass on leaving trees too close to the greens so he has somewhere to chuck his putter? Or, Curtis Strange (is his name on anything yet?) designing soft aprons to bury his putter? What would Daly do?(WWDD?)

I shouldn't try to keep up with you, John. Your "out there" questions almost always have purpose....

Joe

[John Kavanaugh]

From what I can tell by playing two C$C courses, Cuscowilla and Bandon Trails, Crenshaw seems to build course around his strengths and weaknesses....tough putting surfaces and wide open driving areas.  Just seems like what Nicklaus was up too early in his career..(in mirroring his own game that is..)

[Patrick_Mucci]

JakaB,

I think most early designers of highly contoured greens, starting with CBM, SR and CB, placed an emphasis on lag putting.

What evidence do you see that would support your claim that C&C emphasize lag putting ?

With respect to Nicklaus favoring the fade I think the rap was rooted in his designs mirroring his game.

In theory the architects mission is to forge a disinterested challenge, a tactical plan that doesn't favor any particular faction or game.

Nicklaus's early designs were alleged to have favored a specific shot, a specific method of play, HIS method.

And that's where I think the criticism had its genesis.  

Wide fairways went out of vogue when automated irrigation systems became popular.

Many on this site clamor for wider fairways and scream when courses narrow them, ala ANGC and others.

I don't think that wide fairways cater to Crenshaw's game.
Now, if his game was a high hook off the tee and his designs reflected substantive margins for error built on the left side of his holes, then I might agree with you, but, wide fairways, especially those that contain center line hazards, and don't have a particular pattern on one side or the other can't be deemed to favor Crenshaws game.

One dimensional golfers with serious flaws in certain aspects of their game don't win Majors and last on the PGA Tour.

[John Kirk]

Did the Trails kick your ass?  That is a tough course to score on.

I played Stone Eagle this morning.  First round of the year, a smooth 87 that required 5 golf balls.  The lag putting is tough here as well.  Hoping for better tomorrow.

[John Kavanaugh]

Did the Trails kick your ass?  That is a tough course to score on.

I just counted and hit 15 greens in regulation but had 5 three putts.

[JESII]

Patrick,

I think I agree more with your post #3 than any other post I've read on this site. I was formulating a response to John's initial post and realized it wasn't necessary after reading yours.


John K,

Are the greens at the C&C courses you've played designed and built in a manner that produces an inordinate number of lag putts relative to shotmaking? In other words, is it more difficult than normal to hit an approach / pitch / chip inside of lag distance?

[John Kavanaugh]

JakaB,

I think most early designers of highly contoured greens, starting with CBM, SR and CB, placed an emphasis on lag putting.

What evidence do you see that would support your claim that C&C emphasize lag putting ?

With respect to Nicklaus favoring the fade I think the rap was rooted in his designs mirroring his game.

In theory the architects mission is to forge a disinterested challenge, a tactical plan that doesn't favor any particular faction or game.

Nicklaus's early designs were alleged to have favored a specific shot, a specific method of play, HIS method.

And that's where I think the criticism had its genesis.  

Wide fairways went out of vogue when automated irrigation systems became popular.

Many on this site clamor for wider fairways and scream when courses narrow them, ala ANGC and others.

I don't think that wide fairways cater to Crenshaw's game.
Now, if his game was a high hook off the tee and his designs reflected substantive margins for error built on the left side of his holes, then I might agree with you, but, wide fairways, especially those that contain center line hazards, and don't have a particular pattern on one side or the other can't be deemed to favor Crenshaws game.

One dimensional golfers with serious flaws in certain aspects of their game don't win Majors and last on the PGA Tour.

PM,

I am drunk as usual, and may not have read your post with the uptmost clarity, but my friend...are you to deny that Crenshaw won his majors on a course of great width and greater green interest.  I do not fault an architect for copying AGNC...I only question if it is indeed true..and if so, why not examined for which is his motivation.

[JESII]

The C&C courses tend to let you dance with the one you brung. The Nicklaus criticisms seem based in the need to hit one certain type of shot to play those courses with any success at all.

[John Kirk]

Jim,

I realize you are asking the other JK, but I think any course with undulating greens, especially those with distinct sections, separated by ridges or mounds, make it harder to approach/pitch/chip close to the hole, therefore making lag putting more demanding, as the player must negotiate the ridges and mounds.

Augusta National is the poster child for this type of challenge.

Bandon Trails has a great variety of greens, from the extremely undulating 5th to the remarkably large and flat 11th.

[JESII]

That makes sense John, I have not played Bandon Trails or Augusta for that matter.

The point I'm hoping to discuss is my opinion that undulating greens disqualify no specific class of golfer from succeeding. While the course that virtually forces you to move the ball one way does. I'm not the least bit interested in criticising JN, I'm simply trying to answer John in the context of his question.

[JESII]

Which part of your game gets the blame for a three putt bogey from 50 feet on a tough, undulating green?

[Brent Hutto]

Which part of your game gets the blame for a three putt bogey from 50 feet on a tough, undulating green?

Unreasonable expectation. The golfer's curse.

It's like the story about Ted Williams as a batting coach tutoring a rookie major-leaguer. The kid asks "Coach, how do you handle a hard-breaking slider that just catches the bottom outside corner of the strike zone". Williams replied "Son, you just watch that one go by. Nobody said hitting was easy". Or words to that effect.

[Andy Troeger]

I don't think that wide fairways cater to Crenshaw's game.
Now, if his game was a high hook off the tee and his designs reflected substantive margins for error built on the left side of his holes, then I might agree with you, but, wide fairways, especially those that contain center line hazards, and don't have a particular pattern on one side or the other can't be deemed to favor Crenshaws game.

Pat,
I know you've played Warren, so I'd be interested to hear your thoughts regarding this trend...

I always thought it was interesting that at Warren GC by Coore & Crenshaw that they have an overwhelming number of holes going right to left favoring the draw. By my count, Nos. 1, 5, 7, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 18 all do this, while only Nos. 2, 6, and 12 would show a preference for a fade (and 6 and 12 are more or less straight holes so a draw would certainly be a possibility there, just the slightly tougher shot). The defense is that some of these holes do allow for the fade, but it would be a very difficult/risky shot on 7, 13, or 18. There also generally is trouble to the left on those holes, so over-hooking the ball would create lots of problems as well. However, to me the course definitely favors the right-to-left ball flight.

I might be completely wrong, but I could see how many architects that are strong players would tend to design courses and holes that fit their eyes as players. Its only natural to want to do that. Nicklaus, and on this thread Crenshaw, get the rap for it because people are familiar with their games. I don't really see what's wrong with it, as long as there's enough variety and options to the course to allow it to be played in other ways (as has already been stated above). I've not played any of the older Nicklaus courses, so I don't have any first hand experience as to why those were criticized other than what I've read.

[A.G._Crockett]

I can't think of ANY golf course that wouldn't favor good lag putting, including those of both C&C AND Nicklaus.  It would just become a matter of degree.

In my mind, the type of greens that we are talking about here, combined with relatively wide fairways, would contribute to the idea of easy bogey, hard par.  The high fade, for instance, does not lend itself nearly as readily to all levels of players enjoyment of a golf course.  That's at least one measure of great GCA.

That's not giving C&C a pass and busting Nicklaus; it's just a design fact, IMO.

[John Kavanaugh]

I can't think of ANY golf course that wouldn't favor good lag putting, including those of both C&C AND Nicklaus.  It would just become a matter of degree.

In my mind, the type of greens that we are talking about here, combined with relatively wide fairways, would contribute to the idea of easy bogey, hard par.  The high fade, for instance, does not lend itself nearly as readily to all levels of players enjoyment of a golf course.  That's at least one measure of great GCA.

That's not giving C&C a pass and busting Nicklaus; it's just a design fact, IMO.

AG,

I hate to pull a Mucci on you, but have you played Bandon Trails..

First off, let me say that I think it is the best designed course of the three and I love to never lose a ball..but, those greens are not your normal cup of tea.  I really have to question why it is good design to tighten the range of scoring between lets say a 6 and a 12 handicap.

[A.G._Crockett]

I can't think of ANY golf course that wouldn't favor good lag putting, including those of both C&C AND Nicklaus.  It would just become a matter of degree.

In my mind, the type of greens that we are talking about here, combined with relatively wide fairways, would contribute to the idea of easy bogey, hard par.  The high fade, for instance, does not lend itself nearly as readily to all levels of players enjoyment of a golf course.  That's at least one measure of great GCA.

That's not giving C&C a pass and busting Nicklaus; it's just a design fact, IMO.

AG,

I hate to pull a Mucci on you, but have you played Bandon Trails..

First off, let me say that I think it is the best designed course of the three and I love to never lose a ball..but, those greens are not your normal cup of tea.  I really have to question why it is good design to tighten the range of scoring between lets say a 6 and a 12 handicap.

I haven't played Bandon Trails, and I'm jealous of you for having done so!

Nonetheless, I'll stick with the idea that a larger emphasis on good lag putting on difficult greens is just that; a LARGER emphasis.  I don't know why the scoring range between the 6 and 12 should tighten in this circumstance, and the course rating vs. slope of BT doesn't indicate that it should, either.  The 6 should hit more shots closer than the 12, and the 6 should BE a better lag putter than the 12.  It's all relative.

My idea is that a 20 might enjoy Bandon Trails more than he/she might enjoy a course on which they are asked to hit an inordinate number of high fades with long irons.  The 20 three-putts somewhat frequently anyway; he/she is NEVER able to hit a high, faded 4 iron.  In that sense, it is just better GCA.

[TEPaul]

The reason Coore and Crenshaw design golf courses with wide fairways and large undulating greens is not because of Ben's game but because those general principles are prescriptions for really good golf architecture and really interesting golf.

Watch Kavanaugh scream now!  

Furthermore, Barney, the wide fairways and large undulating greens pretty much come from Coore's mental inventory anyway.  

How do I know that? Because at Hidden Creek as we were walking the course I made the mistake of handing Coore my putter and a couple of balls. You should've seen him---he started putting as soon as he got within about 50 yards of most of the greens. Watching the golf ball move along the ground I think is a lot of Bill Coore's architectural inspiration anyway. And why not? What a great way to visualize interesting concepts and great golf architecture.

Have you ever seen Fazio putt around a golf course Barney?  

[Brent Hutto]

I can't think of ANY golf course that wouldn't favor good lag putting, including those of both C&C AND Nicklaus.  It would just become a matter of degree.

The course I learned to play on did nothing much to favor good lag putting. Most of the greens were tiny, they either had a big back-to-front tilt or were rolled off on the sides (or both) and they were slow, bumpy, grainy Bermuda grass. Charwood rewards chipping but it's very hard to even have a 40+ foot putt and if you do it's a crapshoot whether the ball will roll consistently for that long anyway.

When I switched to a private course with big, multitiered, fast and true greens I started learning to lag putt. Now it's two years later and I do OK from 50 feet...but just OK at best.

[A.G._Crockett]

Brent,
I understand what you are saying about small greens; they clearly putt more of premium on chipping and pitching skills vs. long lag putting.  Still, though, there is no golf course where a good lag putter wouldn't have an advantage over a poor lag putter, even if that means putting from off the green on a course with very small greens.  That isn't peculiar to Coore and Crenshaw.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()