[JESII]

Pat,

What if you only have one ball to hit?

[Michael Moore]

While I'd agree, the hole doesn't let one hit low or punched shots as a normal approach.  Elevated greens, while wonderful to assault, have limits on the approaching trajectory.

Pat,

The third green at Merion East is elevated roughly twelve feet above the tees.

From two hundred yards away, this creates an angle of 1.15 degrees.

This angle helps a low shot, as it comes in a bit flatter.

If you can't hit a low shot here, then you can't hit a low shot anywhere.

[Dan Kelly]

What is it that the Scots say, "if there's ney wind, there's ney golf"

it's nea not nay.  Think education, not horses.

I thought it was nae. But what do I noe?

[Patrick_Mucci]

The third green at Merion East is elevated roughly twelve feet above the tees.

From two hundred yards away, this creates an angle of 1.15 degrees.

The elevated nature of the green creates an inability to see the putting surface, which is a factor, it eliminates the ability to run the ball onto the green and it eliminates or greatly reduces the abilty to get to the putting surface, especially the front portion, with an approach with a low trajectory.

I think the grade of 2 % from 200 yards and 3.33 % from 120 yards don't reflect the nature of the approach.  It's not as benign as the numbers might lead one to believe.[/color]

This angle helps a low shot, as it comes in a bit flatter.
You'll have to explain that too me.
How would that help a shot to a front pin position ?[/color]

If you can't hit a low shot here, then you can't hit a low shot anywhere.

I don't think it's a question of having the ability to hit a low shot there, I think it's having the judgement not to hit a low shot there.

So much is dependent upon trajectory relative to the hole location.

Certainly a low shot has a better chance of getting closer to a back hole location than a fronting hole location.

I just can't see a low shot as a prudent shot of preference on this hole, but, I"m willing to learn.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

What is it that the Scots say, "if there's ney wind, there's ney golf"

it's nea not nay.  Think education, not horses.

So I took a shortcut.

It is nae, not nea or ney.  Think education, not horse's asses.

Next you'll be telling me that there's no such word as irrespective ....... again.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

It was a shortcut, not a mistake.
I knew the Scottish quote, and that NAE was the proper word/term, not NEY or NEA.

As to Alan Small, how would I know where he or anyone else was going to qualify ?  

It doesn't matter who's in the field, to qualify for a USGA event you have to beat them all, which I've done in the U.S. Amateur, U.S. Mid-Amateur and U.S Senior Amateur.  
I didn't get to play in those events by winning the lottery.

I had never played Scarsdale, a Tillinghast course, or Cherry Valley.

Scarsdale Golf Club is within 5 minutes of my dentists office, where I have to go for a follow up visit after having had 7 teeth extracted and 7 implants inserted, so why wouldn't I want to kill two birds with one stone ?  
It's also closer to my house than Cherry Valley.

As to my elephant like memory, my wife says it's incredible, but, that it's highly selective and that I only remember the things that I want to remember.

I told her that I remember everything but that I selectively vocalize that which I deem necessary.

 

[Geoffrey Childs]

I totally disagree with your comparison of Creek 11 vs. Yale 9.  

I knew you would.[/color]

1-   Yale 9 plays VASTLY different from day to day with routine 6 club differences without even taking wind into account.  

Geoff,  while I haven't played Yale nearly as much as you, I have difficulty accepting that for several reasons.

I don't think that Yale is a wind swept site.

And, the highly elevated nature of the tee in relation to the green makes the approach trajectory one dimensional.

The overriding consideration is the heroic carry.[/color]

6 iron front pin locations to 3-wood back locations (for me from the back tee).  For the back locations there is also the variety of trying to use less then 3-wood to carry to the downslope of the swale and run it back (more later but the women actually do this best). There is incredible variety in the shots required fro the tee and even more so if you fail to hit the green.

Almost every hole in golf has the same variety with respect to recovery shots, there's almost nothing unique about them.

The approach to # 9 is a high aerial shot.

The approach to # 11 can be a low running shot, a punched shot or an aerial shot.[/color]

2-   There is no heroic carry NECESSARY.  The front tee is set lower to the water and forward so the carry is maybe 20-30 yards more then required at the creek.  Women ROUTINELY do this under all conditions. In fact, one of my favorite things to watch at Yale is women hitting fairway woods or driver where they hit the front part of the green and skip it through the swale to back pin locations.  Its what I imagine old CB MacDonald envisioned for that hole. The biarritz cconcept works at Yale.  Does it work at The Creek?  I contend it does not.

I don't think an analysis of a hole should focus on how the women play it.

The carry is heroic AND there is no bail out area.
# 11 at The Creek as the entire 10th fairway as a bail out area.[/color]

3-   Short game options are infinitely better at Yale 9 then Creek 11. Miss left or right and you are faced with some of the most imaginative shots possible especially to back locations at Yale. The green at Yale is world class with front to back left to right tilt of the front section, a 4 foot 8 inch deep swale and a severely pitched right to left back section.  Its easily 5 putted in either direction.  The green at The Creek is simple large. There are very small undulations and the swale is next to nothing in terms of presenting putting woes.


There's no question that the green at Yale is more pronounced.

But, it doesn't play "pronounced" it's strictly a very high aerial approach with NO variety.

And, I don't consider recovery from dense woods an attractive option.  Yale's recovery options are limited to near misses, and when you consider the distance of the approach, many mis-hits end up in the woods.[/color]

Why is it that you think Yale is on just about everyone’s list of the World’s Greatest Golf Holes and the 11th at the Creek is never mentioned?

Probably because more people played and saw the 9th at Yale.

And probably for the same reason that # 10 and other great holes at Yale rarely get mentioned.

Would you honestly rather play # 9 at Yale every day than
# 11 at The Creek ?[/color]

Pat

I'm just back from vacation with only a bit of time to reply so in brief

From literally hundreds of plays at Yale I would conclude that you are wrong on EVERY count and yes I would prefer to play it over 11 at The Creek given the choice. I would guess that the vast majority of others would as well including those who choose Yale 9 as one of the great holes of the world after leaving Creek 11 off that list  

Read Chris' reply because his analysis is spot on.  The description of how the hole can play to different pin locations is telling.

If you think misses of the green result in playing from the woods then your powers of observation are slipping.  The short game options around that green can be extreme and very interesting.

[Patrick_Mucci]

From literally hundreds of plays at Yale I would conclude that you are wrong on EVERY count and yes I would prefer to play it over 11 at The Creek given the choice.

Every count ?

Even the extreme aerial nature of the hole ?

The lack of wind ?

The one dimensional nature of play from a very high tee, over a heroic carry ?[/color]

I would guess that the vast majority of others would as well including those who choose Yale 9 as one of the great holes of the world after leaving Creek 11 off that list  


I don't know who they are, or if they're in the vast majority.

Day in and day out, I'd prefer # 11 at The Creek over # 9 at Yale, even though I feel # 9 at Yale is a great hole.

It's probably why I prefer # 6 at NGLA over # 4 at NGLA.[/color]

Read Chris' reply because his analysis is spot on.  The description of how the hole can play to different pin locations is telling.

I don't buy it.
I think it's seriously flawed.[/color]

If you think misses of the green result in playing from the woods then your powers of observation are slipping.  The short game options around that green can be extreme and very interesting.

Geoff, the short game options around # 9 green aren't much different from the short game options around a zillion other greens.

I'd venture to say that 99 % of all misses are pin high or short of pin high, and not long of pin high, and as such, I don't see the variety that you see.[/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()