[BCrosby]

Again, I think your question is confusing. It's full of concepts that need to be unpacked.

But it's your question and, as stated, the answer is "no, we can't say that".

Bob

 

[wsmorrison]

"Doesn't the question miss the point.  There is nothing wrong (in fact there is everything right) with a green that rejects a good shot if hit from the wrong angle.

Isn't that what strategically designed holes are supposed to be about?

You get out of position - advertently or inadvertently - even a perfectly struck ball may not save you."

Well said, Bob.  

"My thoughts turn back to Shinnecock #7 at the 2004 U.S. Open. We debated here at exhaustive length whether the Redan was fair under those conditions. A "good" shot was rejected almost every time. One player (Stadler the Younger?) managed to play the perfect shot and bounce his ball onto a the green. Everyone else played "good" shots -- shots that under normal conditions would have at least left a putt -- but saw their balls roll off the green.

Is it a "good" green? No question. Were those "good" shots? Again, I think yes. It was the conditions that demanded a perfect shot -- and, as has been stated, golf is not a game of perfect."

Rick,

While it has been said many times before, the Flynn 7th green at Shinnecock was being played from the Macdonald tee.  The Flynn tee was lost for some reason sometime prior to 1938.  The approach from the Flynn tee, only 7 paces to the left of the Macdonald tee, makes a huge difference in how the hole plays under daily conditions and especially as set up for the last day of the 2004 US Open.  

Even though played from the Macdonald tee to a green as pushed as far as that one was on Sunday of the Open, it was still a good green but it was not accepting good shots.  My definition of a good shot is the right trajectory, right distance and right spin to a green depending upon numerous variables including wind and the firmenss of the green and approach.  I wasn't on the course that Sunday, but the superintendent was and he told me how shocked he was that nobody seemed to try and hit a fade into the right side bolster.  Some were hitting draws and other straight shots too far right.  I cannot fathom the reasons why these guys didn't try to fade the ball onto that green.  I am not certain a lot of good shots were hit into the green that day.

From the Flynn tee to the Flynn green, it is possible on a daily basis to hit a draw (precise though it may be) and hold the green.  It would have worked far better on Open Sunday if it were played from the correct tee.

We think the Flynn tee will be returned but that the Macdonald tee should be retained for historical purposes but also to keep the very difficult angle should wind and wet on a given day demand a harder approach.

[Chris Cupit]

Absolutely

In fact I like a hole that is wide enough to allow for different angles of attack but that clearly rewards and/or punishes the wrong angle.

I would have no problem with a green that would not hold even the great shot if approached from the wrong spot.  However, there should be an angle from the fairway that will allow a great shot to get near the hole (within 10 feet).

That does not mean it must accept every type of great shot equally--a run up or super high approach may be required instead of the "regular" great  shot.

[Mike_Cirba]

Unless the green is tilted at a 45 degree angle, it's simply not a "good shot" if it's rejected.

[Jesse Jones]

The 5th at Pinehurst #2.. Gets me everytime..
A long iron from about anywhere is dead.
You must be in position on that hole with length and direction to get any type of shot at that green that will hold.
What I most admire most about the hole is that if you miss the green, your next "good shot", may also face rejection..

[Doug Braunsdorf]

My opinion on this is that one shot does not make a hole.

In Doug's example, if a ball is essentially not able to stay on a green under any circumstances...no good.

Taking the idea that a good iron shot should always end up on the green can only do one thing, and I think Redanman laid it out quite well...boring golf.

Jim-

  Maybe I'm not hitting the right shot to that green; I don't know.  I'm an 11-marker.  I don't have a problem with hitting the green and the ball releasing off; the only thing I wish for is sometimes a chance to save par.  My problem with the green complex really lies with the red stakes/hazards so close to the green.  
In contrast, when I played your course, if I missed a green, I almost always had a shot at saving par or getting out with a bogey; it wasn't like on 6 at Led where "the ball kicked somewhere in this retention basin to the left" or "this ball is under this shrubbery to the right", and I'm looking at 6 at best, and 7 more likely than not.  
I do rethink my strategy on that hole all the time; I may try laying up closer to the mounding and just try a simple 30 yard pitch shot next time.  

  That's sort of the general overall 'quirk' I have found to Lederach, which may lie more with the maintenance end than the design end, is that areas which may be expected to be soft in fact are firm, and areas expected to be firm are soft.
For example, I have found #2 is often best approached by bouncing a ball in, despite the fact that the second shot is made to a slightly elevated green, maybe knock down a PW or 9i 10 yards short and let it run up, especially to front and center-right hole locations.  

What do you think?

[Doug Ralston]

No!

Doug

[David_Madison]

If Pinehurst #2 is considered a great course, then doesn't it answer the thread's question? When the greens are frim and running, you just can't keep a ball on substantial portions of many of the greens when coming in from the wrong angles, even if you hit a good shot. Actually, a "good" shot might be one that intentionally misses the green but in the right spot to get to a particular cup, while a bad shot goes somewhere on the green but leaves a near impossible 2-putt.

[cary lichtenstein]

The more I think about this question: Let me put it this way

Augusta has greens that will reject nearly perfect shots and everyone would agree that is one of the top courses in the world. So the question becomes, how much fun would it be to play Augusta every day?

My guess is that if you can separate the history, tradition, etc., and put Augusta in your home town as your home club, would you get tired of shooting 10+ strokes every round higher than your handicap?


Then again, it's only a game and its the same for everybody playing that course, so can't we all throw our ego's out the door when we play golf? Probably not

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()