Does Tom Doak Place A Premium On Putting?

[Mike Hendren]

Relative to his contemporaries?

Tom has averred his preference for short grass as a strategic element, but what about the extremely short grass?  

Mike

[Lou_Duran]

Based on my limited experience with his courses (Pacific Dunes, Stone Eagle, and Rawls), yes.  I would add the green surrounds to that as well.  In my opinion, these outstanding courses could use a little more balance, primarily by reducing some of the large changes in slope.

[Jonathan Cummings]

I would say even more than putting surfaces the Ren Group put a high premium on contouring transitions to putting surfaces.

JC

[Aaron Katz]

I think this is truly impossible to answer.  Do wild interior contours place an emphasis on putting?  Yes, but it could also be described as putting an emphasis on a good iron game, as one can more often than not find an uphill, reasonably straight putt after a precise approach shot.  Then we can go even further and say that, since the golfer will have a better chance at an uphill, reasonably straight putt if he can place his tee ball in the correct portion of the fairway, we can say that Doak places an emphasis on accurate driving.  

What I'm attempting to suggest is that it is too simplistic to say that a course places too great an emphasis on putting, at least so long as a reasonably precise iron shot can hope to result in a makeable putt that the golfer can be aggressive with.  To the extent that it is nearly impossible to hit an approach that will leave a straight putt that is either level or slightly uphill, only then do I think we can say that putting has been overemphasized.

It might be better to say that the course punishes ill-placed shots in such a manner that only a good putting or chipping touch can mitigate the damage, whereas on a flat green an average putter and/or chipper can make par from off the green at a relatively high rate.

[Mike Hendren]

Aaron,

Very well reasoned.

Now I understand my problem - I'm average at every phase of the game.

Mike

[Aaron Katz]

 

Bogey,

The first time I played Wintonbury Hills, the greens were playing like concrete and were running at at least 11 on the stimp.  The greens there are very contoured and it's tough to get a putt that you were more likely to make than three putt.  With the combination of firmness and speed, it was like nothing I've ever seen before anywhere.  I felt like I hit the ball pretty solid and was only missing my spots by five or ten feet.  I scored terribly.  I would make double bogey more than I'd make par when I missed a green by a few feet, and I three putted five times for bogey.  Virtually the same thing happened the next day, when I played the course again.

After playing it yet again, and scoring well, I decided two things:  (1) I had gotten used to shooting at greens instead of at specific parts of the green, and (2) I had gotten used to being lazy on chip shots and lag putts, as opposed to really thinking them out.  When I played Wintonbury for the third time, I did hit more greens (12) than the first two times, but I also concentrated harder on those little shots.  It helped immensely.

Moral of the story, I suppose, is that the types of courses that Doak and C & C design can be scorecard wreckers at first because they provide tests that the golfer hasn't seen all his life.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

If you mean do the undulating greens put a premium on putting I’d say-  no they don’t.

Personally I think undulating greens put a premium on the approach shot. Getting the ball to the right part of the green and close to the hole has more significance  and requires more “execution “ and “planning” skills than the long putt.  

Generally speaking I’d agree with Aaron - undulating greens “raises the game” all round.

[tonyt]

I think the likes of Tom Doak have crafted some of their best work by vastly increasing the focus on the surrounds of the putting green. Rather than just a green and green surrounds, Doak has tied in and melded fairway and out of play zones into the overall green complex, to integrate the elements in such a way that the courses can't be strictly defined in terms of fairway, apron, green, rough etc. The green complex has therefore become truly "complex".

I personally believe a lot of what has happened in the post WWII years had focused a lot on these green surrounds being overly defined and separated. Thus the greens were separate entities to their borders, as opposed to being a part of them.

One of the best results of this has been the rightful drop in emphasis on clear cut and formulaic GIR and scrambling stats and their usability, and increased emphasis on rewarding the players over the long haul who think and see and create and get excited over those who want iron clad definitions handed to them.

[Andy Troeger]

I find some of these discussions interesting. Personally, I know that as a generally decent golfer, by far my biggest weakness is chipping with special awfulness (if that's a word) at any chip requiring the ball to get in the air.

So the types of courses with lots of short grass around the greens are perfect for me because it becomes one huge green where I can put or bump the ball from just about anywhere. To anyone who has not played with me before I tend to look creative, to anyone who knows I'm just a hack who can't chip  

I played Lost Dunes a month or so ago for the first time, only had to "chip" twice and shot one of my better rounds of the year on what struck me as a challenging and fun course. I hit 13 GIR (most not especially close) and had one 3-putt canceled out by a made 50-footer!

So I guess for my game the green complexes allowed a greater variety of shots that allows the player to try to better play to their strengths.

[Mark_F]

I would have said he placed a premium on fun and interest.

I think he mixes greens up pretty good - some on my home course are reasonably flattish, others are, apparently, ridiculous and over the top.

[cary lichtenstein]

How about Gil Hanse at Rustic, I'd say he puts a premium on putting, especially my 4 putt on #7.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Having read his books, articles, posts, and having played a couple of his courses, it would appear that he is striving for a total tie-in of driving, approach, and finally putting.  At Stonewall and Stone Eagle, I found an optimum side of the fairway from which to approach the pin.  Both Shooter and I hit some good iron shots that did not finish well because we were approaching pins from poor angles at Stone Eagle.  We both commented about how we would have chosen different lines had we better knwn the green contours.  On the other hand, I would say that Fazio places the biggest premium on putting.  Those who play a decent amount of Fazio courses can attest that there is no premium on location in the fairway for best angle to green.  Quite a few of his greens are heavily contoured with pin locations beyond sucker level.  This is when a premium is placed upon putting.

[Tags:]

Tags: