News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ted Kramer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #25 on: December 11, 2006, 05:15:04 PM »
George believes this course is great in a "clearly better than Pebble Beach" meaning of that term.  I feel confident he finds a lot more to Oakmont than a tough, no nonsense golf course.

To be perfectly clear, I'm a fan of the Goodale Michelin system of ranking, and I think Pebble and Oakmont are both 3 stars, or Doak 10s, or whatever. Each is outstanding in its own way. I think Oakmont may be a better design, by virtue of the unusual way in which it tests each shot.

Ted -

The strategies at Oakmont are much more subtle than the obvious option type holes. Once upon I time, I favored the latter approach, but my time at Oakmont during the Am came to see quite a bit of change in my own thoughts. Maybe someday I'll do a thread on the obvious versus the subtle; maybe even sooner rather than later.

My and your use of the term "subtle" crossed in cyber-space ;)
I'll always prefer subtle as opposed to obvious.
The former insists upon an intimate knowledge, understanding and or appreciation . . .

-Ted

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2006, 05:18:27 PM »
Well now George you are certainly not pardoned as that was very condescending.  If this isn't condescending I don't know what is:


Only the better, more observant golfers, will understand and appreciate the subtle distinctions between two tee shots that may look on the face to be quite the same. I believe it is the ensuing decisions, after one hits his tee shot and looks at what he faces, that makes Oakmont special, and that makes any course of this nature special.


 ;D ;D

But since when do YOU ascribe playing ability to any other abilities here?  Care to rephrase that?

Oh well.  I'm a pretty good player and I'd like to think I'm pretty observant.  Perhaps this would be better seen in person.  So far from the descriptions, it's pretty difficult to see beyond golf holes that just give a series of damned if you do, damned if you don't shot choices....

TH

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2006, 05:20:37 PM »
Ok, change it to "as good as" Pebble Beach.  That's still an extremely tall order, and well... perhaps a penal death march can make it so... but man it's gonna need some selling.

And the Pebble that we saw in the 72 (?), 83, 92, and 00 Opens was not a penal death march? I'd be curious to know if anyone who played in those events felt that way. The biggest difference is that Oakmont plays that way all the time! :)

If that's true, it's the most damning thing of all.

See, Pebble as it plays in the Open is stupid USGA-mandated goofy-golf.  Pebble as it plays the remaining 99% of its existence is inspiring fun.

But again, the focus here is supposed to be Oakmont.  Do you REALLY want to call that a positive that it plays that difficult all the time?

If so, again I ought to just back out now.  That's not fun as I see things... nor is it great.

TH

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2006, 05:28:59 PM »
Ted:

I too prefer subtle, very much so.  In fact I've said many times in here the harder a hole is to figure out, the better it is by me.

I'm just also having a hard time seeing any subtlety at Oakmont.  And I am trying very hard to see it.  All the penalties seem to be right there slapping you in the face.... with no good ways to attack any of the holes so far... It's all defense and no offense...

TH


Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2006, 05:32:57 PM »
One of the things that makes Pebble so great is it's duality. Having both strategic and penal qualities.

"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2006, 05:35:55 PM »
One of the things that makes Pebble so great is it's duality. Having both strategic and penal qualities.



BINGO DINGO!
And that's a very tough trick to pull off.

And we haven't even broached the subject of visuals reminding one of one's insignficance in this world...  ;D

Penal and nothing else...  hmmmm...

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #31 on: December 11, 2006, 05:39:54 PM »
Is there strategy without penality?
"We finally beat Medicare. "

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #32 on: December 11, 2006, 05:40:31 PM »
But since when do YOU ascribe playing ability to any other abilities here?  Care to rephrase that?

You are the one reading playing ability into the statement. I consider myself an observant golfer, and I'm just about the worst one on board.

I also consider many of the lower handicappers to be non-observant.

Now THAT'S condescending!
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #33 on: December 11, 2006, 05:41:31 PM »
Is there strategy without penality?

Fantastically brilliant statement! Utterly fantastic.

Spoken by a very observant golfer, regardless of his playing ability!
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #34 on: December 11, 2006, 05:44:18 PM »
Agreed, that is a very good question by Sarge.  And as brilliant in its obviousness as it may be, it's not a statement but rather a question, and well... I just don't see the relevance at Oakmont.

I'm seeing penalty all over the place....

As I do at other courses.  But at these others, there are risks to be taken, with penalties for failure and gains for success[/b].

I see the former at Oakmont - where is the latter?  Where are there any risks to be taken?

TH

ps - kinda hard to read anything but a playing ability requirement in "only the better, more observant players"... But nice try Mr. Mucci!

pss - I agree many low handicappers are non-observant - especially the more competitive ones.  No condescension there at all.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2006, 05:50:01 PM by Tom Huckaby »

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #35 on: December 11, 2006, 05:47:23 PM »
Is there strategy without penality?

Fantastically brilliant statement! Utterly fantastic.

Spoken by a very observant golfer, regardless of his playing ability!

Now just a darn minute here! Yes strategic golf utilizes penalty to create strategy. However, penal golf does not use strategy to create penalty!
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #36 on: December 11, 2006, 06:00:09 PM »
But at these others, there are risks to be taken, with penalties for failure and gains for success[/b].

I see the former at Oakmont - where is the latter?  Where are there any risks to be taken?


When you have successfully navigated your way through the course around the penalties, your success is rewarded when you total up your score card.

So many on this site cry out for multiple strategies and options all the time. I disagree, its not always about instant gratification for pulling off a shot, while that can be  a load of fun, sometimes its about taking on all 18 holes and seeing what you can do.
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #37 on: December 11, 2006, 06:04:52 PM »
JC:

OK, I can live with that.  As I've said, there is something to be said for a pure challenge.  Oakmont would seem to have that in spades.  And yes, I can see the reward being successfully conquering that challenge, by whatever terms the individual would call a success.

It's for that reason I did love the old Bayonet.

So I get that.

I just have a hard time calling a course where this is all that's going on "great".  It's not instant gratification I want, it's inspiration.

I see inspiration at Oakmont in the great history it has, the uniqueness of the Church pews, the incredible speed and contour combination on the greens.  It seems obvious that this combined with the unique challenge is enough to call it great... I can live with that.

I just thought there was more.  And it's going to take more, in my mind, to call it the equal of Pebble Beach.

TH
« Last Edit: December 11, 2006, 06:09:09 PM by Tom Huckaby »

Kyle Harris

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #38 on: December 11, 2006, 08:39:17 PM »
Tom,

My point was that the elevations and slopes may give each hole at Oakmont more strategy than what is visible in the two dimensions of an aerial or photo. How does the contour of the fairway make the player favor one line of another and how do the lie angles confound the approach from one part of the fairway as opposed to the other?

As you well know, there is more to it than just flat bunker positioning.

I am sure we commit the same fallacy when analyzing Pebble. How do the fairway contours influence positioning and play on holes like 9 and 10, for the example.

Bill_Yates

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #39 on: December 11, 2006, 11:53:01 PM »
Kyle,
You are absolutely correct, the elevation changes, slopes and plateaus define the "strategy of play."  What Oakmont does is it forces the player to find them.  Not only does it require the player to ask, "what side of the fairway should I play to,"  each hole and each shot demands the right distance to position the player for the the best chance of making par.  Since the greens are so severe, playing for par is also a sound strategy at Oakmont because double bogeys are always lurking - on literally every hole.  Oakmont is a very strategic course, but one must play it enough to discover the right strategy for each hole.  If he does not, per the Fownes doctrine, "a shot will be irrevocably lost."

To illustrate, let's look at again at the first three holes.  On #1, a tee shot landing anywhere on the fairway is good, the longer the better, a short drive will leave a blind second shot.  Then, just land your second shot on the front right corner of the green.  On #2, the tee shot needs to find the right side of the fairway as close to the bunkers as possible.  This will open up the severe second green and give you a view up its centerline to its contours and the bottom of the flagstick.  Then on #3, you are playing from a runway tee that aligns the player to the bunkers on the right side of the fairway (see hole diagram that opens this thread) where the fairway slopes right, is steeper to the green and thus gives the player a blind second shot (note in the photo that there is a directional marker behind the green). However, for the strategy that makes a par more probable, the player needs to play a tee shot away from the direction that the tee alignment encourages, and land it on the flat section of the fairway that borders the "churchpews." This position offers a level stance and a view of the top of the flagstick.  

Sometimes "strategic" courses force the player to learn the right strategy as determined by the architect rather than letting the player determine their own strategy.  I think both styles are totally legitimate and both are a great deal of fun to play.
Bill Yates
www.pacemanager.com 
"When you manage the pace of play, you manage the quality of golf."

Ryan Farrow

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #40 on: December 12, 2006, 01:27:42 AM »
Bill brings up one of my favorite aspects of this hole. The left side which is the more dangerous also offers the player a view of the green while the right side is completely blind.


What I don't get is how people on GCA are more worried about bunker placement than the greens. After all isn't that what Oakmont is all about?


Sorry I don't have pictures to post, I am back home now but I will see if I have a CD around somewhere. I have some great shots of this hole.

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #41 on: December 12, 2006, 10:14:15 AM »
Kyle/Bill/Ryan:

I was trying to see all this, but that is all very helpful - especially Bill's descriptions of the strategies involved in terms of distances and avoiding blind shots.  That's getting this more into the realm of greatness....

But man it still looks so severe, so penal, so much death and so little chance at success... I guess it's just never going to be my cup of tea.  I prefer a misplayed stroke to be recoverable from time to time via a great next stroke... irrevocably losing strokes gets old very quickly.

But I can see how others would see it as great.

TH

JohnV

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #42 on: December 12, 2006, 10:35:13 AM »
Tom,  
Oakmont is certainly more penal than strategic in that it requires you to make great shots to score well and can penalize you pretty severely for missing them without offering lots of options in terms of direction and carry choices.  I think there are a few more options and chances for recovery now that the trees are gone.

One of the things I love about Oakmont is that there is a chance for recovery vs typical penal golf courses which have OB or water hazards everywhere.  The fairway bunkers do usually cost you a chance to reach the green in regulation, but they do allow you the opportunity to get the ball back in play and maybe save the par with a precise next shot.  The rough pretty much takes out the chance to fly the ball to the greens and hold them (especially the ones that slope away), but the greens are typically open in front and you can run the ball up on them.

If you are someone who feels that a course must offer lots of strategic options, especially off the tee,  in order to be great, Oakmont is probably not going to meet your definition, just as if you are someone who feels that a course must penalize the wayward shot severely, St. Andrews might not meet your definition as one who hooks it can escape a lot of misery.

Many here are comparing Oakmont to Pebble in this thread and I would like to know where the strategy is at Pebble other than 18 and how much of the ocean I take on?  As I recall, Pebble has pretty narrow fairways and very small greens which require precision more than strategy.

Bill_Yates

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2006, 10:40:29 AM »
Tom,
Perhaps you can now tell how strategic Oakmont really is, as well as how penal it is.  And as one would not expect, that's precisely what makes it fun.  

The fun part comes in the search for the proper strategy on each hole and each shot, as a result of the successes you have in uncovering the secrets of the design, and in confronting the constant possibility of "so much death and so little success."  So when you find the secrets, pull off the required shot and avoid "death," and by-the-way, at Oakmont you can face death by having a 3 foot putt from above the hole, you are fully engaged in the challenge of the course and the game.

You might think that this might get old very quickly, but I promise you, you'll be back to continue searching for the secrets that then demand proper execution of the shot.  To me, that's greatness, that's architectural genius and that's golf.
Bill Yates
www.pacemanager.com 
"When you manage the pace of play, you manage the quality of golf."

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2006, 10:43:00 AM »
Can't strategically picking one area of the fairway over another be an aspect found on a high percentage of golf courses. It certainly is a very important aspect of my home course, a course that no one here is going to get excited about.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #45 on: December 12, 2006, 10:47:37 AM »
Bill:

This is great stuff and you are helping my understanding of this tremendously.  See, I've said many times the harder a course is to figure out, the more I like it.  I can now understand a lot better the secrets at Oakmont... and why it would be fun for repeated play.  But man you'd have to have a thick skin and low expectations...

JV - this is supposed to be about Oakmont and not Pebble - I only keep repeating that because my man George in the past has rather strenuously asserted that Oakmont is the superior golf course.  So I'll not respond too much re Pebble only to say I see strategic options on quite a few more holes than just 18... and also that it has "inspiration" that I am not seeing at Oakmont in terms of scenic beauty and the spiritual intangible things that drive Mucci nuts, but that very much "count" as I see things.  But great point re chances for recovery there as opposed to water and OB - one has to love that.  But then why does Fownes assert that strokes are irrevocably lost?  Seems contradictory....

TH


JohnV

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #46 on: December 12, 2006, 10:51:16 AM »
The opportunity for birdie is usually lost when you err at Oakmont.

Scenic beauty is something.  Now that the trees are gone and you can see across Oakmont, it is a pretty good looking place also.

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2006, 10:58:14 AM »
The opportunity for birdie is usually lost when you err at Oakmont.

Scenic beauty is something.  Now that the trees are gone and you can see across Oakmont, it is a pretty good looking place also.

JV - I have no issues with losing the opportunity for birdie; hell I know that standing on the tee at a tough course like that - that is, it's outside my skill level.  I'm just having a hard time now reconciling Fownes' wishes with the recovery possibilities now available.  I mean I get no trees etc. meaning now some recoveries are possible that weren't before... but is that what Fownes had in mind?

And I'm sure Oakmont is a pretty good looking place in its own way... and of course beauty remains in the eyes of the beholder... it's just tough for me to think it's even in the ballpark of Pebble Beach re such matters.

TH

JohnV

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #48 on: December 12, 2006, 11:08:52 AM »
Pebble Beach would be just as beautiful without the golf course.  The course has very little to do with its beauty.

Fownes didn't plant the trees.  They came after he was gone, which is why they are gone now.  

Perhaps if the other 100 bunkers were restored it would be even tougher to recover from that bad shot.  But, I think he didn't there should be absolutely no way to recover that shot because then he would have made the bunkers into OB or water hazards.

Tom Huckaby

Re:Week 3: The wonderful 3rd at Oakmont
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2006, 11:15:55 AM »
JV - well said re Pebble.  Kinda cool for our purposes they put a golf course there, no?

And gotcha re Fownes.  So the course today is not nearly as horrifically penal as he intended.  Sounds like it's more fun these days.

TH