[Mike_Young]

whether it be fairway speed, green speed , chipping area speed or even rough thickness  AND does it make a wide fairway play narrower AND is a "restoration" ( which I don't believe there is such a thing) really a restoration with modern surface speeds?  

[Joe Hancock]

The only thing I can answer your question with is a comparison:

Play Kingsley Club and Crystal Downs on the same day, then analyze how you approached your shot execution on each course at the end of the day. I think one will find at Kingsley, they are almost always aiming somewhere other than where they intend the shot to come to rest, whereas at Crystal Downs you are trying to hit the ball at the predetermined resting spot, knowing it won't go far after it lands.

It isn't just surface speed, it's also, and, more importantly in my mind, surface firmness. I am a proponent of firmer ground and higher than state of the art heights of cut.

Hope that isn't too confusing...it's late!

Joe

[John Kirk]

Hi Mike.  Thought I would add an obvious example.

As green speeds increase, the need to keep the ball below the hole becomes more important.  Kinloch in Virginia, where green speeds generally stimp at 12-14 feet, is a good example of a modern course where being below the hole is important.  Sand Hills is another.  Crystal Downs and Pasatiempo are excellent examples of classic courses where this is true.

[JESII]

Mike,

When you speak of "playing surface speed", you are referring to firmness and rolling speed, correct?


Assuming so, my answer is...at least as important as any architectural feature out there other than the full one shot penalties like water or OB.

[cary lichtenstein]

Hi Mike.  Thought I would add an obvious example.

As green speeds increase, the need to keep the ball below the hole becomes more important.  Kinloch in Virginia, where green speeds generally stimp at 12-14 feet, is a good example of a modern course where being below the hole is important.  Sand Hills is another.  Crystal Downs and Pasatiempo are excellent examples of classic courses where this is true.

At 12-14 stimp meter, doesn't putting from above the hole just a baby tap and hope the ball stops near the hole for a tap in?

I can't believe at those speeds it can be much fun on a regular basis. I know my stroke tends to break down at those speeds and becomes an exercise in deceleration.

[John Kirk]

At 12-14 stimp meter, doesn't putting from above the hole just a baby tap and hope the ball stops near the hole for a tap in?

I can't believe at those speeds it can be much fun on a regular basis. I know my stroke tends to break down at those speeds and becomes an exercise in deceleration.

Nah, it's still pretty fun, but you really have to be calm to hit soft but good putts.

I'd like to point out that the green speeds at Crystal Downs and Pasatiempo are not as fast, probably more in the 10-12 feet range, but the greens possess more slope.  You can putt off the green at any of these courses.  

[Tom_Doak]

The greens at Crystal Downs are no more than 10 feet on the Stimpmeter for member play, and they don't even need to be that fast for it to be important to stay below the hole ... it was true back in the days when the greens were 8 1/2.  There is a LOT of slope in those greens.

[Mike_Young]

The greens at Crystal Downs are no more than 10 feet on the Stimpmeter for member play, and they don't even need to be that fast for it to be important to stay below the hole ... it was true back in the days when the greens were 8 1/2.  There is a LOT of slope in those greens.

That is what I am getting at.....at what point does the speed of fairways(as in lateral movement), greens and chipping areas detract from the intended strategies of some of the dead guys....

[Adam Clayman]

Mike, Since there's a lot of dead guys, my answer would be it's probably a different answer for each one.

Do you want to identify the dead guys whose course allowed for the highest speeds?

IS there a ground speed where the old Augusta Nat'l (pre Faz)couldn't handle? On the greens I'd guess yes. Everywhere else? No.

Maybe Behr and Fowler would be the other two where the "thump" had no up side limit (save for on greens)?

[Mike_Young]

Mike, Since there's a lot of dead guys, my answer would be it's probably a different answer for each one.

Do you want to identify the dead guys whose course allowed for the highest speeds?

IS there a ground speed where the old Augusta Nat'l (pre Faz)couldn't handle? On the greens I'd guess yes. Everywhere else? No.

Maybe Behr and Fowler would be the other two where the "thump" had no up side limit (save for on greens)?

Adam,
I would say that fairway lies have changed drastically at Places like augusta or any other dead guy course.....if a fairway is cut at 3/8 inch there are probably many more shots that roll into flatter lies than if the fairway was 1/2 inch to 5/8 inches in height.  And that in itself...you can see it now many times with the divot patterns.
Adam, I dont know enough about the different dead guys to actually think they knew what was going on with most of the strategies that are discussed here.
Happy New Year.
Mike

[Scott Witter]

Mike:

Though your focus here is on the old classics, the same applies to some modern courses, such that many architects on paper and in the field believe they are creating some interesting strategy in the fairway for golfers to consider when on the tee, yet with the technology and attitudes of owners and management, the playing conditions, (short tight fairways) deflate much of the intended strategy and the ball still rolls to the flatter lies.  I think it is largely in the physical detailing of the rolls, rumples etc. such that they can be very effective when bold to strategically deflect shots right or left and then at another level become most effective when more subtle, certainly not flat mind you, to create altered stances for the golfer and impart the strategy desired.

"And that in itself...you can see it now many times with the divot patterns"  True with old and many new courses.

[Mike_Young]

Mike:

Though your focus here is on the old classics, the same applies to some modern courses, such that many architects on paper and in the field believe they are creating some interesting strategy in the fairway for golfers to consider when on the tee, yet with the technology and attitudes of owners and management, the playing conditions, (short tight fairways) deflate much of the intended strategy and the ball still rolls to the flatter lies.  I think it is largely in the physical detailing of the rolls, rumples etc. such that they can be very effective when bold to strategically deflect shots right or left and then at another level become most effective when more subtle, certainly not flat mind you, to create altered stances for the golfer and impart the strategy desired.

"And that in itself...you can see it now many times with the divot patterns"  True with old and many new courses.

Scott,
I am not trying to distinguish between the old and new except to say that with new stuff we know what the mowing heights etc can be whereas when the old dead guys were doing this they did not know what they would be today.  So many here think I pick on the old dead guys...not so...I like their work I just don't respect them as much as some on this site because I feel that most of their notoriety is due to the membership legacies and maintenenance that has allowed the clubs to evolve.  I dont think they thought in a micro- strategy as much as they did a macro-strategy and thus speed eliminates much.
JMO
Mike

[TEPaul]

MikeY:

The speed (firmness) of the playing surfaces you listed are remarkably critical to course strategy. Today they are more critical than they have ever been, and that very thing managed by maintenance practices in an understandable combination that creates a virtual equilibrium or "balance" of available options (both ground and aerial) is both the basis and the building blocks of my "Ideal Maintenance Meld".

The flip side of the coin, though, is to not just know how to maximize that equilibrium or balance but very much to know where the top lies with any of its component parts so as not to go directly over it with any of those component parts which can lead "playability" (and strategy) into total silliness known as "The Freak Show".  

[Scott Witter]

"I am not trying to distinguish between the old and new except to say that with new stuff we know what the mowing heights etc can be whereas when the old dead guys were doing this they did not know what they would be today"

Sure, and I agree, but your initial question got me thinking about what I have seen in many modern courses too.

"I dont think they thought in a micro- strategy as much as they did a macro-strategy and thus speed eliminates much"

I am not so sure about this, though I could see it more ( a macro-strategy) with respect to the tee shot, but I believe they were quite in tune with a micro-strategy around the green sites, IMO.

This is a good thought you have and one aspect of design that has evolved, for better or for worse, though I don't think many golfers really recognize the application as much as we would like, nor do they experience the micro-strategy that can be so enjoyable in the fairway when considering the tee shot and the best approach to the green.

[Mike_Young]

MikeY:

The speed (firmness) of the playing surfaces you listed are remarkably critical to course strategy. Today they are more critical than they have ever been, and that very thing managed by maintenance practices in an understandable combination that creates a virtual equilibrium or "balance" of available options (both ground and aerial) is both the basis and the building blocks of my "Ideal Maintenance Meld".

The flip side of the coin, though, is to not just know how to maximize that equilibrium or balance but very much to know where the top lies with any of its component parts so as not to go directly over it with any of those component parts which can lead "playability" (and strategy) into total silliness known as "The Freak Show".  

TE...
We agree.....
You are just more of a wordsmith than myself

[Gary Slatter]

Mike:

Though your focus here is on the old classics, the same applies to some modern courses, such that many architects on paper and in the field believe they are creating some interesting strategy in the fairway for golfers to consider when on the tee, yet with the technology and attitudes of owners and management, the playing conditions, (short tight fairways) deflate much of the intended strategy and the ball still rolls to the flatter lies.  I think it is largely in the physical detailing of the rolls, rumples etc. such that they can be very effective when bold to strategically deflect shots right or left and then at another level become most effective when more subtle, certainly not flat mind you, to create altered stances for the golfer and impart the strategy desired.

"And that in itself...you can see it now many times with the divot patterns"  True with old and many new courses.

Exactly - from the day Mad River (Bob Cupp 1995) opened the Super starting "changing" many of the key design features, just by replacing bent grass with rye. Unfortunately he was one of the 3 owners and the other two did not play golf.

[JWL]

Mike

That is an interesting question.

When I think about it, I think about some of the major championships that I have played in because that is where I am really trying to score my ball and the greens are the firmest and fastest.

The one course that comes to mind the most is Seminole during the Coleman Invitational each year.   The members take great pride in having the greens EXTREMELY firm and fast.   They like to sit on the hillsides and watch approaching shots to the greens and when you approach your putt, you can hear them laughing about the impossibility of getting your putt to stop by the hole.   So, at least during that event, I think the green firmness and speed TOTALLY dictates the strategy of how you play some holes....which would be different if the conditions were less demanding.   Seminole is not a difficult course unless the wind is howling and the greens are not treacherous unless the wind is howling and they are stimping around 14-15, like they are during the Coleman.
One example of this would be the 14th hole.   It is a shortish Par 5 with a raised green surrounded by bunkers, with a big deep bunker fronting the green.  While most of the field can reach the green in two shot because it generally plays downwind, most of the field will lay up to 8-100 yds short when the pin is located in the front third of the green.  The reason why, is because downwind it is impossible to stop a long or mid iron below the hole and from above the hole, even a 20 footer is quite likely to be putt off the green down into that fronting bunker.   So players learn that they have to be below the hole to even think about a birdie and if not, they are just hoping to make par.   Seminole has other examples like the 3rd hole, another Par 5 where even a short chip shot may not stay on the green even if you a chipping up hill if you catch the wrong contour trying to get the ball too close.
What I am trying to say is that yes, the firmness and speed of the green surfaces can very much dictate the strategy of how one plays certain course.   Without that at the Coleman, the course would yield very low scores by many players.   As it is, there is only an occasional great score shot, usually on one of the tournament days when everything just went right and the safe strategy worked to perfection.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()