[Kalen Braley]

I recently finished re-reading Bury Me in a Pot Bunker and came accross what I thought was an interesting comment that Pete touched upon...demanding vs. unfair.

He describes building a hole at Old Marsh and the issue of his height comes up. After building a particular feature he had one of his men look at it who is 6 inches taller than him.  Pete continues on to explain that this led to something being unfair and so he had to change it.  He doesn't explain exactly what it was, but does state demanding is one thing, but "prohibiting the golfer from having a fair chance is quite another"

I'd be curious to know of examples or otherwise where either you as an architect or as a player felt this was the case.  We all know about the usual "unfair" suspect like forced carries, etc, but perhaps commentary on more subtle features would be interesting.

I'll go first and while its not original, it was mentioned on the Merion thread about hitting blind shots to narrow landing areas.

[John Moore II]

I think that to someone who does not have control of their shots, Tobacco Road can seem unfair. A lot of blind shots and such. I however do not think it is unfair.

[Ed Oden]

I generally love boldly contoured greens.  But I think it is unfair to have a multi-tiered green where if you are on the top tier you can't putt down to the lower tier and keep it on the green.  The old 9th green at Carolina Golf Club is an example.  If you were on the upper tier and the pin was on the lower, your next shot after your putt was guaranteed to be a chip back up to the green from the fairway.  Thankfully, this will no longer be the case after Kris Spence is done with his restoration.

Ed

[Bart Bradley]

I generally love boldly contoured greens.  But I think it is unfair to have a multi-tiered green where if you are on the top tier you can't putt down to the lower tier and keep it on the green.  The old 9th green at Carolina Golf Club is an example.  If you were on the upper tier and the pin was on the lower, your next shot after your putt was guaranteed to be a chip back up to the green from the fairway.  Thankfully, this will no longer be the case after Kris Spence is done with his restoration.

Ed

Ed:

I agree with you on this point.  There is a green at Old Linville (another Ross) that is so severe that if you are on the back tier you cannot putt down the hill without likely putting 40 yds back down the fairway....there is a Fazio green at Treetops resort with a similar problem, only the top shelf is the front/right of an angled green...bizarre.

How about a fairway with such side slope that it is almost impossible for the ball to stay in the fairway (a problem on an Arthur Hills hole near my home)?  I've seen Tom Doak on this website talk about what percent grade a landing area can have and hold a shot.

Maintenance issue:  how about where there is so much sand in a bunker that your ball can't help but burry or so little that it is like playing off concrete.

Bart

[Garland Bayley]

How about maintaining the lower branches of a tree at a level where a tall player cannot take a swing, but someone 6 inches shorter can?
 

[Matthew Hunt]

How about maintaining the lower branches of a tree at a level where a tall player cannot take a swing, but someone 6 inches shorter can?
 

Look, us 6'2ers will agree to this in return for more big bunkers that short people look funny in

[George Pazin]

To me, the difference is mostly if a shot is impossible versus just damn difficult.

Also, if the consequences are repeated penalty shots, not exceptionally difficult recovery shots, that borders on unfair versus demanding. It's not so much unfair, but it is at the top of my "What I hate most" list.

[ed_getka]

Ed, Bart, and Garland,
   You are all describing a situation where you played a poor shot it sounds like to me. Now if there is no other possible outcome, because all shots would end up in that spot, that would be unfair.
   Just because you can putt off a green does not make it unfair IMO.
    For instance, on #8 on Pasatiempo (a par 3) if you hit your tee shot above the pin in most places it will be close to impossible to 2 putt. To me that means you do whatever it takes to stay below the hole. It does not mean the green is unfair. If the uphill comebacker went up and then rolled back to your feet, that would be unfair.

[Bart Bradley]

Ed, Bart, and Garland,
   You are all describing a situation where you played a poor shot it sounds like to me. Now if there is no other possible outcome, because all shots would end up in that spot, that would be unfair.
   Just because you can putt off a green does not make it unfair IMO.
    For instance, on #8 on Pasatiempo (a par 3) if you hit your tee shot above the pin in most places it will be close to impossible to 2 putt. To mean that means you do whatever it takes to stay below the hole. It does not mean the green is unfair. If the uphill comebacker went up and then rolled back to your feet, that would be unfair.

I can't speak for the other two...but I disagree.

The instances I am referring to are thus:

I am on the green.  The difference in height of the tiers is something on the order of 8-10 ft.  Any putt in the direction of the hole either A. stays on the top shelf or B. races off the green on the far side...the putt gathers so much speed on the slope that it cannot hold the putting surface...That isn't just a poor putt...it is impossible and unfair.

Bart

[Garland Bayley]

I agree with Ed. That's why the big smiley face. If you think it is unfair to putt off the green from the top tier, then don't hit your ball there! If your opponent hit his ball there, he would face the same situation. What's unfair about that? At least in my example, my opponent would not face the same situation.

BTW, Mr. Hunt, how come you are so short?

EDIT: If Mr. Dye is making design decisions based on differences in peoples physical stature, then shame on him.

[Kalen Braley]

Garland,

When I started this thread I thought to myself, Garland is going to chime in on the tree branches thing.

While it seems like we are having difficulty establishing Unfair, how about examples of something that is demanding, but if they did x, y, ot x it would become unfair.

I'll start off again.  Say Archy X builds green with 10 stimp speeds or less in mind. So at 10 is demanding, but at 12 its unfair?

[Garland Bayley]

The one thing that seem to be considered universally unfair on this site is that if you are below the hole, putt up to the hole, and the ball returns to your feet, that is unfair.

E.g. 11th green at Black Mesa when I played there.

[Andy Troeger]

The funny thing about this question is that the ridiculous and the fantastic sometimes share an almost blurry line. The examples of putts on the green are probably the best example, the contours that most of us love can also drive us nuts, usually when the pins are placed in spots that they may not have been intended.

I do tend to agree that it would seem that building a green with a tier so severe that at normal green speeds the ball can not be putted from the top to the bottom is more severe than I would care for. However, if it was just a difficult shot with a fair chance of a poor play staying on top or going off the front of the green then it might be considered great  

Might also depend on what was in front of the green. If the ball is going to roll back down a hill 50 yards or into a pond or a deep bunker then thats worth considering as well. If its just a simple chip back up then that's different too.

[Matthew Hunt]

BTW, Mr. Hunt, how come you are so short?

Deprivation of food, here in Ireland we 7ft is the norm   The caddies you got were from the institute for the vertically challenged

[Greg Krueger]

How about the U.S. Open at Olympic when Lee Janzen won,
I think Payne Stewart finished 2nd. (1998?) The 18th green
was deemed to be unfair, in fact I don't think they mowed the
green on Sunday. Also Southern Hills 18th green the year
Goosen won.

[ed_getka]

Ed, Bart, and Garland,
   You are all describing a situation where you played a poor shot it sounds like to me. Now if there is no other possible outcome, because all shots would end up in that spot, that would be unfair.
   Just because you can putt off a green does not make it unfair IMO.
    For instance, on #8 on Pasatiempo (a par 3) if you hit your tee shot above the pin in most places it will be close to impossible to 2 putt. To mean that means you do whatever it takes to stay below the hole. It does not mean the green is unfair. If the uphill comebacker went up and then rolled back to your feet, that would be unfair.

I can't speak for the other two...but I disagree.

The instances I am referring to are thus:

I am on the green.  The difference in height of the tiers is something on the order of 8-10 ft.  Any putt in the direction of the hole either A. stays on the top shelf or B. races off the green on the far side...the putt gathers so much speed on the slope that it cannot hold the putting surface...That isn't just a poor putt...it is impossible and unfair.

Bart

Bart,
   I am not talking about the difficulty of the putt, that is a given with a huge height differential. I am talking about the approach shot that put the ball on the top tier. Now if that top tier was where most approach shots predominantly ended up I would agree with you about it being unfair. I would think a really high top tier at the end of a 200+ approach shot could be unfair, because at that point a 10 handicapper probably can't control whether the ball ends up on top. If one were approaching with a mid-iron or less and you can see that being on top is death, then it is incumbent upon you not to hit your approach up there.
    I think the unfairness hinges on whether you have any control of whether your ball ends up in that "unfair" spot. If most or all shots end up there it is unfair, otherwise it is not unfair IMO.

[Bart Bradley]

Bart,
   I am not talking about the difficulty of the putt, that is a given with a huge height differential. I am talking about the approach shot that put the ball on the top tier. Now if that top tier was where most approach shots predominantly ended up I would agree with you about it being unfair. I would think a really high top tier at the end of a 200+ approach shot could be unfair, because at that point a 10 handicapper probably can't control whether the ball ends up on top. If one were approaching with a mid-iron or less and you can see that being on top is death, then it is incumbent upon you not to hit your approach up there.
    I think the unfairness hinges on whether you have any control of whether your ball ends up in that "unfair" spot. If most or all shots end up there it is unfair, otherwise it is not unfair IMO.

Ed:

I understood that your were referring to my approach shot.  But really, is it fair to hit the green in regulation and then be required to have to chip after putting by the hole.  In the one instance I discussed, after racing down the green the ball rolled some 20-30 yds back down a sloping fairway...I hit the green, hit a fine first putt and made a double without a bad shot.  Is that fair?  I don't think so, but I understand that I shouldn't have been on the wrong shelf and I understand you feel differently.

Bart

[Andy Troeger]

Ed,
What do you think about the green on #11 at Crystal Downs? That's a good example of a hole where behind the hole is pretty much dead but really short isn't much better. I tried some practice putts from the top shelf and had Bob and my Dad stopping them from rolling down the hill  

Thankfully my real approach was well placed for once!

[Kyle Harris]

Bart,
   I am not talking about the difficulty of the putt, that is a given with a huge height differential. I am talking about the approach shot that put the ball on the top tier. Now if that top tier was where most approach shots predominantly ended up I would agree with you about it being unfair. I would think a really high top tier at the end of a 200+ approach shot could be unfair, because at that point a 10 handicapper probably can't control whether the ball ends up on top. If one were approaching with a mid-iron or less and you can see that being on top is death, then it is incumbent upon you not to hit your approach up there.
    I think the unfairness hinges on whether you have any control of whether your ball ends up in that "unfair" spot. If most or all shots end up there it is unfair, otherwise it is not unfair IMO.

Ed:

I understood that your were referring to my approach shot.  But really, is it fair to hit the green in regulation and then be required to have to chip after putting by the hole.  In the one instance I discussed, after racing down the green the ball rolled some 20-30 yds back down a sloping fairway...I hit the green, hit a fine first putt and made a double without a bad shot.  Is that fair?  I don't think so, but I understand that I shouldn't have been on the wrong shelf and I understand you feel differently.

Bart

Bart,

I'd challenge your assertion that just because you hit the green means you hit a good shot. If I see a green as you describe, and leave the ball in the spot you described.... no way in heck I'm thinking I hit anything other than a bad approach.

[John Moore II]

Kyle-I agree with what you say about the shot you hit being bad or good. I think demanding or unfair is in the eye of the beholder in many ways.

[Bart Bradley]

Kyle:

I do understand your point.. I didn't say that I hit all "good" shots, for me a GIR is certainly not "bad".  In both cases, I was playing a course for the first and only time.  From the fairway, I had no idea what I was facing.  However, it may depend a bit on the quality of your golf.  With my 9 handi, anytime I hit a green, I am reasonably satisfied and feel like I ought to be able to make bogey at worst without a major disaster of my putting stroke.  I would feel fine defending the statement "if I hit the green, I ought to have a fair chance of making bogey even if my approach did not leave me in the ideal position".  In other words, hitting the green shouldn't come with a more than 1 shot penalty unless I really mess up.

Bart

[ed_getka]

Bart,
   Thanks for clearing something up, I didn't realize you had never seen the course before. Was that large tier not noticeable from where you hit your approach shot?
   If you knew the course well my next thought would have been to point out that a top tier you speak of would be considered a "hazard" IMO (they just happen to mow it at green height).

Andy,
   I do happen to consider #11 CD fair, but it is certainly pushing the boundary. I think once you have to eliminate birdie thoughts altogether the hole has crossed into unfair territory. As is, #11 has a few pin positions where getting aggressive is suicide, but I can safely play that hole in bogey 8 out of 10 times I would estimate. You should have seen the all-world bogey I made from the back bunker to a back pin on on my last trip.  It is quite funny to see guys play the hole for the first time and make a 10 though. They simply cannot accept that they can't go right at the hole and they pay the price.
   I'm a bit of a homer at this point about CD so I am willing to accept that my judgement is clouded. I do know that I could caddy a first-timer around that course at least 10 shots lower than they could do on their own. There is just so much to know and learn about the course that someone could go out there for the first time and get eaten alive and come to the conclusion that the course is unfair. As someone pointed out above, in the end it is just personal opinion. There are no objective measures for this kind of stuff.

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle:

I do understand your point.. I didn't say that I hit all "good" shots, for me a GIR is certainly not "bad".  In both cases, I was playing a course for the first and only time.  From the fairway, I had no idea what I was facing.  However, it may depend a bit on the quality of your golf.  With my 9 handi, anytime I hit a green, I am reasonably satisfied and feel like I ought to be able to make bogey at worst without a major disaster of my putting stroke.  I would feel fine defending the statement "if I hit the green, I ought to have a fair chance of making bogey even if my approach did not leave me in the ideal position".  In other words, hitting the green shouldn't come with a more than 1 shot penalty unless I really mess up.

Bart

Bart,

I'm not quite sure I would consider that a one shot penalty. There was a chance you could have made the chip you had after putting off the green for par. With a one shot penalty, there's no way you can hole out a drop from say a hazard. To me, this falls in the "half shot" penalty category.

[Bart Bradley]

Bart,
   Thanks for clearing something up, I didn't realize you had never seen the course before. Was that large tier not noticeable from where you hit your approach shot?
   If you knew the course well my next thought would have been to point out that a top tier you speak of would be considered a "hazard" IMO (they just happen to mow it at green height).

Andy,
   I do happen to consider #11 CD fair, but it is certainly pushing the boundary. I think once you have to eliminate birdie thoughts altogether the hole has crossed into unfair territory. As is, #11 has a few pin positions where getting aggressive is suicide, but I can safely play that hole in bogey 8 out of 10 times I would estimate. You should have seen the all-world bogey I made from the back bunker to a back pin on on my last trip.  It is quite funny to see guys play the hole for the first time and make a 10 though. They simply cannot accept that they can't go right at the hole and they pay the price.
   I'm a bit of a homer at this point about CD so I am willing to accept that my judgement is clouded. I do know that I could caddy a first-timer around that course at least 10 shots lower than they could do on their own. There is just so much to know and learn about the course that someone could go out there for the first time and get eaten alive and come to the conclusion that the course is unfair. As someone pointed out above, in the end it is just personal opinion. There are no objective measures for this kind of stuff.

Ed:  In fact, at the Fazio course at Treetops, the lower tier is blind from the fairway...it is the back part of the green!  Obviously, the play is to simply blast the ball to or over the back of the green....hitting a shot to the front will either stop on top or roll completely over the back ...same if you hit the downslope between the tiers.  Oh well, like you said the higher tier in this case basically acts as a hazard...and to me, making the green a hazard classifies as "unfair"...

Interesting thread,

Bart

[Bart Bradley]

Kyle:

I do understand your point.. I didn't say that I hit all "good" shots, for me a GIR is certainly not "bad".  In both cases, I was playing a course for the first and only time.  From the fairway, I had no idea what I was facing.  However, it may depend a bit on the quality of your golf.  With my 9 handi, anytime I hit a green, I am reasonably satisfied and feel like I ought to be able to make bogey at worst without a major disaster of my putting stroke.  I would feel fine defending the statement "if I hit the green, I ought to have a fair chance of making bogey even if my approach did not leave me in the ideal position".  In other words, hitting the green shouldn't come with a more than 1 shot penalty unless I really mess up.

Bart

Bart,

I'm not quite sure I would consider that a one shot penalty. There was a chance you could have made the chip you had after putting off the green for par. With a one shot penalty, there's no way you can hole out a drop from say a hazard. To me, this falls in the "half shot" penalty category.

Kyle:

1/2 shot penalty???  You are going to chip-in from 30 yds back down the fairway half the time?  Not me.  It is at least a 1.5 shot penalty for me...I might get half of those up and down and would chip-in virtually never.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()