Will--welcome to the site. ...........................On a course like Tiger won the British Open on in 2006, it is not possible to play an aerial game, the course will not accept it. .........................golf courses should remain very natural and not be pumped with millions of gallons of water per day in order to keep them green. Its not so much the type of game that is prefered, but the type of agronimic practices that are preferred by members of this site. I myself also like firm conditions that force me to think.
--Also, so many modern courses have been designed with only aerial in mind and that again forces the type of agromony that is used, since real firm and fast would not matter, you would still have to fly the ball where you want it to go.
I like firm conditions, too, but would like to gently challenge many of your statements after "Will - Welcome to the site!)
IMHO Tiger won the last Open by laying up more than any particular use of the ground game........
Most courses put out 100's of 100's of gallons per night. Very few average over a million, and none averages several million gallons per day, with perhaps the exception of a few desert courses, who are probably now undergoing rationing, a la Palm Desert.
I would love to see a list of the 6000 modern courses with a hole count of how many do NOT have frontal openings to the greens that allow the ground game by design, if not by maintenance practice. While the normal green might be elevated a few feet, so are most of the greens at TOC.
Should courses remain "natural" rather than have irrigated turf? Last time I tried it, I got very little roll through either the trees, prairie grasses, or even corn that existed on site before building the golf course! Believe me, turf probably wasn't natural at TOC either. I recall reading that they tore out gorse to make turf fw. While it varies in different parts of the country, most combinations of turf and soil just don't allow survival in a deep brown state. While they might be able to be run with leaner water budgets, in fact, most supers water just to the need of the plant to keep it above critical field capacity. And yes, they are scared to cut it too close because of the cost and downtime of replanting. All that said, you can be green and somewhat firm with many turfs.
Lastly, my take on the old readings of the Golden Age are that the ground game was dying a slow death, and some are ignoring that and romantically recreating it in their minds. The difference from the 1930's is degrees - very few could spin a 3 iron with old equipment, but the shorter irons were expected to hit and bite. The response was often the "short shot, small green" idea. Thomas wrote that he sloped up short iron approch greens to help the check of a shot.
I believe the march to the aerial game has been going on, because its easier. Like airlines are safer than Amtrak - once airborn you aren't going to run into anything, while a train has potential bad bounces at every road crossing. At least until the winds really pick up. Why would a competitive golfer play the ground game unless he really had to, given greater potential for things to go wrong?
Lastly, the ground game can exist today. It just starts a lot closer to the green front - or side. While there is no running a shot 50 yards on to the green, I think its just as fun and as much challenge to try to use a green cross slope or slight redan bank to get your shot where it needs to go as it is to run one fifty yards. As noted, you still need to pick a spot to fly to and hit it to get the right result. That can be more fun than picking a spot just in front of the pin or just behind it with even greater spin to aim at, and can help you avoid hazards, so its a good thing.
Good night, gracie.