News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Patrick_Mucci

Re: Is demanding a certain shot shape a legitimate architectural feature?
« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2008, 10:23:02 PM »

Is there a difference between rewarding a certain shot shape and demanding a certain shot shape?


If you demand a shot, inherently, that shot has to be rewarded.

If you reward A shot, I'm not sure that it has to be A mandated shot.

The Redan might be a good example. ....... or a bad example.

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is demanding a certain shot shape a legitimate architectural feature?
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2008, 10:48:18 PM »
Is there a difference between rewarding a certain shot shape and demanding a certain shot shape?

Of course there is a difference.

The example hole in the tree thread (without the bunker) rewards a fade. But a well-played straight ball or draw will still allow the hole to be played in two shots, without an automatic penalty stroke or a a ball deep in the trees.

The holes that demand a certain shot shape can't be played at all unless you can pull off the "correct" curve.

There's a course near here that has a couple of dogleg holes with goalpost trees at the front of the tee. If you can't hit a fade, you might have to lay up TWICE with a mid iron on a medium-length par four.

While that's fair in my book, it's not reasonable, and sure as heck not any fun.

I contend it's also true of that par 5 at Birdsfoot.

For PGA Tour events, US Opens, perhaps even for those UT men's team members, doing things like that may well be the only way to separate the best from the rest. But PLEASE don't ask me to play a course like that every day.

Ken
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back