[SL_Solow]

I watched the replay last night.  A couple of observations.  First, regarding the structure of the greens, I think the "dispute" is a matter of degree and not of basic philosophy.  I think most of us will applaud the attempt by Nicklaus (or any other architect) to get away from bland uninteresting greens that rely almost entirely on wonderful conditions and lightening speeds to generate a modicum of interest.  Interesting contours and greens within greens are design features we all encourage which make for interesting golf.  Brad's point is that even excellent concepts can be carried to extremes.  While these features may make for interesting spectating, tournaments generally occupy only 1 week per year.  If the greens are too difficult they may lead to extemely slow play and "less fun" during regular play.  However, for a strictly resort course, the notoriety may bring players at least for the first time.  Interestingly, Nicklaus' other Tuscon resort creation at La Paloma has also been criticized for being overly difficult, but for other reasons similar to criticisms of other relatively early Nicklaus efforts.

As to green speeds, the topic has been covered ad nauseum.  Too many equate green quality with green speed as measured by the stimpmeter.  Overly fast greens, aside from being expensive to maintain, dictate flatter contours which most of us deem to be less interesting.  The observed extreme differences in speed between uphill and downhill putts harken back to older times where the combination of slower speeds, more grain due tio higher cuts and slope caused greater difficulty in reading putts. see Pete Dye's comments on Oakmont in the 1960's.  From my point of view it is refreshing to see the pros have to think about more than making their perfect stroke on greens that measure 12.  Its one aspect that keeps Augusta interesting but there, the extreme speeds have made the challenge almost ridiculous.  Speeds similar to what we are seeing this week are more enjoyable as they balance the challenge.

Returning to Brad's point, perhaps a few less challenging transition areas on the greens would be in order.  Flagsticks could be placed in these areas for regular play.  I haven't been on the property so I am just speculating.

[Sean Leary]

Could they be 1 click faster and still be OK?

You've obviously been brainwashed by the theory that faster greens are better greens.  Consistency and overall turf health are what matter most.  And if the consistancy is there, then any good golfer, and especially the professionals, should be able to adjust their putting stroke accordingly.

No I haven't. I never said they were better, I just asked if they could be playable if they were 1 click faster.

[Mike Benham]

The Pros want flatish greens, consistent speed, where they can make tons of putts ... just like a homerun hitter wants a belt high fastball ...

Do not confuse the fun factor you may want in a golf course with the realities of earning a living (relatively speaking for this tournament) playing golf.  Would you like to putt on those greens to earn a paycheck that feeds your family?

[Andy Troeger]

Sorry if that came across as harsh, I just do not think that is valid.  Greens can be tricked up but if they are then they are for everyone, even Tiger, the amateur certainly won't be able to putt them as well as Tiger but he could without a doubt still putt them.

As where if every hole has a 200 yd carry than the amateur could not even play the course.  Same goes w/ rough, bunkers, etc./

Kenny,
The forced carries I agree with, the rest of your logic doesn't make much sense to me. A lousy golfer can hack the ball out of rough into the fairway, get out of all but the worst bunkers and continue play, and five putt to his heart's desire--none of those sound like a bit of fun to me. Tricked up greens are just as bad to me as any of the other things you mentioned.

Again, I haven't seen a minute of the telecast to comment on these specific greens.

[Doug Ralston]

So is this the future? Are architects just gonna give up making overall playability and length be a tough enough challenge for the pros? They a now so good at playing from length, and from rough, and from almost any bunker. Must it be a mediocre courses with roller coaster greens for coming professional golf venues?

I agree the putting is fun to watch, but I do NOT want to see this every week. Might as well just have them play the US Open at the local Putt Putt.

Is this the future of professional golf?

Doug

[David Stamm]

So is this the future? Are architects just gonna give up making overall playability and length be a tough enough challenge for the pros? They a now so good at playing from length, and from rough, and from almost any bunker. Must it be a mediocre courses with roller coaster greens for coming professional golf venues?

I agree the putting is fun to watch, but I do NOT want to see this every week. Might as well just have them play the US Open at the local Putt Putt.

Is this the future of professional golf?

Doug

So Doug, is Dove Mountain mediocre to you?



I applaud Nicklaus for at least trying to change his style. From what I can tell from TV, the course looks pretty good. While I haven't seen the course in person, the greens look interesting to me. As long as they are maintained at a proper speed, I see no issue with them. Defending the hole at the green is a step in the right direction, IMHO, for the tour. And I don't mean running non descript TPC greens at 13-14 on the stimp. Some of MacKenzie's greens were wildly contoured (see Sitwell Park), but because the greens could not be maintained like today, they worked. I agree for the most part with Greg's comments. The health of the greens and the speed matching the contouring is the most important factor. Stone Eagle has some of the most interesting greens one can find, but they are kept around a 9-10 and they work with that speed. Any faster and they'd be unplayable.

[Gary Slatter]

So is this the future? Are architects just gonna give up making overall playability and length be a tough enough challenge for the pros? They a now so good at playing from length, and from rough, and from almost any bunker. Must it be a mediocre courses with roller coaster greens for coming professional golf venues?

I agree the putting is fun to watch, but I do NOT want to see this every week. Might as well just have them play the US Open at the local Putt Putt.

Is this the future of professional golf?

Doug

Doug, I think it's great the way the green is causing the world's finest professional players to miss short iron shots into them.  It is very interesting and I think Jack is onto something to make desert golf challenging and enjoyable.  Anyone can make long shots tough, the Dove has made short shots interesting.  at least that's what I see.

[Jeff Spittel]

I think the green complexes and bunkering look pretty cool.

Perhaps some of the Sebonack influence?

[Doug Ralston]

So is this the future? Are architects just gonna give up making overall playability and length be a tough enough challenge for the pros? They a now so good at playing from length, and from rough, and from almost any bunker. Must it be a mediocre courses with roller coaster greens for coming professional golf venues?

I agree the putting is fun to watch, but I do NOT want to see this every week. Might as well just have them play the US Open at the local Putt Putt.

Is this the future of professional golf?

Doug

Doug, I think it's great the way the green is causing the world's finest professional players to miss short iron shots into them.  It is very interesting and I think Jack is onto something to make desert golf challenging and enjoyable.  Anyone can make long shots tough, the Dove has made short shots interesting.  at least that's what I see.

Gary and David;

Please note that I said I DO enjoy watching them. This week. I simply do not think that 'only extreme greens can save us' attitude should be encouraged among the architects. It will certainly lead to a mediocre 'sameness' about courses, where everything is about trying to make it as hard as possible to get a good angle to approach, thereby leaving out less than great golfers.

Extreme greens can be great fun in moderation, but if golf is only about the greens, the rest of the experience will be diminished.

Of course, all this is about designing courses really intended for professional venues. I agree most new courses will not fall into this mold. But I do not even want to watch PGA golf become so straited. And I certainly do not want to see courses designed JUST for the PGA, that no one of lesser skill could hope to enjoy. THAT would be a true loss; the fun of trying their challenges is always a goal to look forward toward.

Doug

[John Kirk]

I somewhat disagree with Jeff Spittel.  Dove Mountain does not appeal to me visually.  It's as if the bunkers, fairways and greens are pieces of a jagged puzzle that don't quite fit.  Regardless of strategic merit, there are more attractive golf courses out there.

I am inclined to trust Brad Klein's opinion that the greens are too severe for the average visitor.

To David Stamm, I think Stone Eagle's greens are very enjoyable at 11 feet.

I'll watch some more today and see if my opinion changes.

[David Stamm]

I somewhat disagree with Jeff Spittel.  Dove Mountain does not appeal to me visually.  It's as if the bunkers, fairways and greens are pieces of a jagged puzzle that don't quite fit.  Regardless of strategic merit, there are more attractive golf courses out there.

I am inclined to trust Brad Klein's opinion that the greens are too severe for the average visitor.

To David Stamm, I think Stone Eagle's greens are very enjoyable at 11 feet.

I'll watch some more today and see if my opinion changes.

Obviously I'll defer to you on that, John. When we played, I believe they were runnung around 10 and it seemed to be a perfect speed. If they run reasonable at 11, I'll take your word for it.

[Sean Leary]

I somewhat disagree with Jeff Spittel.  Dove Mountain does not appeal to me visually.  It's as if the bunkers, fairways and greens are pieces of a jagged puzzle that don't quite fit.  Regardless of strategic merit, there are more attractive golf courses out there.

I am inclined to trust Brad Klein's opinion that the greens are too severe for the average visitor.

To David Stamm, I think Stone Eagle's greens are very enjoyable at 11 feet.

I'll watch some more today and see if my opinion changes.

It would be interesting to know how much more severe the greens are at Dove Mountain than Stone Eagle.

[Ian Larson]

How does the average golfer playing at Stone Eagle know what the greens were stimping at the day they played?

I know the super doesnt go around making sure every group knows and it is very rare that a club is dumb enough to keep it posted at the first tee. Unless you actually, by chance, ran into the super and he let you know...how would you know? And I hope its not by trusting what the pro staff tells you.

Chances are the super isnt stimping his greens everyday behind the greens mowers. And if they were stimped in the morning, the only groups to play that stimp measurement are the morning groups. Once that sun is at high noon, especially in the desert, those grass blades are are standing up and doing some growing until that sun sets. Unless the super has the greens completely shut down with Primo and theyre not growing at all, the afternoon groups are most likely playing greens that are a foot slower.

This is the problem with the stimp and golfers thinking they know what it is and how it works and why. I would bet that nobody REALLY knows what Stone Eagle was stimping and I would bet if they did it was through the grapevine that started with the pro shop attendant.

This is a problem because now we have comparisons between Stone Eagle and Dove Mountain, and what they are stimping at. We cant have a good discussion because there is no accurate information to support a comparison.

All we can say is that, yes both greens are very sloped but the green speed is appropriate to maintain putting fairness and enough cupable areas.

If Stone Eagle is even moderately sloped, Doak is a genius if he designed a green that can roll 11 feet. Still putt completely fair to the golfer. And maintain enough cupable positions. 11 feet is not slow, especially if the super is cutting down around .110" and rolling everyday.

[Ian Larson]

Its blowing me away to hear guys on this thread supporting flat greens with their only defense being green speed.


Dove Mountain may be severe, it may be too severe. But the one thing that brings it together is the green speed. As golf purists dont you believe in every golfer playing the same greens? Am I way off base here by saying that this is a tournament where the golfers are thinking about the approach shots just as much as Augusta and a couple other events? And the greens are slow!!

The other thing that brings it together is their consistency. The only grain on those greens are from that mornings mowing, which has very minimal effect on ball roll. Those greens are dense, consistent and rolling so true. Its obvious that super has them on a very strict regiment. Especially to get them to this point in 1 year. And for a PGA tournament.


Of course the pros probably dont like them, theyre babies and primadonnas. But are we seriously supposed to design greens that only the PGA Tour players like? Seriously? Theyd all be flat!!

That brings the argument up of:  its a public facility so why are the greens so severe which may cause slow play.  GCA.com doesnt own the secret that severe greens may slow play and cause less revenue. Its not a secret and Im sure Jack and the developers were completely aware of that and is an insult to them to think otherwise.

Im not a huge fan of desert golf. I hate it, but what he pulled off at Dove Mountain is really cool and unique. Especially with the greens. It should be a testament in itself that it made ME even want to go play Dove Mountain. Because as a 12 handicap those greens look like they would be some of the funnest greens to putt.


Ill end it with this, has anybody on here ever seen the old pictures of original greens at the classic clubs here in the U.S. and U.K.? Dumb question I know, but how is that any different than Dove Mountain. The lack of mechanical and agronomical technology a hundred years ago
allowed the golden age designers to create severe slopes. I know when I look at some of those pictures I start salivating and licking my chops because they look like they would be so fun to play.

But because we have advanced mechanically and agronomically green speed has increased and slopes have decreased. Producing flat greens that are only defended by how fast they roll. I like the direction Jack took at Dove Mountain and would like to see more of it, both for courses I play and for the TOUR.

[Ulrich Mayring]

I've watched a lot of the Matchplay the last couple of days and I can say I love those greens. They make it a whole different ballgame out there. Players are actually struggling and forced to think. I really hope this is setting a precedent, so we get to see more of this exciting type of golf on TV.

Ulrich

[Matt_Cohn]

As a side note, is there any golf course in the world with more forced-carry second shots on par 4's?

[John Kirk]

How does the average golfer playing at Stone Eagle know what the greens were stimping at the day they played?

I know the super doesnt go around making sure every group knows and it is very rare that a club is dumb enough to keep it posted at the first tee. Unless you actually, by chance, ran into the super and he let you know...how would you know? And I hope its not by trusting what the pro staff tells you.

Chances are the super isnt stimping his greens everyday behind the greens mowers. And if they were stimped in the morning, the only groups to play that stimp measurement are the morning groups. Once that sun is at high noon, especially in the desert, those grass blades are are standing up and doing some growing until that sun sets. Unless the super has the greens completely shut down with Primo and theyre not growing at all, the afternoon groups are most likely playing greens that are a foot slower.

This is the problem with the stimp and golfers thinking they know what it is and how it works and why. I would bet that nobody REALLY knows what Stone Eagle was stimping and I would bet if they did it was through the grapevine that started with the pro shop attendant.

This is a problem because now we have comparisons between Stone Eagle and Dove Mountain, and what they are stimping at. We cant have a good discussion because there is no accurate information to support a comparison.

If Stone Eagle is even moderately sloped, Doak is a genius if he designed a green that can roll 11 feet. Still putt completely fair to the golfer. And maintain enough cupable positions. 11 feet is not slow, especially if the super is cutting down around .110" and rolling everyday.

Well, it just so happens that I spent some time with the superintendent the final day I was there.  He's currently cutting the greens at .100" and rolling about 3-4 times per week.  He said they were rolling around 10.5 feet, but I'm inclined to believe he was lowballing it a bit, based on my experience of playing my home course Pumpkin Ridge, which posts green speeds most weekend mornings.

The greens slowed down considerably over the few hours I was out there.

Most importantly, this is a discussion about Dove Mountain, and I sidetracked the discussion by mentioning Stone Eagle.

[Rob Rigg]

These greens provide great drama - even at low stimp because they went mental on the countours - for people on GCA to be crapping on the greens is wicked shady.

Just because it's a Jack course doesn't mean it's arse - and just because some of the tee shot are balz doesn't mean there isnt't hope.

As McIllroy (sp) siad, every body just has to feckin' deal with it . . .

[Ian Larson]

"based on my experience of playing my home course Pumpkin Ridge, which posts green speeds most weekend mornings."


...big mistake. This does more bad than good and is contributing to the stimpmeter problem.





A green being mowed at .100" being rolled the majority of the days of the week are, especially in the desert, probably fairly firm (if not over watered) and rolling pretty fast. If Stone Eagle is fairly sloped with a stimp around 11 feet is probably going to be comparable to Dove Mountain being more sloped stimping around 9 feet.

[BCrosby]

Good stuff Ian.

I watched a few minutes of the replay last night. I noted above how much I like the greens. What I saw last night only confirmed what I was thinking.

To give credit where due, Mike Young was the first to tell me that contoured, slower, firmer greens were the way out of the mess we've gotten ourselves in.

Contoured, slow (how bizarre that we call 9's "slow"), firm greens are a challenge to the best players in the world. Their speeds can be adjusted for the rest of us for regular play.

I don't need to repeat here that increasing green speeds as a defense of par is extraordinarily pernicious. It causes a range of bad things, including (i) increased maintenance expenses, (ii) extra exposure to disease, drought, (iii) the flattening of putting surfaces, and (iv) worse of all, keeping greens wetter and softer to keep them alive.

Full points to Nicklaus for the greens at Dove Mountain. As for the rest of the course, I'm not so sure.

Bob

 

[John Kirk]

Ian,

In the case of Pumpkin Ridge, where the membership has complained about slow green speeds for years, it helps them to understand that the posted 10' 3" or 10' 6" is not as fast as they expect.  People have gotten used to fast green speeds and don't realize that 10 1/2 feet is a moderate speed by today's standards.

I see nothing wrong with posting green speeds.  It is information which educates the membership.

In your original post you said the announcers were quoting 10 1/2 feet, which is a moderate speed, but somewhat slow for a typical PGA tour event, where they must average 11-12 feet.  Stone Eagle has notoriously sloped greens, but are playable at 11 feet.  At that speed, you really have to be on your toes, though.

[Carl Rogers]

I think the greens shows the influence of Mr. Nicklaus' collaboration w/ Mr. Doak at Sebonac.  It is interesting to see the pros make less number of putts.  It confirms my theroy that putting is more difficult when there are a greater number and variation of green speeds.
If any of you ever get to Riverfront, you will experience smaller greens w/ an equal amount of slope and varying pace.

[Eric_Terhorst]

What I have found interesting while watching the action is the way the ball BOUNDS when landing in front of or on the green.  That first bounce seems to be much different than what you normally see on the PGA Tour.    It's startling how many shots have careened off the back of greens--guys going right at flags end up with a difficult chip or sand recovery.

Often as the ball approaches the flag it is repelled by a slope--again something you don't see often when you watch these guys play.  Of course it's a product of both the contouring and the hole placements--which are often near or between big contours.   I could see how it might be frustrating to play it every day, but it seems like it'd be fun for a weekend.

It's a lot of aerial golf a la Nicklaus for sure, but the fairways seem to be generally wide and the short grass around the greens is great.  Plus there are more-than-you-would-expect-from-Jack  CL bunkers that influence decision-making. 

[Andy Troeger]

I wish Nicklaus would design something with a lot of the same attributes as his recent courses that was a little less severe--I finally watched some of the golf today and the course looks impressive for the reasons many of you have already stated, but really difficult. Even the pros have a hard time recovering from a poor shot, good luck to the rest of us!

[Matt_Cohn]

I wanted to reopen this topic for two reasons:

1. I'm considering playing (or at least hoping for an invitation!) to a tournament at the Ritz-Carlton Dove Mountain this June.

2. The course was just voted as the player's least favorite course of the regular PGA Tour courses. (The only course behind it was Liberty National, a once-every-4-years stop.)

So I've read all the comments on this thread but I thought there might be some new opinions, especially relative to this list. How good (or bad) is it? I mean, the idea of making a special trip to play a course that's not as good as Torrey Pines North or Las Colinas isn't super thrilling, even for a really cool event. On the other hand, Kapalua in the bottom ten too, yet it seems like an incredibly fun golf course.

What do folks think?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()