Ballyneal Greens

[Scott Szabo]

Scott, Care needs to be given as to pin positions when they do get to 11. In last years member guest there were a couple of Pin positions that put a huge premium on placement at those speeds. One was on the ridge on 15 (sort of right center). After having witnessed how difficult it was from nearly every angle, it took quite the analysis to determine which was the best way to play it under those specific conditions. I could tell you, but, then you'd have to be my partner and I wouldn't subject a fine upstanding young man, such as yourself, to that. The other was a backish left pin on #17. Devilishly exacting.

Richard, While it may be a generalization, because I do know of several exceptions, the unsophisticated GD panelist isn't really looking at the architecture, per se.  If they were, I suspect they'd join their brothers here to learn and discuss even more. It has been about two years since they changed their definition for conditioning, allowing course that are designed to be F&F to play F&F.

As a way for me to compare these greens to former courses I have known well, I'd say, the interest lies in just how long it has taken to learn the greens at Ballyneal. Not only their general and contrary slopes, but, at all the different speeds year round.

 i.e. One of our best green reading caddies is Jim Roberts. At last year's member guest he turned to me early in the round and said " I don't have a clue at these speeds". I reassured him it was OK and that we'd figure them out together. By the way, my ringer shot 92. A former state junior champion who I beat by two shots that day. On the way home he said we'd get'em next year, and, I immediately pointed out how presumptuous that statement was. We still laugh about it, especially since I haven't invited him back.  

It would be an honor to be your partner, unless I shot 92 and don't get invited back either!

I would imagine that, at speeds reaching 11, they would have to be very careful with every pin they set or it could get ridiculous.  Mike U. has always said that the times he's played in the member-guest the greens get almost crazy fast, and sometimes three-putts are not a bad thing!

[Adam Clayman]

Scott. It seems that 3 putt phenom is true on courses with intresting greens.    

Let's be intellectually honest about why a group of modern day golfers wouldn't like BN. Its all about the shot demands. The typical scratch modern golfer has a rather one dimensional approach. High and soft. On this course that approach only works when the canvas is soft. Rather than adapting their shots to the firm ground contours they dislike the course. I. E. Our own Bryon Vincent, a stick of the highest order, adapted his shots to the demand and played beautifully. The majority of 1 handicappers haven't a clue on how to do that because they have never been exposed to this type of golf and lack the creativity or inclination to figure it out.

[Andy Troeger]

Adam,
That's a better way of explaining what I've tried to say. In addition many 1 hcps prefer narrower fairways because they can still hit them and it gives them an advantage. Staring at a fairway such as #13 doesn't appeal to them because someone like me who can't hit the broad side of a barn still is going to hit the fairway sometimes through sheer luck if nothing else if I can miss the bunkers.

And they also don't like three putting.

[Jim Colton]

Yes, it does seem strange that a water hazard that you might hit into 10% of the time is a more acceptable form of Resistance to Scoring than a green that you might 3-putt 20% of the time.

[Joe Hancock]

Andy,

Do you think your observations of 1 handicappers is only while playing competitive golf, or do they feel that way even when playing the experiential rounds, where the end result has no meaning?

I would think every golfer would enjoy their experiential rounds on wider fairways as well as playing on more contoured greens. Competitive golf tends to narrow the focus of why one plays the game.

Joe

[Jeff_Brauer]

Yes, it does seem strange that a water hazard that you might hit into 10% of the time is a more acceptable form of Resistance to Scoring than a green that you might 3-putt 20% of the time.

Jim,

I like that point!  I recently played with some Golf Week raters at Fortune Bay where I put a Biarritz. I have also built a few Valley of Sin greens. In each case, good players comments were "You can't practice that shot."  I am not a competitive golfer, so I don't understand that logic too well.  To me, creating an interesting shot you don't see often is kind of the point of architecture, not some standardization.  But, most golfers understand from what is out there the most that being in the trees or water costs a shot.  American golfers have learned generally that ground contours shouldn't cost you a shot, and yet that is a major premise of Tom Doak's designs.

One problem with any rater or ranking system is that it does tend to promote that, if followed too closely.  In that regard, there is room for TD's old system in Golf Mag where expert golfers can vote for a good course under the "If it walks like a duck" theory.

[Scott Szabo]

Scott. It seems that 3 putt phenom is true on courses with intresting greens.    

Let's be intellectually honest about why a group of modern day golfers wouldn't like BN. Its all about the shot demands. The typical scratch modern golfer has a rather one dimensional approach. High and soft. On this course that approach only works when the canvas is soft. Rather than adapting their shots to the firm ground contours they dislike the course. I. E. Our own Bryon Vincent, a stick of the highest order, adapted his shots to the demand and played beautifully. The majority of 1 handicappers haven't a clue on how to do that because they have never been exposed to this type of golf and lack the creativity or inclination to figure it out.

Agree 100%.

I haven't made it out yet this year, but will be playing a round in a couple of weeks.  Can't wait!

[Scott Szabo]

Andy,

Do you think your observations of 1 handicappers is only while playing competitive golf, or do they feel that way even when playing the experiential rounds, where the end result has no meaning?

I would think every golfer would enjoy their experiential rounds on wider fairways as well as playing on more contoured greens. Competitive golf tends to narrow the focus of why one plays the game.

Joe

Joe,

Unfortunately, the end result does have meaning for many golfers, even when not playing a competitive round of golf.  It is sad, indeed, that the score at the end of the day for some determines whether or not they've enjoyed their day.  They just need to put score aside and find enjoyment in the course and the company.

Scott

[Andy Troeger]

Joe,
I don't think the handicap matters as much as the mindset. For golfers that play significant stroke play competitive golf I think their likes and dislikes become so natural to them that it doesn't matter if its a "fun" round or not. Lower handicap golfers (and professionals) tend to do this more than the rest of us I think, but certainly it does not apply to all low handicaps. Many GD panelists that I have met tend to play a lot of competitive golf in their state associations. The closest I have come to competition the last ten years are scrambles and coaching!