[Ed Oden]

At one point during the TV coverage of the BMW this weekend I am pretty sure I heard one of the commentators (I believe it was Kostas) say something to the effect that the biggest difference in course architecture now is how far the tour players can hit their 3-woods.  I don't believe he explained.  Did anyone else catch that?  I wasn't paying too close attention since the tournament was such a romp, so I might not have heard correctly.

Ed

[Mike Benham]

You heard correctly, that is what was said ... except for I don't believe he said "golf course architecture" but "how the course is played" ...

Many pro's use 13 degree 3-woods with 43 inch shafts which is not too far off from the old persimmon driver combo ...

[JESII]

Ed,

I didn't hear it, but let's run with it. I can see the point, if a three wood goes 275 - 290 off the tee and 260 in the air off the ground and is more accurate than a driver how do make a challenging par 5?

My advice to the architects...don't worry about the guy that can do what I say above...

[Peter Pallotta]

Or, to take Jim's point in another (maybe wrong) direction, my advice to the architects would be:

Don't be afraid of letting them make birdies with a wedge in the hands, but use every means (save for extra length) to suggest to them that playing the hole as a three-shotter is the best way to ensure a birdie.

A small, very undulating, heavily bunkered green comes to mind, with foresty-out-of-bounds-death to the left.  At the end of a steadily (and dramatically) uphill Par 5, with rumpled fairways and uneven lies every step of the way.

I'm sort of thinking of one of the very few Par 5s that I've ever liked: the 8th at Crystal Downs.

Peter

[Garland Bayley]

Isn't the comment really about the ball. With 13 degree face and much less problem with slice/hook, sure they can hit it a long ways. In the old days more loft was needed to overcome the side spin on the old ball. Furthermore, the added loft and spin shortened the shot by ballooning.

So really this topic is about the modern ball and GCA.

[Jay Kirkpatrick]

in the golden years, weren't there a lot more par 3s that required a 3-wood off the tee?  that seems a rarity nowadays.  we just updated a par 3 to make it 249... a 3-wood for most people.

[Jaeger Kovich]

Bayley - You are right. The comment about 3-woods is definitely about the ball. It shows that its not just 460cc drivers, because the ball goes farther with every club. Todays equipment allows for perfect calibration of distance and an even distribution from longest to shortest...


Was it ever not like this with spoons and niblicks and bounding billies .... etc?

[Ed Oden]

Mike, I may be wrong, but I could have sworn I heard the word "architecture" in his comment.  That is what caught my ear.  Regardless, isn't "how the course is played" a direct effect on/response to the architecture?

As I said earlier, I don't recall Kostas expanding on his statement, so I can only guess what he was getting at.  But it came up in the context of creativity off the tee.  So I took his comment to mean that the pros can control and shape their shots so much better with a 3 wood than driver that it fits the demands of the architecture better as long as they don't suffer a significant loss of distance.  Since they can now hit their 3 woods 300 yards or so under fast/firm conditions, 3 woods are the creative club of choice off the tee.  I can only assume he feels that dynamic affects the architecture on newer designs intended for tournament play.  Garland, maybe that is ultimately about the ball.  But even though the comment was about "length" it seemed to me it was really more about creative shotmaking.

Jim, I agree that it is foolish to design for the tour calibre player.  But it is also naive to think it doesn't trickle down.  For example, I am about a 5 handicap.  I regularly play courses in the 7000 yard range.  It amazes me how often I play a 3 wood or hybrid off the tee to "fit" the architecture despite the distance.  Hhmmm.........maybe it is all about the ball after all.

Ed

[mike_beene]

I used to think getting rid of the tee peg would solve all golf's problems.Wrong.It would play straight into a few people's hands.

[Chris Buie]

Peter articulated exactly what I was going to say.  The design of the green complex can make going for it from long range prohibitive and foolish.  I can think of several holes where you would stand a much better chance at birdie from 50-80 yards than you would from the area around the green - even if you had a really good short game. 

[Dan Herrmann]

Let's look at Merion East #3 during Saturday's Walker Cup singles matches.  I was following the 2nd match and wandered over to #3 tee only to find no tee markers.  The committee decided to move the markers back to the 6th tee - leaving a tee shot of 274 yards.

I watched the two players each hit 3-woods safely to the green.

To me, this was like science fiction.   If I catch it pure, I might be able to get 225 out of a 3-wood off a peg, but honestly, usually shorter.

Perhaps it's really time for a competition ball....

[C. Squier]

Let's look at Merion East #3 during Saturday's Walker Cup singles matches.  I was following the 2nd match and wandered over to #3 tee only to find no tee markers.  The committee decided to move the markers back to the 6th tee - leaving a tee shot of 274 yards.

I watched the two players each hit 3-woods safely to the green.

To me, this was like science fiction.   If I catch it pure, I might be able to get 225 out of a 3-wood off a peg, but honestly, usually shorter.

Perhaps it's really time for a competition ball....

Dan, I think that's why they are playing in the WC and we're spectating.  Should we raise the rim to 12 ft b/c we can't dunk?

These kids wake up at 5 am to lift weights and run.  They're very fit and have worked incredibly hard to hit the ball as far as they do.  Let them.

[Dan Herrmann]

Clint - I'm telling you - It was an amazing sight.  I didn't think it'd be possible.

Actually, I can argue either side of this one...  I'm all for the competition ball to preserve architecture.  But, on the other hand, you have your argument, which certainly has validity too.

[C. Squier]

Clint - I'm telling you - It was an amazing sight.  I didn't think it'd be possible.

Actually, I can argue either side of this one...  I'm all for the competition ball to preserve architecture.  But, on the other hand, you have your argument, which certainly has validity too.

I hear you Dan, I really do.  Same thing happens at OFCC during the annual U of I tournament.  I watched first hand Rickie Fowler tear up the North in 63 shots in cold and windy weather.  Made Vijay's 63 during the US Open look pedestrian.  He made the course and field look silly during the process and there is just nothing you can do to prevent that. 

Unfortunately, golf is the only sport where a brilliant performance can have a negative connotation.  When MJ dropped 63 on the Celtics, nobody complained about the loose rims in the Garden.  Or that Ruth had a short porch to hit over.  But golfer's egos get squarely in the way because THEIR golf course was played in a way they have no chance of playing. 

[Kalen Braley]

Clint - I'm telling you - It was an amazing sight.  I didn't think it'd be possible.

Actually, I can argue either side of this one...  I'm all for the competition ball to preserve architecture.  But, on the other hand, you have your argument, which certainly has validity too.

I hear you Dan, I really do.  Same thing happens at OFCC during the annual U of I tournament.  I watched first hand Rickie Fowler tear up the North in 63 shots in cold and windy weather.  Made Vijay's 63 during the US Open look pedestrian.  He made the course and field look silly during the process and there is just nothing you can do to prevent that. 

Unfortunately, golf is the only sport where a brilliant performance can have a negative connotation.  When MJ dropped 63 on the Celtics, nobody complained about the loose rims in the Garden.  Or that Ruth had a short porch to hit over.  But golfer's egos get squarely in the way because THEIR golf course was played in a way they have no chance of playing. 

Clint,

I found your post intriguing given the fact that none of us could ever score 63 on the Celtics nor hit a ball out a ballpark using a wooden bat....but that doesn't seem to bother us.  So why should it get members knickers in a twist when someone goes low at thier course?

Perhaps its just the simple act of having access to the same venues the pros play as opposed to this not being the case with Basketball, Baseball, Hockey, etc.  But even if we were allowed to play a scrimmage game at any of those places, I still doubt it would matter.   There has to be something esle at play here.

[JESII]

Being allowed to play a scrimmage at Boston Garden is hardly ownership...whereas the members at each and every club that host a big time event have a real and true ownership. It's their house that someone just came into and tore to pieces...HOW CAN WE PREVENT THIS FROM EVER HAPPENEING AGAIN?

They should get over it.

[Brent Hutto]

Regardless of the fact that the USGA put their heads in the sand for a decade with respect to 3-piece golf ball performance, totally missing out on a sea change in ball design parameters, it still strikes me that the majority of complaint on this topic comes from simple denial. A lot of people seem to think that someone with 30, 40, 50 percent greater clubhead speed than Jack Nicklaus and absolutely perfect technical form should none the less be rendered unable to overpower a 7,000 or 7,500 yard golf course by some means or another. That simply makes no sense.

Sure, the USGA could "roll back" ball flight by 10% at no great harm to the game. But to make today's 20-something year old elite players hit the same clubs and the same shots as their counterparts two generations ago would require a roll back of more like 40% in ball flight and that's just not within the realm of possibility. And that doesn't take into account the children and grandchildren of those 20-somethings who will no doubt be even stronger and better trained than today's generation.

[Kalen Braley]

Being allowed to play a scrimmage at Boston Garden is hardly ownership...whereas the members at each and every club that host a big time event have a real and true ownership. It's their house that someone just came into and tore to pieces...HOW CAN WE PREVENT THIS FROM EVER HAPPENEING AGAIN?

They should get over it.

Jim,

I get that its thier house...I just don't get why its a big deal when the best players on the planet visit that they "not be able to score low".  I mean its mostly expected that they will tear the place up because they are after all the best players on the planet.

If the pros came down to my private gym where I'm a member and played a scrimmage on the basketball court, I know they would do some amazing things on that court that no one else could do.  Would that mean I would request mgmt to "toughen up" the court?

Ditto for the best handballers, raquet ball players, weight lifters, swimmers, etc, etc. 

[JESII]

Kalen,

I guess you missed my last five words..."They" referred to the club members who want Tiger to struggle to break par if and when he shows up on the first tee...

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,

I guess you missed my last five words..."They" referred to the club members who want Tiger to struggle to break par if and when he shows up on the first tee...

Thanks for the clarification.

So in the end, does this whole thing just boil down to a twisted form of sadism by some old coots at a club?     I say that half jokingly, but I suspect in part its true. Is it if the course has doled out its fair share of "pain" on the members thru years of playing, then they want the pros to feel that same pain?

I really don't know on this one, just throwing it out there...

[JESII]

I don't think so...I think it's more the ego of playing a course for 20 years and knowing what your best score is and seeing a Tour player show up with a friend/member and on his first go shoots 6 under.

We all want our best to be closer to their best than it actually is...just like we'd like to think we could score a point on Jordan or get a hit off Clemens.

[Will Haskett]

Being allowed to play a scrimmage at Boston Garden is hardly ownership...whereas the members at each and every club that host a big time event have a real and true ownership. It's their house that someone just came into and tore to pieces...HOW CAN WE PREVENT THIS FROM EVER HAPPENEING AGAIN?

They should get over it.

Jim,

I get that its thier house...I just don't get why its a big deal when the best players on the planet visit that they "not be able to score low".  I mean its mostly expected that they will tear the place up because they are after all the best players on the planet.

If the pros came down to my private gym where I'm a member and played a scrimmage on the basketball court, I know they would do some amazing things on that court that no one else could do.  Would that mean I would request mgmt to "toughen up" the court?

Ditto for the best handballers, raquet ball players, weight lifters, swimmers, etc, etc. 

This is the first time I have ever seen golf compared to other big sports and it is a brilliant concept. The idea of humbling golf professionals is almost unique as compared to other sports. We want to see our heroes in basketball and baseball shatter records and do things others haven't done (as long as they aren't on steroids) because records were made to be broken. The 100-meter dash gets quicker every year, and we don't blink, but the score at the Open is double-digits under par and we cringe.

Sure, technology has made the game much easier for tour pros to go out and do things to a golf course that weren't possible 40 years ago. But that same technology has laso allowed me to reach levels of the sport I never thought possible. Would I sacrifice my own ability to shoot lower scores in order to see current pros struggle more? I don't know. I personally believe that accuracy is the key to any successful golf round, and lengthening a course is not the key. Tightening the course, guarding greens and growing trees and rough is the way to protect from low scores.

I am young, so here's a question: When Nicklaus or Watson or any other player who came along in the 60's and 70's started dominating the game, was there an outcry from people who said they were doing it with superior equipment to Bobby Jones, thus diminishing the game? Is Old Tom Morris a hack in history because we don't play with a gutta percha (sp?) anymore?

[Garland Bayley]

...
I am young, so here's a question: When Nicklaus or Watson or any other player who came along in the 60's and 70's started dominating the game, was there an outcry from people who said they were doing it with superior equipment to Bobby Jones, thus diminishing the game? Is Old Tom Morris a hack in history because we don't play with a gutta percha (sp?) anymore?

There has always been an outcry against new balls/equipment when it came out. In some cases, the ruling bodies did something about it, but have not been real successful. Check the In My Opinion section for the Vander Borght, John – The Balloon Ball article.

[Brad Swanson]

I've had many of the good players I've played with this summer agree that the newer 3 woods have made a big difference in their scores.  We're talking guys that have recently qualified for U.S.G.A. events and other very good amateurs, not washed up, has-been, legend in their own mind types.

Cheers,
Brad

[Martin Toal]

Henrik Stenson mostly uses a 3 wood (old Cally Steelhead, Graf Blue shaft) off the tee these days and he can shift it out there pretty well. He can hit his driver further, but sometimes mostly sideways.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()