Architects are smarter than golfers

[Sean_A]

Maybe he can clrify Sean because the nature of the bunkers at Seminole is that they are right against the greens edge...the one you were referencing in the image has no chance of catching a ball that has any chance of hitting the green.

I think his point was that the green grass face of the slope into the bunkers give golfers comfort (because it's not sand) and therefore makes them more likely to aim for a perimeter hole location...perhaps he'll calrify.

In one sense I agree...grass is a less intimidating visual...but as per my posts, every green at Seminole does this and if you fall for it beyond the first green on your first round...well, lets just say you are easily deceived...

Sully

Well, I am confused as well.  It looks like you will have to give up your critical secret of when you last played Seminole.  Though I am unsure of what that has to do with anything, but the Mucci mind works (or doesn't) in mysterious ways.

BTW

I have always been more fearful of grass/sod faces because it is harder to tell where exactly the trouble begins and ends.  To me, sand faces signal clear danger.  Plus, I rarely think they good - especially on inland courses.

Ciao  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

Sand faced bunkers immediately adjacent to sloped putting surfaces would wash out every time a heavy rain falls, and, heavy rains fall every day in South Florida in the Summer.  Hence, grass faces make more sense from a maintainance perspective.

[JESII]

Pat,

I'll agree that Seminole can thwart even the best golfers attempts...but that is wholly different from deception.

I paced off many of the bunkers and a good number were five yards removed from the green.

Name three...and I'll even give you two potential candidates...approach bunkers in the face of the hill on 2 and 11...I say potential because I've never seen it on 11 and on 2 there were a couple that ran down next to them but not actually in.

Other than those two, gve me one more buner than can catch a ball that had been previously on the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim,

# 5 has bunkers offset a good 5 yards from the putting surface

# 8's left greenside bunkers are even further removed.

The visual on # 6 is beyond devious, especially with back hole locations

On # 18, approaches hit to the center of the green, with a slight cut, will end up in the deep right bunker or far down the embankment, such is the feeding nature of the green, surrounds and slopes leading into bunkers.

# 13 and # 16 provide similar feeds, from the greens to the nearby grass, down into the bunkers or surrounding areas.

But, I can understand how taking care of 4 young children under the age of 10 can cloud your memory of a course last visited 8 years ago.

You need a good night's sleep

You can argue all you want, but, you're wrong, the greens, green surrounds, bunker slopes and bunkers feed balls hit slightly offline or to the wrong section of the green, down into those bunkers or adjacent areas, with the ball ending up far removed from the green.

[JESII]

Well, I cannot argue either that I have a clouded memory, or the most likely cause...but Google Earth has a pretty cool tool which lets you zoom in real close and then measure to the 1/100 of a yard...neither 5 nor 8 have bunkers more than 5 yards from the green which have a chance to pull in a ball that was once on the green...sorry!

Also, Re: your last sentence...no kidding. That's not the point. The point is that you have said people repeatedly think it's not going to happen (you have used the term deception), and I disagree.

The bunkers at Seminole are right at the edge of the green and they look like they are right at the edge of the green...and after a very slight bit of observation, the player knows that a ball near the edge of any green is very likely going to filter off intoa bunker or low chipping area...period.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Well, I cannot argue either that I have a clouded memory, or the most likely cause...but Google Earth has a pretty cool tool which lets you zoom in real close and then measure to the 1/100 of a yard...neither 5 nor 8 have bunkers more than 5 yards from the green which have a chance to pull in a ball that was once on the green...sorry!

That's great.
That means that you'll bet me on # 5 and # 8 having bunkers 5 yards or more from the putting surface.
And, since you're so sure of your "google earth" measurements that you'll give me odds.
When you said you had a "cool tool", at first, I thought you were referencing TEPaul

Also, Re: your last sentence...no kidding. That's not the point. The point is that you have said people repeatedly think it's not going to happen (you have used the term deception), and I disagree.

You can disagree all you want.  You haven't been there in 8 years and as recently as last week I witnessed decent golfers doing it over and over again.

The bunkers at Seminole are right at the edge of the green and they look like they are right at the edge of the green...
No, they're not.
When I pace 3 yards and 5 yards, I'm not taking TEPaul twinkle toe steps.
I know how to measure

and after a very slight bit of observation, the player knows that a ball near the edge of any green is very likely going to filter off into a bunker or low chipping area...period.

Not so, hope springs eternal that the player can attack the hole location with a decent shot.

I suspect your thinking is clouded by a medal play perspective along with a lack of sleep.

Most golfers view each hole in a vacuum, not as a fragment of a systemic challenge

[JESII]

Pat,

After you have your nurse check the prescrition log back in and start over...and maybe even start a thread on that last sentence of yours...pretty mindboggling...

[Lester George]

This is a trick question...right?

Of course architects are smarter than golfers.

Lester

[Melvyn Morrow]

Lester

I think they are talking about living architects not dead, that being the case it must be a trick question otherwise who would design an Island Green. 

Wow these Island Greens are such a great idea just think no need to worry about the routing, nor do you have to worry about any design element either. Now is that smart or has the designer just completely run out of ideas and energy?

Melvyn

[JESII]

And you why you're "misunderstood"...

[Melvyn Morrow]

No Jim just dead from the neck downwards, as for misunderstood who cares on GCA.com. its just another Tower of Babel.
Wonder when someone is going to incorporate that into one of the new designs.

With a question like this one you are going to piss off one side or another - no win situation. But that does not excuse those who design Island Greens, they may be dead from the neck upwards or just had a bad day in the office of life. Anyway are architects not golfers and golfers not some sort of trainee architect or is it the other way round, yes I think architects are trainee golfers - that would explain just about everything.

My problem it seems is that I may be misunderstood, do you realise that Jim, do you? (that's a joke)

Melvyn

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim,

Do you really believe that when 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 handicappers are playing a golf course that they aren't focused solely on the hole/shot they're playing to the exclusion of everything else related to golf ?

Do you think that after each hole, they look back, collectivize all of the holes previously played and try to extrapolate a theme that analyzes the architecture of the golf course along with the way the course is set-up, 17 times ?

Do you think that that process of extrapolation creates a predictive model, better preparing them for the rigors of the holes and random shots that lie ahead ?

If so, how would you account for the randomness of their future play as it relates to the predictive model based on the cumulative analysis of the randomly played prior holes, holes which they may or may not have come into contact with certain architectural features which they may or may not come into contact with on their future play ?

At this point I think I would be more open to accepting the consensus opinion of your four children

Ross's deception and temptation is what helps make Seminole such an interesting and fun challenge.

With the greens at pace, marginally hit shots or poorly thought out shots, or combinations of both often result in balls hit to the green ending up far away from the green, either in bunkers or the adjacent grass.  And, golfers fall prey to those architectural features which act as catalysts for that process, over and over again.

There's a benign look that's very deceptive, but, I can understand how you wouldn't remember it.
Four youngsters under 10 combined with stealing and consuming vast quantities of their pablum has adled your brain.
On the positive side, you can field your own family basketball team

[JESII]

Do you think that that process of extrapolation creates a predictive model, better preparing them for the rigors of the holes and random shots that lie ahead ?

If so, how would you account for the randomness of their future play as it relates to the predictive model based on the cumulative analysis of the randomly played prior holes, holes which they may or may not have come into contact with certain architectural features which they may or may not come into contact with on their future play ?

At this point I think I would be more open to accepting the consensus opinion of your four children

That's because you're speaking like them...please go read those quoted sentences. You sound like the village idiot auctioning off a cow pie...


Are these 20 handicappers the ones you referred to initially as aiming for perimeter hole locations and thinking they hit a good shot that was tragically sucked off the green into a bunker? With respect to the 20 handicappers I know, and others on here...don't aim for the perimeter holes at Seminole because you're not good enough...

[JESII]

From a distance, the golfer sees the bunkers, and, they appear to be a good distance from the putting surface.
Thus, hole locations near the perimeter seem not only accessable, but, demanding of attack, since the bunkers appear to be so far from the green, thus, giving the golfer the impression that ample margins of error are available to slightly mishit or misalinged shots.

Here's your premise.

Perimeter hole locations are "DEMANDING OF ATTACK" because the bunkers appear far from the green...what 15 or 20 handicapper should attack any hole location anywhere and expect to succeed again and again?

Oh yeah, I forgot, you hang out with 20 handicap 65 year olds that beat their handicap by a wide margin around Pine Valley frequently while driving the ball close to 300 yards and straight...that was a prior position you took...

[Patrick_Mucci]

From a distance, the golfer sees the bunkers, and, they appear to be a good distance from the putting surface.
Thus, hole locations near the perimeter seem not only accessable, but, demanding of attack, since the bunkers appear to be so far from the green, thus, giving the golfer the impression that ample margins of error are available to slightly mishit or misalinged shots.

Here's your premise.

Perimeter hole locations are "DEMANDING OF ATTACK" because the bunkers appear far from the green...what 15 or 20 handicapper should attack any hole location anywhere and expect to succeed again and again?

Oh yeah, I forgot, you hang out with 20 handicap 65 year olds that beat their handicap by a wide margin around Pine Valley frequently while driving the ball close to 300 yards and straight...that was a prior position you took...

Jim,

Obviously you don't get it, so please have your kids get together and explain it to you.

The VISUAL the golfer sees, doesn't provide him with the data that tells him how dangerous the pending shot is.

When the golfer is playing # 2 the flag can appear to be in a benign location, when in fact anything hit toward the flag will end up down in one of the deep bunkers, fairway or rough.

The same is true on # 3, # 4 to a lesser degree on # 5, especially # 6, # 10, especially # 11, # 12, # 13, # 14, to a lesser degree on # 15, # 16, # 17 and especially on # 18.

[JESII]

Pat,

Your entire premise is based on people no recognizing that the greenside bunkers are actually greenside...it's a flawed premise.

The challenge at Seminole isn't so much the deception as it is the miniscule effective green size when their speeds are up.

The aerial shots didn't sit well with you because they clearly refuted your premise that the bunkers are separated from the green...people can go look at Ran's reveiw and see a nice shot of the 17th and reprt back on whether or not that green looks ripe to attack a perimeter hole location...

The next part of your premise is interesting...5 - 25 handicap players don't pay enough attention to the primary characteristics of a course to carry what is available for observation forward in the round...or upon return trips to the same hole. Not really sure what to make of that yet.

Here's the challenge at Seminole, when the greens are up...when the hole location is towards the perimeter of the green you only have a couple yards worth of error in distance before your ball is filtered off the green one way or the other. Watch the guys on TV, they don't know within 2 or 3 yards if they got it right when the ball is in the air, how are we supposed to? So back to my earlier point, it's not that the visual and memory clues at Seminole "DEMAND YOU ATTACK" perimeter hole locations, it's just that we want to...once the ball lands and starts trickling off the green we are obviously disappointed, but we weren't foolish enough to think it was safe anyway...