News:

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


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #25 on: August 15, 2010, 09:17:41 PM »
Dustin, if you hit that same drive at the 18th at Pebble Beach or The Old Course, you're likely out of bounds and voila - a two stroke penalty.  Perhaps the architect should be given credit for providing abundant width at the home hole of a major championship.  

Tim Bert, if Dustin hits that drive on the 18th at Kingsley Club he never finds the  ball in the thick waste high fescue and guess what? - incurs a two stroke penalty. ;)

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #26 on: August 15, 2010, 09:20:23 PM »
Yes, I was referring to the media contingent, with whom I am sure he'd have gladly chatted if he'd won...

I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I have no doubt if some other players were in that position and stiffed the pressroom they would be criticised.

Bill Hyde

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #27 on: August 15, 2010, 09:30:08 PM »
I'm sorry, he was really foolish. I can't imagine ever setting my club on sand on the 72nd hole of a major I was leading by 1.

The second he grounded his club before the "shadow" incident, I thought to myself "some guy is going to call in and say he had broken a rule."

Frankly, I think he knew he had broken the rule the at that time. Then he used the shadow thing as a cover and to think for a moment. Then, I think he decided to pretend he never viewed it as a bunker, grounded it again and prayed all the way to the scorer's tent.

It's a bummer, he's a great talent and surely will win a few majors, but that was a junior golf mistake...

Carl Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #28 on: August 15, 2010, 09:37:46 PM »
I'm not particularly a Pete Dye fan, but right now my thinking is that neither he nor his architecture is stupid.  He puts a "bunch of junk out there" and the rules makers have to figure out the rules that apply and explain them and the players have to follow them.

Jay Flemma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #29 on: August 15, 2010, 09:44:37 PM »
I'm sorry, he was really foolish. I can't imagine ever setting my club on sand on the 72nd hole of a major I was leading by 1.

The second he grounded his club before the "shadow" incident, I thought to myself "some guy is going to call in and say he had broken a rule."

Frankly, I think he knew he had broken the rule the at that time. Then he used the shadow thing as a cover and to think for a moment. Then, I think he decided to pretend he never viewed it as a bunker, grounded it again and prayed all the way to the scorer's tent.

It's a bummer, he's a great talent and surely will win a few majors, but that was a junior golf mistake...

it was...still uncertain whether bobby his caddie had a chance to tell him, "wait a minute."

I like Bobby a great deal and he gave me great quotes all week, but when Steve Elling of CBS asked him what was up he said a terse "no comment." 

I think they bounce back.
Mackenzie, MacRayBanks, Maxwell, Doak, Dye, Strantz. @JayGolfUSA, GNN Radio Host of Jay's Plays www.cybergolf.com/writerscorner

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #30 on: August 15, 2010, 09:46:17 PM »
Look at all the knee-jerk posts in this thread...don't ever be amazed or aghast when a major news outlet gets a story wrong or jumps the gun...many on here are masters of rumor-mongering without substantiation.  Now that's the real shame.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Ryan Farrow

Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #31 on: August 15, 2010, 09:49:08 PM »
Bill, I agree with you 100% I think he knew what he did,. I hate to speculate though. From the look on his face, i saw the look of a man with his hand caught in the cookie jar...



In the interview he had a hard time accepting that the right call was made. Perhaps he thought it was unfair.

With the 2 Michelle Wie instances, the grass moving at harbor town, and now this..... when are we going to add proper judgment to these decisions? Why can't we argue that if no advantage was gained, he did not really break the rule. Will we ever see common sense and spirit of the rules? Or will we will always accept the rules as black and white.


I wish the fans would have chanted more for Dustin to Play, and booed the rules officials off the property....

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #32 on: August 15, 2010, 09:57:22 PM »


I wish the fans would have chanted more for Dustin to Play, and booed the rules officials off the property....

Or have Bubba and Kaymer refuse to participated in a playoff without Johnson...

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #33 on: August 15, 2010, 09:59:47 PM »
I lost all respect for Pete Dye today after his smug interview.The PGA should be ashamed for taking the championship to a resort course that thinks hundreds of bunkers is a good feature.How could an average golfer follow the rules and ever finish half the holes?The rules officials were very helpful to Watson on 18 in the playoff.Johnson had to do his own crowd control.Bush league handling from setup to execution.

John Moore II

Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #34 on: August 15, 2010, 10:06:59 PM »
Ryan-You make a good point. The rules are designed to make the game equitable for all players. How is there any lack of equity with Dustin grounding his club in that supposed bunker? There was no advantage gained. I do think we get far too black and white with the rules, fact is, there are gray areas in the rules and in situations. Heck, I am watching the Golf Channel coverage right now and there is an access road about 10 yards away from this supposed bunker. How would any reasonable person think this was a bunker? There are numerous other scenarios where there are gray areas in the rules, all depends on how the committee wants to make the ruling, and rightly or wrongly, the decision, one way or the other, is never made in true equity, its always made in rigidity.

Gib Carpenter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2010, 10:08:23 PM »
The whole thing is really unfortunate but I also think he recognized his mistake prior to the "shadow" comment.

Don't know if anyone pointed this out yet but Faldo clearly said "Oh dear" (or something to that effect) as soon as DJ grounded his club the first time then quickly switched to commenting on the "shadow" issue so I think Faldo knew too.

Guys whose opinion I generally trust wrt GCA have told me they liked WS...Although I've never played it I suspect I would feel differently if I did...which I won't.  ;)

Lastly, I've decided that 18 at WS must officially supplant 18 at Valhalla as the worst hole in championship golf. I  mean, it's quite a feat to ruin both a great PGA AND a dramatic playoff in the span of one hour, no?

GCA/AOK

John Moore II

Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2010, 10:16:43 PM »
The whole thing is really unfortunate but I also think he recognized his mistake prior to the "shadow" comment.

Don't know if anyone pointed this out yet but Faldo clearly said "Oh dear" (or something to that effect) as soon as DJ grounded his club the first time then quickly switched to commenting on the "shadow" issue so I think Faldo knew too.

Guys whose opinion I generally trust wrt GCA have told me they liked WS...Although I've never played it I suspect I would feel differently if I did...which I won't.  ;)

Lastly, I've decided that 18 at WS must officially supplant 18 at Valhalla as the worst hole in championship golf. I  mean, it's quite a feat to ruin both a great PGA AND a dramatic playoff in the span of one hour, no?



I think you are correct about 18. Its a crazy hole. The fairway is 35 yards wide and thats fairly narrow as far as I'm concerned. 18 has very little drama, just an attempt to prevent a train wreck from happening. I mean, there was one birdie on that hole today; no chance for a player to do anything good on that hole. Just pray from tee to green you can make a 4 and move along.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #37 on: August 15, 2010, 10:45:14 PM »
The rules as they were read, and the very first one on the local rules sheet is explicit.  You'd have to be a moron not to understand what it said.  Any structure, anywhere on the property, filled with sand is a bunker hazard.  That was specifically given to the players, first thing and first item on the agenda when they arrived to register for competition.  And, while it is the player's responsibilty, that caddie was not on the ball either.

I sat exactly 5 ft from that lower lip for about 1/2 hour watching players come through.  I had no illusion it was a bunker.  Not as many people were there on Thurs, as were crowded in the bunker today.  But don't for get, these players passed that point within 10-20 yards every day last week during practice rounds and three previous competition rounds.  It is a bunker on the program map, and a bunker on their yardage maps.  This is a case of mentally lazy or careless play.  Johnson has a good quality in being able to stay laid back and not too excitable, but being brain dead isn't an advantage, either.

I think Pete Dye was perfect in the interview.  And, his quip on what he will do for next time in 2015, was 'maybe add a few more' was a good way of saying, I'm the architect, and you are not. 

You can argue if WS is grea architecture or not.  I've argued both ways (good competition architecture - not so much for general play)

but on this rules thing, it was explicitly covered.  I was let down by Feherty today.  I like him alot.  But, that rushing in and saying it never entered his mind that it was a bunker was so much horsehockey in my opinion.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Ted Cahill

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #38 on: August 15, 2010, 10:49:13 PM »
I disagree with the criticism of 18 at Whistling Straits.  I like that the hole is tough for all players, regardless of how far they hit the ball.  It is genuinely tense when they are making decisions on shot strategy.  That makes great tounament drama.  If you don't like 18 @ WS then you must dislike 14 @ Pebble Beach?  The worst 18th hole on a major course is Bethpage Black- calling it a snoozer does a diservice to snoozers everywhere.
“Bandon Dunes is like Chamonix for skiers or the
North Shore of Oahu for surfers,” Rogers said. “It is
where those who really care end up.”

MikeJones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2010, 10:53:00 PM »
It seems that on the list of special rules which the players get for each tournament, the bunker issue/ situation was at the top of the list. It's a shame that the penalty happened but you can't really blame anyone but the player in the end. It's his responsibility to know the rules is it not? Having said that I really wanted Dustin to win as it would have concluded a great comeback from his last round disaster at Pebble.

If the 18th hole was 20 yards longer and a par 5 people wouldn't be so negative about it's merits. It's a 4 1/2 hole if ever there was one and if you make your par you're up on the field. It's a hole that penalizes bad decisions as much as bad swings and so for a finishing hole I think it's pretty good.

Richard Choi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #40 on: August 16, 2010, 01:02:10 AM »
I don't think anyone is arguing that Dustin did not break a rule or he should not have been penalized for what he did.

But I think it is fair to criticize PGA for making a dumb rule. When you have course where you can brush away a clump of grass to find a bunker underneath (as Golf Magazine quoted when they tried to count every bunker on the course), it is a DUMB rule to consider them all bunkers. It may be easy for us to see when CBS shows the computer graphic showing the bunkers, but it is not so easy to discern when there re hundreds of people surrounding it no more than 5 feet away from the ball.

It was dumb rule, period. I hope PGA is happy.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #41 on: August 16, 2010, 01:06:09 AM »
Ran,

Thanks for the thread. Will Dustin be retiring after one post? Is that a new record, or have others gotten on and only posted once too?
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Jason Walker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #42 on: August 16, 2010, 01:43:08 AM »
"Dustin - What the heck were you doin' hittin' it there on the 72d hole with the Wanamaker Trophy on nth eline??

Seriously though, i was standing next to Pete Dye and he said, "It's a bunker.  I know because I built it.  They're all bunkers.  He shouldn't be hitting it up there on that hill."
"

Jay, I agree with you--the untold story is that on 99% of major championship courses that tee shot would be OB or jail...it was 75 yards of line.

That said--did Pete Dye really say that?  I watched the last nine holes of the championship right next to him in the clubhouse--I don't recall him saying that.  In fact, he said some things today quite the opposite of that.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 01:48:12 AM by Jason Walker »

V. Kmetz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #43 on: August 16, 2010, 06:13:49 AM »
Ryan Farrow:

What?  Do you just want to publicly sniff Pete Dye's jock, so he'll grant you a job?

I wagered not a dime on the outcome and the only reason I used profanity at him is because his answer/commentary was a slovenly, profanity of it's own.   The now-notorious "info sheet" that was supposedly tatooed to their foreheads says "anything designed to be a bunker" and I'm saying that is precisely the point:  How in god's name can you distinguish designed from undesigned in that place.  thsi is not where we want the player's focus to be.

Sorry if you think I'm overly invested in a game by saying FU Pete Dye.  If accurately reported, his comments are that of a smug, arrogant bastard.  No better place to say it than on a Golf Architecture board.

But I will wager on this however, if you like Football and the Super Bowl is ruined by hitting the scoreboard in Jerry Jone's Xanadu, you're damn disappointed...Ninth Wonder of the world and they can't get the height of the scoreboard right.  Who cares about the game at that point - when it was more important that the big money patrons get a hexagonal scoreboard as big as your city hall than it was to ensure that the game was free of interference?  Same thing goes for Tropicana Field in St Pete?  You want a World Series decided on ball that hits the catwalk?

With this local rule, required by the precisely overblown nature of Pistling Straits, said to be duly applied and enforced by the PGA by a minority on this board - Golf has now dropped that much more to the level of the other sports - it's not important what happens during the game, it's just important that the game go on, and people pay through the turnstiles and upper-middle class corporate sponsors are involved.

If they discover that everyone who finished in the Top 12 had violated this rule at a certain point in the tournament, including DJ in a previous round, and now the #13 man is actually the winner - under the rules of this event - are going to say...nice job #13, you're the guy shooting lowest to not fuck up

I have worked at and in Golf for nearly thirty years.  I write about golf, I post on this board, I caddy - I'm invested.  Perhaps those who don't view it in the same way would be best to question their own position.

cheers

vk
"The tee shot must first be hit straight and long between a vast bunker on the left which whispers 'slice' in the player's ear, and a wilderness on the right which induces a hurried hook." -

John Shimp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #44 on: August 16, 2010, 10:37:43 AM »
Dustin,
I hate the way it came out for you. 

The OB right post earlier is not relevant.  There isn't OB right on 18 at WS and there is nastiness to the left. So players miss right. 

Clearly there are bunkers all over the place that serve little purpose other than to create a wild look.   But here is a question:  is sticking those bunkers way up a hill side with long grass a bad example of "double hazarding"?  What I mean is 18 at TPC sawgrass doesnt need a bunker running along the left side of the fairway against the lake.  (Btw, i've always hated the long bunker that runs along the seawall on 18 at Pebble.  Let a ball that far left get wet...)

Dustin, I'm a fellow Irmo boy by the way.

Phil Benedict

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #45 on: August 16, 2010, 11:39:52 AM »
The whole thing is really unfortunate but I also think he recognized his mistake prior to the "shadow" comment.

Don't know if anyone pointed this out yet but Faldo clearly said "Oh dear" (or something to that effect) as soon as DJ grounded his club the first time then quickly switched to commenting on the "shadow" issue so I think Faldo knew too.

Guys whose opinion I generally trust wrt GCA have told me they liked WS...Although I've never played it I suspect I would feel differently if I did...which I won't.  ;)

Lastly, I've decided that 18 at WS must officially supplant 18 at Valhalla as the worst hole in championship golf. I  mean, it's quite a feat to ruin both a great PGA AND a dramatic playoff in the span of one hour, no?



I think you are correct about 18. Its a crazy hole. The fairway is 35 yards wide and thats fairly narrow as far as I'm concerned. 18 has very little drama, just an attempt to prevent a train wreck from happening. I mean, there was one birdie on that hole today; no chance for a player to do anything good on that hole. Just pray from tee to green you can make a 4 and move along.


Seems like 18 is your basic half par hole - a par 4 where the average score must be something like 4.5.  (Question:  Why do we love par 5's or short par 4's that play as half par holes because they are easier than par but hate half par holes that play over par?) 

I thought there was plenty of 'drama' on 18.  Bubba making a tough par; Kaymer's par save; Rory's miss.  Plus everyone thought DJ had a 5-footer to win.  It was the same in '04 with Leonard missing the winning putt.  It may be goofy architecture but the fact that it is such as hard par means there will always be drama on the hole unless the winner separates himself from the field.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #46 on: August 16, 2010, 11:45:11 AM »
I disagree with the criticism of 18 at Whistling Straits.  I like that the hole is tough for all players, regardless of how far they hit the ball.  It is genuinely tense when they are making decisions on shot strategy.  That makes great tounament drama.  If you don't like 18 @ WS then you must dislike 14 @ Pebble Beach?  The worst 18th hole on a major course is Bethpage Black- calling it a snoozer does a diservice to snoozers everywhere.

There's all kinds of drama - there's drama imposed by the setting and the curcumstances, and there's artificial drama imposed by certain types of architecture.

I greatly prefer the former.

My analogy would be a fight between two warriors and Russian roulette. Maybe the same outcome, plenty of "drama", not at all the same contests.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Gary Slatter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #47 on: August 16, 2010, 11:51:27 AM »
Dustin, if you get a chance play the Castle Course in St Andrews.  It's a mini Whistling Straits!  In fact it might be the first copy of WS.
Gary Slatter
gary.slatter@raffles.com

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #48 on: August 16, 2010, 02:09:20 PM »
(Btw, i've always hated the long bunker that runs along the seawall on 18 at Pebble.  Let a ball that far left get wet...)


John:

I've never understood the fixation some people have about a "double penalty".  But, I suspect the bunker on the 18th at Pebble Beach is there because their only options were a bunker, or dead grass (due to all the salt spray that portion of the ground receives).

John Moore II

Re: Who says stupid architecture doesn't matter?
« Reply #49 on: August 16, 2010, 04:23:36 PM »
The rules as they were read, and the very first one on the local rules sheet is explicit.  You'd have to be a moron not to understand what it said.  Any structure, anywhere on the property, filled with sand is a bunker hazard.  That was specifically given to the players, first thing and first item on the agenda when they arrived to register for competition.  And, while it is the player's responsibilty, that caddie was not on the ball either.

Local rule for the PGA at WS:

1. Bunkers: All areas of the course that were designed and built as sand bunkers will be played as bunkers (hazards), whether or not they have been raked. This will mean that many bunkers positioned outside of the ropes, as well as some areas of bunkers inside the ropes, close to the rope line, will likely include numerous footprints, heel prints and tire tracks during the play of the Championship. Such irregularities of surface are a part of the game and no free relief will be available form these conditions.

Note 1: The sand area in front, left and behind No. 5 green in the later water hazard is NOT a bunker (do not move stones).

Note 2: Where necessary, blue dots define the margin of a bunker.


RJ-That is the rule as written. It does not say all sand is a bunker, it says all areas designed and built as sand bunkers. So, now, players are literally left to determine in the heat of competition whether or not it was the architects intent to build this sandy/dirt area as a bunker. The area where DJ hit his ball was not what I would call sand, it was plain dirt. Nothing but trampled on dirt with grass and trash strewn about. The call was terrible and the rule was worse.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back