[Patrick_Mucci]

CBM,

Having Options of play, and acceptable options of play when attempting to maintain one's handicap are two different circumstances, with the latter rejected in many cases.
A zero handicap could option his way to nirvana at NGLA, but
shooting 90 in the name of variety is unacceptable to most.

Besides, the Judge has recused NGLA for this trial.

JEarle,

What options of play exist a Winged Foot (west) from the back tees, in the spring ?

Rich Goodale,

True, certain holes allow for lay ups or bail outs, but most players who chose that option usually conceed par or bogie, and how many times in a round can one live with that.
How many times, when sitting around the clubhouse, or having a beer, have you been regaled by someone describing their fantastic lay-up or bail out ?  Especially, on a repetitive basis.  How many times have any of us bragged about our incredible lay-ups, safes, or bail outs ?

TEPaul,

Options of play were severely diminished in 1951, when the STYMIE was eliminated.

Do golfers really have options of play when trying to shoot or maintain their handicap  ??

[Richard_Goodale]

Patrick

I play mostly with very low handicap golfers, and we find birdies and eagles to be obvious and thus boring.  You can bet your ass that what we talk about in the 19th hole are those occasions where we needed to sink that 10 foot downhill sidehill putt for a bogey!

Rich

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Not sure I get the question about having options of play (or not) when trying to shoot your handicap. I think one needs to consider options carefully anytime one is trying to seriously shoot the best score he can.

This stymie rejuvenation thing of yours has been a bit of  ongoing Tomfoolery on here for a while but now you have a real ally--Geoff Shackelford--and he's very serious!!

On the stymie return subject since we should probably try it out sometime--I've gotta ask you are you lobbying for the return of just the stymie as a fun thing to do or do you also advocate what made the stymie a wrinkle in golf in the first place which was that one must put his ball in play on the tee and not touch it until he removes it from the hole? Of course that precludes cleaning your ball and all that unnecessary stuff!

Actually if you're advocating not touching your ball until it's removed from the hole you're onto something very pure indeed since the prohibition against touching your ball happens to be part of the two great principles of the game which as written were:

1/You play the course as you find it.
2/ Put your ball in play at the start of the hole, play only your own ball and do not touch it until you lift it from the hole.

These two great priniciple were supplemented by ten working principles, but basically those two great princple are the basis of the game!

[Matt_Cohn]

1) Will a golf course with few options become boring if you play it every day?
2) If the course you play every day does have a lot of options, given the same weather, pin location, etc., won't you choose the same option every time?
3) Is that better than having no options?
4) Is variety (tee and pin positions, wind) more important than strategic options in keeping a course interesting?
5) Do courses with many options require more local knowledge, making them less ideal tournament sites? (ex., is Baltusrol a fairer course than Augusta?)
6) If you played a golf course made of the list of holes offered earlier, would you feel like you were being ordered around all day? Or would you enjoy being challenged to hit the ball a specific way on each shot?
7) Is there a better solution than having some holes with options and some holes without options on each course?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I think this thread is a sly attempt to upgrade the reputation of the exhilirating but optionsless Boca Rio.

Interesting hazards and a variety of challenges - from strategic to penal - are what sperates the greats from the also-rans. To answer your question, no, options of play are not overrated. If thought wasn't an important ingredient in a great golf course design then it would be possible for any idiot from NJ (or Ohio) to design a great golf course and we both know that ain't the case.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I would like to see the STYMIE returned for match play.
It would bring defensive play back into the game, along with heightened interest, I suspect.

With respect to options of play, look at the 3rd hole at NGLA.
Are you really going to play conservatively up the right side alley, or are you going to try to fly it over the hill and bunker onto the green ?  

Do the options of play diminish as your handicap diminishes ?

Has the aerial game greatly diminished options ?

Are we all that good that we can see options, and then execute them precisely ?

Tom MacWood,

My post has absolutely nothing to do with Boca Rio.
And..... I would love the opportunity to design a golf course, in order to seperate theory from reality.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
I have heard it said that you must give courses like Boca Rio their due, maybe it isn't the most thought provoking course in the world, but at the end of the day the strongest golfer will prevail. But in my mind the sign of great golf course is one in which the strongest golfer may not prevail, especially if he is unable to think his way around. The golf course that provides options and rewards not only good shot making but also thought are the ones that I appreciate.

I find this thread ironic coming from someone who seems to hold the NGLA in such high esteem - I figured it either had to do with Boca Rio or maybe an architect who shall remain nameless.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Sorry, you're wrong on both counts.

The topic came to me after I had played 18 at The Medalist and 18 at Old Marsh, followed by a late night symposium dealing with shapes, angles and strategies.

The question of whether the aerial game and lower handicaps diminish options combined with one's particular game , ie, hooker, fader, high ball hitter, low ball hitter, caused me to reflect on the significance or reality of REAL options of play ?

For example, take the 4th at NGLA.  Now take a 10 handicapper who hits everything with a big high fade.
Irrespective of the wind, what are his options when the pin is back left, front right or dead center ?

Take his counterpart, a 10 handicapper who hits everything with a low running hook, what are his options on the same hole ?

Go through every hole on the golf course with these two players and tell me if they have an abundance of options, or does their particular game limit REALISTIC options ?

Does one's own game DICTATE play, eliminating many elements of strategy and options ?

Has modern day equipment and the ball diminished options and strategy by hampering shaped ball flight ?

I don't think it is so surprising that someone who loves NGLA can come up with this thread, I think it reflects diversity and alternative thought processes.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Richard_Goodale]

Patrick

Your hypotheticals about course set up remind me of a true story about the once current pro and soon to be pro of a famous and venerable course.  The current pro hated his heir apparent, who hit everything with a low running hook (but with great skill), and expressed this hatred by tucking all pins as far right as possible on the days of important competitions.  Because of the great skill of the heir apparent, however, this ploy was ineffective and you can see his name on the clubhouse wall numerous times.

[Mike O'Neill]

Patrick,

Your original post about great holes and options didn't say anything about a player's tendencies "dictating" their play. Regardless of whether a golfer takes advantage of a given hole's options, those options are still there from one player to the next. A golf hole does not get it essence from a given player who is unable to hit anything but a high fade. If a golf hole exists in the woods and there's no one there to play it, does it still have options...

I agree that there are great holes with very limited options. There are limited holes that are not great. There are great and varied holes in golf. That is the magic of golf compared to other games--we have options even in what golf course we play to begin with. Options, options everywhere.

By the way, I know of a great 290 yard par 4 with a 90 yard wide fairway, creative bunkering and a really cool green that confounds almost everyone that putts it. There are many ways to play that hole from trying to drive the green, to laying back with an iron to varying points in the fairway. Some might even choose to try to drive one of the greenside sand traps. It is great fun and as a 10 handicapper (when I've practiced) I can manage to find the proper side of the fairway with a 3 iron. One thing that is not an option because of the green is firing at the flagstick. With that green, you always have to hit the ball to a "spot" and let it feed to the pin. And the "spot" totally depends on the pin location. Sometimes the "spot" is actually five or ten yards short of the green itself--again, on a 290 yard hole.

No, options are not overrated. They are actually underrated.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike O'Neill,

Golf courses do not exist on paper.  They are not intended to be played by robotic golfers capable of precisely executing everyshot in the book.
They are played by individuals of varying abilities, and an architect must remain detached from a given style of play or player, yet, they must forge a tactical challenge for every level of golfer.

Hence, the architect must consider the golfer who only hits a high fade or a low running hook.

Could it be that the shot of choice was a draw, and that Tillinghast, Ross, CBM and others favored that play when designing their holes ?

Is it, was it Nicklaus's influence that favored high fades in designing golf courses ?

How does a hooker fare on Nicklaus's golf courses ??
Discard the humourous answer.

How does a fader fare on Tillinghast, Ross, and CBM courses ??

Did/Do architects design with a prefered shot pattern in mind ?

[Mike O'Neill]

Patrick,

I am looking through my posts for "robotic golfer" and can't find it. I don't see where I said that courses are built for any particular golfer. If you happen to have more than one shot in the bag, golf often affords you the opportunity to play those different shots.

If Ross (or take your pick of architects) favored a draw on all or the vast majority of his holes and did not allow golfers to ever run the ball up and bank the ball into the left half of the green, I would be surprised. But I am not a Ross expert. If that is the case, that one can only hit a draw into a Ross green, then Ross did not provide many options in his designs. Luckily, he was only one man. I have seen many golf courses with great holes with varying options.

I am sorry Patrick, there is no way around the fact that there are great holes out there with different options. I agree that there are great holes that are limited in options. They are but a percentage of the golf holes.

Let me ask you this, what do you think of a golf hole that does afford different possibilities? Something that has some interesting oppotunities in terms of terrain around the green and varying landing areas and run up possibilities. Do you have anything good to say about such a concept?

[Richard Mandell]

Patrick:

In response to your first question, "where are the options?",  In the trees my friend, in the trees!

Lots of those examples were holes built originally in open land, became legend, and then the trees grew.

In the trees, those options are in the trees.

Cut 'em down!

[Richard Mandell]

Patrick:

In response to your first question, "where are the options?",  In the trees my friend, in the trees!

Lots of those examples were holes built originally in open land, became legend, and then the trees grew.

In the trees, those options are in the trees.

Cut 'em down!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike O'Neill,

Could you cite me five holes that would fit your criteria, and I'd be happy to comment on them.

I'm all for options, but I wonder if they're not more the object of myth than reality.

I don't know of many golf courses where the run-up or along the ground game exists.  I think Tom Paul hit on the perfect phrase, using "maintainance meld" to describe the influences that must exist in order to optimize the golfing and architectual experience.  Unfortunately, the "maintainance meld" is the rare exception, even on golf courses with historical connections to the great architects.  All to often, the aerial game, and overwatering make the ground game non-existent.

With respect to my ideal golf course,  I'd probably cite Newport as a prime example.  No fairway irrigation system, hard by the water, and plenty of wind.  But, how many Newports are there ?

I see options, in a realistic, playability sense, in the great minority throughout golfdom in the US.

Perhaps you see differently, and as such I would welcome examples where options abound, not where they are a rare commodity.

[Mike O'Neill]

Patrick,

Well at least we are getting somewhere. At least we now know that options are not a figment of our inflated imaginations, unless Newport does not actually exist.

As for course with holes with options, Wild Horse in Nebraska is filled with them. Certainly more than five on that course alone. But you have not seen that one nor all the public courses I grew up playing in Omaha that have options and may think that those rare examples.

How about East Hampton? Numbers 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18 and to a lesser extent 3, 4, 5, and 9 all allow the run up shot in addition to the thrown dart. Even though the course is somewhat narrow in places, you can always still choose to shoot for the better side of the fairway depending on how you want to approach the hole. Not all of the holes at East Hampton are great holes mind you. I am not judging them in that way necessarily. Just saying they can be played in more ways than one.

All of the par 5's at East Hampton have options depending on where they cut the cups. If you get far enough up the left side of 14, you can run the ball in for your third shot. Or you can play away from the big bunker down the right on your tee shot and then play to safe right side for your second and then throw a dart at the flag from there over the greenside bunker, if I remember correctly. I like the driver, three iron, wedge because my three wood gets me into trouble more often than not if I go for the big hit. It is still a choice of where to land the second shot depending on the location of the cup. If the cup is way left, the right side is the best side despite the right greenside bunker for the wedge shot in because it gives you some green to work with on a proper angle.

Couldn't we have the same discussion on hundreds of courses? If you think not, then we will have to agree to disagree. Fair enough?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()