Mark:
For someone to say, as I did, that removing the flags from greens is an interesting thing to do I think you have to try to take it for what it means--and not assume it means I'm suggesting the game of golf should be revolutionized in some way!
These few threads recently, like this one, and the others that discuss things like length vs accuracy, the factors of the risks and rewards involved with both, how that relates to strategy and design balance, and even the thread on par are showing me a lot actually. But primarily they're showing me how differently golfers look at these various facets of the game.
Have you ever noticed that even a Tour pro if asked what his strategy might be that day may say; "hit fairways and greens"? What do you suppose he means by that?
While I think it's very interesting how different golfers look at these things you must understand I don't necessarily believe that some of what they think is the best way or the most advantageous way to look at golf, not if they're interested in good ways to keep their scores down-- and certainly not the best way to play unless those golfers are truly only interested in just batting a ball around on some piece of property with not much thought to doing anything other than that.
When I said how interesting it is to remove flags from greens all I meant is that just happens to be a wonderful example of understanding what good risk management is all about and can be for most golfers!
Most golfers who aren't particularly accomplished in scoring well in golf don't have much idea about risk management and might be inclined to aim right at a flag when clearly that might not even be the most sensible thing to do for Tiger Woods!
Golfers like this may have never heard of something like not short-siding themselves and so really don't have much understanding of some of the basic ramifications of strategy in golf. And they don't have much understanding of the ramifications of strategy particularly when they're the ones who need to understand it as much as Tiger does because they're far more likely to make mistakes than he is!
For the basic strategies of golf I tend to look at the essence of it which I believe is temptation as much for what the risks are as for what the rewards are.
But anyway, I do think removing flags can be an interesting practice in the strategic understanding of hitting greens, for instance, and the risk managment of it.
But seeing as how cups have been part of the game since the beginning and definitely before the onset of golf architecture I wouldn't recommend removing them, as you did. Certainly not a good recommendation for any reason whatsoever unless you're inclined to gut the very essence of the game--which is to score, I think, and mostly in as few shots as possible--and always weighing the risks of what might prevent scoring well is not such a bad idea!
And also I don't think any of us on this site have said or implied that just because we like to talk about some of the finer points of architecture that we don't like to play the game.
Would you agree with that?