[David_Madison]

Pat,

First, your using the term "for sake of argument, let's assume I agree with you." That's about as close to agreement as I believe you are legally allowed on this site. Your use of "for the sake of argument" does not soften the blow. I am honored.

I clearly remember during a telecast of the PGA Tour event at Riviera their showing a comparative scoring graphic of those attempting to drive #10 vs. those laying up. As could be expected, the scoring was much more scattered for those going for the green than those laying up to the pitching zone, but those laying up had a lower stroke average. Isn't that exactly the definition of "interfacing with the architecture"? Getting to the lay-up zone with a shorter club due to the ability to hit it a long way only means that the likelihood of safely getting to a prime piece of the lay-up zone goes up. The interaction with the architecture still happens.

I suspect we'll all see the same type of thing on Pinehurst #2 with C&C's redo. The course will not yield to bomb and gouge unless the bombing is incredibly precise. The gouge part just won't work there due to the nature of the off-fairway ground and the severely reduced receptiveness of the greens to shots from same. The course likely won't play long, but the players will absolutely interact with the architecture in a manner that will be far more involved than what we are all used to seeing.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ballyneal and Dismal River were two, among others, that featured bunkering at varying distances off the tees.  Of course, I don't think you need to have bunkers at all of those distances on every hole.  Instead, put a bunker 220 off the first tee, 310 off the second tee, 180 off the third tee, etc. etc. etc.

And you think that the random placement of single bunkers will thwart the best golfers in the world ?

And yes, there is something wrong with the equipment, but it only helps those at the very top of the heat. 

That's totally inaccurate, you just told us that you're a 5 handicapper and that you hit it 260.
40 years ago there wasn't a 5 handicapper in the universe who hit it 260.
The distance issue is sytemic.
One reason is that with driver clubheads being the size of a platform tennis racquet, you can swing as hard as you want to since the margin of error will be compensated for by the increased size of the clubhead, resulting in mishits that go a mile, that go straight.  Try that with a shallow faced Power Bilt driver and balls that spin.

Most golf courses won't see action from those players anyways. 
I don't think many high school kids hit it farther than tour players.
The NCAA driving stats indicated that they were hitting it farther than the PGA Tour Pros.
That's systemic, and, it's generational.
400 yard drives are in the future if I&B aren't regulated. 

Maybe a couple like Jordan Spieth that you see on television in TOUR EVENTS, but other than that, the pros hit it farther than anyone else.
NOT TRUE.
The collegians have them beat.

[JNC Lyon]

Ballyneal and Dismal River were two, among others, that featured bunkering at varying distances off the tees.  Of course, I don't think you need to have bunkers at all of those distances on every hole.  Instead, put a bunker 220 off the first tee, 310 off the second tee, 180 off the third tee, etc. etc. etc.

And you think that the random placement of single bunkers will thwart the best golfers in the world ?

And yes, there is something wrong with the equipment, but it only helps those at the very top of the heat. 

That's totally inaccurate, you just told us that you're a 5 handicapper and that you hit it 260.
40 years ago there wasn't a 5 handicapper in the universe who hit it 260.
The distance issue is sytemic.
One reason is that with driver clubheads being the size of a platform tennis racquet, you can swing as hard as you want to since the margin of error will be compensated for by the increased size of the clubhead, resulting in mishits that go a mile, that go straight.  Try that with a shallow faced Power Bilt driver and balls that spin.

Most golf courses won't see action from those players anyways. 
I don't think many high school kids hit it farther than tour players.
The NCAA driving stats indicated that they were hitting it farther than the PGA Tour Pros.
That's systemic, and, it's generational.
400 yard drives are in the future if I&B aren't regulated. 

Maybe a couple like Jordan Spieth that you see on television in TOUR EVENTS, but other than that, the pros hit it farther than anyone else.
NOT TRUE.
The collegians have them beat.

Pat,

Once again, WHO CARES if a layout doesn't "thwart" the best players in the world?  They're the best players in the world! In the case of Plainfield, tour pros will play it once for four days--AND THAT'S IT.  Who cares if it's too short for tour players?  Design a course that has variety for 99% of all golfers, and forget about the freaks on television and the two college-level players that belong to the course.  And yes, roll back the ball, but only so impressionable, reactionary club members and developers won't demand that every course be 7,700 yards to accommodate a fraction of the golfing population.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Once again, WHO CARES if a layout doesn't "thwart" the best players in the world? 


I think those that watch competitions care.
Isn't the purpose of a championship to test the competitors competing in that championship ?
Shouldn't the venue present a challenge commensurate with their abilities.


They're the best players in the world!
In the case of Plainfield, tour pros will play it once for four days--AND THAT'S IT.

The same can be said of the U.S. Open, The Masters, PGA and British Open.
Should we host those championships at courses that don't offer a challenge commensurate with their ability. 

Who cares if it's too short for tour players?

Those who want to see them tested, just like we're tested.

Design a course that has variety for 99% of all golfers, and forget about the freaks on television and the two college-level players that belong to the course. 

Why are the two mutually exclusive ?

And yes, roll back the ball, but only so impressionable, reactionary club members and developers won't demand that every course be 7,700 yards to accommodate a fraction of the golfing population.

Roll back the ball and reduce driver clubhead size to less than that of a tennis racket.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()