[Tom ORourke]

I like courses that feature eagles, birdies, and DBs. Medinah seems like a grind to me, with a lot of pars. Would Sherwood be a good venue for a Ryder Cup? Not will it get one, or should it. But could it be a good one? It seems like a pretty good match play course, and the players seem to like it.

[JR Potts]

Seems to be a lot of birdies out at Medinah as well.

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/players/Tiger+Woods/147/scorecard/2006/33

[Alex Miller]

There is no way a Ryder Cup crowd could move around that venue sufficiently.

[Jason Walker]

weren't most of the DB's at Sherwood the result of wind and near-island greens, waterfalls, and other water hazards?  The players like it because don't they get $100k+ just by making sure they wake up Sunday morning?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

Sherwood is almost impossible to walk.

How would that influence your decision ?

[Andy Troeger]

Sherwood would be a fun match play course--there are some definite opportunities for the guys to be aggressive and try to make eagles. I'm sure Medinah will do just fine as a host, although the variety of scoring may not be quite as high.

I'd say Sherwood is a challenging walk, but not nearly impossible. The back nine (most of which is played as the front for the event) is an easy walk, while the other nine gets into the severe terrain. If they followed the same routing, it wouldn't be a great spectator course for watching more than one match at a time.

[noonan]

Sherwood seems to be the opposite of Royal Melbourne.....trees encroaching ....water hazards and creeks everywhere.....I would not find it fun to play...but I am not on the Ryder Cup team

[Garland Bayley]

Tom,

Sherwood is almost impossible to walk.

How would that influence your decision ?

Pat,

If you meant it is almost impossible to walk for the spectators, you are right. A high percentage of the fairways are bordered by steep slopes. I wouldn't want any non-sherpa, spikeless spectators at that venue.

[Jud_T]

uh, NO.  In what way is it better? if what you want is variety of scoring conditions, how about playing all 4 courses at Bandon in the Summer winds?

[Sean Leary]

To me, Medinah seems like the almost perfect course for the pros to play on in any format...

[David Kelly]

Sherwood is fine just where it is, as a nice weather venue for a silly season cash grab. 

[jeffwarne]

Sherwood is fine just where it is, as a nice weather venue for a silly season cash grab. 

How is that different than any Ryder Cup for everyone but the players?

[Jim Eder]

Tom,

I think it could be a very good one with the routing of the Chevron. The par 5s offer the eagles, 15 with a pin up front can be a bit daunting in a match, maybe move up #10 and get people to go for it. #2 is a fun hole and makes one think early in the round. There are a lot of birdies/eagles out there (1,2,5,6,9,10,11,13,16) but also some higher numbers and there are some interesting putts that take some touch. Think of the ways to play #4 and the advantage of going further right (and risking the water), or do you hit driver or layup on 6 and 14.  There is more thinking out there than I think people think.  But because of the trees one has to execute as well or be penalized (rightly or wrongly).

I thought the play on 16 was actually fun to watch yesterday. They both did some thinking instead of the "bomb and gauge" play we see so often.

Whether it is better than Medinah, well, I have only played Medinah a few times but I am kinda in your camp. Medinah is a great course but it may lack some of the excitement opportunities that could exist at Sherwood. Medinah is more of a US Open course to me than a match play course.

But of course as others said there is no way spectators the size of at a Ryder Cup could ever get around there...............................

[Jud_T]

Guys,

If Medinah isn't good for this event, what the hell is it good for?  It was essentially made for this type event (or rather remade)...

[PCCraig]

Sherwood was remotely interesting this past week because it was played in 40+mph winds. Any other year its a snooze of a course to watch Tiger's tournament, in my opinion. I think Medinah will make for a fine host next year.

[Sean Leary]

Sherwood was remotely interesting this past week because it was played in 40+mph winds. Any other year its a snooze of a course to watch Tiger's tournament, in my opinion. I think Medinah will make for a fine host next year.

I actually think that Sherwood shows up quite well on TV for the average golf fan.

[Jim Eder]

I am not sure the course is the reason for the "snooze" aspect of watching the tournament in years past. I think that has more to do with the fact that a lot of the players are there to pick up a nice check and aren't at their peak performance.

I have never played the course in the winds we saw this past week but I have no desire to try, it would be seriously difficult. With no wind it is a fun course and one can score. 

The greens have a lot of movement, the course makes me think (I don't hit driver on every hole), one has to execute shots, and the setting is nice.  If one is playing well you can score but there is some trouble.  I think one has to play it to really get a feel for the course.

[Tim Martin]

Sherwood was remotely interesting this past week because it was played in 40+mph winds. Any other year its a snooze of a course to watch Tiger's tournament, in my opinion. I think Medinah will make for a fine host next year.

Last years finish with GMac winning was pretty darn exciting IMO.

[Jud_T]

The tournament finish was exciting last year and this year.  The course, however, had little to do with it IMO...

[Jim Eder]

For anyone who hits a draw the 18th tee shot is a tough one and they both hit brilliant tee shots. 16 was very interesting because of the hole and the match play aspect of the match (again a tougher tee shot for the right to left player), 15 is always interesting though I think better with the front pin, 14 pin placement was interesting and people don't realize how you need to draw that tee shot perfectly to get a shorter iron in, it is a tougher tee shot and the approach to get to that pin is not easy, 13 again because the green has some challenge, people don't realize how that tree on the right affects the thinking on 11 approach. There is a lot of movement in those greens, TV does not show it. Those two hit some shots on that back nine that I think one personally has to hit to understand how well they played.

I think it is very interesting that a strategic player like Zach went head to head with a long hitter like Tiger. I think some credit has to go to the course to allow for that type of outcome.

Remember there are only a handfull of players and not all of them are at the top of their game at this time of year. I think this causes some of the dullness seen in prior years.

[SL_Solow]

There are numerous factors that go into deciding whether a venue is appropriate for a particular event.  Unfortunately for us, architectural interest is not high up on the list although I confess i don't consider Sherwood to offer anything special.  Medinah offers a lot.  The course is an excellent test for the pros, even if a number of us find it to be relatively uninteresting.  It is well located in a major metropolitan hot bed of golf which will not have any other professional events next year since the Barclay's (Western) will be in St. Louis.  The club has outstanding facilities suited for the event from the massive clubhouse to the space for tents, media, parking and spectators.  It has a large membership experienced at and dedicated to hosting major tourneys.  The other clubs in the CDGA always provide tremendous assistance.  Say what you might about the course, the events held there generally provide drama and when Medinah has held majors there have been plenty of great moments.  Middlecoff's great shot at 17(now 12).  Hale Irwin's victory lap.  Sergio's shot from behind the tree and others. If the event is close, there will be memorable moments.  I doubt there will be a great deal of discussion about the course although there will be plenty of comments along the "difficult but fair" genre.

[DMoriarty]

Not sure that looking for Eagles, Birdies and Doubles is a good way to judge whether a course would make for exciting/interesting matchplay.  But whatever the standard, Sherwood would not make my list of interesting match play venues, even in Southern California. 

Now if you asked about a matchplay event at Riviera, you might be onto something . . . 

[Jim Eder]

What do you think the best way to look at a match play course is? (Trying to learn, not trying to be difficult)

To me, it is all about risk/reward. If you take the risk and execute you should win more often. If you take the risk and don't execute you more often than not lose. If you don't take calculated risk you should lose more often.

I have to think about Riv as a match play course.  I'll say, Riv is a fave of mine though I do think LA North has jumped ahead of it so it is my #2 now in SoCal. On a pure view Riv is superior to Sherwood but on a match play view I actually have to think about it. Because of the blatant penalties at Sherwood I wonder if that makes it more interesting (kinda gets back to the eagles/birdies vs bogies/doubles I guess which may be flawed).

[DMoriarty]

Jim,

I think your way is the way most look at it; a wide scoring band for a hole or course makes for a good matchplay venue.  There may he some truth in this, but I am not sure how far it can be taken.  I think a  good match play course ought to have plenty of excellent matchplay holes, and to my mind one type of excellent matchplay hole presents the golfer with real choices from the tee through green.  But the consequences of a good choice/execution or poor choice/execution need not always be as immediate or as stark as death vs. victory.   

A perfect example of a great matchplay hole which doesn't fit into the victory (eagle) or death (double) mode is the 10th at Riviera.  There is a very real and stark choice for top golfers off the tee, but the range of consequences is not stark nor are the consequences immediate.  Screw up going toward the green and you still have an outside chance at a recovery shot, but you had better hit a perfect one.  Hit a perfect layup to the left and your work is not even half done --you still need to hit a perfect wedge and you will still be left with a tough putt (even if it is short.)   Both players could remain in the hole even after a slight error in judgment or execution, and every shot through the last putt is interesting and exciting for players and spectators alike.

Some years back I took a look at scores from this hole in whatever the L.A. Open (whatever it was called that year) to test this notion that a wide scoring spectrum correlates with an interesting matchplay hole. I don't remember the breakdown but a large sample of players who went for it and a large sample laid up.  The range of scores was surprisingly narrow, and the scores were heavily bunched at birdie/par.   Eagle and double (or worse) were both possibilities, but both are extremely unlikely for top players, and extremely rare.  Even bogey was fairly rare. 

I guess what I am saying is that sometimes interesting strategic golf might produce a wide scoring spectrum, sometimes not.  And wide scoring spectrum may also be indicative of severity and immediacy rather than than interest and options.  Features such as unplayable gunch, lots of potential for lost balls, forced carries, etc are all conducive to a wide scoring spectrum, whether or not they present real choices or interesting shots.   Just my opinion of course.

As for the LA area, LACC is a good call. I can't wait to see the 2017 Walker Cup there.  Riviera I already mentioned.  Rustic Canyon would never be chosen to host any big time event, but I view it is a terrific matchplay course. 

You ask about whether the blatant penalties at Sherwood make it more interesting.  To me the answer is no.  Matchplay is only fun for one guy when the other is in essentially in his pocket.

[Jim Eder]

Thanks, that is very helpful.

Maybe I see more options at Sherwood than others.  Going for 2 and 16 and trying to hit it down the right on 4 and draw it around on 6 and 14 are things I struggle with. And I am a right to left player so there are just difficult holes where a cut is needed and that makes me think. 18 is one stressful tee shot for me.

I wonder if a great match play hole is one that makes a player change his game plan or makes one play the shot he really doesn't want to play.

I totally agree on #10 at Riv though I believe the risk of double when one misses right is higher.  I have found that personally I average about the same whether I go for it or lay up.  But I still debate when I am on the tee (of course pin placement dictates it as well).

I think about the 10th at the Belfry.  I played the course a few times because of that hole (and because of weekend play) and with the right tee it is a great hole (but one with more penalty than 10 at Riv). If I am 2 down on that tee and hitting first do I go for it and risk giving the hole to my competitor if I don't pull it off or do I lay it up (and then what does my competitor do?).  10 at Riv is a bit less stressful decision.

Augusta 13 is a fantastic match play hole in my opinion (with a lot of risk). Same with 12 depending on the pin placement.

I hear you on the fact that there is risk of having a hole with too much risk. Too much and either no one takes the risk or one person is out of the hole.

I could go on and on. Thanks for making me think a bit more on this topic.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()