I just had to chime in since the discussion has turned to the subject of distance.
As someone who hits the ball a decent ways off the tee (
)I'm always interested in seeing how architects today deal with the subject of power.
Too many designs deal with power by narrowing in the landing zones to such an extent that you have for all intents and purposes "taken the driver out of one's hands" -- especially the longer hitters. To have this happen on maybe one or two holes is fine, but when it becomes the standard feature of a course you have a problem of fairness and understanding of where power falls in the game. This would be no different than having forced carries of 240 yards or more with water everywhere. Clearly, the shorter hitter would cry foul because there are no other options except to land in Davey Jones locker.
Mike, there are quite a few contributors to GCA who wax on about the merits of 6,100 yard courses because, let's be honest, they don't have the wherewithal to handle longer courses that call for dextertity with long irons or even wood approaches -- ditto, hitting the driver with some pop on it. I'm not advocating completely what Shivas is arguing for, but distance is no less a part of the game than accuracy. I see them as equals -- I'm sure others weigh the balance towards the accuracy side -- so be it.
Mike -- you're example of the 6th at Hawk Pointe is a good one. I've driven the green from the tips on a coupe of occasions, but unless one can get it to the green or the fringe you are absolutely dead on target with your analysis. It's a well crafted hole -- public golf needs more of these types of holes. I also would like to mention the 18th at Hawk Pointe -- a classic power hole. Played from the absolute tips the strong player can take the tee shot directly at the farthest corner on line with the tree and leave himself a relatively short easy pitch. The weaker player must stay left or becomes wet.
Like you Mike, I favor courses that call for a combination of both elements. But, I do agree with Shivas, too much whining is done by those who can't hit the ball far. I'm amused that Palmer and Nicklaus complain about how far the ball goes today, but 30 years ago when they were blowing tee shots way past competitors the game was just fine. Hello -- Anyone see a bit of inconsistency in the arguments!
I credit today's modern designers such as Doak -- i.e. the short 16th (338 yards) at Pac Dunes is another great example in testing the skills of all types of players when you give enough room to "tempt" the longer hitter to pull out the driver.
When I'm playing I play for score -- not for ego on club selection. If I don't sense some sort of gain from hitting the driver I'll automatically club down to a 3-wood or 1-iron to get the ball in play.
Balance is part of the game and modern designers in many cases / courses I have seen do try to fathom a remedy that keeps the game in "balance" even when different players have varying ways in playing the game. The bottom line -- to score well you must have a complete package in order to max out your opportunities -- long hitters know full well the woods are full of balls they have hit. At the same time those are "bunters" should try to understand that power is not just about some big lug firing away and therefore cease whining about al the "unfair" advantages long hitters have. On well designed courses the balancing elements are there for both styles.
