[Michael Whitaker]

I think where blind shots become a problem is when they hide a serious penalty for missing the target area. There is nothing more upsetting in golf than executing what you think is the proper shot required only to find the ball in a totally unplayable position.

As we all know, a shot is only blind the first time it is played... after that the player's memory overcomes most of the mystery with only the final result remaining unknown. Still, this type shot can remain thrilling. For example, hitting to the punchbowl green at Deal never gets old!

Blind shots exist on old courses for two reasons:  1) it was not possible to move great amounts of dirt; 2) the difficulty of getting the ball airborne made hitting over large hills and dunes the ultimate challenge. Both of those reasons for blindness no longer exist (unless one plays with ancient equipment) so modern golfers must invent new reasons to appreciate blindness. The "mystery" argument is a good one, but I don't think it applies in every case. Some blind shots serve no useful challenge beyond just clearing the hill in front of you. Once that is accomplished there is not much mystery remaining. I can see where "back in the day" that would have been an exciting challenge, but today most golfers don't have as much trouble launching the ball so most of the thrill is dampened.

I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball.

[PCCraig]

Who said modern golfers don't like blind shots?

and who said good players don't like blind shots?

Exactly, this seems to be some sort of accepted architectural wives tale. I've never heard anyone say that a blind shot was "unfair" and generally I think players (good and bad) like blind shots.

I'm guessing modern architects and owners are more afraid to build them into new designs for liability / risk reasons than they used to, and with modern earth moving equipment they can now alter the property so that a blind shot isn't needed, like it might of been 100 years ago.

[Tim Martin]

I think where blind shots become a problem is when they hide a serious penalty for missing the target area. There is nothing more upsetting in golf than executing what you think is the proper shot required only to find the ball in a totally unplayable position.

As we all know, a shot is only blind the first time it is played... after that the player's memory overcomes most of the mystery with only the final result remaining unknown. Still, this type shot can remain thrilling. For example, hitting to the punchbowl green at Deal never gets old!

Blind shots exist on old courses for two reasons:  1) it was not possible to move great amounts of dirt; 2) the difficulty of getting the ball airborne made hitting over large hills and dunes the ultimate challenge. Both of those reasons for blindness no longer exist (unless one plays with ancient equipment) so modern golfers must invent new reasons to appreciate blindness. The "mystery" argument is a good one, but I don't think it applies in every case. Some blind shots serve no useful challenge beyond just clearing the hill in front of you. Once that is accomplished there is not much mystery remaining. I can see where "back in the day" that would have been an exciting challenge, but today most golfers don't have as much trouble launching the ball so most of the thrill is dampened.

I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball.

Mike-I don`t think the thrill is hitting it over the hill per say but hitting it on the right line with the right shape to put it in the proper position. When you know that you have hit a good shot the anticipation of  the outcome is palpable. For those that are not excited on an approach like the 4th at Fisher`s Island or the 12th at Yale then I can`t imagine what gets their blood pumping.

[Matthew Petersen]

Who said modern golfers don't like blind shots?

and who said good players don't like blind shots?

Exactly, this seems to be some sort of accepted architectural wives tale. I've never heard anyone say that a blind shot was "unfair" and generally I think players (good and bad) like blind shots.

I'm guessing modern architects and owners are more afraid to build them into new designs for liability / risk reasons than they used to, and with modern earth moving equipment they can now alter the property so that a blind shot isn't needed, like it might of been 100 years ago.

I agree with this.

When I played The Rim Club I was struck by and really enjoyed the relatively large number of blind shots, because that's just not something I see a lot of playing mostly public courses. But, at the same time, I definitely was aware that a good portion of those shots wouldn't work on a non-private course unless they had lots of tricks in place about how to tell when it was clear to hit.

[Colin Macqueen]

Michael,
You say "I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball."

That was my greatest fear (I must have had a blessed childhood!) as a wee boy. Invariably there was only 2 or 3 battered, grinning balls in my bag. The number of times I was found hunting in the gorse for any ball at all so that I could continue my round was legion. I never liked losing my ball but I detested losing it without seeing it become lost! So blind holes filled me with trepidation and I think I still suffer from this ailment. Blind faith has taken over!

Cheers Colin

[Michael Whitaker]

I think where blind shots become a problem is when they hide a serious penalty for missing the target area. There is nothing more upsetting in golf than executing what you think is the proper shot required only to find the ball in a totally unplayable position.

As we all know, a shot is only blind the first time it is played... after that the player's memory overcomes most of the mystery with only the final result remaining unknown. Still, this type shot can remain thrilling. For example, hitting to the punchbowl green at Deal never gets old!

Blind shots exist on old courses for two reasons:  1) it was not possible to move great amounts of dirt; 2) the difficulty of getting the ball airborne made hitting over large hills and dunes the ultimate challenge. Both of those reasons for blindness no longer exist (unless one plays with ancient equipment) so modern golfers must invent new reasons to appreciate blindness. The "mystery" argument is a good one, but I don't think it applies in every case. Some blind shots serve no useful challenge beyond just clearing the hill in front of you. Once that is accomplished there is not much mystery remaining. I can see where "back in the day" that would have been an exciting challenge, but today most golfers don't have as much trouble launching the ball so most of the thrill is dampened.

I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball.

Mike-I don`t think the thrill is hitting it over the hill per say but hitting it on the right line with the right shape to put it in the proper position. When you know that you have hit a good shot the anticipation of  the outcome is palpable. For those that are not excited on an approach like the 4th at Fisher`s Island or the 12th at Yale then I can`t imagine what gets their blood pumping.

Tim,

I agree completely that the 12th at Yale represents the best type of blind shot. That's the type of shot that still gives blind shots some saving grace.

Your comment about hitting a blind shot over a hill sort of makes my point for me. It's not about clearing the hill as it once was, but is now about "hitting it on the right line with the right shape to put it in the proper position." But, of course, that is assuming that one has played the course before and knows what the "proper posiition" should be. Otherwise, without some guidance, it is just a shot over a hill without a clue to what lies ahead... kind of like playing golf in the dark! There is a reason we play golf in the daylight, you know. 

[Michael Whitaker]

Michael,
You say "I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball."

That was my greatest fear (I must have had a blessed childhood!) as a wee boy. Invariably there was only 2 or 3 battered, grinning balls in my bag. The number of times I was found hunting in the gorse for any ball at all so that I could continue my round was legion. I never liked losing my ball but I detested losing it without seeing it become lost! So blind holes filled me with trepidation and I think I still suffer from this ailment. Blind faith has taken over!

Cheers Colin

Colin - No one likes to lose a ball or spend lots of time searching for one... at any age!

[Michael Whitaker]

Mac

If players want fair they are in the wrong game and should find something meets their requirements instead of watering down our game.

Melvyn

Melvyn - I agree that golf is not a game of "fair," but I have seen features on golf courses that were inherently unfair... and often involve some form of blindness.

For example, a resort course in South Carolina that offers the option of cutting the corner of a dogleg with a blind tee shot over a dune... with a burn hidden just over the dune. This is a RESORT course that most will only play once. While such a feature might be acceptable on a member's course, I don't think it serves any useful purpose on a resort course as the player will not know the burn is there and, therefore, cannot feel any thrill in trying to clear it. Instead, it only causes anger and longer rounds as players who think that have hit a wonderful shot search for their ball and then realize that it must be in the burn.

This type of blind shot is what give a bad name to the genre.

[Jon Wiggett]

Colin - No one likes to lose a ball or spend lots of time searching for one... at any age!

As a junior I would spend quite a lot of time looking for golf ball lost in the rough. Used to find loads of them and make money selling them to the full members. I enjoyed that planty I can tell you

Jon

[Tim Martin]

I think where blind shots become a problem is when they hide a serious penalty for missing the target area. There is nothing more upsetting in golf than executing what you think is the proper shot required only to find the ball in a totally unplayable position.

As we all know, a shot is only blind the first time it is played... after that the player's memory overcomes most of the mystery with only the final result remaining unknown. Still, this type shot can remain thrilling. For example, hitting to the punchbowl green at Deal never gets old!

Blind shots exist on old courses for two reasons:  1) it was not possible to move great amounts of dirt; 2) the difficulty of getting the ball airborne made hitting over large hills and dunes the ultimate challenge. Both of those reasons for blindness no longer exist (unless one plays with ancient equipment) so modern golfers must invent new reasons to appreciate blindness. The "mystery" argument is a good one, but I don't think it applies in every case. Some blind shots serve no useful challenge beyond just clearing the hill in front of you. Once that is accomplished there is not much mystery remaining. I can see where "back in the day" that would have been an exciting challenge, but today most golfers don't have as much trouble launching the ball so most of the thrill is dampened.

I enjoy occasional blind shots, but not those that threaten the loss of my ball.

Mike-I don`t think the thrill is hitting it over the hill per say but hitting it on the right line with the right shape to put it in the proper position. When you know that you have hit a good shot the anticipation of  the outcome is palpable. For those that are not excited on an approach like the 4th at Fisher`s Island or the 12th at Yale then I can`t imagine what gets their blood pumping.

Tim,

I agree completely that the 12th at Yale represents the best type of blind shot. That's the type of shot that still gives blind shots some saving grace.

Your comment about hitting a blind shot over a hill sort of makes my point for me. It's not about clearing the hill as it once was, but is now about "hitting it on the right line with the right shape to put it in the proper position." But, of course, that is assuming that one has played the course before and knows what the "proper posiition" should be. Otherwise, without some guidance, it is just a shot over a hill without a clue to what lies ahead... kind of like playing golf in the dark! There is a reason we play golf in the daylight, you know. 

Whitty-How can I argue with you as you are always the voice of reason.

[Michael Whitaker]

Whitty-How can I argue with you as you are always the voice of reason.

That's not what my wife says!!! 

[Tim Martin]

Whitty-How can I argue with you as you are always the voice of reason.

That's not what my wife says!!! 

When have you been home long enough for her to render an opinion?

[Melvyn Morrow]

The interesting part of this thread for me is the comments that are actually based upon fairness. Points that there should be no penalty once over the blind spot, i.e. ‘hide a serious penalty’ or ‘without some guidance’, but guy it just go to show how far adrift we have become from the game.

To hear a golfer even whisper the words ‘not fair’ is a terrible indictment upon the way the modern game has developing. Christ, guys, soon some are going to tell me that you can’t walk certain courses, that walking is banned on a golf course – now that IMHO would be justifiably defined as unfair – would it not? -  a sort of a bridge too far for the faithful.

Melvyn
 

[Pete Lavallee]

Are there any blind shots to greens in the current British Open Rota? I can't think of any.

Melvyn,

With professionals playing for millions of dollars these days is it any wonder they cry out for fairness. Don't forget, if they don't play well they don't get paid! When your families livelyhood depends on your golf score your mindset would likely change considerably. Unfortunatey the plight of professional golfers greatly affects the perception of others golfers and it is virtually impossible for the golfing world to ignore them.

[Melvyn Morrow]

So are you saying its OK to con the public so some can feed their families

[Pete Lavallee]

Do you think the fact that there are no blind shots into greens at the British Open is a coincidence?

I know you would prefer the world at large ignores professional golf but unfortunately you are not in charge!

[Jon Wiggett]

Are there any blind shots to greens in the current British Open Rota? I can't think of any.

From the back tees TOC has a few (unless the gorse has been cut back recently). Muirfield's 11th from the tee, RSG, Turnberry's 9th tee shot is at the least semi-blind, Birkdale's 17th from the back right tee the landing zone is blind, Lytham St.Annes' 17th second shot (i.e to the green) and I am sure I will have missed the odd one.

Jon

[Pete Lavallee]

Jon,

I know there are blkind TEE SHOTS at the Open, but I thinking blind shots into the green like the Alps at Prestwick. Tour Pros would howl likee wolves if forced to play the Alps or the Dell for example. Just imagine their outrage if the white rocks were taken away!

[Michael Whitaker]

The interesting part of this thread for me is the comments that are actually based upon fairness. Points that there should be no penalty once over the blind spot, i.e. ‘hide a serious penalty’ or ‘without some guidance’, but guy it just go to show how far adrift we have become from the game.

To hear a golfer even whisper the words ‘not fair’ is a terrible indictment upon the way the modern game has developing. Christ, guys, soon some are going to tell me that you can’t walk certain courses, that walking is banned on a golf course – now that IMHO would be justifiably defined as unfair – would it not? -  a sort of a bridge too far for the faithful.

Melvyn
 

Melvyn,

I would expect you to be unwavering in your position, even against a reasonable argument. You didn't disappoint.

Do you not think it is unreasonable to have a hidden burn on the far side of a dune on a resort course that was constructed to be played by a clientele who will mostly only see it once or twice in their lifetime?

[Scott Warren]

Pete L,

There are some, but few. Many golfers will be blind approaching the 5th green at R. St George's.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Pete

The point I was trying to make is it reasonable to ask the Pros not to perform to the best of their ability, after all you said it they are playing for money, more money in a day than many see in a month or a year. People are happy to pay to see performance but not for spoilt brats who care more for money than servicing their public and final paymasters.

I have no beef with the Pro’s but yes their game is getting very obscene in money terms, particularly if they are trying to minimise their efforts to collect these large amounts.

At the bottom of all this, are blind Holes being slowly deleted to appease the Pros or to satisfy a golfing public who want fairness in preference to challenges and easy in place to perseverance.

The blind Hole is in fact, if anything an equaliser and has nothing to do with fairness, it is a challenge open to the scratch   or average player. Skill and fate working hand in hand, a test of steel wills.

Melvyn    

Michael
I expect designers and clubs to produce challenging courses and if we want our game to flourish we need to place the unexpected in the way. Golf is not just a fast sprint down a fairway but SHOULD be an obstacle course set to push the golfer mentally as well as physically. For some reason we seem to be forgetting the idea behind the game, apparently happy to settle for the easy when we can reach the achievable the near impossible, otherwise what is the point of the game.

[Mac Plumart]

...what is the point of the game.


Golf has no other justification for existence than to heighten the joy of living, to diminish this is to defeat the purpose of golf.  

Behr

[Michael Whitaker]

Michael
I expect designers and clubs to produce challenging courses and if we want our game to flourish we need to place the unexpected in the way. Golf is not just a fast sprint down a fairway but SHOULD be an obstacle course set to push the golfer mentally as well as physically. For some reason we seem to be forgetting the idea behind the game, apparently happy to settle for the easy when we can reach the achievable the near impossible, otherwise what is the point of the game.

How can a hidden burn on the far side of a dune be a challenge if the golfer does not know it is there? Are you saying that any obstacle placed in the path to the hole is acceptable whether it can be known by the golfer or not?

If that is your true belief then why not play golf while wearing a blindfold?

A golfer cannot be pushed physically or mentally if the obstacles in his path are always unknown. The game then becomes a random mess. Remember, I said this was a resort course that is mostly played by golfers who have never seen it before. Do you really think that is sporting to place such obstacles on that type of course? Does this "heighten the joy of living?"

[Scott Warren]

Mike, of course the challenge of an obstacle or hazard comes from knowing it is there and navigating past it, which the first time player in the example you've provided cannot do.

But I would agree with your suggestion above that trying to debate rationally with Melvyn is an exercise in futility.

[Sven Nilsen]

Michael
I expect designers and clubs to produce challenging courses and if we want our game to flourish we need to place the unexpected in the way. Golf is not just a fast sprint down a fairway but SHOULD be an obstacle course set to push the golfer mentally as well as physically. For some reason we seem to be forgetting the idea behind the game, apparently happy to settle for the easy when we can reach the achievable the near impossible, otherwise what is the point of the game.

How can a hidden burn on the far side of a dune be a challenge if the golfer does not know it is there? Are you saying that any obstacle placed in the path to the hole is acceptable whether it can be known by the golfer or not?

If that is your true belief then why not play golf while wearing a blindfold?

A golfer cannot be pushed physically or mentally if the obstacles in his path are always unknown. The game then becomes a random mess. Remember, I said this was a resort course that is mostly played by golfers who have never seen it before. Do you really think that is sporting to place such obstacles on that type of course? Does this "heighten the joy of living?"

Michael:

Curious as to exactly what hole and course you are referencing?  The same argument has been made regarding the hidden bunker on the 6th at Bandon Trails.  Kevin Pallier recently made a similar comment about the diagonal nature of the coast line on the 8th at Pebble.

For resort courses, I'm of the school that the more homework you do, the more likely you'll enjoy your round.  I'd rather go in knowing about the hidden hazards, rather than rely on visual clues to negotiate my way around.  For example, I probably would not have known how to play the 5th at Lost Farm if I hadn't read about the course on this site.  I'm glad I did, as the drive over the corner of the dune was counter-intuitive the first go around.  To each their own, but sometimes the advance knowledge will save you a few strokes, and probably a few titleists.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()