Tournament Architecture vs. Recreational Architecture

[David_Elvins]

Related to Tim's point is that tournament golf is played under the rules of stroke play, while most AMERICAN recreational golf isn't.  A course really shows its character when EVERY shot counts.
WW

It's an excellent observation from JK and I think that it is a major flaw from a lot of people on this website when assessing courses.  If you are not playing a course in some sort of competition (strokeplay or matchplay) then you are going to have a really hard time understanding the playability of the course. 

Matt Ward was the worst at this IMO.  His course reviews (and perhaps his style of play) seemed like they were based on a game of golf where you could take 2-3 shots off each tee and select the best one.

[John Kavanaugh]

I'm talking about when recreational golfers play a course they have played often playing the same course in a tournament.  I'm telling you, it's not the same course.

JakaB,

It's the same course !

What's different is the "mind set"

It is no more the same course than the driving range is the first tee.  You can not simulate tournament conditions in a recreational round. The architecture is amplified.  Hell, if you are in the hunt the dial may be on 11.

[Ben Kodadek]

JK,

When's the last time you played a recreational round?

[John Kavanaugh]

JK,

When's the last time you played a recreational round?

Playing for any amount of money also does simulate tournament conditions. Making money is like making babies, winning championships is like raising children.

[Jim Sherma]

I'm talking about when recreational golfers play a course they have played often playing the same course in a tournament.  I'm telling you, it's not the same course.

JakaB,

It's the same course !

What's different is the "mind set"

It is no more the same course than the driving range is the first tee.  You can not simulate tournament conditions in a recreational round. The architecture is amplified.  Hell, if you are in the hunt the dial may be on 11.

It's only the same course if the conditions are the same. Any pressure you put on yourself is on you the player.

Where I've seen the architecture change or be enhanced relative to the player is when a course has been prepped for a tournament. I used to play every year in the Lehigh Valley Amateur at Green Pond in Bethlehem, PA. It's an Alex Findley course and was also my home course for almost 20 years. The tournament is the biggest event in the Lehigh Valley and when the tournament would arrive you would see the rough grown up, the greens sped up a foot or two and everything allowed to firm up.

Given the change in conditions my interaction with the architecture changed in the following ways:

The greens presented more break due to the speed, especially around the cups, this was partially due to green speed and partially to pin placements - clearly being above the pin became a much more serious concern on certain holes

The slopes on the approaches became more important as more shots needed to be bounced in, especially from the rough

The bad miss spots around the greens became truly dead as the rough coupled with the enhanced speed of the greens made recoveries from certain spots almost impossible

Clearly these conditions helped separate the men from the boys due to the added patience and acceptance of the lost shots you could not quickly get back. I always was fortunate in being able to perform relatively well in tournaments, most of my best scoring rounds were in competition. In my experience, architecture is more relevant or important in tournament golf assuming the course is presented in a condition that makes it so. If the course is not presented any differently than normal than any impact from "competition" is my own fault.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm talking about when recreational golfers play a course they have played often playing the same course in a tournament.  
I'm telling you, it's not the same course.

JakaB,

It's the same course !

What's different is the "mind set"

It is no more the same course than the driving range is the first tee.  

You can not simulate tournament conditions in a recreational round.

Nonsense.
I played Sebonack in a practice round on Thursday and on Friday I played the first round of the tournament and the course was substantively identical, nothing had changed except my mindset.

On Thursday, I was familiarizing myself with the golf course, taking an open book test so to speak.
Hitting shots and retrying and reclubbing to try to "dial in" the golf course I'd be playing the next day.

On Friday, other than the tee and hole locations, the course remained static.

Certainly nothing had changed it that was due to the official start of the tournament.
Only Mother Nature and the tee and hole locations influenced play, the balance of the course remained static.

The architecture is amplified.  

No, the consequences are amplified, the architecture remains static.
When Bobby Jones declared, "there's golf and there's tournament golf" he was talking about the mindset and pressures, not morphing architecture

[Tom_Doak]

Nonsense.
I played Sebonack in a practice round on Thursday and on Friday I played the first round of the tournament and the course was substantively identical, nothing had changed except my mindset.

On Thursday, I was familiarizing myself with the golf course, taking an open book test so to speak.
Hitting shots and retrying and reclubbing to try to "dial in" the golf course I'd be playing the next day.

On Friday, other than the tee and hole locations, the course remained static.

Certainly nothing had changed it that was due to the official start of the tournament.
Only Mother Nature and the tee and hole locations influenced play, the balance of the course remained static.

Patrick:

Well, most of it is in your mind, but sometimes the course does get harder from one day to the next, due to wind, or set-up.

Years ago I saw the Amateur champion, John Harris, the day after he had competed in his first Masters [and missed the cut].  He had played Augusta National a couple of times before, and I asked him if it was way different between a casual round and Masters week.  His response was that it was way different from Wednesday to Thursday.

I'm sure part of that was in his mind and in his comfort zone ... but probably not all of it, since he was a heck of a tournament player.

[Ted Sturges]

[/quote]
 Making money is like making babies, winning championships is like raising children.
[/quote]

That's a pretty good quote.  I actually like it alot.  Did you just make that up, or is that one attributed to someone else? 

TS

[John Kavanaugh]

Thanks, I made it up the day after choking a tournament away.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

Well, most of it is in your mind, but sometimes the course does get harder from one day to the next, due to wind, or set-up.
Tom, that's why I cited Mother Nature and tee and hole locations.
Those variables can always change the way a course plays.

Years ago I saw the Amateur champion, John Harris, the day after he had competed in his first Masters [and missed the cut].  He had played Augusta National a couple of times before, and I asked him if it was way different between a casual round and Masters week.  His response was that it was way different from Wednesday to Thursday.

Years ago, a friend of mine made the quarter finals of the U.S. Amateur.
In those days, quarterfinalists received an invitation to play in the Masters.
He practiced all winter, he went down a week or so early and played and practiced every day.
He said he was playing the best he ever played, was familiar with the course and was ready to do well in the tournament.
Then, on Thursday morning, when he was on the first tee and the starter announced his name and hometown as he was teeing up his ball, he said that he couldn't let go of the tee and ball because the reality of where he was and what he was about to embark upon, hit him like a sledge hammer. He said that he just froze.

Which makes Ken Venturi's debut even more amazing.
His first time there, I believe he opened up with five (5) straight birdies on Thursday morning.

I'm sure part of that was in his mind and in his comfort zone ... but probably not all of it, since he was a heck of a tournament player.

I know John and played with him at Mid-Amateurs.
If I'm not mistaken, he was an All-American at Golf and Hockey at the University of Minnesota.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thanks, I made it up the day after choking a tournament away.

JakaB,

I think medal play is more demanding, mentally, than match play.

I think both present an entirely different challenge than casual rounds.

At match play you want to advance.
At Medal play you want to be a contender and to make the cut.
Bad rounds usually result in a hasty departure.
With casual rounds, you'll be back tomorrow irrespective of your play, no problem.

In tournaments, the consequences of failure to think/execute seem to take on greater significance, thus creating tension and anxiety.

Interestingly enough, whenever I was qualifying for an event, the pressure seemed greatest until after I had made a bogey, or worse.
Then I seemed to settle down.

[Jamey Bryan]

This is a very timely topic for me.  As many know, we’ve recently completed a renovation/restoration at Camden Country Club (a Walter Travis/Donald Ross track) overseen by Kris Spence.  One of the major changes made to the course was to convert a long, severe dog-leg par 4 to a par 5.  Yardage was added to the tee shot so that the carry for a nest of bunkers was 280, but with that carry one is left with 150 or less in (the green is interesting, to say the least).

Upon opening, our recreational players universally condemned the hole, with the longer drivers generally saying something along the lines of “I had a 9 iron in”.  In talking with tournament players, though, the general thought was that anyone who would try to carry the bunkers (and keep the ball in the fairway, which runs away) was an idiot.  Their thoughts were that one could take 3 wood and challenge the bunkers, leaving around 185, or hit driver more left, leaving 190-200.

My take from these discussions is that we’ve created a pretty good hole!  There are decisions to be made on the tee box.  If you’re playing a recreational round with few ramifications from a big number, then bang away.  If you’re playing a tournament round and need to finish, then you better think about what you’re doing.

Jamey

[Mike_Young]

IMHO tournament play is based more on where to miss the shot than recreational play.  Therefore the "short side" of the green and "down hill" putts create the biggest difference between everyday play and tournament play on one's home course...pin hunting is much more prevalent in everyday play...JMO

[John Kavanaugh]

This may explain why a course like Torrey Pines South is great architecturally during tournament play but mundane when played recreationally. I stand by my theory that the architecture changes under tournament strategies.

[Patrick_Mucci]

This may explain why a course like Torrey Pines South is great architecturally during tournament play but mundane when played recreationally. I stand by my theory that the architecture changes under tournament strategies.

JakaB,

Could you break it down for us and tell us specifically, what architectural features change, and how they change ?

Thanks

[Kalen Braley]

I'm with Pat on this one....nothing has changed.

This is kinda like texas hold em in that the only difference in how one plays depends on how much money is on the line.  For example at a $20 buy in tournament, most people play whatever hands and are donkey calling left and right in hopes of picking something up on the turn or river. You can't push guys off marginal hands, and reckless play is the order of the day. You make that a $10,000 buy in tournament and whats changed?

Not the cards
Not the game mechanics
Not the rules.

Its all just the mental approach and how much less risk one is willing to assume.

[JESII]

I'm talking about when recreational golfers play a course they have played often playing the same course in a tournament.  I'm telling you, it's not the same course.

I don't think John is talking about a practice round the day before an event. Greens don't go from 8 to 11 overnight...or in Pat's Sebonack example they don't go from 11 to 13.5 overnight. The process of preparing the maintenance of a course for a tournament reveals architectural features that were previously obscured.  Does anyone think the front pin on 9 at Augusta is as scary today as it is in April? How about the 7th green at Shinecock?

These are architectural features that change based on tournament oriented maintenance setups.

[Jason Topp]

Having just played a bunch of tournament golf over the last two months I compared my scores and I average about 3/4 of a stroke higher in tournament rounds than in casual rounds (using the number the handicap formula comes up with).  In the past I have usually had about a 3 stroke difference so I am pretty happy with the improvement.  I see the following factors (beyond pressure) that make tournament golf more difficult.  Some relate to architecture but most do not:

Rolled and cut greens make a huge difference in difficulty.  Short siding yourself is a big problem and green slopes that are minor issues in regular play become big concerns when in an event.

Playing an unfamiliar course makes a big difference.  For some reason the issue seems bigger in an event.

Pin positions are more difficult on average.

Putting everything out makes it more difficult to putt with optimal aggression. 

Peripheral hazards that one does not think about in normal play become a concern.  I find myself aiming far away from ob or water to the point I think it is costing me shots.

Even minor increases in rough length make a big difference.  I struggle to hit a mid-iron out of the rough on a course that has let it grow an extra inch.

[Tim Gavrich]

This may explain why a course like Torrey Pines South is great architecturally during tournament play but mundane when played recreationally. I stand by my theory that the architecture changes under tournament strategies.

JakaB,

Could you break it down for us and tell us specifically, what architectural features change, and how they change ?

Thanks

During a casual round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green below you and you think, "Wow, what a cool view and shot I'm faced with."

During a tournament round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green, very small-looking below you, and you feel the wind on every hair on your forearms and your neck and you think (perhaps not in so many words), "What a cool--yeeeeeesh, I've got to hit this green or else!"

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.

[John Kavanaugh]

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.

Thank you. To think anything else surrenders the thought that architecture can play games with our minds.

[Patrick_Mucci]

During a casual round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green below you and you think, "Wow, what a cool view and shot I'm faced with."

During a tournament round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green, very small-looking below you, and you feel the wind on every hair on your forearms and your neck and you think (perhaps not in so many words), "What a cool--yeeeeeesh, I've got to hit this green or else!"

That sounds like a hypothetical.

Can you provide an real hole where the architecture "changes" ?

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.
[/quote]

[Tim Gavrich]

During a casual round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green below you and you think, "Wow, what a cool view and shot I'm faced with."

During a tournament round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green, very small-looking below you, and you feel the wind on every hair on your forearms and your neck and you think (perhaps not in so many words), "What a cool--yeeeeeesh, I've got to hit this green or else!"

That sounds like a hypothetical.

Can you provide an real hole where the architecture "changes" ?

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.

[/quote]
I'm confused. Isn't the hole I mentioned a real hole? In its case, the hole becomes a different, i.e. changed challenge because the approach is different. The features do not change physically, but the physical is but one way of measuring change.

[Patrick_Mucci]

During a casual round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green below you and you think, "Wow, what a cool view and shot I'm faced with."

During a tournament round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green, very small-looking below you, and you feel the wind on every hair on your forearms and your neck and you think (perhaps not in so many words), "What a cool--yeeeeeesh, I've got to hit this green or else!"

That sounds like a hypothetical.

Can you provide an real hole where the architecture "changes" ?

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.

I'm confused. Isn't the hole I mentioned a real hole?


I don't believe it is.
Would you name the golf course ?

Thanks

In its case, the hole becomes a different, i.e. changed challenge because the approach is different. The features do not change physically, but the physical is but one way of measuring change.
[/quote]

[Jason Topp]

During a casual round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green below you and you think, "Wow, what a cool view and shot I'm faced with."

During a tournament round, you arrive at the 3rd tee and see the ocean in the background and the green, very small-looking below you, and you feel the wind on every hair on your forearms and your neck and you think (perhaps not in so many words), "What a cool--yeeeeeesh, I've got to hit this green or else!"

That sounds like a hypothetical.

Can you provide an real hole where the architecture "changes" ?

The architectural features change because our minds process them differently--more acutely, generally--in a round in which there are consequences for sending three or four consecutive shots into the canyon by that green.

I'm confused. Isn't the hole I mentioned a real hole?


I don't believe it is.
Would you name the golf course ?

Thanks

In its case, the hole becomes a different, i.e. changed challenge because the approach is different. The features do not change physically, but the physical is but one way of measuring change.

[/quote]

Sounds like number 3 Torrey Pines South.

[jvisser]

There are a number of aspects in my opinion:
1)  there are definitely effects by changing the set-up of a course
2)  the generally more tense mind-set of players
3)  the amplification factor of the first two on scoring

Ad 1) I recently caddied on my home course for a player of the same club in the National Strokeplay Championships in Holland at Noordwijk.
Although we both know the course really well, we were surprised with a number of breaks on the greens that you
usually don't notice when the speed of the greens is lower. 
Also as a tournament director for all kinds of Dutch championships, I have seen significant effects of pin placements of
up to halve a shot for a single hole over fields of about 70 good players.
So the firmer set-up of the course and the harder pin placements will surely influence the results.

Ad 2) As I have experience myself, playing in tournaments will make you think more about the outcome than you
would normally do in a friendly game and the odd lost ball or mess-up on a single hole will be forgotten much quicker.
In addition, people tend to play more conservatively and play away or short from danger, leaving them other shots
to greens than that they are used to, putting them even further out of their comfort zone, probably with adverse results
as a consequence.

Ad 3) When in trouble the tense mind will sometimes short circuit and lead to much bigger numbers than necessary as
giving up one shot for a simple way to get back in to play often is declined for a risky recovery shot that might also
have the chance of not losing a shot.
This also become apparent on greens that are much quicker than a player might be used to. When playing a friendly
round one usually gets the feel for the greens much easier as you don't give it much thought. But once you start thinking
about the speed of the greens and can't trust your own ability, then the 3-putts might be plenty.