[Tom ORourke]

My home course on S.C. has a hole designed by Bob Cupp that is a very difficult par 4 with water on the right. 440 from back and 410 from whites. I would say at least 90% of the members play it as a three shot hole. There are sections of the green near the water where I have hit a 70 yard wedge to within 12 feet of the hole and have had it roll down into the hazard. And there is enough slope from left to right (toward the water) that bailing out left leaves a chip you can either chunk or hit well and still go into the water. The green is very narrow and just too severe for a hole this difficult. Of course the movie "Who's Your Caddy" (2.0 / 10 on IMDB) was filmed here and they used this hole for number 18 and Big Boi made a two to edge out Jesper so I guess he knows how to play it. The rest of us are struggling with it. We need to grow the rough near the water to give us a chance to stay dry. Too many good shots get punished.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,


My curiosity is always peeked by those who advocate for retaining an horrendous architectural feature.


While I'm note an advocate for consensus architecture, like obscenity, I think golfers recognize horrendous features when they see them.


What puzzles me is why an architect, after hearing of the problems created by a given feature, doesn't review and remedy the situation if he feels it's merited.


Controversial features are NOT inherently bad features.


But, there are features that are in need of review and alteration.


Most amateurs aren't good enough to control spin and most aren't capable of precise distance control, so why create a feature which will unduly penalize a good shot that either has too much spin or isn't precise.   And why invoke that penalty when the golfer can't see the danger ?

[Zack Molnar]

Pat,


Do you have a problem in general with greens where a shot into the middle of the green will be funneled off?


Could you cite five greens where an approach shot hit to the middle of that green is funneled off that green  ?

I can think of the 11th hole at Kingsley. Howard mentioned 7 at streamsong. 16 at Seminole also comes to mind. Im sure there are several examples at Pinehurst, Chambers Bay and Augusta, but you will most likely be directed into a chipping area and not any sort of marginal situation.

Or do you find greens problematic only when shots are funneled into a hazard of some sort (tall grass, severe bunker, water) where a significant recovery effort would be required?


I don't consider tall grass to be a hazard.

I like greens where marginal and poorly planned/executed shots are funneled off the green into bunkers, tightly mowed areas or rough where recovery is possible.

I would agree with this. It certainly benefits the thinking golfer and those who executed on the drive to be able to come in from the correct angle or shaped their shot in a certain way.

In the situation I described, there is no recovery as the ball is directed into an adjacent water hazard.

In addition, good shots, not marginal shots are penalized due to the very steep nature and invasiveness of the slope.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,


Do you have a problem in general with greens where a shot into the middle of the green will be funneled off?


Could you cite five greens where an approach shot hit to the middle of that green is funneled off that green  ?

I can think of the 11th hole at Kingsley.

Never played it, perhaps others who have can comment, but, I would doubt that balls hit to the center of the green are funneled off the green


Howard mentioned 7 at streamsong.

Balls hit to the center of the green on # 7 at Streamsong do NOT funnel off the green

16 at Seminole also comes to mind.

Balls hit to the center of the green on # 16 at Seminole do NOT funnel off the green

Im sure there are several examples at Pinehurst, Chambers Bay and Augusta, but you will most likely be directed into a chipping area and not any sort of marginal situation.

I've played Pinehurst and ANGC there are no greens that will funnel balls hit to the center of the green, off the green.
# 14 at ANGC probably diverts the ball the most

Or do you find greens problematic only when shots are funneled into a hazard of some sort (tall grass, severe bunker, water) where a significant recovery effort would be required?


I don't consider tall grass to be a hazard.

I like greens where marginal and poorly planned/executed shots are funneled off the green into bunkers, tightly mowed areas or rough where recovery is possible.

I would agree with this. It certainly benefits the thinking golfer and those who executed on the drive to be able to come in from the correct angle or shaped their shot in a certain way.

In the situation I described, there is no recovery as the ball is directed into an adjacent water hazard.

In addition, good shots, not marginal shots are penalized due to the very steep nature and invasiveness of the slope.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()