Has modern day golf/architecture rejected this feature due to fairness ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tiers place a premium on accuracy, especially with angled greens.
 
Tears created by whining about unfairness bring a smile to my face.
 
This was MacKenzie's favorite par 4.
 
MacKenzie was a brilliant architect, a creative genius.
 
What Sean and others who haven't played Pasatiempo don't understand is the terrain between the 15th green and the 10th green/11th/17th tee.
 
Like the three blind men examining the elephant, individually and collectively, they don't know  and understand what's in front of them.
 
For some,  it's hard to recognize creative genius.

[Patrick_Mucci]

In my view tiers in greens are fantastic.
They are a relatively simple way to add a lot of strategy and attractiveness to a hole.
 
In Europe the 8th hole at Huntercombe springs to my mind. Great multi-level greens are the 3th at Wentworth West and the 18th at The Belfry Brabazon.

I have never visited, let alone played, Pasatiempo, but in all honesty the hole in the picture doesn't look particularly nice to me.
 
What about it doesn't look nice ?
 
What do you think caused MacKenzie to declare it his favorite par 4 ?
 
 
 
The shape and style of the right hand bunker are pretty ugly...
 
Martin,
 
The scale of Pasatiempo is relatively large, especially some of the bunkers.
Their visual impact on the golfer is.......... impressive and intimidating.
 
The right side bunker guards the entire right flank of the putting surface and fits perfectly within the style of the entire golf course.
 
The "shape"  is dictated by the terrain and intended function.
The "style", unique and simply brilliant.

[Niall C]

Patrick

I'm hoping to try out that very green Spring next year and looking forward to the challenge. The bunker and the barranca don't worry me that much but I suspect being on the bottom tier when the pin is on the top will be a real challenge. The only comparison I can think of over here is the 10th at Balmedie where on my one play there I made the mistake of leaving myself with a putt from the bottom tier to the top. Having to employ a three quarter swing for my putt just felt like a nonsense. I'm not saying it was unfair just not very satisfying.

For me the strong point at Balmedie is the internal contours of the greens but that green did nothing for me.

Niall

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick

I'm hoping to try out that very green Spring next year and looking forward to the challenge.
 
Niall,
 
You're in for a real treat.
 
The bunker and the barranca don't worry me that much but I suspect being on the bottom tier when the pin is on the top will be a real challenge.
 
Considering that the green is about 50 yards from front to far back, if you're 5 yards onto the green and the hole is cut 5 yards from the back, that's a 120 foot putt up two high, steep slopes.
 
But, then again, your approach would be 40 yards off target and you should be punished, hence, you'd probably 3 putt and maybe 4 putt.
 
The only comparison I can think of over here is the 10th at Balmedie where on my one play there I made the mistake of leaving myself with a putt from the bottom tier to the top. Having to employ a three quarter swing for my putt just felt like a nonsense. I'm not saying it was unfair just not very satisfying.

Leaving your approach 40 yards short of the intended target should produce consequences.
 
Golfers can't expect to be 40 yards short of a target and not experience consequences.
 
Look at # 12, 13, 15 and 16 at ANGC.
 
What happens on those holes if you're 40 yards short of the intended target ?

For me the strong point at Balmedie is the internal contours of the greens but that green did nothing for me.

Niall

[Tom ORourke]

I have been playing some of the courses on the RTJ Trail in Alabama. I can tell you that the concept of multi-tier greens is alive and well on the trail. In fact, I think some of the courses would be better if the greens were completely done over. I recently played the Capital Hill site in Montgomery. The Judge course had a lot of neat holes. You needed to move the ball left and right, some nice use of trees and landforms. And then the worst set of greens I can remember with some ridiculous sole placements. Greens with 4 tiers with the pin almost off the back edge. You would be better off just knocking it over and chipping back up. And a few pins right on the top of a tier, so if your putt made it to the hole and missed you were going to be at least 5 feet by. The greens at their courses in Auburn were almost as bad. I am all for tiers, but putting up to a tier, or two, that then runs away from you can get tiring very quickly. The greens MacKenzie did at Palmetto have some tiers, and most of them make the hole challenging. But I am seeing some real goofy golf on the trail and it is not much fun. But that feature has been embraced, not rejected, on the trail. I think the greens are harder than the full shots on almost all of the 11 courses I have played. A caddy who could tell you where to miss it would be a huge help, but first time players are going to have some head scratchers of putts. Moderation in all things, maybe?

[RSantangelo]

Patrick

I have never played pasatiempo so I am at a bit of a disadvantage

What else is going on at the 16th....it looks shortish at 387 from the championship tees so I assume most folks expecting to make 4 are hitting a wedge or short iron

The approach shot itself and one that looks visually stimulating and like a fun shot to try to hit

I am getting the sense the hole is about hitting a precise approach and maybe  hitting the drive far enough so you can have the shortest approach

Does the fairway narrow as you press up the fairway to make a longer drive more risky?

[Carl Rogers]

Green speed would seem to be the 'fairness' determining factor.
 
Carl,
 
Rethink your response in the context of green speeds in 1926.
 
1936
 
1946
 
1956
 
1966
 
1976.
 
I don't think green speeds are the issue.
 
 

Is this example of potential 'unfairness' any more 'unfair' than a 25 yard wide landing zone for a tee shot on a 470 yard par 4?

I am not sure I understand your remark.  My surmise is that green speeds 3 generations back were quite slow than today for many reasons.

[Tom_Doak]

Never played the course.  How do its green contours compare with other courses in the area.  How to do they compare to courses built in recent years?

They're severe by most anyone's standards.  If I recall correctly, Pasatiempo has five greens that have more than five feet of elevation change from back to front.  [3rd, 5th, 8th, 11th, 16th].  That's probably as much as any great course I know.  For comparison's sake, Crystal Downs has three such greens.

[Bill Vogeney]

All I know, I played Pasatiempo during the height of the drought in 2014. I was babbling like a school girl to my buddy about the green complexes and how awesome they were. The more change in elevation the better.

[Bob Montle]

I was surprised to learn from Tom that such greens are tough sells in today's world, with some loving them but more calling them unfair. I've never played a course/green with such huge tiers, but I have played several with more-modern style contouring as well as many courses/greens with old fashioned severe tilts. For an average golfer like me, and a basically average putter, those are challenging greens too; but this one from Pasatiempo looks just so darn cool and nerve-wrackingly fun that, if I were going to 3 putt anyway, I think I'd rather 3 putt over that than over more 'run-of-the-mill' contours -- and I would've guessed that many/most average golfers would too. The green is so dramatic that it would make me feel like I was playing a game within a game - i.e. one game from the tee to the putting surface, and then a strikingly different/second game on the greens. (Maybe it's only good golfers, or golfers who think themselves good, who complain about greens being unfair; most of the rest of us feel it in poor taste to blame an unmoving, inanimate object for our failings.)   
 

Sir, I absolutely love your comments here and agree with you 100%.

It makes me think of the Himalayas putting green at St. Andrews.
People having a blast putting over the humps and through the valleys.

The only ones I have seen that were not enjoying themselves were the "golfers who think themselves good".
"The humps are silly, the green is too bumpy, the green is too slow, this isn't golf" and so on.

Everyone else is just plain having fun.  And that is why I play golf.  To enjoy myself and have fun.  I think I would have so much fun on that 16th at Pasatiempo that 3 putting wouldn't bother me at all.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob,
 
I agree.
 
I wonder, if match play were the dominant form of play and scores weren't required to be posted, how golfer's assessments of # 16 and the green might differ.
 
It is fun, on the approach, recovery and putts.

[Martin Lehmann]

In my view tiers in greens are fantastic.
They are a relatively simple way to add a lot of strategy and attractiveness to a hole.
 
In Europe the 8th hole at Huntercombe springs to my mind. Great multi-level greens are the 3th at Wentworth West and the 18th at The Belfry Brabazon.

I have never visited, let alone played, Pasatiempo, but in all honesty the hole in the picture doesn't look particularly nice to me.
 
What about it doesn't look nice ?
 
What do you think caused MacKenzie to declare it his favorite par 4 ?
 
 
 
The shape and style of the right hand bunker are pretty ugly...
 
Martin,
 
The scale of Pasatiempo is relatively large, especially some of the bunkers.
Their visual impact on the golfer is.......... impressive and intimidating.
 
The right side bunker guards the entire right flank of the putting surface and fits perfectly within the style of the entire golf course.
 
The "shape"  is dictated by the terrain and intended function.
The "style", unique and simply brilliant.

Patrick,


It is always difficult, or maybe even impossible, to judge a golf course on the basis of pictures. I have no doubt that playing Pasatiempo must be an incredible experience. And who am I to criticize one of the greatest architects in the history of golf.


With regard to style, shape and size of bunkers, I always use three criteria:


1. Function


If I look at the picture, I don't get the feeling that a bunker of this size is needed to protect the front and right side of the green. Two much smaller bunkers, in a bank that looks quite steep, would have the same result. For me, the intimidation factor with smaller bunkers would be the same, or even greater.


2. Taste


I know that many golfers like large bunkers with massive acres of sand. Especially the MacKenzie style with rough edges is fashionable these days and used by many contemporary architects. Depending on the site, size and type of golf course, these bunkers can be very beautiful indeed. But in the end, I prefer smaller, more subtle and elegant bunkers (like the ones Colt used to build) over the massive ones. A matter of personal taste, I admit.


3. Maintenance


Bunkers are a big factor in the maintenance costs at a golf course. They come very close behind greens. There are clubs where costs are irrelevant, but I know many courses where clubs or owners are struggling to keep bunkers in proper shape. In many cases they regret the choice made by the architect to go for the big, spectacular ones.


 

[Carl Rogers]

isn't "fairness" & "playability" one in the same?

[Patrick_Mucci]

isn't "fairness" & "playability" one in the same?

NO

[Jon Wiggett]

isn't "fairness" & "playability" one in the same?

[/NOsize]

Playability is decided by how many shots it takes to get the ball in the hole. Fairness is what the player thinks about how many shots it takes to get the ball in the hole

[Carl Rogers]

isn't "fairness" & "playability" one in the same?

[/NOsize]

Playability is decided by how many shots it takes to get the ball in the hole. Fairness is what the player thinks about how many shots it takes to get the ball in the hole

a distinction without a difference

[Jon Wiggett]

a distinction without a difference[/size]

Not quite. One is factual the other emotional. Big difference

[Carl Rogers]

Human judgement is part objective and part subjective.

[Jeff_Brauer]

As it happens, I just changed one of the greens on a current remodel to a similar 3 tier green. It's a true 3 shot par 5 for most.  Not only that, but I am building a side to side 3 section green a few holes later on a drop shot par 3.  I hope they won't be rejected by golfers as unfair!

Actually, one 3 tier green used to be a staple in my designs, starting with my first effort as an assistant, and recently profiled by someone in the Best Chicago Greens thread.  I have started to get away from them, not so much because I have heard too many complaints about them being unfair, but more because the trends in gca are towards more natural, and you rarely find a natural slope with steps like that, so they tend to look unnatural.

I have heard complaints, and concede, that if you are worried about proportional punishment, the tiers can reject a shot that doesn't miss by much to quite a distance from the flag.  A gently rolling green tends to keep shots about where they land, so if you miss by 10 feet its easier than missing by 20, whereas, with a tier, you sometimes (rare) get a shot 10 feet short (or side) that ends up 10 feet, and 11 feet short ends up 90 feet back.

It does increase challenge, if not strategy, on short approaches, while increasing green size to minimize ball mark problems.  By that, I mean, most folks would probably try to aim for the right tier, as purposely coming up short wouldn't yield any benefit, unless you go over and have a very tricky downhill chip, or something like that.  So, I would never use a lot of them.

That said, and as someone mentioned, it dawned on me several years ago that many of RTJ's greens are really 2-3 tier greens, but he moved the tiers well, not just straight across as you often see (and as at Pasa 16) so many golfers wouldn't really think of them as tiers.  Quite artful and difficult!

[Bill_Yates]

Is having a poorly struck putt that rolls back to you any worse than hitting a fat pitch to a perched green and having the ball roll back behind you? Where does "fairness" count and where does it not count?

[Kalen Braley]

Pat,
 
This is simple, and I'm going to use the same line of reasoning you used with me in the other thread on the 7th hole at Pasa.
 
Yes its very demanding, and there is a penalty to be paid for a miss, but it only happens on this one hole.  I don't think that's too much too ask.   

[Niall C]

Patrick

I'm hoping to try out that very green Spring next year and looking forward to the challenge.
 
Niall,
 
You're in for a real treat.
 
The bunker and the barranca don't worry me that much but I suspect being on the bottom tier when the pin is on the top will be a real challenge.
 
Considering that the green is about 50 yards from front to far back, if you're 5 yards onto the green and the hole is cut 5 yards from the back, that's a 120 foot putt up two high, steep slopes.
 
But, then again, your approach would be 40 yards off target and you should be punished, hence, you'd probably 3 putt and maybe 4 putt.
 
The only comparison I can think of over here is the 10th at Balmedie where on my one play there I made the mistake of leaving myself with a putt from the bottom tier to the top. Having to employ a three quarter swing for my putt just felt like a nonsense. I'm not saying it was unfair just not very satisfying.

Leaving your approach 40 yards short of the intended target should produce consequences.
 
Golfers can't expect to be 40 yards short of a target and not experience consequences.
 
Look at # 12, 13, 15 and 16 at ANGC.
 
What happens on those holes if you're 40 yards short of the intended target ?

For me the strong point at Balmedie is the internal contours of the greens but that green did nothing for me.

Niall

Patrick


To an extent I don't disagree with your post in that to be 40 yards distant with your approach should have consequences in so much as you aren't close. However if the next shot is basically a recovery shot, then I'd much rather have a chip the same distance. Now I know Tom D has said before that he wouldn't object if someone took the wedge out on one of his greens but I'm afraid I couldn't bring myself to do it, especially on a MacKenzie masterpiece. From that aspect alone it would be a very unsatisfactory shot to "have" to play.


Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

Human judgement is part objective and part subjective.

Carl,

maybe I should have used the word feels instead of thinks as I was referring to the emotional response the golfer has not intellectual. Very, very few people judge fairness set in a personal context on an intellectual basis, it is almost always an emotional judgement.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,
 
I think you raise a valid point.
 
# 16 green at Pasatiempo enjoys surrounding terrain that mirrors the three tiered ascent of that green from bottom to top, thus, the green is "shelfed" into that particular terrain rather well.
 
It would be difficult to attempt replication absent accomodating terrain.
 
One has to give credit to MacKenzie for siting and crafting that green in that particular location.
 
When you play Pasatiempo, MacKenzie's locating of those green sites is simply brilliant as are the holes that host them.

[RSantangelo]

I have heard complaints, and concede, that if you are worried about proportional punishment, the tiers can reject a shot that doesn't miss by much to quite a distance from the flag.  A gently rolling green tends to keep shots about where they land, so if you miss by 10 feet its easier than missing by 20, whereas, with a tier, you sometimes (rare) get a shot 10 feet short (or side) that ends up 10 feet, and 11 feet short ends up 90 feet back.

Architects:

you sure have many masters to serve, for me I think "unfair" is a really over utilized term....I think a course that creates some serendipity is more unpredictable and more fun...shots that have a binary quality create suspense until they stop rolling...

In this case, it's fun to watch a approach shot and hope it will just carry a ridge...and you watch it all the way with anticipation until it lands and settles.....that adds interest and enjoyment for me..

In the case, missing it probably costs a half a stroke....now, a two putt from the wrong tier becomes a good result...