[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

Neither of us are going to win this debate but it has been fun.  Agreed
 
I will tell you that I am one to discourage and/or think carefully about adding new back tees when I am asked to add them on courses I work on.  On a typical golf course, statistics say that less than 5% of golfers use the back tees.  More time and money should be spent getting the middle and forward tees right (where 95% of golfers play) than than adding back tees.

So I am in your camp that many back tees are a waste of resources, can be a real eye sore, can change or ruin original design intent, and often only add to maintenance costs, etc. to cater to a very small group of golfers. 
 
But, not the middle tee on # 14 at PV, that's played by the vast majority of golfers and at 187 it's lenght is excessive given the pass/fail nature of the shot and the consequences for failing.
 
Without the drop area the hole is a nightmare.


However, at Pine Valley there are some back tees that make sense and I can live with (I don't care for #4) because the course was designed to be HARD!
 
Agreed.
 
I think one of the first holes to have the back tee lengthened was # 16 and I agree with that lengthening.
 
As such PV gets a pass including the 220 tee on #14 
 
We disagree.

Remember it is not like it is now a driver!
 
At 220 into a wind ? 
 
It is a 7I to 5I for a good player back there.  If they can't handle that, too bad! Crump would probably like that!
Mark


By the way, the Devil's Asshole would get more action and command even more respect if the hole were a touch longer.  Crump would probably like that!
 
Crump was and continues to be unaware of the existance of the DA.
 
He did not incorporate that feature into his original design.
 
The DA was a subsequent addition.

[Mark_Fine]

Pat,
As you know, there were a lot of things Crump was "unaware" of and/or never saw including the completion of four of the holes.  The DA on #10 came about early on (not exactly sure when) but we have an early photo of the #10 greensite which shows the DA from Golf Illustrated in our Bunkers book.  The DA is easy to avoid with a wedge or 9I but that would not be the case if the hole were 20 or 30 yards longer.  How hard is too hard?  That is a very subjective question. 
Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

 
Pat,
As you know, there were a lot of things Crump was "unaware" of and/or never saw including the completion of four of the holes.  The DA on #10 came about early on (not exactly sure when) but we have an early photo of the #10 greensite which shows the DA from Golf Illustrated in our Bunkers book.
 
 
The DA is easy to avoid with a wedge or 9I but that would not be the case if the hole were 20 or 30 yards longer. 
 
 
Mark,
 
That's my point.
 
If the DA becomes a problem when the 10th is lengthened by only 20-30 yards, how much of a problem does the surrounding lake at # 14 become when the hole is lengthened by 40 -60 yards ?
 
And, last I looked, that lake is exponentially larger than the DA.
 
And, the DA is only in play, short right of the green.
The lake is in play short, left and behind the green.
 
How hard is too hard?  That is a very subjective question.
 
Only in terms of the threshold or line of demarcation.
 
At 187 and 224 # 14 is too hard for the great majority of golfers.
 
Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

Nelson and Littler played the hole at 169 yards, maybe shorter, and both hit 6-irons, with no wind.


If 169 presented an adequate test for Nelson and Littler, two of the greatest players in golf, it's good enough for the members and guests who play there today.


I rest my case............... For the moment

[jeffwarne]

Nelson and Littler played the hole at 169 yards, maybe shorter, and both hit 6-irons, with no wind.


If 169 presented an adequate test for Nelson and Littler, two of the greatest players in golf, it's good enough for the members and guests who play there today.


I rest my case............... For the moment

+1
also just because a modern pro athlete might hit a 6 iron as well from 224, there's still a lot more that can go wrong from an elevated tee 55 yards further back on a windy day.
Another example of the scale of the game expanding needlessly.

[Mark_Fine]

Jeff,
I agree with you and think I said in an earlier post that back tees on many courses are only there for a very select number of players.  Too much time and money is wasted on these tees.  However, at Pine Valley I don't have a problem with that back tee for the reasons I also mentioned earlier.  Just play the middle tee if 224 is too tough.  It is right there.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()