When Do Wild Greens Go from Exciting to Ridiculous?

[Matt Albanese]

I'm having a difficult time articulating this question. Maybe you guys can help. I generally love interesting greens with both wild and subtle internal contours. I find green complexes to be the most architecturally exciting aspect of a golf course. Some of my favorite courses have severe green complexes. However, there is a point where the contours can become some combination of excessive, unnatural, exceedingly difficult or just plain offensive. My least favorite local course has over-contoured greens that perhaps fit all of these criteria. But it is hard for me to objectively define the difference between the crazy greens at Old MacDonald, which I love, to the crazy greens at this course, which I hate. One of my friends who loves the course says that I don't like the greens because they are, "too difficult." But I vehemently disagree with this assertion as I love extraordinarily difficult greens. However, these I find to be ridiculous and devoid of fun or intrigue. Any thoughts?

[Ryan Kelly]

Matt, I think your friend is under the notion that he or she should be rewarded for hitting the green when maybe he or she should be thinking or trying to hit the correct section of the green.  I can't speak for your local course, but I know that at courses like Old Mac you are not guaranteed a two putt just for hitting the green and I think there is a general thought out there that thinks that.  As to your question regarding why you love certain wild greens and despise others, is that the greens just don't "flow" with the entire course.  In other words, is that they were just created to say they have "wild" greens?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Reminds me of the great quote from "Spinal Tap":


"There's such a fine line between stupid and clever."


Greens at Old Mac run around 9.
They are clever.


If they ran at 11+, would they be stupid?

[Tom_Doak]

Generally, I think wild greens become ridiculous in one of two circumstances:


1.  They get too fast, or


2.  The rest of the course is also very hard.


If the wild greens have a purpose, such as to generate interest on a course that's otherwise short and/or fairly wide open, then the people who complain are just the ones with poorer short games.  But if the course is 7000 yards long and tightly bunkered or treed AND it has wild greens, then most people are going to think they're too much.


Sebonack's greens are not as wild as a few other courses I've built, but in the context of the course, they're much more severe for reasons (1) and (2) above. 


Old Macdonald's greens are bigger and more severe, but if they were faster, I think there would still be plenty of places to put the hole ... you'd just have to skip a lot of the most interesting spots.  Plenty of people complain about all their three-putts at Old Mac, not realizing that many should just be chalked up to the sheer size of the greens.  As at St. Andrews, three putts from 75 feet are not at all uncommon, but there are many courses where you never face a putt that long.

[Kalen Braley]

In my opinion....Never.

Jim Engh makes some of the wildest greens I've ever played and I love them!!

[Carl Rogers]

Sweeten's Cove pushes this envelope.

[Mike_Young]

For myself the defining point is when there is no room for transition for a well played putt..

[jeffwarne]

For myself the defining point is when there is no room for transition for a well played putt..

Not sure we're talking about the same thing but...


I strongly dislike greens that due to green speed have removed the severe tilt/slope in pinnable locations, in favor of tiers that (from above the hole( allow perfectly paced putts(i.e. just starting it ) to stop at the hole.
On such a green one merely has to hit a one-two inch putt every time he finds himself out of position above the hole.
Hitting a putt one inch is not difficult.


Having actual slope in pinnable locations, where occasionally the ball CAN'T be stopped from above it,and slopes that aren't ALL just steep enough where a barely started putt gets close, is a much greater test of judgement and skill than series of one inch nudges that consistently settle near the hole for better putters

[Sean_A]

I don't think I have come across a course with greens that are too severe...its the surrounding issues which causes the problems (and even then I can't think of many examples)...things like green speed, narrow fairways and harsh rough.  I recall thinking Renaissance's greens are too much (and in isolation they aren't that undulating) given the state of the rough and narrow fairways...sometimes the best angle is buried in severe rough....stupid setup when you look at the design. 


But I can forgive just about anything in greens if there is a good mix of styles.  I have always thought the ODGs were better at recognizing the value of more subtle greens, but much of the time the wilder end of the spectrum was under-represented.  Without question, in my experience anyway, the problem is much more where greens are not as interesting as they could be.  You folks need to get around more 


Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Greens with tiers have a tendency to end in tears 😂
Atb

[David Davis]

I don't believe I've run into a course where I thought greens were far too severe either. I have run into a few in which the greens certainly couldn't be faster or otherwise there would be hardly any pin positions yet.


Castle Course at St. Andrews is often criticized for radical greens that also run too fast in the summer. I understand at least 4 of them were softened prior to my only visit in March of last year. I enjoyed the greens very much running at a beginning of the year 9 although being very firm. Make that 10 or 11 and I'm pretty sure I would not of felt the same way.


On my last trip I ran into some highly undulated C&C green complexes running at 10 ft. Even at that speed there were 2 pin position on the day where it was impossible to stop the balls near the hole. So either in the hole or pick up basically. Now on these greens there were plenty of pin positions, speed them up to 12 and forget it.


So there is a fine line and I agree with what Mr. Doak said above, speed has the biggest impact.


On that note, Crystal Downs is one of the world's great courses, greens are fast and rather sloped, to the point where most members have putted off all of them at one time or another, or so I'm told. Not hard to believe even seeing them on a slow day.

[Sean_A]

David


I forgot about the Castle Course!  The problem wasn't putting on the greens..it was getting on them.  Too much target golf for the windy site.  In essence, this is my beef with Trump Aberdeen...though I believe that was done on purpose with the best players in mind.  The Castle Course was simply a misjudgement..hence the continued work over several years.


Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Yes, even on a difficult, windy site, the most undulating and severe greens in the world can be made to play much less so if there are gathering slopes and backstops.

It's when you put highly undulating greens with run-offs on all sides where things start to become a little more questionable.

That said, Pinehurst 2 is just that, isn't it? People seem to love those greens.

[Thomas Dai]

I was once told that one of the main differences in terms of playability between the Castle Course and the Cashen is that on the Cashen lots of the approach shots are played with short-irons and wedges whereas on the Castle the clubs used for approach shots are generally longer. Is this correct?
Atb

[Sean_A]

Ally


#2's greens aren't terribly difficult once on them.  They are small, raised targets which are difficult to hit even if only looking at the centre and not the flag.  That said, a saavy ground player can recover with a flatstick for bogeys...tough to get up n' down for par though.  That safety shot doesn't work as well at Castle because the grass isn't as amenable. 


In any case, there is too much target golf at #2 and I have to believe this is not by coincidence because its pretty well documented that the original greens were very different.  I recall Dunlop saying that during the recent restoration Roaring Gap had to shave several greens down to counterbalance the soil buildup over the years.  If there was any push at Pinehurst to properly restore the course than I suspect the same thing would have to happen. But we all know #2's calling card is the turtleback greens so a proper restoration ain't never gonna happen.


Ciao

[Josh Tarble]

Greens become too wild when there's no "ideal angle" to hit into them.

[A.G._Crockett]

Like others, I think it's the speed more than the contours that make greens "ridiculous".

There is a very private course in north Georgia that converted from bent to Champion bermuda several years ago, and regularly keeps their greens at 11+ for daily member play.  They didn't recontour at all when they converted, and on the old pin sheet there were SIX pin positions; now there are THREE.  And I assure you that on some of the greens, three is pushing it.

Stuff like that is fun to play every now and then, but not on an everyday basis. 

[Mike_Young]

Often a guy who doesn't know how to set pins can make a green ridiculous also...

[Jim Nugent]

David


I forgot about the Castle Course!  The problem wasn't putting on the greens..it was getting on them.  Too much target golf for the windy site. 

Maybe greens get ridiculous when they don't tie in with the rest of the course, i.e. they don't help dictate a strategy, going back to the tee, that a decent golfer can reasonably try to follow. 

So crazy for crazy's sake = ridiculous.

Crazy that brings out and enhances the strategy of the course = memorable, cool, maybe inspired. 

[BCrosby]

Greens become too wild when there's no "ideal angle" to hit into them.

A green can be so wild that approach angles become meaningless. But that is rare. More often than not a green without an ideal approach angle is just a dull green.


Bob

[BCrosby]

Often a guy who doesn't know how to set pins can make a green ridiculous also...

Good point. I'd guess it is pretty rare that the guy who sets pins has an appreciation of how the design of a hole affects what he is doing.


Bob

[BHoover]

In my opinion....Never.

Jim Engh makes some of the wildest greens I've ever played and I love them!!

Interesting that you say this, yet you think playing 18 at ANGC is a factor of luck. Are not "wild" greens more a factor of luck than anything else?

[Thomas Dai]

Player expectations are I would suggest an important consideration here.

Is the player actually looking to hit his approach shot stiff to the pin or is he taking various other factors into consideration such as his likely next shot and even the shot after that into account? Aiming at another part of the putting surface or green surround and feeding shots into pins? Spotting sucker pins? Playing for the wide part of the green or even a safe area at the greens edge?

One shot only or chess or pool played on grass?

Tactics and course management. A bowler working out a batsman at cricket. A player manoeuvring his opponent around the court at tennis or squash. Strategy and playing angles and knowing where to miss and knowing the best spot for the next shot, even if it be from off the putting surface.

When asked why he never had a hole-in-one isn't Ben Hogan supposed to have replied something akin to never having aimed directly at the pin.

Atb

[Josh Tarble]

Greens become too wild when there's no "ideal angle" to hit into them.

A green can be so wild that approach angles become meaningless. But that is rare. More often than not a green without an ideal approach angle is just a dull green.


Bob

Bob,
I'd ask that you go play Harbor Shores in Michigan. 

While both much, much better than Harbor Shores, I believe Sweetens Cove and the re-designed Desert Forest are both close to this scenario as well.

[MCirba]

Where do folks think the greens at Ballyhack fall into this discussion?   When I played earlier this month they were still being maintained with a bit of early spring longishness (is that a word), but I can't imagine some of them cut short.

Once again, to touch on what others have said, I think it's all about the slope/speed balance, which can be a very fine line.