Would you rather play a firm Doak 5 or a soft Doak 8 in your area

[Sean_A]

Can anyone name an 8 that is consistently maintained soft?

Franklin Hills

Franklin is a 7...and a stretch of a 7...I would give it a 6 personally.  I'll take the bones of Grosse Ile over Franklin any day of the week.

Ciao

[BCowan]

Can anyone name an 8 that is consistently maintained soft?

Franklin Hills

Franklin is a 7...and a stretch of a 7...I would give it a 6 personally.  I'll take the bones of Grosse Ile over Franklin any day of the week. 

Ciao

Laughable.  I ain't the only one

[Sean_A]

Grosse Ile's greens are miles beyond Franklin's. 

And, I think Birmingham is every bit the course Franklin is.  I wasn't blown away by the course like I was told I should be.


Given the state of the bunkers and tree issues, I am amazed Doak gave Grosse Ile a 5.  Even so, its a 6 for me. 

Ciao

[BCowan]

Ile has best greens in se mi.  U wanna talk 6s, oakland south. 

Could it be that u need a 2nd look and admit that the all knowing arble is wrong? 

Rob Collins and Ran were blown away.  There are many others.

[Sean_A]

Sure I would like to see Franklin again, why not?  Its a damn good course.  That sort of highlights this thread no?  Plenty of quality golf out there...once you play enough conditions begin to take on more meaning. 


Ciao

[Steve Lang]

   Hell, just being practical, give me the 8, I can play a 5 or f&f anytime...  I'll matriculate down the fairways and shoot at pins and enjoy

[jeffwarne]

Assuming that both courses are in your area and you have played each a couple times, would you rather play the firm Doak 5 or the soft Doak 8 if you had few times in which you could get out for a round

Doak 5 ---firm and fast and rough and ready anytime.


Going to run into far less belt notchers and far more likely to be a low key event.....

[Carl Rogers]

Riverfront is an example of a slow 5.  What commonly known course of TD is a slow 8?  Beechtree that is NLE, but would it have been called slow?  or an 8? Played it 3 rounds, 6 weeks before closing.  A real loss.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Are you guys really serious? You'd rather play a firm 5 rather than a soft Garden City, or, Somerset Hills, or Fishers Island, or Shoreacres, or Chicago Golf? Except for courses that have exceptional drainage most courses are soft from time to time. They still have a lot to offer in terms of greens complexes and shots into the greens. It is just different than when they are firm.

[BHoover]

With as infrequently as I get out to play these days, I'll play any course any chance I get.

[JESII]

Tommy,


Remember, in the premise, we've played each course a couple times.


If I've played Garden City twice (which I have not) and have the option to play a third time in soft conditions or a different good course that I know will be firm, I am going to the firm course. I absolutely love playing golf when the ground is firm and there are real consequences for leaving yourself in a bad spot. Soft just doesn't do it for me...

[Sean_A]

... and proper firm conditions are rare.

Ciao

[Cristian]

The better the design, the more it benefits from f&f conditions.

Since a real Doak 5 is still a very good course, I would probably agree to the premise of this thread, however in general badly designed golf courses become even worse when f&f. I would rather play the average doak 2 in soft than in f&f conditions, as this would avoid a lot of frustration.

In fact the premise is probably reversible: If a course becomes better in f&f conditions, than it is a good design.

[Ben Sims]

Best thread I've seen on GCA in months. I was in this exact same conundrum in 2013 when I first moved to University Place WA. After a dozen or so rounds at Chambers Bay, it became increasingly obvious I'd made a mistake. I went across town to Fircrest. Why?


1) the walk is tough at Chambers. I prefer to walk. But I also enjoy a cart sometimes too (none of those at Chambers Bay)


2) can't eat at the nice restaurant every night. It's too much. It's too heavy, complex. Sometimes food is food. Golf courses are similar. Give me simple, easy, interesting. Fircrest is certainly that. CB is a one-star Michelin restaurant. It's very good, and very big, and complex.


3) time of play. It just takes way less time to play at one place than the other.


The men's club cost plus greens fees at CB was pretty much equal to dues at Fircrest. Money wasn't an issue. I'd call CB solid Doak 8, and I'd argue that Fircrest is a 6. Unless one is lucky enough to be a member at one of the small, compact, classic Doak 8's and above, the argument might be moot. But in my anecdotal case, I know what I chose.

[Steve Lang]

   Ben, Did you ever see CB playing "soft?"

[Mark_Fine]

I'm sorry but I just don't understand the logic with this question      Maybe someone will up the definitions of a Doak 5 and a Doak 8 so everyone can see what we are talking about.  This is no different than asking, "Would you rather play a firm Doak 8 or a soft Doak 10 in your area?  The answer should be obvious!


Variety of the playing fields is the beauty of the game and it is why I always go out of my way to play so many different courses and not the same ones over and over.  However, if you have the choice to play a much better design (one or the other), why would you pass on experiencing it?  Of course there are always rare exceptions but in general there is no thought required here in the answer. 

[Ben Sims]

  Ben, Did you ever see CB playing "soft?"

Yeah, uh, I didn't really understand the OP I guess.  I was thinking like a Doak 5+ against a Doak 8-. Now I see the soft vs firm thing as a conditioning thing. Interesting. Well, I have played CB in a ton of conditions. And yeah, there were lots of times it played soft relative to what it could play. Had be careful to not to expect the ball to release a ton and leave stuff short.

[JESII]

I love when Mark Fine tells me my answer doesn't even warrant consideration because he's played 1,000 courses.

I would rather play a firm golf course than a soft one almost every single time. [full stop]

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
I'm glad you agreed with me 


I just realized what was meant by a "firm" Doak 5 vs a "soft" Doak 8     I wasn't thinking in terms of the condition of the turf.  I love firm and fast and despise a course that should be firm and fast but is kept soft.  However, if it was a choice for example between playing Augusta CC when it is firm and fast vs Augusta National after a heavy rain, I'll still choose Augusta National.  Maybe a more realistic example would be choosing between playing Somerset Hills after a softening rain (which many here will give a Doak 8 vs. playing a firm and fast Ballyowen which many here might give a 5 or even a 6. One should not pass on playing most 8's in any conditions. 

Mark

[JESII]

Remember, you've already played both courses a couple of times...

I haven't played Ballyneal so no opinion, but do people really give it a 5 or6? I seem to remember it being in the 8-9 class, no?

[jeffwarne]

Jim,
I'm glad you agreed with me 


I just realized what was meant by a "firm" Doak 5 vs a "soft" Doak 8     I wasn't thinking in terms of the condition of the turf.  I love firm and fast and despise a course that should be firm and fast but is kept soft.  However, if it was a choice for example between playing Augusta CC when it is firm and fast vs Augusta National after a heavy rain, I'll still choose Augusta National.  Maybe a more realistic example would be choosing between playing Somerset Hills after a softening rain (which many here will give a Doak 8 vs. playing a firm and fast Ballyowen which many here might give a 5 or even a 6. One should not pass on playing most 8's in any conditions. 

Mark

ANGC is not an 8 and is a silly comparison in the soft 8 vs. 5 argument as playing it is a rare/once in a lifetime event due to the Major it conducts.
Nobody's passing their chance at ANGC because the 5 over the fence is firmer that day.


Again, the example was that you were familiar with both courses and therefore not missing out on a course forever by skipping the 8 that day to play the 5. The question is which one would you prefer to play that day.


It's not an obvious answer at all to me, and in fact it's almost more obvious to me to play the firm 5 as I enjoy firm conditions that may well make it more architecturally compelling and fun than the 8(that day) and  in this example I've already experienced the 8 so what am I going to learn by playing it soft, and it may in fact cause me to downgrade that 8.


But as I said earlier I'm probably going for the 5 anyway to avoid the baggage that nearly always accompanies a round at a course that's an 8 or higher.

[Ian Andrew]

I've played a Doak 8 that sums up your conditioning perfectly - Highlands Links.
I've seen it firm only a few times in thirty plays.


It lacks drainage in places and the maritime climate creates those playing condition most of the time.


There is not a single Doak 5 I would play before that course.
I'll never understand the concept of playing a lesser course for better conditioning ...

[Sean_A]

There is not a single Doak 5 I would play before that course.
I'll never understand the concept of playing a lesser course for better conditioning ...

For me, "conditioning" is much more than the dirty word its used for on this site.  Conditioning can make or break a course. Conditioning and design should be hand in glove, but rarely is.  So when I get the chance, I am usually going to opt for a hand in the glove rather than merely having a hand.

I often use Addington as an example.  The course is so poorly presented that much of the quality is negated.  I would much rather play any number of architecturally inferior courses.  This may well be a case of the difference between being a paying punter and an archie who is playing with a critical eye.

Is there such a thing as an affordable Doak 8?  Its a pisser to lay out serious money and get a course which is presented in a dull as dishwasher fashion.

Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

"This may well be a case of the difference between being a paying punter and an archie who is playing with a critical eye."

I think this is spot on. I know that we all try to be and would like to think of ourselves as mature and well-rounded people able to see the other fellow's point of view, and I know that architects are certainly golfers too and love to play the game just as much as (and maybe even more than) us paying punters.  But maybe we all have our biases, and maybe it's fair to assume that the archie's professional bias is to look at/experience the architecture as architecture more so than as a field of play, whereas my bias is strongly against feeling a squishy, mushy, shaggy, soggy field of play under my feet for 4 straight solid hours.

After all, on any given golf hole I get to spend maybe 60 seconds figuring out my best options (vis-à-vis the design) and 60 seconds actually hitting 2 or 3 golf shots and maybe 60 seconds hitting a couple of putts -- and even if I spend another 60 seconds (for a total of 4 minutes) simply standing back and admiring the brilliance of the architecture and the genius of the architect I still have to spend the other 6 minutes (indeed, the entire 10 minutes) walking that golf hole/field of play; and if the course is soft underfoot those 10 minutes of walking are for me simply less enjoyable than they might otherwise be.

I'm not sure why it should surprise anyone that some of us would rather play -- actually play, not critique or admire or seek to understand -- a firm Doak 5 than a soft Doak 8? Does anyone enjoy a late Fall hike through the woods and over the hills when they ground is soft and damp and slippery as much as they do when there is a brisk, dry, hard packed soil underfoot?  Besides everything else that it is, golf is a game of physical sensations: the cracking sound of a well struck iron, the feeling in your hands and up your arms and into your heart of hitting a driver on the sweet spot, a cold wind in your face, and (by far the most dominant and constant sensation) the connection to the ground under your feet. How do you separate that constant sensation from the overall experience of playing the game/a golf course?  I can't.

I think that is one thing not often mentioned in regards to the use of carts, i.e. the lessening of the importance/constancy of this key physical sensation, and what it allows the architect and the course conditions to get away with. Execellent golfers like JES and Jeff relish the challenge of a firm golf course; someone like me is happy to settle for the experience of one.

Peter     

[Steve Lang]

   Peter,


Some players doth protest too much, methinks!


if its just soft, one can appreciate everything offered,  you've turned it into a quagmire, sucking your shoes off...


I'd rather walk on soft grass than concrete...