Impossible Putts

[JESII]

Thomas, Yes, but I’ve never seen someone intend to, and successfully put certain side spin on a putt to counteract a side slope they had to deal with.  The variables of the strike and roll are so great as to make this idea float like a lead balloon! Pitching and chipping, where lifting the ball and imparting at least a bit of spin, are natural shots to then try to vary the spin.


Neil, Winged Foot’s greens are certainly a marvel. I’ll defer to you on the notion of zero impossible putts there.

[Kyle Harris]

Interesting how the rhetorically same point made as it pertains to Winged Foot is more well-received than when made in other lights.

Context is for Kings, as they say.

[archie_struthers]

 


It had to be almost forty years ago at one of my favorite golf courses in Philly , Rolling Green. It's a 1926 William Flynn gem.




Was playing in a qualifier and the practice green was super quick. Remember parring the first and hitting two pretty good shots to the second. As we were walking toward the green which comes back to the clubhouse I remarked to my caddie Chris that there were an awful lot of spectators behind the green so early in the morning. When we got there I realized why the pin was cut front and I had hit it almost to the back of the green. The group of spectators were clearly interested in how silly I was going to look after the putt so we really took a good look. Somehow I lagged it for a tap in, playing a huge parabola and walked off the green felling pretty good. Birdied the next par three with a good putt and hit it right down the middle (with a ping beryllium one iron ) on four. Hit what looked like a good second on the short uphill par four and then we got to the green! Pin was front middle.


Had about a fifteen footer straight down the slope, oops... not so good after all. Had a putt that if it didn't go in was going to roll back down to where my tee shot had been 95 yards down hill.  Told Chris to get my sand wedge ready and tried to ever so gently nudge it down the slope. It tantalized me by just missing and was barely moving at the hole. At that time I just got my wedge and started walking down the hill LOL.  Was it bad , nah , it was great given that I remember it so vividly so many years later. Rolling Green later softened a few greens but remains one of the best courses anywhere.


Sure that Mayday will enjoy this one!

[Ally Mcintosh]

Not sure what you are getting at, Kyle?


Neil has stated that Winged Foot has no impossible putts (or at least pin positions that shouldn’t be used when the greens run fast) and that he’s inclined towards seeing the first putt have a chance of getting to tap-in distance, no matter how difficult or roundabout it is to  do this.


That is a similar point to mine.


Impossible putts are usually mistakes.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ally,


For clarity, golf mistakes or design mistakes?


Re-reading this thread, I think it's not unlike any other item of "fair golf."  Not many architects would purposely try to create an impossible putt, but they probably still occur for reasons beyond their control over time - faster greens overall, specific bad cup locations, etc. 


Even with that said, any multi-tier green which is common and popular, makes a pin position near the base of that tier almost impossible to hit, not to mention stay close, so we commonly accept a few of those in most designs.  You can say the same of any pin position adjacent to any interior muffin, which would be impossible to stay close from any angle that requires a putt to come over that little hump.  Except for a few new wave designers, those were never as accepted as the multi-tier greens, although, I now wonder why?  Was it because RTJ basically created his contours with wobbling (and thus somewhat disguised in my eye) tiered greens, so it was figured to be okay?  Are interior knobs now accepted because they are associated with Doak?  And, I guess that means Maxwell wasn't popular enough an architect to make those features stick as "standards?"


For whatever difficult pin location, while it sounds goofy to type, we count on supers not to put pins there on important days, as if everyday play isn't "important."


Short version, I still think known impossible putts are usually avoided in design (and often remodeled when not) but a small number from "putting here to there is impossible" are probably accepted.  I think the degree of impossibility is important, too.  It's one thing to not be able to make a putt, but as in a few examples above, quite another to have a missed putt routinely roll down the fw up to 100 yards off the green.  That is one of those "I hate it when it happens to me, but love it when it happens to my opponent" features, that golfers generally conceded should not be there. 


If that is a standard of sorts, it also probably came from RTJ, who talked of hard pars and easy bogeys, but never mentioned to my recollection, that he was trying to create double and triple bogeys via design.  Maybe on his water holes, where golfers can miss, but rarely on the green and cup locations where every golfer has to get to when playing a hole. 

[Jon Sweet]

Ally,


For clarity, golf mistakes or design mistakes?


Re-reading this thread, I think it's not unlike any other item of "fair golf."  Not many architects would purposely try to create an impossible putt, but they probably still occur for reasons beyond their control over time - faster greens overall, specific bad cup locations, etc. 


Even with that said, any multi-tier green which is common and popular, makes a pin position near the base of that tier almost impossible to hit, not to mention stay close, so we commonly accept a few of those in most designs.  You can say the same of any pin position adjacent to any interior muffin, which would be impossible to stay close from any angle that requires a putt to come over that little hump.  Except for a few new wave designers, those were never as accepted as the multi-tier greens, although, I now wonder why?  Was it because RTJ basically created his contours with wobbling (and thus somewhat disguised in my eye) tiered greens, so it was figured to be okay?  Are interior knobs now accepted because they are associated with Doak?  And, I guess that means Maxwell wasn't popular enough an architect to make those features stick as "standards?"


For whatever difficult pin location, while it sounds goofy to type, we count on supers not to put pins there on important days, as if everyday play isn't "important."


Short version, I still think known impossible putts are usually avoided in design (and often remodeled when not) but a small number from "putting here to there is impossible" are probably accepted.  I think the degree of impossibility is important, too.  It's one thing to not be able to make a putt, but as in a few examples above, quite another to have a missed putt routinely roll down the fw up to 100 yards off the green.  That is one of those "I hate it when it happens to me, but love it when it happens to my opponent" features, that golfers generally conceded should not be there. 


If that is a standard of sorts, it also probably came from RTJ, who talked of hard pars and easy bogeys, but never mentioned to my recollection, that he was trying to create double and triple bogeys via design.  Maybe on his water holes, where golfers can miss, but rarely on the green and cup locations where every golfer has to get to when playing a hole.

I think here I am with Jeff.

Not sure where this sense of entitlement amongst golfers came from.
If there is large two tiered green, let's keep it simple. 30 FT of front, 30 FT of a steep slope, 30 FT of back.
If the pin is set close the back of the front tier near the slope, and your ball is on the front of the top tier near the slope, why on do you think you deserve to be able to lag it down there to a foot?
You can clearly see the pin, clearly know you are better off missing the green short than hitting it long.
Even better, why from wrong side of a fairway do you feel you are entitled at direct line to the pin?
Seriously?
Why is the middle of the green supposed to be like home base in tag?
If you can putt the ball towards the hole and it stays there IE doesn't come rolling back to your feet... we're good IMO JMO.

[Peter Sayegh]

I've only once felt I've had an IMPOSSIBLE putt. Knew it as soon as I approached the green. My first (safe/smart) thought was to putt into a bunker. My second (egotistic/curious) thought was to test my touch and see what happens. Four putts later, I laughed and enjoyed the experiment.Before you ask, it was at the redone Charleston Muni.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jon,


Should have mentioned that I had a long discussion with Lanny Wadkins on design a few times.  Once, we discussed tiered greens, and he didn't think they should not be there, he just seemed to think they should be very limited, grudgingly upping his max to 4 greens per course, with variety, i.e., some side to side, not back to front.  Even then, I have heard some players complain that from the higher side, you can de-green a chip or putt to the lower level, LOL.


But, even more than putting on a 2-3 tier green, Lanny mentioned that they might inflict a disproportionate penalty on the approach shot, i.e., coming up one foot short may make the difference between being 5 feet from the pin or kicking back 50 feet.  He recognized that it happens on occasion, that a tier is necessary to take up grade on occasion, etc. But, he didn't want a tier designed into a green with his name on it unless he could defend it as necessary, i.e., definitely not on flat ground.  And, as someone has also opined, a built up multi tier green on flat ground somehow stands out visually as bad or at least artificial.


Short version, what design feature is so good you want it all the time?  None, really, and that is especially true for a design feature that might add to your own self inflicted penalty for a bad shot.  Of course, a related question, especailly when redoing old, steep greens....what is worse, a constantly steep (i.e., 4% or more) downhill green, or one remodeled into two 2% areas, with a tier in between that might accelerate a putt off the front of the green just as much as the constance 4% would, maybe just not as often?


All design is a compromise, in some ways, picking options that lead to the least bad outcome, LOL.

[Thomas Dai]

Good point by Jon about a sense of 'entitlement' amongst golfers. I raised a thread akin to 'entitlement' a little while ago although I used the phrase 'divine rights'. An ever expanding sense it sometimes seems. Rather sad imo, maybe a reflection of society in general?
atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

Jeff,


Execution mistake, whether it’s design, green speed or poor pin position.


I’m just not sure than any designer has deliberately built parts of a green that they meant to be pinnable and that can’t be putted to within 10’ from the middle, either in the name of “strategy” or “fun” or “variety”.


I certainly haven’t and don’t believe I ever will (though never say never). If people want to surmise that my greens may then “lack interest”, then they don’t have the first clue what they are talking about.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ally,


Yes, I have made the point here that most of us design on budgets, and thus rarely have the opportunity to design greens large enough to "waste" practical cup locations, i.e., anything over about 6500 SF in the US.  But even one of the Golden Age guys, can't recall who at the moment, wrote that the vast majority of the green ought to be useable to set cups, even if they envisioned less than, say, 6%, while we envision less than 3%.


Interesting point, about defining "interest." I have wondered aloud here (and never gotten a response) if there is anything inherently more interesting in reading the break of a 2-3% green and a 3-4% green?  In terms of judging a putt to make it, is there any real difference in skill needed?  Or is the only difference, the amount of penalty should a put roll 5-10 foot past, rather than 2-3 foot past?


And, again, the difference is in degrees, either in the number of times it happens in a round or how severe the penalty is in proportion to your ability as a golfer to not induce it.  Yes, once a round where someone in the foursome misses badly makes for a great post round bar story.  A badly missed putt that you might take a mully on, and prove to yourself you could have gotten it close may make you shake your head, but not get mad.  But, a green where you can literally not stay on with any kind of putt in certain locations is likely to make you mad.   Or several greens on one course where coming close to de-greening several times, will both likely result in some kind of renovation work for another gca.


It's all grey, but when typing, most of us seem to want to posit in black and white.

[Jon Sweet]

Ally,


Yes, I have made the point here that most of us design on budgets, and thus rarely have the opportunity to design greens large enough to "waste" practical cup locations, i.e., anything over about 6500 SF in the US.  But even one of the Golden Age guys, can't recall who at the moment, wrote that the vast majority of the green ought to be useable to set cups, even if they envisioned less than, say, 6%, while we envision less than 3%.


Interesting point, about defining "interest." I have wondered aloud here (and never gotten a response) if there is anything inherently more interesting in reading the break of a 2-3% green and a 3-4% green?  In terms of judging a putt to make it, is there any real difference in skill needed?  Or is the only difference, the amount of penalty should a put roll 5-10 foot past, rather than 2-3 foot past?
Jeff,
For me I often here you guys in here talking slope percentages. I have zero idea what the course I caddy at would be but I would imagine it's more towards the higher end slope wise. If you read them well you have a large number of putts you need to start well outside the hole from short distances.  Some of the greens have either tiers or sections and putting from one to the other involves puts with well over 30 to 40 foot of break if not more. I enjoy trying to feed the ball in and let it find the fall line.
Conversely, I played a course in Charlottesville called Old Trail.  Really great property, greens were about as flat as can be.  Most all putts of length had a cup or two of break at most.  I found similarly when I played Pikewood that for such a dramatic and difficult course and property the greens were far less severe than the rest of the property.

In terms of the penalty, I would say a 5 to 10 footer really isn't all that long of a putt and if you put the ball in the wrong spot on the green... you've earned it.


And, again, the difference is in degrees, either in the number of times it happens in a round or how severe the penalty is in proportion to your ability as a golfer to not induce it.  Yes, once a round where someone in the foursome misses badly makes for a great post round bar story.  A badly missed putt that you might take a mully on, and prove to yourself you could have gotten it close may make you shake your head, but not get mad.  But, a green where you can literally not stay on with any kind of putt in certain locations is likely to make you mad.   Or several greens on one course where coming close to de-greening several times, will both likely result in some kind of renovation work for another gca.

Here again, at a course where there are set pins which are rotated, certain pin days have considerably tougher pins than others. I can think of one day, pin #5 which it seems is the toughest pin possible on each green.  A lot hid on knobs and tough little spots. That's actually my favorite pin on the course but there are a few places for pins, especially when green speeds are up you are putting it off the windmill and threw the clown's mouth to get to the pin. Any member that's been there for a while knows this and I would say the large majority take pride in it. Small private club though, and it makes it fun.  I would say with all of these pins, even the tough ones, I can't think of any where you would putt it off the green unless you just really fouled up.


It's all grey, but when typing, most of us seem to want to posit in black and white.
That's why I chose blue.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Jeff,


Don’t get me wrong. I’ve “wasted” acres of internal square footage.


If a greenkeeper wants to put a pin on a 15% slope linking parts of the green, then it is his mistake, not mine.


But it is still a mistake.

[Jim Sherma]

I prefer slope with variation much more than pinnable shelves with transition slopes. The example that convinced me of this was Philly Cricket’s restoration. All the high spots and low spots stayed the same but the character of the greens changed for me. The work is wonderful and I’m sure the club got what they wanted. The green complexes as a whole are more difficult with all of the sharper edges both in the interior of, and along the edges of the greens. However, the types of putts and chips required for the old greens I found more pleasant and fun. Tiered greens certainly reward a more one dimensional aerial approach to pitching with spin as opposed to bump and run chips.

[JESII]

Interesting how the rhetorically same point made as it pertains to Winged Foot is more well-received than when made in other lights.

Context is for Kings, as they say.

I agree with Ally, Kyle, in that I'm not sure what you mean.


Matt's initial question/issue has been debated back and forth while Neil put forward Winged Foot as an example of incredibly difficult and undulating greens but with no "impossible putts"...and went further to say he agreed that all putts should be doable.


I'd love to challenge the WF example but don't know it quite well enough. I can't imagine every realistic hole location is puttable from every part of the green...but...


Are you suggesting Matt's example of 10 feet being the best that can be done is the equivalent of putting to a foot?

[David Ober]

The impossible putt:


https://youtu.be/u9KrMQDU94g

[Kyle Harris]

Not sure what you are getting at, Kyle?


Neil has stated that Winged Foot has no impossible putts (or at least pin positions that shouldn’t be used when the greens run fast) and that he’s inclined towards seeing the first putt have a chance of getting to tap-in distance, no matter how difficult or roundabout it is to  do this.


That is a similar point to mine.


Impossible putts are usually mistakes.

That was the point I was making with the Matt Ginella story and repeatedly prior.....

...about which you were rather dismissive. Unless I misinterpreted. But you did say something along the lines of the purists running away with it...

[Kyle Harris]

Red #13 at Streamsong has a devilish mound at the front right. Hole locations near the mound are unstoppable within 10 feet from the other side of the mound.

HOWEVER.

You either have roughly 80% of the putting surface to hit into where the mound does not enter into the equation (and acts as a backstop) or you have a large approach area to use on the other side. Plenty of real estate all around it.

The green is at the end of a reachable Par-5 where you have no sense of the contour playing that second shot the first time around.

Let us please remember that PAR is EXPERT play under normal weather conditions. Having to contend with the mound after a second or third shot in order to demonstrate EXPERT play is perfectly REASONABLE. Furthermore, you likely will remember the mound on subsequent plays and plan accordingly. Familiarity with a golf course should be a rewarded advantage.


I've been playing golf since 1997. I can think of less than a dozen instances where I've seen an impossible hole location (most were involved with training staff here!). I still am skeptical that Matt's situation falls within this category. He had two-shots to make PAR (EXPERT PLAY, remember) from 30 feet.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kyle,


I agree with your example.  I have used valley of sin type greens, for example, and when someone says it's an impossible putt from below the valley (and funnier yet, question why I would use a feature that isn't replicated on the putting green because otherwise, they don't have a chance to practice that shot) to which I reply, "That was sort of the point."    Your point reasonably being that the more difficult a particular shot might be, the more space and options you should have to miss having only that shot.


It also brings to mind another type of impossible putt - the putt around the corner on a wildly shaped green (in the horizontal plane).  While I agree they are rightfully pretty rare, avoiding any putt around the corner means building nothing but oval greens, or those with just very soft curves.

[Ken Moum]

He had two-shots to make PAR (EXPERT PLAY, remember) from 30 feet.

Actually, he had THREE shots to make par.


The complaint (comment?) was that after driving the green on a short par four, he couldn't see a way to get his EAGLE putt closer than 10 feet.


While I certainly have sympathy for anyone with a putt that difficult, I'm pretty sure there are plenty of examples of holes where "good" drives that end up in the wrong place strategically leave even a great player with no chance of getting closer than 10 feet.


Note that I said good drives in the wrong place , as opposed to plain old bad drives.


Where I play in the winter, Red Mountain Ranch CC, the eight hole is a short par four that's theoretically driveable, but players who choose the "correct" tees typically have a wedge or nine iron approach.  If the hole is in front of that green and you hit it in the middle, leaving 10 feet would be a good first putt.


When the course opened it had bent grass greens and that same putt would usually end up 10 yards off the green.

[Kalen Braley]

Ken,

While I agree that anytime an average joe weekend player drives a green its not only a good shot, but an amazing one....

But given Matt is a damn good player (from what I've heard), perhaps for him driving the green in the wrong spot wasn't a "Good Drive" for his standards.  And we see this on holes like 13 at ANGC where players hit to the back part of the green in 2 with a front pin and hang their head in disgust, cause they know it will be difficult to even get bird.

P.S.  DeltaView golf course in Pittsburg, CA, (which is now NLE) had an interesting par 3 where the right side of the green was 4-5 feet higher than the left side.  I've had a few birdie putts there where I was only 20 feet away, but just hoping to make par.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Thomas, Yes, but I’ve never seen someone intend to, and successfully put certain side spin on a putt to counteract a side slope they had to deal with.  The variables of the strike and roll are so great as to make this idea float like a lead balloon!

Jim (and others), here is a two-minute video that demonstrates the technique!


https://youtu.be/sa1fhS6O64o

[JESII]

Yes Kevin, I think that's the Seinfeld side-spin putting Maestro...

[JESII]

I'm assuming you didn't actually watch it...

[Kalen Braley]

I'm assuming you didn't actually watch it...

I was wondering same.  It looked like if anything he was putting side spin on it in same direction of the slope which would make it curve more...

But then again, the Stimp on that green looked to be about 7, I wonder how well that putting style would work on todays greens of 11-12.