"The importance of the ground just before the green cannot be overstated."

[Thomas Dai]

+1 to what Ally says above. Sometimes of course even smallish humps and bumps and hollows whilst appeared tempting to use are crucially not actually smooth enough to permit predictability of a ground game shot.
By the way, anyone still carry and use a ‘chipper’, ie a putter head and length like club but with 25-35* of loft? My mother had one and was a wizard at using it. I’ve seen a few other folks be pretty good with them too. I guess chipping with hybrids has maybe taken there place these days though.
Atb

[Jay Mickle]

Thomas,
I often put my 23degree hickory approach cleek in my bag for running shots. Had it at Streamsong Black. Great fun.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim,
I see you reference this thread on the Alnmouth Village thread.
I was -of course- being a little simple in my posts above. Undulations in front of the green (like the 5th at AV) do make you think a little, especially downwind when the pin is on the front. No undulations and it’s a no-brainer: You use the ground to bump one in. But with undulations like those, you may choose air or you might actually go closer to the ground by making sure the ball is running very early.
These kind of ground contours are awesome. They look really cool and can provide options. But my point was that the flatter courses will actually see you USE the ground on a few more shots per round, maybe just not in such a varied way.

Scoring and jumped up ground game aside, I don't see the very few instances per round wherein one has to actually weigh what type of shot will produce the better outcome because the ground in front of the green is more uneven and undulated as problematic. Having only the air as an option is much more of an issue, and from the looks of it I don't think that anyone would say that about Machrihanish #14.

[David_Tepper]

Don't forget the "E-Club,"  invented/created by golf writer Michael Bamberger.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=golf+e-club+&_sacat=115280

https://www.golf.com/equipment/one-si-scribe-appeals-warren-buffett-takeover-his-club-company
 

[Thomas Dai]

Curious to know how folks would play a shot from the position of the camera to the pin on the green? Looks like damp, murky weather with a slight wind from the right.




Given the apparent murky dampness, the amount of space between the front of the green and the pin, the wind direction and the worm casts I’d fly the ball onto the front of the green and let it roll out. Lie would also be a consideration.
However, given different weather conditions, a different pin location, a different wind direction and strength, hard ground conditions and no worm casts I may well play the shot totally differently.
Nice to have the option though. Not just air, not just ground, but options.
Atb

[Steven Blake]

The shame of it all is that the modern game has changed the way we look at conditioning. I'd guess 70% of our customers here in the states like it lush and green. They tend to see anything else as in poor shape. Pity that more don't appreciate how much fun it could be playing firm and fast.


Also the easy way out for superintendents is to water more, despite the dangers inherent with disease. That's why many of  here have such a love for the firm conditions espoused as the goal. For a brief shining minute the other day Riviera shone thru, giving some of the best players in the world fits. However the ability to hit the ball 320 yards negated a little of that. Note the tee shots on 18 , which anyone who has played there no doubt  doesn't see it as a short par four. Nevertheless it was fun to watch!

Archie,


Very well said! Unfortunately you are right most people want lush and green. Firm and fast has so many benefits if only we had an organization that would talk about the proper way the course should be presented.


One of the biggest issues getting new golfers and “growing the game” is cost.  Overwatering leads to more pesticide applications etc. But let’s not forget that lush turf needs to be mowed more which uses more fuel and courses in turn by more mowers because the demand for mowing 24-7 is so much greater on a lush course. All this cost is paid for by the consumer in higher green fees.  I would love to see a decent if not great course in the US charge less than $20-25 walking only have firm and fast presentation.  What does a course like that look like?


The ground game is the most fun part of the game for me. Even a course that is a Doak scale 2 is interesting with firmer conditions. But a great course with F&F is the ultimate. I have always thought the sand belt course of Australia had the best balance of architecture and F&F conditioning. But there climate and unique blend of warm and cool season grasses makes it a bit easier I feel than here in Wisconsin for example.


Blake

[Jason Topp]

It seems to be there has been a huge change in attitude by the average player over the last 10 years. 

I would guess comments I hear in favor of firm and fast outweigh calls for lush green grass by a factor of at least 10 to 1. At my club I believe the view is nearly universal that the course is best when brown tinged and shiny.  I hear similar sentiments when playing with people from other courses. 

Many of those calling for such conditions have little or no knowledge of this site or other golf architecture orthodoxy. 

[John Chilver-Stainer]

I find the severe bumps and hollows shown in the pic of Machrihanish are a whole lot of fun for the short chip or putt from off the green but too unpredictable to play as ground game from more than 100 yards, but so what?


In an ancient links I accept all quirk with relish, however in a new design I'm looking for the bumps and hollows to provide roll in paths to different parts of the green, in the form of feed-ins or kicking plates. All part of the fun of deciphering undulating surfaces.

[Sean_A]

John

It's interesting that you accept features that have seemingly unsolvable puzzles in old courses, but for new designs the puzzles should have solutions...presumably which can be figured out within a few plays. If this is the case, why do delineate between old and new courses this way?

Ciao

[John Chilver-Stainer]

I accept all ancient courses for their antiquity as an opportunity to take a ride in the tardis and imagine playing with bearded wierdos with leather balls, but that doesn't mean I necesarily enjoy all the unsolvable tight bumps


However if I'm designing a new green I like to provide a ground game opportunity with various ways of rolling into the green to give players a choice and an invitation, rather than just aiming at the pin.
I like to see the same idea in other newer courses.
It's unlikely (never say never) I would put a steep bump in front of a raised green as in the Machrihanish pic as it appears too harsh and if someone did I'd probably "tut tut" it.

[Thomas Dai]

Despite being a fan of the ground game and firm and fast golf in general I will admit there can sometimes be an excess of humps and hollows, not that I'm suggesting any be removed!

The presence of humps-n-hollows around greens or even in the approach areas are probably expected, but extremely hump-n-hollow fairways where there is an element of luck even if you know the course and the driving lines well, can be off-putting.
This may well be one factor that puts some folks off links golf when they first experience it. And of course humps-n-hollows also result in uneven stances (and all made more difficult in a cold wind and rain).

As an aside, it should be recognised that most of the classic GB&I courses arose or were built in an era when the construction and size of the ball, and thus it's trajectory, especially when hit by the clubs of the time, was significantly lower than these days and that more courses had the grass nibbled nice-n-tight by grazing animals so there wasn't really another way to play the game especially with limited or no greens irrigation. Plus 'big machines' weren't around in days gone by to easily remove or flatten any hump or hollow that was perhaps thought to be inappropriate. Something that we should probably now be grateful for!!
atb

PS - when Francis Ouimet first captained the US Walker Cup Team at St Andrews between the wars he had made and presently to each team member a 'jigger', a short shafted, low/mid-lofted iron designed specifically to play run-up shots. And he apparently told his players to practice a lot with the club prior to the event.

[Sean_A]

JCS

I guess I don't delineate what is okay today compared to yesterday. I want archies to have a free hand to explore the possibilities of design. Besides, in my experience it is very rare the ground game puzzle cannot be solved. It's so rare as to not be an issue. For me the far more frustrating situation is on drives to fairways when hit down the middle the ball could end up lost left or right. However, usually this is more about lack of width than it is about unpredictable bounces.

Ciao

[Pete Lavallee]

Steve,


I played Rustic Canyon this Tuesday and paid $30 to walk (Sr. Rate). It was deliciously firm, with dormant Bermuda fairways. The greens and collars were very dry, I wasted a lot of time searching for ball marks from wedge shots! The extended bent grass collars were also nicely dry, not littered with ball mark as in the past. It was very busy, so it can be done!