"Short" shot value

[David Druzisky]

Here we are in 2008 often discussing the merrits of restoring classic courses and golf holes and how it pleases most of us when such restorations are well done and true to what is known of the original design.  In giving the Short a little thought lately, and reading some of the recent great threads that discus examples, I am trying to get a better impression on shot values (and how they were played) of the "old" shorts back when originaly put into play as compared to todays values.

With todays equipment how much has been de-valued? (example - the sand wedge)

Many of you are blessed with the ability to see and play some of the more notable versions on a more routine basis and have likely given this some consideration to how those holes were played back in the day. I would love to hear your thoughts.

DbD  

[RJ_Daley]

David, that is an interesting question.  While I don't have the repetoire of shot making skills of a very good golfer, I would say that a 'short' that offers the player a variety of methods of attack, based on conditions, is the hallmark of a good short, and a 'classic short'.  

The first condition I believe is situating the hole where it uses the variability of potential wind directions and strength, which is highly dependant on geography.

Next is the conditions of the ground, and if it can be maintained to the architect's vision of playing condition of firm and fast, or softish.  

Both of these above factors obviously give the player a choice if he has the shot ability to decide on an aerial lawn dart, or a low trajectory, spinner that can skip and stop, or back up.  

Then, there is the foregreens, that also dictate possible strategies, including the bound and run-in, and the aerial.  Then there are the ever important surrounds.  Sometimes I think that the surrounds aren't given enough consideration as to the quality of any hole, and particularly the shorts.

Back in the day, I think there was far more emphasis on the player having a variety of skills on a short hole than now.  Aerial assault is only one skill.  And, with a 9-I down to various wedges, modern equipment probably demands that the competitive golfer stay mostly with the aerial assault of lawn darts if they want the best percentage of scoring chances.  Yet, for us recreational golfers and those that use old or hickory equipment, I think short holes really do give the rec golfer, the most chance to have fun, in many different methods of shot making.  

[Gerry B]

today's green speeds have to be the great equalizer in some cases.

A couple of examples:

Chicago Golf Club's 10th - there are some pin positions that when it is fast and firm can yield 4 and 5 putts - if you end up on the wrong side of the pin. - i have witnessed it first hand.

St. Louis CC - as the green tilts left to right  - again putting can be treacherous if one ends up on the wrong side of the green.

[Tommy Williamsen]

My favorite shots are those from sixty yards in.  I think today's equipment allow for more creativity than fifty years ago when I was a kid. I had a pitching wedge and a sand iron with so much bounce that its use off the fairway was limited.  Today a good player can still hit the bump and run, low spinner, etc. but also high soft shots that were a dream fifty years ago. I carry three and sometimes four wedges that allow me to hit all kinds of different shots.  Rather than de-value the short shots, I think it puts a premium on them.  Getting up and down from all kinds of lies becomes imperative if you are going to be competitive.  

I'd be curious to know how much time tour players spent on the short game fifty years ago as compared to today's players.  I would venture to say that the guys today practice them much more.

[Sean_A]

My favorite shots are those from sixty yards in.  I think today's equipment allow for more creativity than fifty years ago when I was a kid. I had a pitching wedge and a sand iron with so much bounce that its use off the fairway was limited.  Today a good player can still hit the bump and run, low spinner, etc. but also high soft shots that were a dream fifty years ago. I carry three and sometimes four wedges that allow me to hit all kinds of different shots.  Rather than de-value the short shots, I think it puts a premium on them.  Getting up and down from all kinds of lies becomes imperative if you are going to be competitive.  

I'd be curious to know how much time tour players spent on the short game fifty years ago as compared to today's players.  I would venture to say that the guys today practice them much more.

Tommy

The problem with your statement is that while the variety of wedge shots may have increased (though I do take issue with this), the value of the positional play previous to that wedge shot has been decreased.  There is often little need to pick a spot that is best for a layup or recovery shot.  I don't know if architectural design (soft conditions/carry shots into greens) was the reason for the invention of several different types of wedges or if it was the other way around.  I do know that one of my main reasons for wanting to reduce the number of clubs from 14 to maybe 9 is stop guys carrying 3-4 wedges or at least make guys think about the necessary tradeoffs with the rest of their bag.  IMO loads of wedges combined with modern soft conditions/carry into greens shots are the biggest problems with golf/golf design today.  This combination of factors has encouraged smash mouth golf which in turn has encouraged the lengthening of courses.  

I am not sure we are ever going to get back to the way it was 30 or 40 years ago because an entire generation or two has grown up with smash mouth golf ideals, but at least we can get guys thinking about their strategy and how that blends with strategy the archie has intended before setting foot on the 1st tee.  Reducing clubs would certainly encourage more positional play and that has to be a good thing so far as strategy is concerned - especially if more courses become f&f.  

Ciao

[Peter Nomm]

The biggest difference I see in watching the old classic golf matches on TV and watching today's golf is the height of cut of the grass.  Back then, you would see all the short shots bounce in and roll, but they would stop rather quickly.  The fairway grass was longer reducing spin on the shots, but the greens were also longer (therefore slower) so the ball slowed more quickly.

Today, the tighter lies and faster greens produce a shot that flies and bites more.  And it is the course conditioning that I believe has had a major factor in changing that.

We can still experience the differences today - go play a local muni with slower greens and longer fairways - you will hit the old school shot.  Then go play somewhere that is manicured to the hilt - the new one will be more beneficial.

[David Druzisky]

RJ - my impression is that back in the day the Short - especially ones that were templated such as the two that Gerry brought up with bunkers al around etc - were very intimidating.  Dont get me wrong, they still are, but because of the arsenal of clubs that golfers have today, combined with the ball, todays golfer has more weapons to tackle the variables that you identified.  Back in the day the player had to be more creative based on their skills it seems.  Being in those greenside bunkers back then had much more meaning then as compared today.

Tommy - The tour player has more clubs to work on for the short game so I would bet they spend more time on it. ?  I laugh just about every time the commentators durring a TV golf event remark about how creative some shot was.  It makes me think that if that is as creative as they guys are, the game has de-evolved considerably.  Is it creativity or just ability because of the available tools?  Can you imagine how many out of the box shots one had to play to get up and down back in the day!

Sean - agreed on the point you make about positional play.  Most designers try to establish these types of values in the design only to see 95% of players completely disreguad the obvious.  Tour players do consider it, but only when defintely called for - usually The Open (British that is) or a select few holes here and there force the matter.  Unfortunately again the commentators are not on it as much as they could be to help establish strategy.

Would it be safe to say that with the short examples of St Louis and Chicago options off the tee are as limited today as they were back in the day.  Identify the yardage and throw in some form of dart?  Or, is it a drastically different experience today because of the advanced equipment.  Is the short far shorter?  Todays wedge options allow us to get out of the surrounding trouble with far more ups and downs than back then?

Peter - so do you think the new turf conditions have made holes such as the shorts at St Louis and Chicago easier or more difficult?  This is a tee shot as it was back in the day.

Maybe todays version of the Short - as it was meant to be back in the day - would be something like 17th TPC?

[Garland Bayley]

My favorite shots are those from sixty yards in.  I think today's equipment allow for more creativity than fifty years ago when I was a kid. I had a pitching wedge and a sand iron with so much bounce that its use off the fairway was limited.  Today a good player can still hit the bump and run, low spinner, etc. but also high soft shots that were a dream fifty years ago. I carry three and sometimes four wedges that allow me to hit all kinds of different shots.  Rather than de-value the short shots, I think it puts a premium on them.  Getting up and down from all kinds of lies becomes imperative if you are going to be competitive.  

I'd be curious to know how much time tour players spent on the short game fifty years ago as compared to today's players.  I would venture to say that the guys today practice them much more.

First off Tommy, I would venture to say that you are wrong about the guys practicing short game more now than in the past.

Second, I doubt you really use 4 "wedges".

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

On a Short template hole I'd think the shot value off the tee is pretty much the same today as it was back in the day.  The hole requires/rewards a high spinning shot that is relatively precise in length and direction.  If the hole is 125 - 135 yards then and now, then we're talking about a PW or 9 iron for most players in either era.  The old balata balls spun as much as the ProV1 does, so stopping it on the green is likely not much different in either era.  With a short iron you're probably not working the ball too much.  Green conditions were likely harder back when compared to most of today's over-irrigated greens so the shot was probably harder in that respect back when.

Where I think the shot values are definitely different is in the recovery from the surrounding bunkers or from the surrounding rough if the tee shot is messed up.  Back in the day, with the implements of the time, it required more skill and creativity to get the ball up and down.

[Peter Nomm]

David - I would actually think overall it has not changed much for the pros - the shot from long fairways to slow greens is effectively the same as short fairways to faster greens.  But I think higher handicaps have a harder time with tight fairways and faster greens.  

I think the average player has gotten better tee to green but worse around the greens - primarily because the speed of greens makes them more difficult.

[Bruce Katona]

IMHO every course should have a "short" or wedge/short iron par 3 hole....

Why?

Because players of abalilities actually enjoy playing them....for the high handicapper, it is a good chance to make a par....for the better player, depending on green size, internal contour and green speed, perhaps a birdie....the difference in score over time for a low versus high handicap should not be much different.

On a course with 4 par 3 holes, one should be short, one medium, one long and the last dependant on site conditions or routing issues.

[Tommy Williamsen]

My favorite shots are those from sixty yards in.  I think today's equipment allow for more creativity than fifty years ago when I was a kid. I had a pitching wedge and a sand iron with so much bounce that its use off the fairway was limited.  Today a good player can still hit the bump and run, low spinner, etc. but also high soft shots that were a dream fifty years ago. I carry three and sometimes four wedges that allow me to hit all kinds of different shots.  Rather than de-value the short shots, I think it puts a premium on them.  Getting up and down from all kinds of lies becomes imperative if you are going to be competitive.  

I'd be curious to know how much time tour players spent on the short game fifty years ago as compared to today's players.  I would venture to say that the guys today practice them much more.

First off Tommy, I would venture to say that you are wrong about the guys practicing short game more now than in the past.

Second, I doubt you really use 4 "wedges".

Garland, I carry three wedges more often because I made room for a hybrid.  There a a few courses where I do carry four wedges.  And you are right, I don't always use them all.  

As for some of the other comments, all I know is that as someone who has played the game for some fifty years and have always spent at least half my time practicing the short game, I have more options than I use to and so practice various shots more.  As for creativity, I think there is a good argument to be made that years ago short shots required more creativity.  I can remember working on opening the blade, shutting it down and learning to play a variety of shots with my pitching wedge and "Sandy Andy."

[David Druzisky]

Okay, I will put it this way then,

How would a short be designed today to satisfy the same intentions of the original template Short design?

A couple things need to be factored in possibly.  Were not the original Shorts designed with Match play in mind?

Modern turf conditions including height of cut, green speed, and consistent conditions.

The golfer has far more weapons.

Multiple tees are a new ingredient.

Also, exactly what club was used say in 1915 on #6 NGLA?

[Garland Bayley]

... I carry three and sometimes four wedges that allow me to hit all kinds of different shots.  ...

...
Second, I doubt you really use 4 "wedges".

I was wrong. Tommy truly is a "wedge nut". He probably owns more wedges than I own golf clubs.

[TEPaul]

DavidD:

Because of some maintenance changes over the years particularly about the doubling of greenspeed the difficulty of playing a "Short" back then with what they used in clubs and balls compared to today with what we use that way today is probably about a wash, in my opinion.

In other words, approaching and recovering around the green is probably easier today but putting probably isn't.