Blind or semi-blind part pitch shots (unable to see the bottom of the pin)

[Thomas Dai]

I believe it was Pete Dye, someone will no doubt correct me if it isn't him, who would sometimes build par-5 greens in such a way that the bottom of the pin isn't visible from 30-80 yds, to deliberately force better players to play a type of 3rd shot they don't feel comfortable with.

This is apparently because the blind or semi-blind part pitch shot, a shot where you can't see the bottom on the pin, is a shot that is particularly disliked by more accomplished players and tour pro's.

Any thoughts on this?

atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

I quite like the odd pitch where the green surface isn't visible.... Think punchbowl greens and uphill short par-4's....

Can get a little old if used in the same way more than 2 or 3 times a round though...

[Guy Nicholson]

See Jeff Mingay's essay on the 16th at Highlands Links, partly on this topic.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/jeff-mingay-a-great-hole-the-16th-at-cape-breton-highlands/

[Garland Bayley]

Some thoughts from your other thead.

...
I believe the tenants of gca that favor visibility will stay in place for a while, unless this merry band of 1500 gca zealots finally manage to convince them otherwise.  Even then, I think it would be a case of Groucho Marx asking, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

Just food for thought.

Here's food for thought. Only a tiny percentage of golfers have much need to see the bottom of the pin, because only a tiny percentage of golfers have the ability to hit it close to the bottom of that pin. The average golfer sees a green with a pin somewhere, and hopes to hit it somewhere near the green. It seems to me that you are advocating designing for the tiny percent, like your friend Notah, whereas the John Kirk unified theory of golf enjoyment says the rest of us like the mystery of hidden pins and the like.

[Grant Saunders]

Thomas

I started a thread on something similar a while ago.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,51461.msg1176827.html#msg1176827

Some nice pictures were posted with examples of partially hidden flags. As a low single digit golfer, playing to a flag or putting surface obscured by a mound or similar is way harder than pitching over a bunker but seeing the whole target area.

[Garland Bayley]

... As a low single digit golfer, playing to a flag or putting surface obscured by a mound or similar is way harder than pitching over a bunker but seeing the whole target area.

As a high handicap golfer, i.e., average, the opposite is true. Pitching over the bunker almost always sends the ball to the back of the green, whereas pitching to a obscured flag can leave the ball short, long, or even  near the pin.

[Sean_A]

The John Kirk unified theory of golf enjoyment is more about how much time the ball spends on the ground rather than blindness. 

Unlike Bailey, I think it matters for everybody if they can see the entire target or not.  There is definetely a comfort zone provided by visibility, no matter where one is on a course.  As I think it is important to make golfers feel uncomfortable now and again, I am ion favour of intentional blindness built into holes.  Although, I prefer when blindness is the result of the less than optimum shot rather than equal opportunity blindness, but both scenarios are important in design if we value variety.

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

I believe the most exciting shots in golf are the ones we wait the longest time to ascertain the result.  This applies to both long and short shots, sometimes in different ways:

...

A drive or approach shot that disappears from sight holds our attention for a long time, as we anticipate the result for the entire walk until sighting the ball.  That's why I would make the case for the occasional blind shot off the tee.  Even a poor shot on any hole which disappears from sight evokes plenty of apprehension, or excitement, until the result is determined.

...

I thought this weekend about trying to develop my own little unified theory about golf course design, based on my belief that the excitement in golf is the anticipation of watching your ball come to rest, and the longer, the better.  ...

...  But the greatest joy occurs between the stroke and the result, and the longer it takes, the better.

[Matthew Essig]

I believe the most exciting shots in golf are the ones we wait the longest time to ascertain the result.  This applies to both long and short shots, sometimes in different ways:

...

A drive or approach shot that disappears from sight holds our attention for a long time, as we anticipate the result for the entire walk until sighting the ball.  That's why I would make the case for the occasional blind shot off the tee.  Even a poor shot on any hole which disappears from sight evokes plenty of apprehension, or excitement, until the result is determined.

...

I thought this weekend about trying to develop my own little unified theory about golf course design, based on my belief that the excitement in golf is the anticipation of watching your ball come to rest, and the longer, the better.  ...

...  But the greatest joy occurs between the stroke and the result, and the longer it takes, the better.

IMHO, this theory is true.

It can be applied to many things we discuss.
-Downhill shots
-Blind shots (skyline greens could be clumped with this)
-F&F conditions
-Contour
The list goes on and on.
 
However, everything has a tendency to be better in moderation, so every hole shouldn't be downhill, blind, heavily contoured, etc.

[Thomas Dai]

Grant,

Thank you for cross-referencing to your interesting previous thread on this subject. Folk herein certainly did post some fine and topical photos in response to your thread. I particularly like the photo Eric posted of Tenby's 11th green, mild and subtle. How far on is the pin? Where should I land my approach shot? Do I land it short and bump-n-roll-n-trickle it on or do I fly it all the way and if so how far? Thought provoking, which IMO is good. Here is the photo reposted.

11th green at Tenby, photo by Eric Smith


Although the semi-blindnes is a bit more severe I liked this too, your photo of the 18th green at Oreti Sands. Reminds me of the 12th green at Cruden Bay, the 6th at Tain and even a bit of the 1st at Royal St Georges.


Slightly blind full approach shots have been nullified to a certain extent by rangefinders and GPS. However, as these gadgets are generally a little less helpful on partial shots, a level of blindness or semi-blindness still has a lot of validity when it comes to shorter distance approach shots.

atb