[Mark Bourgeois]

I have a question: if wind truly is an integral design element of links golf, how come course records don't require some sort of minimum wind speed in order to actually count as the record?

Like, if the wind doesn't rise above X KPH, the round will not enter the record books, or it will, but with an asterisk.

Kind of like what they do in track ("athletics" for you Royal genuflecters), only in reverse...

If the R&A did something like this, would it lessen the pressure to do crazy things to protect par? (Although the success of the Hoylake "experiment" certainly will do far more on this front...)

Is this idea totally daft? Seriously, why is this not done if it's true that "nae wind, nae golf"?

And please don't give "measurement challenge" as a reason -- surely the Met Office is up to such a simple task!

Mark

[Gary Slatter]

I agree somewhat but its the pressure of the importance of the game that should account - i.e. is a 62 on Wednesday not easier than 62 on Thursday when the bell rings?  I think all courses should have several records, a competitive (in a competition, including monthly medal) and regular (all other conditions, your choice).  You have to admire course records in windy conditions, and if wind became a scoring factor would rounds played "before the wind came up" count the same as later rounds.  
Par isn't as important as beating the other players, golf is wonderful because we have so many outside influences acting on our mind as we try to play.
What percentage knows about course records? At our course the course record is 55 minutes.

[Bob_Huntley]

Mark,

In the Medal rounds at the R@A they post the SSS for the day. An especially nasty wind with driving rain might well go as high as 76.0. One could compute this as four strokes harder that on a benign weather round of 72.

I think it could be done but really, why bother?


Bob

[Mark Bourgeois]

Bob,

Why do they do it in track?

Mark

[ed_getka]

Mark,
  I can think of a reason, where will the asterisks end? There would be a dry, firm record; a rainy, wet, soft record; the aforementioned wind record; and some I'm sure I haven't thought of. A course record is relatively meaningless anyway, it is the competition that counts and the field plays under the same conditions for the most part (since the weather is always changing). If anything I would advocate that course records should only count if they occur during competition.

[Gary Slatter]

In track they only play one hole. and they are wussies compared to golfers.

[ed_getka]

Mark,
    In track it would be logical to have wind restrictions, since in sprints or throwing events being downwind is a big advantage. I doubt that any event that is a lap or more around the track has any wind criteria since there won't be an advantage gained.

[Dave_Miller]

I have a question: if wind truly is an integral design element of links golf, how come course records don't require some sort of minimum wind speed in order to actually count as the record?

Like, if the wind doesn't rise above X KPH, the round will not enter the record books, or it will, but with an asterisk.

Kind of like what they do in track ("athletics" for you Royal genuflecters), only in reverse...

If the R&A did something like this, would it lessen the pressure to do crazy things to protect par? (Although the success of the Hoylake "experiment" certainly will do far more on this front...)

Is this idea totally daft? Seriously, why is this not done if it's true that "nae wind, nae golf"?

And please don't give "measurement challenge" as a reason -- surely the Met Office is up to such a simple task!

Mark

Mark:
How about "Play the course as you find it".  If wind, what about rain, temperature, humidity.  
Play the course as you find it.  Who cares what the conditions are? Mother Nature is not controllable and you just have to go with it.
Merry Christmas
Dave

[Bob_Huntley]

Mark,

In track, the times registered are kept for RECORD purposes and have been for a very long time. The person breaking the record wins the competition. In golf, one may well break a course record in one round but not only not win the tournament but could possibly miss the cut as well.

Bob

[Mark Bourgeois]

Okay, this looks like a beatdown...no mas!

Mark

[ed_getka]

Mark,
   Come on, don't give up that easily. I'm quite sure we haven't thought of every angle. I am always interested in hearing other points of view. Support your case.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Okay, Ed,

I can understand the difference between one's philosophy on scoring versus how to keep scoring records. One record book is easier to keep track of!

But do you consider wind an integral design element on links courses? I certainly do and it appears the great courses assume its presence.  For example, Muirfield's circular routing ensures the golfer will face wind from different directions on the par 3s.

For example, The Old Course has wide fairways (even if there's a right and wrong side to the fairway).

If wind is an integral design element, and a tournament is played in the absence of wind, then isn't that akin to playing only 17 holes, or to Ben Hogan's belief that putts shouldn't count for a full stroke?

In other words, if a course is designed to be played in a certain wind, and that wind is lacking, then why shouldn't we somehow discount scores played on that "incomplete" course?

Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob,

Why do they do it in track?

Because it's easy to monitor a wind for 10 seconds in a very limited area as opposed to 300 acres for five hours.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Bob,

Why do they do it in track?

Because it's easy to monitor a wind for 10 seconds in a very limited area as opposed to 300 acres for five hours.

At the risk of opening another front in this discussion (violating rule #1 of debate: when in a hole, stop digging!), I doubt measurement would be a significant challenge -- although your point on the temporal challenge is well taken. For that, you could take continuous or periodic measurements from an anemometer, and calculate an average off that.

Linksland actually might be a better venue for getting accurate measurements than a limited area.  My understanding of how the National Weather Service takes its wind measurements is in an open field, with the anemometer a prescribed height.

Mark

[JESII]

1997 British Amateur at Sandwich:

Wind blows 30 - 40 and nobody breaks par either day of qualifying. Justin Rose draws a young Spanish protigy on a calm day in the second round (I believe) and wins about 6 up while being about 6 or 7 under.

Mark,

realistically, nobody could argue your point...logistically, to much to do to make it work.

[Glenn Spencer]

I don't know about this wind bit, but course records should be much more official. Here is a basic idea of how I think they should go.

Ladies Record from Ladies Tee
Ladies Record from Mens Tee
Ladies Record from Ladies Tee in Competition
Ladies Amateur Record in Competition

Men

All tees should have there own record in and out of competition.

Competition Records for all tees and Amateur in Competition Records

Is it really that much work. I don't think so.

Hell, they GAVE Moraine's course record to a guy that shot 63 in a partners matchplay event. I was told that he even had a few gimmes. I have always thought that this should be a more official undertaking and I thought it interesting information as to how the course plays.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Mark,

realistically, nobody could argue your point...logistically, to much to do to make it work.

Surely it would be easier than Shotlink!

Technically, I don't think there would be much of a challenge, just a feed from the BBC.

Sounder objections would be:
Why make things more complicated?
Rub of the green / play the course as it lies.
Wind is NOT an integral element of design.

But it is sad to hear / read someone's comments along the lines of, "Too bad they didn't get to play Royal X with her defenses fully intact."

With the changes to global climate patterns, it's likely that wind as a defense, as an integral element of design, will factor less and less in the high summer of the Open, and setups going forward will resemble Hoylake 2006 and Turnberry 1977.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but shouldn't the R&A make some type of official acknowledgment when a critical element of the original design is missing?

If the pros are going to assassinate a course simply because of benign weather, we can at least note the victim was unaware of what was about to happen...

Happy Holidays,
Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob,

Why do they do it in track?

Because it's easy to monitor a wind for 10 seconds in a very limited area as opposed to 300 acres for five hours.

At the risk of opening another front in this discussion (violating rule #1 of debate: when in a hole, stop digging!), I doubt measurement would be a significant challenge -- although your point on the temporal challenge is well taken. For that, you could take continuous or periodic measurements from an anemometer, and calculate an average off that.

Mark,

And whom is going to do all this work, every day, every hour at every local golf course ?

And, what if the equipment fails for whatever reason for an hour, or a day.

A track meet is an event of limited duration in a confined area.
Each event takes place in a relatively short period of time, from the Javelin throw to the shot-put to the high jump, to the pole vault to the sprints and distance races.

Golf takes place from sun up until sun down, and, if you like the Dean's daughter, well into the night.[/color]

Linksland actually might be a better venue for getting accurate measurements than a limited area.  My understanding of how the National Weather Service takes its wind measurements is in an open field, with the anemometer a prescribed height.

Why stop with wind.
Let's include precipitation and temperature and time of year.

Don't take this personally, but, it's an absurd idea.
[/color]

Mark

[ForkaB]

Mark

The following could be done in Great Britain and Ireland, at least:

1.  As Bob H refers to above, in every competitive round at every course a Competition Standard Scratch (CSS) is computed, which broadly reflects the difficulty of the course on the day.  It can vary by 4 strokes, as Bob says.  In US terms is it a variable Course Rating.

2.  Using that data, a difficulty adjusted course record could be established, defined as the amximum number of strokes played under the CSS.  Thus a 65 when the CSS was 76 would be "better" than a 62 when the CSS was 72.

3.  You could apply the methodology to Tour and/or Major scores on a retroactive basis, if you wished, maybe using the Sagarin numbers to establish the "handicaps" of the pros.  It could be interesting in comparing scores from different eras and under different conditions.

4.  All that being said, I doubt if you are going to get the guy that shot 62 in benign conditions to give up his course record to the guy who shot the 65 in a gale!

[Padraig Dooley]

What would you do if the wind died down?

It's not unusual for the wind to be blowing then die down when the tide changes and pick up again shortly afterwards.

Wind is rarely a constant strength over a four hour period.

Wind can also make some holes play easier. A similar strength wind blowing from two different directions will provide two different tests.

[ForkaB]

All good and true points, Padraig

I was just trying to offer a (necesarily) flawed answer to the question.  In the real world, all you could do that would be interesting with the data available would be to do a rough comparison between great rounds in history.  That's all.  IMO.

Rich

[Mark Bourgeois]

Hey, I wasn't thinking of doing it on every course every day, just for the Brit Open!

Padraig, you got me on that one!

Rich, the CSS is an interesting idea but that takes into account all the design elements.

Mark

[Bob_Huntley]

Rich,

A perfectly cogent analysis, however I think Mark is off his rocker here.  


Bob

[Mark Bourgeois]

...paging Dr. Katz!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()