News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Multiplication or magnification ?
« on: February 05, 2007, 04:32:46 PM »
MISSED SHOTS ON SHORT HOLES & SHORT APPROACHES

Should the penalty be exponentially greater, especially in this age of "distance" ?

The thread on the 10th at PV inspired this thread.

On GOLF courses, shouldn't the penalty for missing the green, or the DZ off the tee on short to very short holes be exponentially more difficult ?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2007, 04:50:55 PM »
Sure,

I would suggest a tree to block the very, very left edge of the fairway on #17 at PV...uh, oh...

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2007, 04:54:25 PM »
JES II,

That suggestion has already been made, albeit, by default or neglect.

But, that green is a good example of a short par 4 where a missed approach pays a heavy price, especially long or green high misses.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2007, 04:57:20 PM »
JES II,

But, that green is a good example of a short par 4 where a missed approach pays a heavy price, especially long or green high misses.

Agreed 100%

Not sure what I make of the actual thread topic though, I'll have to think about it and get back later.

JNagle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2007, 05:18:54 PM »
Yes - Isn't the premise of many of the great "short" holes to punish, to a greater degree, an errant shot.  The best short 4's require accuracy or the penalty is greater.  Tillinghast has one of the best quotes for a short 4 -

The old-fashioned cross-bunker always leers at the player with a “You must.”  The modern diagonal hazard shows even a more ferocious face at one end as it says to the scratch man, “You should.”  But all along the line to the short end it is saying, “You may.”

If "you should" and you fail you lose the hole.

We recently visited Hidden Creek and the 11th hole there is a perfect example of exacting revenge on a miss hit shot.  And the 8th hole is unquestionably difficult when a golfer misses the green on a short 4.

It's not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or the doer of deeds could have done better.  The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; .....  "The Critic"

Kyle Harris

Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2007, 05:27:57 PM »
Pat,

Pretty well every "Short" hole archtype I've seen has this feature in spades. While I've only seen NGLA's and Mountain Lake's Macdonald/Raynor "short" variety, the green contouring and bunkering make the challenges for a slightly missed shot that much greater.

In terms of your discussion, do you feel that bunkering or green contour are more effective? In what situations would you prefer one over the other?

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2007, 05:52:55 PM »
JES II,

That suggestion has already been made, albeit, by default or neglect.

But, that green is a good example of a short par 4 where a missed approach pays a heavy price, especially long or green high misses.

At least W/R/T Pine Valley, can't the same be said for holes 1,2,3,5,6,8,9,12,13,14,15,18?  ;D

I do agree with your premise though, irrespective of what age we live in.

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2007, 06:20:13 PM »
Patrick,

Do you really mean the penalty should increase exponentially?  Do you mean the penalty, as in penalty strokes, should be exponentially higher? Like 10 times higher?  Or are you saying that the resultant shot should be harder, or twice as hard, or 10 times as hard following a miss on a short hole?

The obvious way to achieve an exponential penalty would be to have penalty strokes closer at hand on short holes - water, OOB, unplayable lies, lost ball jungles.  Seems to me this would make such holes not much fun.  Why ever risk the exponentially higher score.

If you mean that a short hole should present a birdie opportunity, where a miss would likely result in making a bogey, then, yes, that seems like a good trade off to me.  But it doesn't seem to require an exponentially more difficult second or recovery shot.  Just a harder shot to get up and down.  If you want to guarantee a double or worse, then you'd likely need to introduce a penalty shot.

One short hole that comes to mind and fits the bill is the Postage Stamp at Troon.  Hit the green and the reward is a potential birdie.  Miss the green and you  can run up a score going back and forth between bunkers (perhaps running up even an exponential score ;D ).

 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2007, 06:35:01 PM »
Patrick:

Sounds like too much of a formula or a prescription for fairness to me.  If you always restrict their use to short 3's or short 4's, then the good player will seldom find those hazards, but the average golfer will often be clubbed to death.

I think that hazards which offer the possibility of a dire penalty should be used sparingly (for most courses, presuming you want customers to come back), but I don't think you should restrict such situations to "short holes" necessarily.

Two of the worst penalties at Pacific Dunes are on the short par-4's (holes 6 and 16), but another is at the seventh (a long 4) and one of the worst is to the left of the par-5 third hole.  That one is natural, but I didn't worry about it because I thought if a player was strong enough to reach the green in two, he ought to have enough control to keep away from it.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2007, 06:36:04 PM by Tom_Doak »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2007, 06:52:59 PM »
Tom Doak,

The first hole that flashed into my mind at PacDunes was # 11

Missing that green can be a nightmare.

I also thought of the challenges faced when the pin was set to the far back right on # 3.

I wasn't confining the concept to par 3's and par 4's and thought that # 13 at ANGC would be a fitting example amongst par 5's.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2007, 07:35:04 PM »
Patrick,

I thought of PacDunes as well, but hole #16.  Missing to the right and going into that swale makes things darn tough.  I can't think of another hole where you are 50 yards from the pin after your drive, in the fairway,  and just praying to get it down in 3 more shots.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Multiplication or magnification ?
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2007, 09:46:16 PM »
Kalen,

I also think the DZ and the surrounds at # 16 present magnified penalties when compared to other DZ's.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back