The Virtues of (Relatively) Tiny Greens for Championship Golf

[Tim Gavrich]

I'm watching a rerun of today's Golf Channel coverage of the RBC Heritage at Harbour Town and it's reminding me how much I enjoyed the golf course the one time I got to see it (played the front, drove the back).  It's the perfect counter to the default belief that golf courses need to be 7,500 yards-plus in order to challenge good players.  The low score today was 67 (-4), a high number for the first round of a regular season Tour event.

Harbour Town forces players to shape and control shots with a combination of well-placed trees (though some steadfastly believe there's no such thing...more's the pity) and small (miniscule, by Tour standards) putting surfaces.  As a result, Harbour Town doesn't need to grow nasty rough to post a challenge to players, which I think we can all agree is a favorable situation.

Thoughts?  I know golf courses with enormous greens are lauded here by many (and who doesn't love hitting more greens in reg than usual?), but which are some favorite courses with very small greens?  Which courses with small greens would hold up similarly to Harbour Town against a professional field?

[Phil McDade]

Tim:

Nice topic; I've always liked the ying and yang of Augusta National (big greens, wide fairways) and Harbourtown the week immediately after.

Pebble Beach comes to mind immediately, as does the site of this year's US Open -- Olympic.

Addendum: I'd add that Pebble's small greens tend to be harder to hold under typical US Open conditions there in June than during the Clambake, but it still serves as a good example.

[Ben Sims]

Phil,

I wouldn't consider ANGC's greens large.  Some yes, but not as a group.  Greens like 3, 5, 14 and 15 also belie their square footage with relatively small target areas as well.  Makes for an interesting topic from Tim, but I wouldn't lump ANGC as a yin to yang comparison.  In fact, I bet a straw poll of tour guys would yield a conclusion that they felt their targets were smaller at Augusta.

[Tom_Doak]

For years, the Tour players' three favorite courses were Harbour Town, Pebble Beach, and Riviera -- which are the three smallest sets of greens on Tour.  [Riviera's were not that small when built.]

[Tim Gavrich]

For years, the Tour players' three favorite courses were Harbour Town, Pebble Beach, and Riviera -- which are the three smallest sets of greens on Tour.  [Riviera's were not that small when built.]

I can't say that's surprising to me.  Tom, which regular Tour course(s) do you think the players have underrated over the years?

These are also three of the shorter courses the Tour visits.  In the end, is the notion of 7,500 yards being necessary to challenge players a myth?  I say probably.

[Sean Leary]

Add in lots of trees and it tests the best players. Not sure about how it suits the average golfer though.

[Jeff_Brauer]

The thing about the 7400 plus yard courses is that it negates about half the field from having a realistic chance to win.

No doubt small greens better test accuracy, which seems fair enough on the tour.  I suspect it differentiates more than big greens, since they are probably better lag putters than chippers or bunker players when they miss the flag by 50-60 feet, no?

[Tom_Doak]

The thing about the 7400 plus yard courses is that it negates about half the field from having a realistic chance to win.

No doubt small greens better test accuracy, which seems fair enough on the tour.  I suspect it differentiates more than big greens, since they are probably better lag putters than chippers or bunker players when they miss the flag by 50-60 feet, no?

It depends on what's around the greens, of course.  But the general Tour pro conventional wisdom has always been that most players would rather see the guy who hits the most greens win, as opposed to the guy who putts best.  So, they figure the smaller the greens, the more likely that will happen. 

It's not necessarily true -- if everybody is missing a lot of greens because they're small, then the guy with a great short game will likely gain an advantage -- but that's the second step in the equation, and many only think of the first step.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

I suspect over time, the mean average of GIR plays out and the guy just slightly better in GIR usually does win on that type of course. 

If nothing else, for my money, watching a guy stay in the hunt because of his short game ability is generally more entertaining than watching a bunch of guys hitting bigger greens and two putting from distance, with one making a birdie or two from shorter distance.  Granted, the long bomb putt to win is exciting on the last few holes, too.

[Matthew Essig]

Let me flip this by saying what are the vices of having small greens, if any??

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

I suspect over time, the mean average of GIR plays out and the guy just slightly better in GIR usually does win on that type of course. 

If nothing else, for my money, watching a guy stay in the hunt because of his short game ability is generally more entertaining than watching a bunch of guys hitting bigger greens and two putting from distance, with one making a birdie or two from shorter distance.  Granted, the long bomb putt to win is exciting on the last few holes, too.

But, like me, you'd probably also rather watch Larry Mize chip in, or Bob Tway hole out from the bunker, rather than Hale Irwin making that long bomb at Medinah.

I wish we had the opportunity to build small greens on more projects.  But I do remember Mr. Dye muttering to himself that if he'd known how popular Harbour Town would be, no way would he have built the greens so small.  [And then it wouldn't have been so popular!]

[Tom_Doak]

Let me flip this by saying what are the vices of having small greens, if any??

Matthew:

I just covered it for you, above.  Small greens can't handle the traffic, if the course becomes popular.  Pebble and Harbour Town are typically not in very great shape for this reason.

[Jay Flemma]

I absolutely agree. Who needs 7.500 yards?  Just make the greens smaller.

Tom Watson on why he hated Sawgrass: He [Dye] took Augusta's greens and miniaturized them!

Pete Dye: Thank him for me. I always thought Augusta's greens were too big...

[Tim Gavrich]

The traffic issue does seem to be the real fly in the ointment.  To those who know more about this than I: it seems like progressively hardier strains of grass keep getting developed every year or few years.  Will this allow you to build some smaller greens in the future?

Also, where's the tipping point between maintenance and green size?  Super-small greens on a well-loved course get beat up more easily, of course, but at what size does the strain of maintaining, say, 8,000 sq. ft. greens start to get tougher?  Has that tipping-point size changed over the years?

[Matthew Essig]

Let me flip this by saying what are the vices of having small greens, if any??

Matthew:

I just covered it for you, above.  Small greens can't handle the traffic, if the course becomes popular.  Pebble and Harbour Town are typically not in very great shape for this reason.

Sorry, I must have missed that.

[Joey Chase]

The few times I've been to Valderrama, the size of some of it's greens really surprise me.  I was disappointed with their conditioning.  It seems as though they like to keep them soggy, maybe so they are more receptive for average members?  Most must be around 3,000 Sq. ft. or less, with a few exceptions.  I do remember some of the pros really hating the course though at the Ryder Cup. 

[Jason Topp]

Matthew:

I just covered it for you, above.  Small greens can't handle the traffic, if the course becomes popular.  Pebble and Harbour Town are typically not in very great shape for this reason.
[/quote]

In theory, I would think it would be possible to address the conditioning issues by building greens that are shallow and wide or narrow and deep. You could spread traffic around while still keeping most of the playing characteristics of small greens.  I am not sure I have seen such an approach pulled off successfully.  The ones that fit the profile (4 at Spyglass, 17 at Pebble Beach, some of the par threes on Tobacco Road)  wind up seeming goofy.

[Peter Pallotta]

I think the top 4 or 5 guys on the leaderboard so far are averaging around 280 yards off the tee. I don't know for sure, but I imagine some of those leaders would normally hit if further than that, but that they don't/can't on Harbour Towns' tight, bending fairways.  Which I guess is what makes the small greens appealing, in the 'fair test' sense, i.e. just about everyone is coming into those greens with basically the same irons in their hands, and so their ball-striking is being tested more 'comparatively' than it would be on courses where some have seven iron approaches while others have to hit three irons.

Peter

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tim,

There are some strains more hardy than others, often at the expense of putting quality.  Top courses usually select for putting, and live with the maintenance stresses, whereas lower level courses select for durability.

Jason,

As far as I can tell, its total SF.  Each cup location (generally considered a 8' diameter circle around a space flat enough for a cup takes up about 50 SF.  Private clubs might get away with as little as 6 pin positions, most supers would like 14 because thats how many days it takes the turf to fully recover (in growing season, under heavy play).

While that is only 700 SF of real cup space, if you keep pins 10 ft from the green edge, plus add a 3'collar, the minimum size green is, for me, about 4000 SF, and more if you add in transition slopes, random contours, etc.

That said, I have seen greens do better when the wide part is on the cart path side, since it spreads traffic but overall, you have to figure all areas of the green eventually get random, but evenly distributed traffic.  The bigger stress factors are shade and traffic.

[Tim Gavrich]

I think the top 4 or 5 guys on the leaderboard so far are averaging around 280 yards off the tee. I don't know for sure, but I imagine some of those leaders would normally hit if further than that, but that they don't/can't on Harbour Towns' tight, bending fairways.  Which I guess is what makes the small greens appealing, in the 'fair test' sense, i.e. just about everyone is coming into those greens with basically the same irons in their hands, and so their ball-striking is being tested more 'comparatively' than it would be on courses where some have seven iron approaches while others have to hit three irons.

Peter

Peter--

You could be onto something re: the fairness doctrine, but in terms of driving distance, the Tour selects just two holes on which those figures are mentioned per course per week, so I would have to guess that one of the holes where they're checking that is 15, which is a pretty straightaway par 5 where the players will hit driver and probably won't hold back much more than they would at, say, Redstone in Houston.

I personally like that sort of more "comparative test," as you rightly put it.  There's been a really good mix of winners of the Heritage, in terms of the ways they play the game.  Who wouldn't want to see a bomber and a pea-shooter battle it out more often?

[William_G]

I'm watching a rerun of today's Golf Channel coverage of the RBC Heritage at Harbour Town and it's reminding me how much I enjoyed the golf course the one time I got to see it (played the front, drove the back).  It's the perfect counter to the default belief that golf courses need to be 7,500 yards-plus in order to challenge good players.  The low score today was 67 (-4), a high number for the first round of a regular season Tour event.

Harbour Town forces players to shape and control shots with a combination of well-placed trees (though some steadfastly believe there's no such thing...more's the pity) and small (miniscule, by Tour standards) putting surfaces.  As a result, Harbour Town doesn't need to grow nasty rough to post a challenge to players, which I think we can all agree is a favorable situation.

Thoughts?  I know golf courses with enormous greens are lauded here by many (and who doesn't love hitting more greens in reg than usual?), but which are some favorite courses with very small greens?  Which courses with small greens would hold up similarly to Harbour Town against a professional field?

From a spectators standpoint, I enjoy large greens with small target areas on the greens.

For instance, @ Harbour Town and Pebble...it's mostly over after you "hit" the green, so it's target golf in that the targets are the greens.

The GIR stat is interesting in that it helps one manage their game, from tee to green, and thus also can be misleading in regard to what is really happening on the course.

A good friend of mine who is a 1 handicapper can't get over playing Old Macdonald and hitting 14 greens in regulation and having 38 putts and shooting 74, LOL...

Nice topic Tim...I would like small greens for some PGA events, if hitting the greens were more extremely difficult. I love Augusta,  in that it's never over even if you a GIR.

Thanks