You Want Firm and Fast? You Can't Handle Firm and Fast!

[Mike Hendren]

"Firm and Fast" is a term casually bantered about on this site.  I have yet to find anyone who loves the ground game more than I do (for example in 2003 I reached the 10th and 16th at The Old Course with driver/putter)  but be careful what you ask for.  While I suspect our friends across the pond "get it" there's a big difference between firm and fast and simply slick. 

I grew up playing an unirrigated nine holer with tiny push up greens sloping severly from back down to front.  From July until September we basically played on dirt.   Miss the green right or left with a wedge and suddenly you're 40 yards over the green, staring at a four to five foot bank to a green sloping away from you.  The game is silly when the roll-out cannot be reasonally guaged so that execution, not luck is rewarded. 

I suspect very few on this site would be so ecstatic about the conditions at Muirfield if they went through the logistics of booking a tee time and paying the going rate. 

NOTHING rolls like a ball.

Bogey

[BHoover]

I don't think that anyone living in the NE or Midwest expects that we would have Muirfield-like playing conditions anytime soon. But it would be great to have firmer and faster playing conditions than what we normally see at many courses here in the Midwest. I don't expect to see a ball roll 60-70 yards on the fairway, but it's always nice to see a ball take a big jump when it (hopefully) lands in a fairway. I'd much rather see that than my ball make a big plug mark and back up in a soggy fairway. I'd also rather see a ball roll off a green rather than simply sit in its pitch mark.

It's a matter of relativity. I'd like firm and fast conditions that are appropriate for the climate in which I live.

[Steve Kline]

The problem at Muirfield isn't the lack of water and firm and fast but the height of the cut. Of the course the pros would bitch if the greens were stimping at 9 or so.

[Richard Choi]

Saying you want firm and fast does not equate to wanting to have a major championship conditions for everyday. There is a vast chasm between what a typical course condition is like at US and what the condition is right now at Muirfield. We just want the scale to be tilted more towards the latter.

Just because I want to drive a fast car does not mean I want to drive an F1 racer everyday.

[Thomas Dai]

If there was no first cut at all and no big rough or hay, then shots hit off line would bounce and roll and bounce and roll and bounce and roll some more, maybe even 40-50 off line, assuming they didn't get stopped accidentally by spectators.

If your 40-50 yds off line then hitting into Muirfields greens, all dry and firm would not be easy from wide angles.

It would be interesting to see how things would be with no rough at all.

Just a thought.

All the best

[Tim Pitner]

I don't know, Mike, I think it would be a blast to have a go at a course that firm and fast.  I would fail the test, most probably, but I would enjoy the challenge and change of speed (pun intended).  Plus you'd probably be playing foursomes at least half the time.

[Tony_Muldoon]

"Firm and Fast" is a term casually bantered about on this site.  I have yet to find anyone who loves the ground game more than I do (for example in 2003 I reached the 10th and 16th at The Old Course with driver/putter)  but be careful what you ask for.  While I suspect our friends across the pond "get it" there's a big difference between firm and fast and simply slick.  

I grew up playing an unirrigated nine holer with tiny push up greens sloping severly from back down to front.  From July until September we basically played on dirt.   Miss the green right or left with a wedge and suddenly you're 40 yards over the green, staring at a four to five foot bank to a green sloping away from you.  The game is silly when the roll-out cannot be reasonally guaged so that execution, not luck is rewarded.  

I suspect very few on this site would be so ecstatic about the conditions at Muirfield if they went through the logistics of booking a tee time and paying the going rate.  

NOTHING rolls like a ball.

Bogey

Nice thoughts.

I've said it before but anyway.

Sand really comes into it's own when it get's dry like this.  Unirrigated clay based courses get hard as bricks and you will get some very unpredictable bounces and changes of direction.  I find this happens much less on sand.

I've played a bunch of links courses this year and Muirfiield seems to be  firmer and faster than any of the them except...


I also played two links courses that have no automatic irrigation systems at all,  Dawlish Warren (should be in the Pepper book but isn't) and the 9 holer at Cruden Bay.  These offered the most firecracker golf I've EVER experienced. I'm not long but hitting 8 iron and then 9 iron through a 330 yard hole was revelatory.  Somehow it was easier to score on the Par 3's than 4's.  The Warren is tight and surrounded by Gorse sometimes you almost couldn't lay back enough!  Not golf as we know it.


I do wonder if the total lack of irrigatin meant they were the best courses naturally prepared for the dry weather we've experienced.

Thomas, the first tiem I played Pennard it was like that.  Livestock kept the rough to a minimum and it helps explain my love affair with the course.

[Bill_McBride]

It really is amazing to watch the skill of the players as they negotiate their way around a course that's as fast and firm as Muirfield is playing.  I got up at 5:30 to watch the inquisition of the game's best players.  Stenson and Westwood both knocked second shots well into the green on the par 5 fifth, only to see their balls catch the slope and feed back into a deep left front bunker.  I don't know about anyone else, but I would find that demoralizing!   In some cases there seems to be a matter of inches between safety and disaster.

Fasten your seat belts, it should be a great weekend!

[Adam Clayman]

"Firm and Fast" is a term casually bantered about on this site.  I have yet to find anyone who loves the ground game more than I do (for example in 2003 I reached the 10th and 16th at The Old Course with driver/putter)  but be careful what you ask for.

Ahmmmm. Have we met?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

There's F&F and there's super F&F

When I held my GCA get together at Mountain Ridge, despite a misting rain, the course played F&F

Fairways that have that yellow/green/brown tinge tend to provide superior playing surfaces.

In the US I think there's a balance that has to be achieved between the look and the quality of the playing surfaces.

It would be nice if that balance started to trend away from lush green

[Mac Plumart]

I think it is simply a matter of expectations and experience.

People around where I live, Atlanta, expect a certain type of golf experience.  It would warp their mind if they got really firm and fast conditions.  I'm sure the same would be true if they lushed up and greened up the Scottish courses.

I find this one of the great aspects of traveling to play golf...different courses, conditions, and experiences.

[Mark Pearce]

I was at Muirfield today.  Conditions there are absolutely perfect for golf.  The course is NOT stupidly firm or fast but it is firm and it is fast.  It would be an absolute ball to play.

I came away this evening convinced of two things.  Anyone that doesn't love conditions like those at Muirfield doesn't get it.  Anyone that doesn't appreciate the brilliance of Muirfield doesn't get it.  People lazily describe the land as flat but it isn't, it is perfect for golf in the same way that St Andrews, another "flat" course, is perfect for golf.  Watching balls catch greens and then roll away into trouble, watching skilled players use contours to feed balls to a desirable location, watching tee shots bound away for  60 or 70 yards after landing reminded me why, for those that get it, Muirfield is as good as it gets.

[Ed Brzezowski]

I was at Muirfield today.  Conditions there are absolutely perfect for golf.  The course is NOT stupidly firm or fast but it is firm and it is fast.  It would be an absolute ball to play.

I came away this evening convinced of two things.  Anyone that doesn't love conditions like those at Muirfield doesn't get it.  Anyone that doesn't appreciate the brilliance of Muirfield doesn't get it.  People lazily describe the land as flat but it isn't, it is perfect for golf in the same way that St Andrews, another "flat" course, is perfect for golf.  Watching balls catch greens and then roll away into trouble, watching skilled players use contours to feed balls to a desirable location, watching tee shots bound away for  60 or 70 yards after landing reminded me why, for those that get it, Muirfield is as good as it gets.

There last week and it looked great. Played a few that looked the same as  Muirfield and they were very fair. Good shots rewarded  and poor shots and planning paid for in high numbers. One of our guys on the first tee said it " was not real golf" , he was grinning afterward. A great experience to play these courses.

[Carl Rogers]

i wonder how this can be measured.  the most f & f i have played in the eastern US is Ballyhack near Roanoke VA.  Ballyhack is a mountain course with a lot of uphill approaches  .... you are right ... I cannot handle it!

[Thomas Dai]

I've played a bunch of links courses this year and Muirfiield seems to be  firmer and faster than any of the them except...I also played two links courses that have no automatic irrigation systems at all,  Dawlish Warren (should be in the Pepper book but isn't) and the 9 holer at Cruden Bay.  These offered the most firecracker golf I've EVER experienced. I'm not long but hitting 8 iron and then 9 iron through a 330 yard hole was revelatory.  Somehow it was easier to score on the Par 3's than 4's.  The Warren is tight and surrounded by Gorse sometimes you almost couldn't lay back enough!  Not golf as we know it.

I do wonder if the total lack of irrigating meant they were the best courses naturally prepared for the dry weather we've experienced.

Thomas, the first tiem I played Pennard it was like that.  Livestock kept the rough to a minimum and it helps explain my love affair with the course.

Tony,

I've not played Dawlish but it's always kinda appealed to me. Top call about somewhere like Pennard. I guess you could put the likes of Brora, Church Stretton, Cleeve, Kington etc into that bracket as well, plus my favourite Minchinhampton Old. I believe there are also a couple of courses in the New Forest area, possibly Lyndhurst (?) and Brockenhurst (?) which may come into the category but although I've heard of them, I've not played them. I'm sure there are many others too.

You've played the 9-holer at Cruden Bay! That should be merited with a Blue Peter Badge! If you have any photos of the holes on the St Olaf 9-holer please post them. Those who've not seen the St Olaf ought too and there arn't, crazily, any on the CB-website, which is a marketing oversight IMO. 9-holes on the St Olaf followed by a helicopter ride to play the 9-hole Channel Course at Burnham and Berrow would make a wonderful 18-holes. I somehow doubt they'd be many scores under handicap, if any, on this combination, especially if in firecracker mode.

All the best.

[Ben Stephens]

I was at Muirfield today.  Conditions there are absolutely perfect for golf.  The course is NOT stupidly firm or fast but it is firm and it is fast.  It would be an absolute ball to play.

I came away this evening convinced of two things.  Anyone that doesn't love conditions like those at Muirfield doesn't get it.  Anyone that doesn't appreciate the brilliance of Muirfield doesn't get it.  People lazily describe the land as flat but it isn't, it is perfect for golf in the same way that St Andrews, another "flat" course, is perfect for golf.  Watching balls catch greens and then roll away into trouble, watching skilled players use contours to feed balls to a desirable location, watching tee shots bound away for  60 or 70 yards after landing reminded me why, for those that get it, Muirfield is as good as it gets.

Mark,

I agree with you 100 percent having been at Muirfield on Thursday. It has eclipsed Carnoustie as my no. 1 Open course. The layout works brilliantly and it has slopes and contours that you can't see on TV. The pros are struggling to read the subtle movements on the greens that only the best can read well.

GCA'ers,

I guarantee that Muirfield on the ground is definitely not flat its bloody amazing that I have put it on the top of my list of must plays. In fact it is the best course on the Open rota in my opinion. The only downside is that it is a men only club

The bunkers are small but gnarly! I saw something with my eyes that I thought I would never have seen in my life - Ernie Els (one of the best bunker players ever) taking three shots out of a bunker on the 16th.

The greens looked like glass. The course is basically asking questions to the best players in the world and the winner has the most right answers. I can't help feeling that Tiger is in the zone and is looking good ahead of the weekend's play. I do really hope it is Westwood's year riding on the crest of British sporting successes this year!

At the end of the day I was covered in sand dust - it was like being in the desert.

Cheers
Ben

[BHoover]

GCA'ers,

I guarantee that Muirfield on the ground is definitely not flat its bloody amazing that I have put it on the top of my list of must plays. In fact it is the best course on the Open rota in my opinion. The only downside is that it is a men only club

The bunkers are small but gnarly! I saw something with my eyes that I thought I would never have seen in my life - Ernie Els (one of the best bunker players ever) taking three shots out of a bunker on the 16th.

The greens looked like glass. The course is basically asking questions to the best players in the world and the winner has the most right answers. I can't help feeling that Tiger is in the zone and is looking good ahead of the weekend's play. I do really hope it is Westwood's year riding on the crest of British sporting successes this year!

At the end of the day I was covered in sand dust - it was like being in the desert.

Cheers
Ben

I was at the 2003 Open at St. George's. The conditions seem similar to 2003. Heat wave, baked fairways and greens, wispy rough and dust EVERYWHERE. I remember leaving the course that day. It had been 90+ and breezy. I was covered in sweat, grime and dust. I had a white shirt that had turned nearly brown from the dust. My socks were a complete loss. And I was never so happy for a cold shower and the miracle that is Gold Bond Medicated Powder.

But it was an absolute blast.

[Doug Siebert]

"Firm and Fast" is a term casually bantered about on this site.  I have yet to find anyone who loves the ground game more than I do (for example in 2003 I reached the 10th and 16th at The Old Course with driver/putter)  but be careful what you ask for.  While I suspect our friends across the pond "get it" there's a big difference between firm and fast and simply slick. 

I grew up playing an unirrigated nine holer with tiny push up greens sloping severly from back down to front.  From July until September we basically played on dirt.   Miss the green right or left with a wedge and suddenly you're 40 yards over the green, staring at a four to five foot bank to a green sloping away from you.  The game is silly when the roll-out cannot be reasonally guaged so that execution, not luck is rewarded. 

I suspect very few on this site would be so ecstatic about the conditions at Muirfield if they went through the logistics of booking a tee time and paying the going rate. 

NOTHING rolls like a ball.

Bogey

Like you, my first course was an unirrigated nine holer with push up greens - though most didn't have a whole lot of overall tilt to them.  What you say about missing the green and going 40 yards past during a drought is certainly true, but that's due to several reasons:

1) if your course was anything like mine, the greens were far far smaller than Muirfield's, probably about as small on average as the smallest green played on tour.  My course had (still has, actually) a 227 yard par 4 with a green that measures less than 30' wide at its widest point.  Kinda easy to miss that one to the sides.

2) again, if it was anything like mine, there were only a couple holes with any bunkering on the sides, so nothing to catch the ball like at Muirfield

3) very little rough, and of course during a drought the ball bounced just as well in the rough as in the fairway

4) tiny greens also mean greens that aren't that deep.  Think about a pin in the middle of a typical Muirfield green, which is 35 to 40 yards deep, and going 40 yards long.  That's about 20 yards over the back.  I've seen plenty of players going 10 yards long, and they would have gone longer if they didn't run into the 18" grass and gallery.  Being 40 yards past the pin on a green that's 10 yards deep seems much worse than if you did it to a front pin on a green that's 40 yards deep.

It is certainly a crapshoot hitting a high spinning shot with a wedge, landing it short and hoping it bounces and rolls the way the you hoped.  The lower the angle your ball lands at and the less spin it has the better you're able to predict how it goes.  The pros seemed to have a much better time gauging the roll into the 9th from 200+ yards into the green than they do on 15 where they're coming in with a sand wedge, for that reason.  Maybe that's why Schwartzel decided to play driver on 15 today - he was afraid of that SW approach