Wayne,
Yes I agree, it doesn't do justice. Like any kind of remote sensing, there are limitations.
But I get a lot out of comparing how I play courses in the moment against the satellite imagery after the fact. This hole was no exception. Having played Cabot three times now (and making a big number on this hole each time) it was nice to be able to make some comparisons between what I saw and a more objective measure. Some shots and angles get scarier. Some get tamer.
Of course E.B. White famously said "explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understanding it better but the frog dies in the process."
I'd be curious to hear from people if they think this applies to a golf course. Do people seek out or avoid these kind of data when they consider a course?
Cheers,
Christian