[Ira Fishman]

I know that one is supposed to be baffled on the first play of TOC. I certainly was, particularly the lines to take on 2-6 and 12-16. The seeming paradox that prompts this post is that while TOC has inspired generations of architects, I am hard pressed to think of another course (links or otherwise) that is so baffling.

[Michael Felton]

Royal St Georges has several holes on it where you can't really tell where you're supposed to be going. 2, 4, 7, 12, 13, 17 for example you're only vaguely aware of where the hole is (and on 7 even that's questionable).

[Thomas Dai]

Less elevation change can be very confusing and forms an important aspect of visual deception, dead ground, camouflage techniques etc.
Unfortunately visual aspects of the game are less important in relation to the long game these days with yardage books, satnav based devices and range finders. Fortunately visual aspects can still form a thought provoking part of the game on shorter shots into and around the green. Mowing lines, length of grass, playing angles in relation to sunrise, sunset and shade etc can also play a part in this.
Atb

[Stewart Abramson]

I know that one is supposed to be baffled on the first play of TOC. I certainly was, particularly the lines to take on 2-6 and 12-16. The seeming paradox that prompts this post is that while TOC has inspired generations of architects, I am hard pressed to think of another course (links or otherwise) that is so baffling.

Ira, Wait until you play the new Lido. Even with a caddy, it is pretty baffling the first time (and probably until you get to play it several times.)  It has many of the characteristics that Thomas D refers to in his preceding post: "Less elevation change can be very confusing and forms an important aspect of visual deception, dead ground, camouflage techniques etc."


 I'll be curious to hear which one you think was more baffling on your first play.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Not to the extent of TOC, but Tobacco Road and Tot Hill Farm are pretty confusing the first time around.
Lido is a good call.

[Tom_Doak]

I know that one is supposed to be baffled on the first play of TOC. I certainly was, particularly the lines to take on 2-6 and 12-16. The seeming paradox that prompts this post is that while TOC has inspired generations of architects, I am hard pressed to think of another course (links or otherwise) that is so baffling.

Ira, Wait until you play the new Lido. Even with a caddy, it is pretty baffling the first time (and probably until you get to play it several times.)  It has many of the characteristics that Thomas D refers to in his preceding post: "Less elevation change can be very confusing and forms an important aspect of visual deception, dead ground, camouflage techniques etc."

If I built a course of my own design where the visuals were as poorly defined as The Old Course or Lido, people would rip me, because they want to see where they’re going.  But the level of interest generated by those two courses clearly demonstrates that great golf is not about the visuals, it’s about the golf shots.


The closest thing I’ve built on my own is The Loop, and a lot of the people who don’t love that probably are thrown off by the lack of visual definition.  They complain that it’s unfair, but they only think so because they don’t really see where their ball landed.

[Sean_A]

I know that one is supposed to be baffled on the first play of TOC. I certainly was, particularly the lines to take on 2-6 and 12-16. The seeming paradox that prompts this post is that while TOC has inspired generations of architects, I am hard pressed to think of another course (links or otherwise) that is so baffling.

Ira, Wait until you play the new Lido. Even with a caddy, it is pretty baffling the first time (and probably until you get to play it several times.)  It has many of the characteristics that Thomas D refers to in his preceding post: "Less elevation change can be very confusing and forms an important aspect of visual deception, dead ground, camouflage techniques etc."

If I built a course of my own design where the visuals were as poorly defined as The Old Course or Lido, people would rip me, because they want to see where they’re going.  But the level of interest generated by those two courses clearly demonstrates that great golf is not about the visuals, it’s about the golf shots.


The closest thing I’ve built on my own is The Loop, and a lot of the people who don’t love that probably are thrown off by the lack of visual definition.  They complain that it’s unfair, but they only think so because they don’t really see where their ball landed.

Perhaps this a prevailing feeling. I would say that where there is blindness there is plenty of space. A bit like a flat Cleeve Hill. It makes a difference where the blind shots finish, but if the space on offer is used there isn’t any threat of lost balls. Unlike at a place like Co Down. That place can be seriously frustrating because it feels like decent shots for a handicap player can be treated rather harshly.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Among the amazing aspects of The Loop was that I actually considered how few blind shots there were among the 36 holes. Yes, there were areas that felt less defined but that suited my eye.


RCD is a wonderful place. But when it is being considered as one of the Top-3 golf courses in the world, it definitely lives correctly on the “overrated” thread.

[Ira Fishman]

I am a fan of blind shots. Several of my favorite holes feature them. I think there is a difference between blindness and what Tom calls a lack of definition. Or at least the latter is a special form of blindness.


The posts prompted a thought experiment: what if the tees at TOC were raised 4-5 feet? What impact would it have on how the golfer experiences the course? Don’t get me wrong—I am not suggesting anything of the kind, far from it.

[Steve Lang]

   Ira,


Did you play TOC first time without any information?  I'd seen it many times on tv before playing there back in '96 and had two guide books which i studied on the flight across the pond, to help reduce potential bafflement first time out on those historic links.


Also, I studied the J.Pate topo map for a while at the museum entrance but once on course, after lifting my one guide book to compare real to presented horizon views, one of the two caddies in our group said, "Laddy, today you'll want to be hitting it to ... x yards to/from that green and...", etc..


Since neither the New Yorker nor New Jersey guy who played with Ms Sheila & I couldn't hit it where their caddies were telling them to, and got downright irritated (or was it baffled by their play?) we ended up receiving quite a bit of good free advice while walking along talking.


ps shot a 77


I'd suggest bafflement, tee to green, is probably good for all, resets the ego


 

[Stewart Abramson]

I know that one is supposed to be baffled on the first play of TOC. I certainly was, particularly the lines to take on 2-6 and 12-16. The seeming paradox that prompts this post is that while TOC has inspired generations of architects, I am hard pressed to think of another course (links or otherwise) that is so baffling.

Ira, Wait until you play the new Lido. Even with a caddy, it is pretty baffling the first time (and probably until you get to play it several times.)  It has many of the characteristics that Thomas D refers to in his preceding post: "Less elevation change can be very confusing and forms an important aspect of visual deception, dead ground, camouflage techniques etc."

If I built a course of my own design where the visuals were as poorly defined as The Old Course or Lido, people would rip me, because they want to see where they’re going.  But the level of interest generated by those two courses clearly demonstrates that great golf is not about the visuals, it’s about the golf shots.


The closest thing I’ve built on my own is The Loop, and a lot of the people who don’t love that probably are thrown off by the lack of visual definition.  They complain that it’s unfair, but they only think so because they don’t really see where their ball landed.

I don't think most players would "rip" you or say it's unfair, at least not those who post here. But, there certainly would be  some that would, especially one time visitors. "Baffling" isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's just disorienting, especially on a first round. TOC, Lido and the Loop are all courses that are difficult, if not impossible, to really appreciate from a single round, and  I'd guess that the majority of visitors only play these courses once or twice. Many people rip TOC and think it's overrated. That's okay. They don't know what they're missing.


The Loop has been very well received and I think if you build a course "where the visuals were as poorly defined as The Old Course or Lido"  as a private course, it would also be well received as the members will play it enough to understand it. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()