Tom's views trouble me because major design decisions are being driven by some dubious assumptions about how weak players play. The theory seems to be that because weak players can't spin the ball, they don't have a chance on shallow greens, thus we shouldn't build 'em if any kind of forced carry is involved.
My experience is that these players CAN spin the ball with lofted clubs. At 110 yards or so, my wife has a better chance of stopping her 9i than hitting it straight. She is a charming, bright and a delightful woman. But she gives new meaning to the phrase "pathetic golfer," god bless her. The same applies to her father who is quite frail and in his mid-80's. When they make contact with their wedges, however, their balls stop.
It seems to me that basing a design theory on a debatable view of how weaker players play is not a good beginning point for a design theory. Especially if it means doing away with a wonderful feature found on may great courses.
Shivas -
Not sure I agree. Take ANGC. Nos. 2 and 7 are shallow greens. Both are wonderfully contoured. No. 2 is wild. No. 7 has some incredible little knobs. There are some spots middle left that are unpinnable because they are so knobby (knobbie?).
Bob