News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
"Unplayable Courses"
« on: December 30, 2005, 11:16:37 AM »
In another thread, Tom Doak states that Pine Valley is unplayable for anybody over a 15 handicap (from ANY set of tees). I couldn't agree more.

 Are there any other Top 100 caliber courses (I wanted to use the word great but since that word understandably means different things to different people, I'll say Top 100) where the same thing can be said.  Obviously the key here is from any set of tees, not just moving the average player all the way back.

If there aren't any (or many), is that even a further testament to how great PV really is? I would think so.

Phil_the_Author

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2005, 11:37:06 AM »
If by unplayable you mean not being able to score at their handicap level more than a time or two out of ten, then Bethpage Black has to top that list.

It beats the hell out of everybody, but oh it hurts so goooooood!!!!!   :o

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2005, 11:59:33 AM »
Philip,

I think what Tom was referring to was the fact that at PV it is very easy to get your ball into a position off the fairway (very likely) or off the green (almost as likely) in which a bogey caliber golfer will literally not be able to finish the hole. PV has this capability on virtually every hole.

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2005, 12:02:12 PM »
or does that mean something else?  wasn't it Tom D who also said that TOC is the "Ideal" (not sure if that's the exact word) because it is playable for all??
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2005, 12:04:41 PM »
I think Tom clearly said that the one reason he does not rank PV #1 is its lack of playability for all. Certainly a valid point of view, but PV was never intended to cater to all.

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2005, 12:07:02 PM »
Haven't played it, but I've heard similar complaints about PGA West Stadium

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2005, 12:12:05 PM »
Are there any other Top 100 caliber courses (I wanted to use the word great but since that word understandably means different things to different people, I'll say Top 100) where the same thing can be said.  Obviously the key here is from any set of tees, not just moving the average player all the way back.

If there aren't any (or many), is that even a further testament to how great PV really is? I would think so.

(Bold emphasis added by your truly)

I'd guess many or most of the more modern top 100 courses are unplayable for the >15 handicapper, if by unplayable you mean the potential for not being able to finish a hole, due to the abundance of water as a hazard. It's not top 100, but a course like Mystic Rock is unplayable (under this definition) for me. Too much rock and too much water. Unless I want to simply hit 7 iron through wedge all day long, and try to bunt it around. Same thing holds with most desert courses.

Contrast that with many of the older classics, which will kill you on the scorecard, but at least allow you to finish all the holes and not go through a dozen golf balls.

As to your second point, any idiot can make a course unplayable for a >15 handicapper. I'm sure PV is worthy of its lofty status, but I'm also certain this isn't the reason for it.

 :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Adam_F_Collins

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2005, 12:16:21 PM »
I'm interested in Tom D's point about it being easier to design a course when you get to forget about making it playable for higher handicappers.

Why don't we see more of it? Why don't more people make courses which are specifically designed for lower (or higher) handicap players?

Brian Noser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2005, 12:21:20 PM »
I belive it may have somthing to do with money. ;D and percentages.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2005, 12:34:43 PM »
Adam:

There are lots of modern courses that are basically designed for lower handicap players.  However, the business being what it is today, they also put in a bunch of forward tees and then pretend that this makes the course playable for everyone.  They insist on trying to be all things to all people.

However, if I could build a course where every hole had a 175- to 230-yard carry from the back tee, there are a bunch of good players who would think it was the best course I ever built, because they love their ability to hit the driver solidly.  They think when I make the course playable for someone who hits a 170-yard tee shot that that is a WEAKNESS in the course, and that my "shot values" are off base because I'm letting somebody get away with something.  And that is a great part of why Pine Valley is rated #1.

I wouldn't put Bethpage Black in the same category as Pine Valley, although clearly, they were building several courses and they intended that one to be much more difficult and "not for everyone".  Same for the Stadium course at PGA West, although some of their other courses are really difficult as well.

peter_p

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2005, 12:46:17 PM »
Koolau on Oahu may fit the bill, although I have never played there.

As far as PGA West goes, from the tips I could get over the first trouble okay and stay short of the main hazards. The second shot was usually just short of the green hazards. I could scrape it around in 90. From a more reasonable tee selection I would shoot 100+.

Any course with an island green is probably unplayable following the rules of golf.

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2005, 01:31:07 PM »
I agree with Peter:  I played PGA West and one can scrape it around and shoot in the 90s

I believe Tom D. cited playability for all re Long Cove; he gave it an 8

Pete Dye's book recalls how they had to keep in mind that there was an older lady who was going to play the course
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Paul Payne

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2005, 01:37:30 PM »
I have played a few decent quality local courses that have a forced carry off of every tee location for more than half the holes. I don't really mind because in some ways I kind of like that sort of thing, but I always wonder why they do that. It has to discourage local traffic from the higher handicap golfers. If you can;t get the ball in the air you will never get there period.

Evan Fleisher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2005, 02:27:41 PM »
Koolau on Oahu may fit the bill, although I have never played there.

As far as PGA West goes, from the tips I could get over the first trouble okay and stay short of the main hazards. The second shot was usually just short of the green hazards. I could scrape it around in 90. From a more reasonable tee selection I would shoot 100+.

Any course with an island green is probably unplayable following the rules of golf.

Peter,

I think that Ko'olau probably does NOT fall into this category...certainly from the back tees you are a dead duck, but if you moved significantly forward, the carries would be do-able for the high handicapper.  Not so sure about someone who could both NOT carry the ball and sprayed it...then they too would be dead no matter which set of tees they chose.
Born Rochester, MN. Grew up Miami, FL. Live Cleveland, OH. Handicap 12.2. Have 24 & 21 year old girls and wife of 27 years. I'm a Senior Supply Chain Business Analyst for Vitamix. Diehard walker, but tolerate cart riders! Love to travel, always have my sticks with me. Mollydooker for life!

Kyle Harris

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2005, 02:32:00 PM »
Sometimes I wonder about this sort of thinking.

Aren't high-handicappers high-handicappers because they CAN'T play golf? (At least as well).

When I hear about a course being unable to be played by a high-handicapper, I think to myself... well Duh!

That being said, I know Pine Valley has some pretty treachourous carries. But, from the most forward tee, what is the furthest carry?

Is the fifth hole a 200+ yard carry for every tee?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2005, 02:40:28 PM »
Kyle:

There is only one tee for the fifth at Pine Valley, but it's only about 160 yards to clear the road and the cross bunker to get to the mown approach in front of the green.  (Of course, it's also death to both sides.)

It's not any single carry which makes PV unplayable ... although if you couldn't carry it about 170 from the tee at 15, you'd have no choice other than to play it down the bridge.  It's the fact that EVERY hole has a pretty decent carry or a potential multi-stroke penalty, and if you hit a really bad shot you're lucky to find a playable lie.  It just wears down anybody more than a 10 or 12 handicap.

I didn't say Pine Valley wasn't a great course, just that I could never put it at #1.  To me it's just a lot more clever if you can build a course like St. Andrews or Royal Melbourne, where the good player is consistently challenged but the poorer player can actually have some fun.

Mike McGuire

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #16 on: December 30, 2005, 02:41:40 PM »
Anyone here like "Lost Key Golf Club"  near the  Florabama (RIP)? Its an Arnold Palmer course that we have to drag our high handicappers to. Gunge on both side....forced carries...some island like greens - built up with ties etc.

The par 4 10th for me was the toughest. I finally figured out its a 6I drive followed by a 9I short of the green and then a pitch.

Kyle Harris

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2005, 02:46:47 PM »
Tom:

Okay, I've walked it during a Crump Cup, but that was when I was more concerned about play than architecture, and what you're describing seems very similar to Bethpage Black.

I tried the new back tees in the fall of 2004 and I had to play around the bunker on 5 and barely even reached the fairway. I don't think I'd have much fun on the new back tee on nine, there either and I play to about a 7 of late.

I know you weren't trying to say Pine Valley wasn't a great course, and I personally agree with you. There isn't much fun in having forced carries all the time, or even more than half a dozen times during the course of a round, in my opinion.

When I do my hole doodlings, I try to through the high handicapper a bone here and then, but without moving the hole right next to the tee, there's only so much I can do. Then again, I rarely, if ever design a forced carry, except for over a creek.

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2005, 02:54:26 PM »
Tom -

ANGC is also one of the relatively few courses both good and bad players enjoy. It was also one of the first courses I know  where that was the principal and publically announced goal of the designers. By which they implied, without saying so expressly, that ANGC was designed to contrast with the PV model.

"Enjoyable for both good and bad players" has become an over-used (and virtually meaningless) cliche in recent years. But that wasn't always the case.

Bob
« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 04:16:21 PM by BCrosby »

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #19 on: December 30, 2005, 03:08:28 PM »
Courses have a course rating and slope for a reason.  Too many players measure themselves to par and not the cousre rating.  
In additiion a major problem with many high handicappers is not just ability, it is course management.  If you are a 20 and hit a poor tee shot, say on #7 at Pine Valley and have 180 yards to carry Hell's Half Acre and hit your three wood in the gunk it is your own dumb fault.  Lay up and take your medicine.
One of my best friends plays to about 18.  His motto is,"If I can see the green I try to reach it."  If he were to manage the course beter he could save four or five shots a round.  He is a great guy but he  stubbornly insists, "I should be able to hit the shot."
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2005, 03:48:22 PM »
Kyle (and to a lesser extent tommy Williamsen) -

You must not have spent much time as a high handicapper. There are numerous things within your posts that I would take issue with.

To say a high handicapper can't play golf is certainly an exaggeration. When I was playing somewhat regularly, say 3 times a month, my index was 22.something. It doesn't take much bad play to shot a 95 - a few penalty shots from bad tee shot, and a mediocre short game that does not save those strokes around the green that better golfers routinely save. If you don't have the time to practice (or probably more accurately, choose other things to do with precious time), you're not going to learn to save those strokes, and you're not going to stop hitting the occasional shot OB. (All of this applies to your post on course management as well, tommy - course management might save your friend a few strokes, and it might even take an idiot who goes for everything from 130 to 100 in a blink of an eye.)

Call me crazy, but here is my characterization of most 20-30 handicappers, based on my play and the observation of many golfers I've played with:

- lousy short game due to lack of practice (this is where there is a tremendous advantage to having played the game a lot as a youngster - this trait comes back quickly)

- incredibly wide range of misses - often short, occasionally (thought rarely) long, often way right, occasionally way left, plus throwing in the odd topped or fatted duff shot that goes maybe 10-20 yards, regardless of the club

- penchant for penalty shots, probably too often due to trying to make an heroic shot (with the logic being, I don't get out that often, might as well give it a shot, I have nothing to lose)

- indifferent putting (not grinding out every putt).

I can make a 170 yard carry pretty easily. I can make it with my 5 or 6 iron if you give me a few tries. The problem is that I can't do it consistently, so on a course with tons of forced carries, I'm going to occasionally duff one into the hazard, or I'm going to crank my 3 wood or driver OB while trying a 200 yard carry (which is well within my capabilities).

But, as I've often stated on here, most golfers want to have their egos stroked (see Tom D's sagacious post above), so architects throw in a bunch of 100-150 yard carries that are really not even that difficult for a high handicapper, but become problematic if they are frequent enough, to make the better golfer feel better about himself.

So, in closing, I'll say that it's the better players with poor self esteem that are screwing us part time high handicappers! :)

P.S. specifically to tommy - I take my medicine all the time. The problem is, even after taking my medicine, there's still a good chance I'm going to be further punished on a penal course.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 03:52:16 PM by George Pazin »
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Adam_F_Collins

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #21 on: December 30, 2005, 03:54:49 PM »
George P

Very interesting post. I'd like to see more of that kind of viewpoint expressed here - the view of the average golfer.

Sounds a lot like my game...

 ;)

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #22 on: December 30, 2005, 03:57:59 PM »
One other thought:

I seriously question the numbers thrown around by the people on here who do actual course ratings. That approach seems to me to be a highly fallacious way of looking at the game. I played a round a few years ago with an older gentleman who I consistently outdrove with my 4 iron versus his Big Bertha, yet he beat me by about 15 strokes, because he could chip and putt. He was effectively a single digit handicapper who drove it about 200, while I was a high handicapper hitting my 4 iron about 210. Those numbers flat out don't make sense to me.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

tonyt

Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2005, 03:59:09 PM »
I agree with the sentiments that when many fine courses can be played by all and sundry, that has to be a good thing. I hate the thought of ruling out lesser players automatically. They (we?) are not simply hackers or the unwashed masses. Not only do some have money, but many have the poise, respect and nature to be a very giving contributor to a club or good public course visitor, play briskly and without delay, and observe all the niceties (and then some) of many low handicap players.

I don't think PV's nature as scribed here must automatically vilify it, as it takes all sorts and greatness comes in many guises.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Unplayable Courses"
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2005, 04:01:20 PM »
Thanks, Adam. I'm sure they're a lot of us out there, though few who post on this site, in my experience playing with other GCAers. :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back