News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
A Waste Of Good Green Space
« on: February 23, 2007, 09:40:37 AM »
Patrick's thread on "creeping up" made me wonder if most supers use the entire pinnable areas of their greens.  At our club the hole locations seem rote, with some fascinating and challenging locations disregarded.  

I don't see it being a pace of play issue - just a failure to use the entire golf course.  

Thoughts?

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

TEPaul

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2007, 09:57:27 AM »
I think it would be a very thoughtless thing to actually not use "pinnable" space for green space. After all most interesting putting greens have a certain percentage of greenspace that is not pinnable. Interesting greens need some non-pinnable greenspace just to be able to get the ball from various pinnable spots to other pinnable spots.

When greenspeed increases those pinnable spots need more area simply so the ball can be transitioned from one pinnable area to another pinnable area without having it build up so much speed it goes right through or past the area the pin is in.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 10:12:24 AM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2007, 10:30:03 AM »
Interesting greens need some non-pinnable greenspace just to be able to get the ball from various pinnable spots to other pinnable spots.

When greenspeed increases those pinnable spots need more area simply so the ball can be transitioned from one pinnable area to another pinnable area without having it build up so much speed it goes right through or past the area the pin is in.

Scary line of reasoning there Tom...how exactly do we go about ensuring these pinnable areas get "more area"?

I propose that one is not entitled to be able to stop a putt near a hole simply because he is on the green. How would you respond to that?

Scott Witter

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2007, 10:58:57 AM »
Mike:

I think you have to remember that at many clubs, private and public, the super and their crew may be the one cutting the cups, but they are often not the one who set its location.  I remember working on the grounds crew at a few clubs, were we were to cut cups at locations set by the pro staff :P

I think a better solution is for the super and the pro staff to decide together the best pin positions for the day.  Each has something valuable to offer in this regard IMO

Mark_Rowlinson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2007, 11:06:08 AM »
Much depends on who is playing the course on any one day, the nature of the golf (competitive or social), the weather, wind speed and direction, time of year, issues of wear (where is the next tee, for instance? Do players carry or use trolleys?)  I remember the days when pin and tee positions were only changed once a week on the courses around Wolverhampton.  

I should be interested to know how many interesting pin positions are cut on TOC during a normal visitor day.

TEPaul

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2007, 11:14:24 AM »
"Scary line of reasoning there Tom...how exactly do we go about ensuring these pinnable areas get "more area"?"

Sully:

We don't. The question on this thread is about the shrinking of "pinnable areas" not finding more where it never existed in the first place. My point is there's probably no good reason to shrink original greenspace in the first place---eg it was originally designed for a reason.  ;)

But do increasing greenspeeds make it all more intense in play? Of course.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2007, 11:22:06 AM »
Patrick's thread on "creeping up" made me wonder if most supers use the entire pinnable areas of their greens.  At our club the hole locations seem rote, with some fascinating and challenging locations disregarded.  

I don't see it being a pace of play issue - just a failure to use the entire golf course.  

Thoughts?

Mike


Tom,

The question of this thread was a failure to use "existing" pinnable space. Michael see interesting and playable areas of greens on his home course not being used as seems to be looking for some rationale behind it.

You replied with a post including these sentences...
Quote
When greenspeed increases those pinnable spots need more area simply so the ball can be transitioned from one pinnable area to another pinnable area without having it build up so much speed it goes right through or past the area the pin is in.

If I misinterpreted your words "need more area" I apologize...could you elaobrate on what you intended?

TEPaul

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2007, 11:24:47 AM »
"I propose that one is not entitled to be able to stop a putt near a hole simply because he is on the green. How would you respond to that?"

Sully:

We've talked about that a lot on here over the years. That kind of thing is what I call "greens within a green".

The way I define that term is in some cases if you are on the wrong part of the green you may not be able to physically two putt unless you sink a relatively long second puttt AT BEST!

Personally, I think that's OK for the more elite player for the simple reason it really is truly "strategic" (all the way back to the tee).

But there is no question at all for the general player level that kind of thing is going to evoke plenty of negative comment and criticism.

The larger question is why in the world do almost all golfers feel they almost have a constitutional right to be able to physically two putt if they are on any green surface?

That's a good and fundamental question and the reason may be that the USGA/R&A has actually defined "par" as regulation 'two putts' on any green. Just the fact that they have called it that long ago may've made golfers feel that is their right at least as a possiblity----and obviously to most golfers a possibility has come to mean being able SOMEHOW to get the ball near the hole on the first putt.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2007, 11:32:44 AM »
I'm sure you know what I say about all of this entitlement garbage...

"Par" is defined on long game shots as well...one-shot holes, two-shot holes and three-shot holes. Does the 200 yard driver feel entitled to reach a 420 hole in two just because it's a Par 4?

TEPaul

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2007, 12:44:42 PM »
""Par" is defined on long game shots as well...one-shot holes, two-shot holes and three-shot holes. Does the 200 yard driver feel entitled to reach a 420 hole in two just because it's a Par 4?"

Sully:

I believe they feel entitled to reach it far, far, far more than they used to feel entitled to do that during the "Golden Age" of golf architecture.

Matter of fact, it seems like far, far too many on here assume such a thing when they discuss the whole idea of "strategy" in golf.

If they would just step back and think a bit more about what the entire concept of handicapping is all about maybe it would occur to them more that they aren't even supposed to reach par 4s of that length in two with their two best shots. ;)
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 12:46:28 PM by TEPaul »

Brad Tufts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2007, 02:00:39 PM »
My club has a "Hard as it gets" tourney every October, which I have played in once.  I showed up expecting ridiculous pins that should have windmills guarding them, but they weren't that bad at all.

I returned to the clubhouse with all the guys talking about how hard the pins were and the course setup was (which is what they asked for in planning), but I didn't see it.  I think, at least at my course, we would be better served by having a couple downright nasty spots on a day-to-day basis.
So I jump ship in Hong Kong....

Peter Pallotta

Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2007, 05:24:36 PM »
"I believe they feel entitled to reach it far, far, far more than they used to feel entitled to do that during the "Golden Age" of golf architecture."

That's interesting, TE.  How much of that has to do with architecture that dictates/telegraphs strategy through the use of hazards, i.e. the fairway bunkers that are at just the 'right' spot for the player playing the right tees, or the green that opens up to where the player is 'suppossed' to be hitting his second shot from?

All good things in general, mind you, but obviously not the only way of doing things.

Peter

Steve Burrows

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:A Waste Of Good Green Space
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2007, 06:39:45 PM »
Sometimes when I am doing course set-up, I simply position pins in places where I haven't seen them in a while, which is to say I try to use as much of our greenspace as I reasonably can.  We have a pre-determined daily rotation for hole placements, which serves to balance left-center-right, and front-center-back, but within the confines of this schedule, I try to take some liberties.  Sometimes this means setting the cup nearer to a side, or 3-4 paces over a bunker, or further up a slope than normal (though, as a player myself, I don't set them in places that I think are, dare I say, "unfair").  I try not to set more than one or two of these more daring pins on a given day, and really, I leave it to the player to choose whether they want to attack a "dangerous" pin or to play away, and safer.

Some members approached me last summer and stated that there is something different about where the pins were located this year, as opposed to years past.  They weren't saying that the course played more or less difficult than in the past, but simply that it was different.  I took this as a complement, meaning that we were using more available greenspace than in previous years, adding variety to the playing experience.  There is plenty of room out there, so I try to use it.
...to admit my mistakes most frankly, or to say simply what I believe to be necessary for the defense of what I have written, without introducing the explanation of any new matter so as to avoid engaging myself in endless discussion from one topic to another.     
               -Rene Descartes