[Mike_Cirba]

You're arguing that a bunch of sheep are better architects than, say, Bill Coore, when it comes to designing golf courses?  Do you really believe that golf course architecture is so brainless and unchallenging that a bunch of long-dead sheep with 0.00003 IQ's were better at it than a Tom Doak or a Bill Coore?  Really?  

If so, how do you justify the position that there are architects that "get it", as has so often been espoused on this board.  Clearly, by your standards, there is not a human being on this planet who can "get it" to the same degree as a bunch of mutton-in-waiting.  

C'mon, seriously?  You believe this??

Shivas,

I firmly believe that if you asked Tom Doak, Bill Coore, Gil Hanse, Ben Crenshaw, Kelly Moran, Mike DeVries, or even Jack Nicklaus or Ron Fream to implement your idea on the 18th hole of the Old Course, they might attempt to do you physical harm.  

Perhaps you should call Tom Fazio's office?  

[Paul Richards]

Mike

>Perhaps you should call Tom Fazio's office?


Don't kid yourself.


If the price was right .....

 

[PThomas]

Shiv -- one the one hand, the panaroma of the hole would change, though....it's just a sea of green on the 1st/18th fairway now...

on the other,  the 18th has never played as easy , statistically speaking, for a tournament..

personally, I just don't think I could vote for making such a big change to that hole....

[James Bennett]

on the other,  the 18th has never played as easy , statistically speaking, for a tournament..

Does anyone know how this hole has played in previous Opens when the hole was downwind?  Was it really easier (given the conditions) in 2005?

I understand the hole was downwind each day this year.  I also assume the Valley of Sin is a greater hazard if you can't get to pin high with your drive (eg when the hole is not playing downwind).

[Mike Hendren]

With the exception of Vijay on Saturday, everybody played left to avoid OB.  Hit it too far though and you're OB behind the 1st tee.  Don't quite catch it and you're pitching around the corner of the Valley of Sin hoping to make that dowhill left to right breaker from 8 feet if the pin is up front (as Jose Maria was forced to do Sunday).  Where else is the modern player asked to two-putt from 150 feet for birdie (okay the 13th if he's hit a decent approach!).  Plenty of strategy here. Plenty of drama, too (Seve, Doug Sanders, Jack, Rocca).  Golf as a playing field, not a minefield.

That said, there's a better reason to leave the 18th as is in my book.  The 1st/18th fairway is so well integrated with the town itself, not unlike a front lawn / town green.   The emotional high of coming up that huge expanse need not be interrupted by some silly pot bunker.   No need to spoil a good walk, the best walk in golf.

Mike

[Doug Siebert]

Shivas:

SHAME ON YOU!  Mr. "Scorecard and Pencil is everything wrong with golf today" is complaining that a hole is too weak because its average is well under PAR?  What is par?  Who cares what par is for that hole?

Let me clue you all in on a secret.  That hole is now a golden age par 3.  Yes, one of those holes that is only reachable with a driver or a 3W by a strong player in good weather, and unreachable for everyone when into a strong wind.  Just like those 260 yard par 3s in the golden age we've discussed here from time to time.  The idea that a comparable par 3 would be over 300 yards today was poo pooed by almost everyone as being silly for some reason, but if you want to see how it works in practice, look no further than TOC's finisher.

Of all the problems caused by technology at TOC, I'll say again what I said a few years ago when the topic of the 18th came up.  I think the 18th is the only hole at TOC that has been improved by today's technology as it took a weak finishing hole with little interest to the drive save for Jack Nicklaus in his prime after removing his sweater and made the tee shot much more strategic for everyone capable of a halfway decent poke.  Do I aim right of the Valley of Sin and risk the OB?  Do I aim left of it and risk having a chip or putt through it? (or worse, as I found out, just along its top side to a pin cut immediately behind it)

[Rick Shefchik]

Allow me to summaraize:

If any of our most popular architects -- or those of us who contribute to this site -- were to design a hole like TOC #18, there would almost certainly be a pot bunker where Shivas has proposed one. It makes perfect architectual sense. It would not be gimmicky. It would not be garrish. It would not be a waterfall. It would fall squarely within consensus opinion of what constitutes thoughtful, logical, "get-it" GCA.

But because this is TOC, and because it does not currently exist -- because sheep never chose to protect themselves from the wind in that particular spot during the time of William the Conqueror -- it must never happen.

[Mike_Cirba]

Rick,

Is there not one course in the world worth preserving, as is?  

You know, in our minds we can always think of things that we individually think might be an "improvement".  That's human nature.

However, in the case of the Old Course, it has met the challenges of millions of golfers over centuries (at least 100 years in its present form) and it's still relevant today, even if you and Shivas believe that the shorter holes need to suddenly be "toughened" due to the stroke average of .000001 of golfers playing at their best.

I seriously doubt, however, that the other .999999 percent of golfers find the hole lacking strategy or challenge.    

[Jim Nugent]

Rick,

Is there not one course in the world worth preserving, as is?  

You know, in our minds we can always think of things that we individually think might be an "improvement".  That's human nature.

However, in the case of the Old Course, it has met the challenges of millions of golfers over centuries (at least 100 years in its present form) and it's still relevant today, even if you and Shivas believe that the shorter holes need to suddenly be "toughened" due to the stroke average of .000001 of golfers playing at their best.

I seriously doubt, however, that the other .999999 percent of golfers find the hole lacking strategy or challenge.    

Hasnīt TOC been changed considerably over the years?  I know it has been lengthened a lot.  Thought they changed some bunkers and some teeing angles as well -- i.e. it has never been preserved as is.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas/Rick,

You fellows insist on treating the symptom and not the disease.  

The problem is that most of the field can now routinely launch driver and get to the green.  This hasn't been the case if you look back over the results of even two Opens ago.  

Prior, the strategy worked like this;

You had this big, wide expanse of fairway, but you also knew that if you got within 100 yards of the green you were left with some type of less than full shot off a tight lie and normally had to negotiate the Valley of Sin in some way...either throwing your ball up in the air to the vagaries of the wind or trying to run it up and through.  

Of course, you could try to favor the right (OB) side and avoid that conundrum, but then you would be bringing a potential bigger number into play.  

Believe it or not, quite a number of pros used to play irons from the tee to leave themselves far enough back (just over Granny Clark's Wynd) for a full shot.  

Do either of you recall the exuberance of Seve Ballesteros when he birdied 18?  The hole was never a routine birdie hole before, guys.  Yes, 3 was always a good possibility but required thought, planning, and execution.

Do either of you recall how rare it was in our lifetimes when Big Jack, downwind, took off his sweater and had a go of it?

This is hardly the only hole where uninhibited technology has reduced strategy, on The Old Course or any other course in the world.    

[Brian_Gracely]

And in my book, it's long overdue.  Every hole on The Old Course has something to cause decisionmaking.  Even #1 has Swilican Burn.  #18 has nothing.  The Valley of Sin is a cool name, and yes, sometimes it causes guys to 3 putt for par, but it clearly doesn't change decisionmaking one iota.  Every guy in the field, and I suspect during regular play, aims right at the damn thing!!

How many strategic ramifications can the Valley of Sin have if basically everybody aims right at it??  It's a cool name.  It's a lousy genesis of strategic decisionmaking.

Yes Shivas, #1 has the grand strategy of, "go in burn, don't go in burn"....brilliant!!  Why not put a pot bunker in the middle of the green, to really have to make the player think if he wants to land his approach between the burn and bunker, or potentially have to putt around the bunker if he decides to avoid the burn and go long?

Doesn't the fairways of #1 and #18 essentially act as a park for the town of St.Andrews on Sundays?  Do you really want a pot bunker in the middle of your football pitch?  Do you really want to occassionally lose the dog while throw the frisbee?  

And I suppose that OB long and right is not strategic concern for anyone, huh?  

Why not dig the Valley of Sin deeper, and maybe rename the Valley of Eternal Damnation?  Maybe leave the grass in there slightly longer, so players have the strategic option of skulling a wedge out of there and killing passers-by on the street?  

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim Nugent/Shivas,

The Old Course has been it's present configuration since, oh, about 100 years ago.  

That includes Old Tom, Jim Barnes, Bobby Jones, Walter Hagen, Sam Snead, etc, etc. etc. through Tiger Woods.

Yes, some new tees have been added over the years (and again this past year) to keep up with the crazy technological arms race.   But the basic layouts, holes, shot angles, greens, bunkers and other features have remained unchanged.  

The basic routing of holes and most of the bunkers have been there much, much longer.  

[Kyle Harris]

I find it hard to justify changing any course for one tournament that comes around every five years.

When I play the Old Course, I'll hopefully be able to do it frequently over the course of a month or so. I can't wait to play 18 and test new angles and styles of play of the hole. Hitting the approach from 150 one day and then trying to drive the green the next. All different parts of the challenge. That's the fun of it to me.

Who cares if pros (which I am one) birdie the daylights out of the hole (which I probably will do most often than not) every five years?

[Brent Hutto]

There are at least two questions in play here.

Question 1. Would the eighteenth at the Old Course be "more strategic" with a pot bunker as suggested by Shivas

I'd say the answer seems to be "Probably so" but that's debatable.

Question 2. Should the eighteenth at the Old Course be changed to make it either "more strategic" or at least to bring bogey into play for the best players in the world?

I'd say the answer is "Don't be ridiculous".

[Brian_Gracely]

Brent,

At this point in the thread, Shivas is basically just practicing his ability to defend Jeffrey Dammer to a bunch of vegetarians.

[Rick Shefchik]

Question 2. Should the eighteenth at the Old Course be changed to make it either "more strategic" or at least to bring bogey into play for the best players in the world?

I'd say the answer is "Don't be ridiculous".

How does one argue with that? Shivas has proposed a small modification to a hole he finds lacking in strategic merit, and no one has seriouslfy refuted that charge, except to say, "Don't touch it...because it's the Old Course."

I'd love to see the hole play the way it did in 1970. I have no faith in the R&A to ever make that happen. Leaving TOC exactly the way it is now is obviously the easiest and most popular option, but not only do I not think it's the best option, I don't think it's going to happen. As I said earlier, I think that pot bunker is going to come into existence in the next 10 years if the equipment isn't scaled back, and it won't be because Shivas suggested it or I endorsed it.

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

I don't think there's been a bunker added or removed from the OLD Course in 100 years.

Ironically, the last bunker removed, if memory serves, was one between the 1st and 18th fairways.  

Your hypothetical question is lacking context.  Would I move the 18th at Pebble Beach to the Old Course?  Or Muirfield?  Or Merion?

Of course not...golf holes are not only about the internals of the hole but about context, flow, environment, and surroundings.

Did you ever see the movie "Poltergeist"?  I'd say dig at your own risk.  

[Brian_Gracely]

As I said earlier, I think that pot bunker is going to come into existence in the next 10 years if the equipment isn't scaled back, and it won't be because Shivas suggested it or I endorsed it.

What does scaled back equipment have anything to do with the 18th hole, especially when there is no wind or it's playing downwind (as it did this week)?  Players have been driving the green there for years, and when you get 50-80yds of roll in the fairway, getting there is no big deal.  

[Kyle Harris]

IF a change is to be made...

Why not just move the tee back... say... on the other side of the road right next to 17 green?

[Rick Shefchik]

I remember Nicklaus driving the green years ago, but I don't remember the field trying to decide between driver and three-wood because they were afraid of knocking it into the clubhouse, even when it did play downwind.

With today's equipment, I think the hole is more defenseless than it's ever been -- and likely to get even more defenseless, the way things are going.

[Mike_Cirba]

Sandbox,

The point is that players haven't been routinely getting there for years.  That's why Jack Nicklaus's feat was such a big deal.  

I have tape of the Opens that Faldo and Daly won.  NOBODY was driving the 18th green...many players were taking iron and 3 wood off the tee to lay back for a full shot over the Valley.

Players hitting driver were getting up over the Wynd, but still a good 50 yards short of the green.

Shivas,

Of course I'd still play the Old Course, even if the new Road Hole bunker has been horribly disfigured, and probably even if additional disfigurements occurred like the one you are advocating.  

[Kyle Harris]

Shivas,

The hole is great for match play. Where score doesn't matter so much as what your opponent does matters.

If I'm down in a match, I am trying to drive the green... bringing OB and the Valley into play.

If I'm up in a match, I'll bunt the ball down to throw some pressure on my opponent.

If halved... oh you get my point.  

[Brent Hutto]

How does one argue with that? Shivas has proposed a small modification to a hole he finds lacking in strategic merit, and no one has seriouslfy refuted that charge, except to say, "Don't touch it...because it's the Old Course."

I think your take on it is pretty close to correct. One of the unique things about the Old Course is that it doesn't get changed as often as other courses. If we were talking about ANGC, I'd say just what Shivas says. Try a bunker there for a couple years and if it doesn't improve the course then take it out. That's always been part of the nature of ANGC.

I think it is a good thing to have a course (available to the public in fact) that changes more slowly than our modern preference dictate on other courses and it's an even better thing to invite the best players in the world to play there every few years and let us watch on TV. Adding new tees to lengthen holes isn't in the same league with digging new bunkers. Heck, I think the tweaks to the Road hole bunker were an insult to the course.

[Mike_Cirba]

I remember Nicklaus driving the green years ago, but I don't remember the field trying to decide between driver and three-wood because they were afraid of knocking it into the clubhouse, even when it did play downwind.

With today's equipment, I think the hole is more defenseless than it's ever been -- and likely to get even more defenseless, the way things are going.

Rick, dammit!, you're undermining my position.

This isn't about "defenseless".  That's USGA/Hootiespeak.

This is about ADDING strategic merit to a hole that lacks it.  It's about adding beta to the hole and making it more interesting, strategic and fun to play because it makes you think more.  It's not about jacking up scoring averages.  Any mope can do that.  That's NOT what I'm espousing at all.  

You guys need to get your rationalizations straight.  

My point is that the 18th hole IS strategic and thought-provoking and interesting for almost everyone in the world.

The strategy has been negated by technology for the touring pros, as is the case on almost every other hole in the world.

What's the strategy on 14 now?  Even at 600+ yards it played as driver, 6-iron for Tiger and crew.

Should we MOVE Hell bunker, bringing it within 20 yards of the front of the green??

You guys are so focused on the symptom you're ignoring the problem.

[Rick Shefchik]

Shivas, I'm just providing a second front.  

Think of it as a WMD justification -- the real reason to add a pot bunker is to give the hole strategic options, as you suggest. But nothing gets changed in golf these days unless you raise the spector of mass carnage (i.e., equipment making a course obsolete.)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()