Huck, I understand the theory for low handicappers. I thought Ryan had addressed the comment to me, which implies I should give it a try; maybe I misunderstood him.
George,
I will admit first and foremost that I am not a high handicapper so anything I say here is presumption on my part.
But-
High handicappers do it all the time - they just don't know it.
Let's say golfer 1 is a 28 with a wicked slice. He aims well left of the fairway, even if that means aiming at the trees, and slices it into the fairway or possibly into the right rough.
Change the setting from a tee ball to the green with desert to the left and long, and a chipping area and shallow bunker to the right. One can aim at the flag here, knowing that they shouldn't hit it left, and if they pure it they're on the green, and if they cut it they are in the bunker or bail out area.
Sure, there are limitations to this, and often a high handicapper can only hit one shot shape, so a mirror image of this scenario might prove catastrophic, but I think that's just pointing at the limits and challenges inherent in design - how do you make something ideal for all skill levels.
The theory holds together far longer with a low handicapper, but I think that the high handicapper has a better shot at implementing the planned miss than he/she would otherwise think. Even if they can only make use of it half of the time (holes with death left, for example)
Jordan - I was not commenting on your attendance, but rather pointing out that if you are planning ahead, you should be planning for KPVI, not KPV, lest you find that the latter ship has sailed.