Play well=Love course, or Love course=play well?

[Adam_F_Collins]

I've heard many times that golfers like the courses that they play well.

I tend to play well at the courses I love. It seems to make me focus more, somehow.

There are some which I love, but still never play well.

How about you?

• Do you love the courses because you play well?
• Do you play well because you love the course?
• Do you love a course that hates you?
• What are your feelings on these questions and what courses do you think of?

Thompson's Digby Pines is a course I love, but never play well - and it's not especially difficult, it's just that I want to play it well SO badly, that every poor shot seems like the end of the world. Maybe because I only get there once or twice a year...

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

GREAT questions, tough to answer - which of course is what makes them great.

Here's how I take this:

 Do you love the courses because you play well?
I think anyone who says this has NOTHING to do with his assessment of a course is lying, at least to himself.  It simply must have SOME effect when one has a career-low type round, or something great happens there.  Hopefully this isn't the sole determiner though.  I feel confident it's not for me.  But I must say it's quite easier to be in a mood to love a course when one comes off of it having played well.

• Do you play well because you love the course?
Another great question.  I think going into a course with a pre-determined love for it just does put one in the positive mindset which allows for good golf.  Now it's never going to be foolproof; I know I've had lots of awful rounds at courses I love.  But thinking back, most of my best rounds have been at courses I went in loving.  Never thought of it this way before...

• Do you love a course that hates you?
WHOA!  That would be tough.  Thinking of courses that hate me - that is on which I've never scored well - man it's tough to find one that I'd say I love.  I guess the courses that come closest are some at the far end of difficulty, where everyone gets their asses kicked.  I'm thinking Shinnecock Hills, Winged Foot-West, PGA West-Stadium, Spyglass Hill... all of those have the deed to me, but I must say I do love them all.  But those are all "great" courses for other reasons... so they are easy to love.  I can't come up with a more on-point example of a course that owns me - and there are many - that I love even so.  I guess the closest would be Pacific Dunes, which kicked my ass sideways but which I do love without a doubt.  But that's so great in other ways it rather doesn't count also... Oh well.  There are a few I hate that own me too.

• What are your feelings on these questions and what courses do you think of?
As I say these are GREAT questions and I gave some examples already.  On the positive side, courses I love on which I have generally played well are Cruden Bay, St. Andrews-Old, SFGC, RC Down, Ballybunion-Old, Sand Hills*.. among the famous.  I know if and when I get the great chance to play any of those, I feel like I am gonna play well... on top of the excitement of being at such great places.

TH

* - dammit I just jinxed myself for my June trip there.  I have been playing awful and have no right to think that setting will change the status.  But... it is a great place... and I sure did play well last time there... the self-mind tricks are beginning.

[mike_malone]

 I wish I could play well at the coursees I love, but my game is too inconsistent.

     I can "score" well on an easy course and not like the course, because it has not challenged me. The courses I don't like are those that punish me for bad shots without providing a fun challenge.


  Recently , I played Indian Creek. I shot much better on the front than the back, but loved the back much more.

[THuckaby2]

Mike brings up a good point also - it sure is possible to score well and come away with no great love for a course... The course would be seen as too easy... I've had that happen.  Not often, as I tend to butcher easy courses as well... but a few times.

One that comes to mind is San Jose Muni here.  I've had some scary-low scores there, but the course is so blah, I surely don't love it.

TH

[Doug Braunsdorf]

This is a good question, and one I have thought about in the past.  Obviously, one would like a course they play well, or where they play well.  
The question the other way is even better; liking a course, and then playing well.  From my experiences, some courses, through their architecture and maintenance, just fit my eye and find a place in my heart.  

Bethpage is one, this is partially due to personal (family) reasons; but it still inspires me, especially stretches like the first hole on Red, Black, or Green, looking out over the complex, and the second nines on Red and Black--the way the holes are relatively open, the way the wind kicks up in the afternoon, the way brownish fescues and bunkering look, flagsticks, it just fits together really well, for me.  

I haven't played these, but from pictures I've seen of GC, NGLA, and walking Shinnecock last June, I feel certain I would feel the same way.  

This was one reason I liked Beechtree so much, some of the architectural features reminded me some of the above mentioned courses.  I didn't play well here, but I have a good excuse  

In contrast, I was at a "US Open" club for a year--and I played the course often, it was immaculate, but it just never got me going--I didn't think it was very interesting, architecturally, and my opinion was that for me, it was not inspiring to play.  We all are entitled to our own opinions and tastes & preferences.  

I think also, for me personally, I play better on old, classic courses--there's just something about the history of them that resonates with me, and this ties back in with the architecture of them, as I appreciate classic architecture.  

The 'new' courses, by which I mean a lot of the 1950s-mid '90s stuff, just don't do it for me as much in that they really don't catch my eye to the extent that 'classic' courses do.  They seem to lack a certain 'something', whether it's age, or older-looking trees, or attractive architecture, for me to enjoy them to the extent I do the classic courses.  

[Doug Braunsdorf]

I wish I could play well at the coursees I love, but my game is too inconsistent.

...preachin' to the choir, buddy.  

[Dan Kelly]

Not that I play often enough or well enough to be speaking on this subject, but speak I shall!

I think I play/score the best when I'm concentrating the best on playing/scoring the best.

That usually happens on courses where I've played a lot of rounds -- and there are very few courses of which I can say that. None of those very few is a great course.

The single-minded concentration I need to play well has almost never happened on the courses I've loved best. I'm always a little distracted on a great or very good course  -- and unwilling not to be a little distracted. I'd rather look around more than post lower scores. I'm unwilling to grind when I could be gazing -- and I'm unwilling to gaze inward when I could be gazing outward.

Reminds me of a great New Yorker cartoon about 25 years ago -- a full-page cartoon, 90% of it a night sky FULL of stars. At the bottom of the cartoon stood a man and a woman, outside of their house. He was saying: "I've just been appointed Sales Manager for the whole Eastern Region! Why should I feel small?"

[THuckaby2]

That's a very important take on this also:  scoring well does typically require "grinding", and I'd say if one is at a truly great course, grinding is the last thing one ought to be doing.  One really SHOULD treat it as Dan does - looking outward and gazing instead of inward and grinding.

I know I do this, or at least I try to.  I am very very very far from score-focused as those who have played with me can hopefully attest.

BUT... what happens sometimes is that this mind-trick of NOT caring... of being truly NATO when it comes to score... allows for a peacefulness out of which a great score results.  I surely have had this happen.  And interestingly, I seem to be a total opposite of Dan - the more I concentrate on score, the more I focus, the WORSE I do.  But you can't cheat and trick yourself... if you really DO care about score, trying to appear that you don't is not going to make it so.  I'm guilty of this from time to time also.

The blissful thing is when it all comes together and one is SO happy to be at a course that one truly is NATO... and one just rolls along, playing well... and not really caring... until he adds it up at the end.  Gosh that doesn't happen very often... but when it does, oh what a feeling it is.  I once shot a 73 at Ballybunion Old from the tips where I had no idea how I stood until the post-round beers when my friend added it up and told me.  I was in such a haze of joy I really had no idea... and it was from the course and the company so much more than the score... the score was just a happy coincidence.

One that I now try to recreate, in competitive rounds.  As you can imagine, it ain't easy to do.

Man there are so many ways to approach this game... which is among the many things that makes it so great.

TH

[mike_malone]

 The caddie I had at Pine Valley was much more concerned than I was about my score. For example, I wanted to try to hook my 5 wood around a bunker and try to roll the ball between a couple of bunkers. He said" I want to make sure you break 100; hit the 8 iron." I did what I wanted and enjoyed myself more.

[THuckaby2]

Mike, you just encapsulated the real problem with being too score-focused... because the caddie was right... to achieve the best possible score, 8-iron was the play.  But what the hell fun is that?  That's grinding... which isn't even all that much fun in competition, but score is the goal there so grind one does.  Outside of competition I don't really see the point.  Oh, taking it to the extreme isn't any fun either.. I mean a succession of low-percentage go for it plays isn't what the game should be about either... but nothing but playing the percentages, layups, etc... that's no fun for sure - ESPECIALLY at a truly great golf course.

TH

[Doug Siebert]

I had my #1 and #2 worst scores I shot in the last 20+ years (a 95 and a 102) in my two visits to Prestwick (though under some pretty tough conditions) but it is still one of my favorite courses I've ever played.  Its a crazy, frustrating but loveable place.

On the other hand, I've shot 76 in two visits to Turnberry, and while not under gale force winds, the winds were 20-25 mph or so.  But I continue to believe it is overrated because of the beautiful views and most golfers overlook (or enjoy) the fact that it doesn't really challenge one to bring their best game to the table.

Its not that I like being beat up, but I do like being challenged to produce some good shots, and my enjoyment of a course in that respect has little to do with how well I've managed to meet those challenges when I've played there previously.  There's always next time, after all.  If on my next visit to Prestwick I've got my A game in place, get a few lucky bounces and shoot 76, I'd feel 100x more proud of that accomplishment than I would of a third 76 at Turnberry.

[A_Clay_Man]

Huck-

I think anyone who says this has NOTHING to do with his assessment of a course is lying, at least to himself.

I'll take exception to this notion since the quality of any golf course, and, my game, are mutually exclusive.

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

100%, absolutely perfect?

Then you are a role model for us all.

But I knew that already.

 

Seriously though, let's not go overboard with this.  I am absolutely not saying that one's quality of play determines what one thinks of the course - hopefully we are all above that.  My point is just more that if you play well, it tends to get one in a good mood where one might accentuate the positive more.  That's it.  

All I am saying is that this is human nature.  And although I do find you to be quite the role model, well I do assume that you are also human.