The Ground Game: the most misunderstood concept on GCA.com

[Tom Huckaby]

Jason:

VARIETY is the key to this without a doubt.  So please help me with a sanity check.

IF a course consisted of nothing but "ground game" approaches - that is, if it were SO firm and fast, with nothing to be carried, that every single approach and shot around the green had by far the greatest chance at success being kept along the ground - then wouldn't a little variety in the way of an obstacle or two be a good thing?

This came up in a discussion of the "sleepers" at some famous UK links.  God save my golf soul for forgetting which course.  But anyway, several usually logical folks decried these as being stupid, inappropriate, whatever, just because they took away a ground game option.

My take - and that of Rich Goodale, of all people - was that they were in fact a good change of pace, and actually ALLOWED for variety in terms of one's shot choice - that is, with those in the way, one had to put some air under the ball - thus putting variety into a course that had less before.

Does this make any sense?

My sanity awaits your decision.

 

[ForkaB]

My take - and that of Rich Goodale, of all people

When Huckaby starts dissing you with faint praise, you know that you are the Rodney Dangerfield of GCA.

BTW, it was Rye, Buckaroo.  Shivas will never forgive you...

[Tom Huckaby]

 
I was hoping you'd see that, Rich.

All in good fun.  We just tend to disagree on so many high-profile things here, well... although we do agree on far more important issues, it's just fun for me to point things like this out from time to time.

Rye.  Gulp.  Shivas will never forgive me.  But I shall cop to my diminishing memory rather than go back and edit that post.

 

BTW, we remain right about the sleepers at Rye.

TH

[Jason Blasberg]

Huck:

Yes, I agree that some number of forced carries can be a good thing from a variety perspective . . . of course a lot of that will be site driven.  If you're dealing with a site with wetlands, forced carries will be a requirement.  If there's a lot of undulation change some uphill carries will be required.  All of these things can be very good, so long as it's not forced carry over marsh after marsh or to elevated green after elevated green.  You get the point.  

I think a good example of an excellent use of the forced carry is #11 at Pacific Dunes.  It's short and intimadating and when the wind is blowing all the 9-iron or wedge you could ask for!

BTW, I sure hope that your sanity is in no way tied to me, otherwise you're in trouble  

[Tom Huckaby]

Jason - I like to live dangerously.

But you have confirmed my sanity - thanks.  11 at PD illustrates this perfectly.  Not that PD is filled with nothing but ground game shots, but for the most part that is what's involved.  The forced carry at 11 is a great change of pace.  That's pretty much what Rich and I were trying to explain about Rye... that these sleepers, as odd and forced as they might appear, do provide a change of pace, and that is a good thing.

TH

[Andy Troeger]

Tony,
   The conditions at the course you mentioned make more sense in that regard. Having that does indeed create some variety in the same course at different times of the year which is certainly a good thing.

Garland,
    Forgive me, I didn't really mean for that comment to be taken at face value. I admittedly don't really try to hit shots that spin a lot, I prefer to give myself something just slightly less than a full sand wedge...I feel its easier to control the distance that way.
    As for flying the ball 300 yards...you're right probably not. I wouldn't put 280 out of the question occasionally, however. Its the direction that causes me many problems  

[Jason Blasberg]

10 at Prairie Dunes is another example of a forced carry that is visually intimadating on a course loaded with ground game options and that generally plays firm and fast.  

Personally, most of my favorite forced carries in the game are on shorter 3 pars.  Although, the go for broke heroic carry like the approach to #8 at Pebble gets the juices flowing too!  

[John Keenan]

In golf it is how many not how.

Does it really matter how one gets the ball in the cup? There are no style points.  

As the old Irish saying goes there are many paths to Dublin. So enjoy the trip.

I must admit one of the things I like about about watching the Euro tourneys is TGG. It is creative and imaginative to watch for a Yank who plays on over watered courses  

[Bill_McBride]

Jason, isn't Pacific Dunes and the wind a wonderful thing?  The first time I played PD I hit a very solid 4-iron on #11!

If the conditions are such that everything is firm and fast then the only way to force some aerial shots is the occasional cross bunkering at the greenside.  All's fair in love and GCA!

But even then at Pacific Dunes you get some alternatives.  Take #13 for example, where you can circumnavigate the right front bunker by playing out to the right and catching that slope just... right....and onto the green!

[TEPaul]

"More than anything else, confusion begins with the very definition of "the ground game" (henceforth "TGG").  Too many people on here want to make it only about approach shots to the green."

Ross:

Confusion sure does exist with the very definition of the ground game. I don't even call it a ground game unless tee balls bounce about five feet in the air and runs at least 40-50 yards and on up.

But if a course has that then in one way or another everybody is going to be playing "the ground game" at various points in the round.  

The idea, though, for set-ups for good players is to get those green surfaces to the ideal firmness so good players pretty much starting thinking about the ground game bounce-in as an option, at least. They may not use it but it gets them thinking about it compared to highly receptive greens.

I can even tell you how to identify the "ideal" green surface firmness.  

[Doug Braunsdorf]

Beechtree #5 is a great second-shot ground game hole.  
I'd be interested in candid opinions on this hole--I love it--
the last time Cory, Kyle, and I played this hole, we watched the group behind us play "aerial" approach shots, and all shots bounced well through the green.  

In contrast, having played Beechtree before, I knew of the firmness of the fairway, slope down to the green about 30 yards out, and played a knockdown 6 iron from 150--landing it well short, allowing it to run down the hill, and settle about 12 feet away.  

Many of the other greens here are quite receptive, and fun, to approach on the ground, or with less-than-aerial approaches; 3,4,6,7,8,9 on the front, 12,13,14,17, and 18 on the back.  

Any thoughts?  

[Jason Blasberg]

Jason, isn't Pacific Dunes and the wind a wonderful thing?  The first time I played PD I hit a very solid 4-iron on #11!

Wow!  We didn't have that kind of wind, save for the first evening when we played the front nine at Bandon in a 4 clubber.  I don't think I hit a green in reg. but man was it fun.