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.

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« on: June 04, 2003, 09:30:43 AM »
On several other threads we have casually included a golf course among the Top Ten modern courses "sixty yards and in".

I'll confess I don't have the slightest clue what ten modern courses would possibly achieve such an honor, but I am interested to hear what others think.

No need to name all ten - that would be damn hard to do. But, nominating candidates for this list would be appreciated.

I also think it would be interesting to hear people's thoughts on exactly what "sixty yards and in means".

How much weight should we give to putting? Recovery shots? Approach shots? Short risk reward par 4s? Reachable par 5s?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Tim Weiman

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2003, 11:13:45 AM »
Tim,

I've paid attention to everyone's bickering regarding the value of the tee shot and what not, I assume that is where this thread is born from.  

I didn't have a whole lot to say there, but I'll chime in here.  Hopefully I'll have something significant to contribute, lest I forget the immortal words of Barry Kruger:

mdugger

"You are a snotty little idiot without a single original thought in your pathetic excuse for a brain. In searching the archives for your words of wisdom I do not see a single contribution to golf course architecture. Where do you ever find any self-esteem?"

How many times has one heard someone say that be it a 300 yard drive or a one inch putt, they all count the same-1 stroke?

To me this embodies the notion of sixty yards and in.  We can spray drives all over the course, but we can make up those erroneous shots with one fantastic pitch, a great up and down from a bunker or a great long putt.  

It will be a dream for me to one day see Ross' Pinehurst #2.  From what I hear it is as exacting a short game course as there is.  

Tim wrote, "How much weight should we give to putting? Recovery shots? Approach shots? Short risk reward par 4s? Reachable par 5s?"

I'd say a bunch.  A ton.  Why is everyone so crazy about Maxwell greens?  I think it was Thomas who wrote that strategy is what gives the short player a chance against the long hitter.  Golf is not just about bombing drives.  It is not just about "thinking your way around the course".  We travel from the tee in hopes of sinking the ball into the smallest of holes.  This is exacting.  This is challenging.

I'd love to see a trend where the short game was paid more attention to.  It seems to be the best defender of par, even more so then length.  Technology can't help you with the short game-it won't make you a better putter, a better chipper.  The short game seems to be the anti-technology.

Just my thoughts.

I'd nominate Pac Dunes as a great "sixty yards and in" modern course.          
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2003, 12:10:11 PM »
Imagine the mind numbing task it has been to let the great debate get too far gone about "60 yards and in", "challenge/interest for skilled golfers off the tee" and "can it be a valid high ranking if not challenging/interesting off the tee".  I have been trying for days to catch up in reading to this golf rutt season of head ramming about these issues between Huckie, Wiggles and Whyman ;) ;D  

I haven't seen enough modern to make a list of top 10 from 60 yards and in.  I've seen some that are great, however.  Wild Horse, Rustic, Arcadia Bluffs, Sand Hills, KC, are all meritorious in their own individual styles of design from 60 yards and in and give interest to what came before their 60 yard perimeters.  

Even though Wiggles seems to be the originator of the term "60 yards and in", and refined it to 30 yards and in, I don't know that I agree with him as to what it means.  He seems to be saying that it is the design and construction around and within the green complex that gives rise to the interest in that next shot towards the hole, having arrived at that certain place around that green design from a previous point by error or skilled placement (which he doesn't necessarily think was relavant or necessarily challenging/interesting  enough to play from at Rustic Canyon).

Now, if I have convolute Wiggles position - I'm sorry.  What do you expect from a simple minded fellow with all that mind numbing whirl of esoteric debating academy material we have to wade through. ::)  Wait Huck and Tim, I can convolute your positions just as well! ;D

I think "60 yards and in" is the essential zone of design where all credit and interest/challenge is conferred to the LZ off the tee.  If the design is great 60 yards and in, then seemingly plain wide and relatively untrapped LZs off the tee retain interest and challenge because it still matters by virtue of those great greens and surrounds design where you have played from as to angle, shot shape, and trajectory and distance below or beyond the cup, let alone right or left.  Forrest said about an eon ago in one of those threads that from the tee, no matter how bland the fairway and potential LZ seems, interest and challenge comes from recognising the consequences after taking that shot of where the tee shot is is purposely placed or will just happen to go.  That interest and challenge comes from recognition of what could happen next, which comes from the approach considerations mainly from design from 60 yards and in.  


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

THuckaby2

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2003, 12:16:26 PM »
Great stuff, RJD.  Just wanted you to know I saw this and had audible yuks re the smiley parts!  ;D

Your take on all this makes a-1 perfect sense to me, btw... not sure if that's a good or a bad thing for you, though!  ;)

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2003, 12:54:24 PM »
mdugger & Dick Daley:

Thanks for responding. I really didn't mean to start the thread just to continue dickering about the value of "sixty yards and in". The is plenty of opportunity to do that on other threads.

Instead, I wanted to see if we could come up with a serious list of names that might meet the criteria of modern Top Ten sixty yards and in. I know I can't do it. I think it is a damn hard question for anyone. But, it would be interesting to be what the group comes up with collectively.

When I asked about the weight we would give to putting, recovery, shots, approach shots, etc., I really didn't mean this thread to rehash sixty yards and in verses the importance of tee shots. Rather, I was thinking about putting vs the other shots that are playing to or within sixty yards, e.g., recovery shots, approach shots.

Staying with the theme of statistics, I would assume that there are about 2-3 putts played per green, but how many of the other shots - when you consider all classes of golfer?

Is it 1 or 2, perhaps an approach and a recovery being the average? I don't know. I guy like Dave Pelz probably has done the analysis.

In any case, I would propose that to get nominated for best sixty yards and in, the course would have to present challenge, interest or fun to all in something like a 50/50 split for putting verses the other shots. I'm talking ballpark here.

I'm also going tho throw the following on the table for discussion/debate: it would be tough for courses with minimal green contour to achieve Top Ten sixty yards and in status. My reasoning would be that that they are less likely to present interesting recovery and/or approach shots.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Tim Weiman

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2003, 01:21:35 PM »
Well, because I consider you three 'esteamed' [sic] friends, and had the pleasure of playing golf with all three at one time or another, I feel I can take license with pointing out the humor of being able to say - while reading through the prolific threads, "hey, I know these guys"! :o 8) ;D

Remind me sometime to tell you guys about the golf course here in my area that is one of the best I've seen from 150 yards in, has plenty of interesting/challenging tee shots, yet is a nightmare as a total.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

THuckaby2

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2003, 01:26:40 PM »
"esteamed" - love it!

Well done.

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Mike_Sweeney

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2003, 01:42:51 PM »
Okay I will get killed for saying this, but rather than choose the standard Sand Hills, PD... I am going to go out on the limb and say Architects GC in New Jersey. Yes, it does not flow because the greens are all supposed to be different and different looking for each Architect. Stephen Kay and Ron Whitten seemed to have put a lot of time and thought into how to recreate each of the green sites, even though they had to soften what they chose due to the public nature of the facility.

What can I say, I like the course :).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

John Foley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2003, 02:13:04 PM »
Gotta second the call on Arcadia, some great complexes there.

The other one you gotta vote for is The Ocean Course -  Kiawaha.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Integrity in the moment of choice

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2003, 02:15:56 PM »
Tim,

I think the lesser player spends a lot of time with the wedge in their hand.  

Poor drive, three wood to inside a 100 yards, proverbial wedge.

Good drive, bad approach.......chip and run or pitch shot.

  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2003, 02:27:58 PM »
Played Friar's Head recently and it qualifies.  Also, Lost Dunes is very interesting in and around the greens.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2003, 02:50:59 PM »
The Kingsley Club allows a lot of inventiveness. I only saw half the course and played a few holes, but it got my attention.

Second the nomination of Rustic Canyon.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2003, 04:34:11 PM »
I have to say that Musgrove Mill GC in Clinton SC may have the best set of holes from sixty yards and in.  The greens are well bunkered, relatively small and undulating, and raised.  When I am there I have to invent all kinds of shots. In addition there are many shots that could be played in different ways.  Sometimes a floop shot and sometimes a run up shot.  If you get on the wrong side of the hole two puts can be difficult.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #13 on: June 04, 2003, 06:28:44 PM »
Guys:

Here are the nominations submitted thus far for Best Modern Course Sixty Yards and In (in the order they were submitted):

Pacific Dunes
Wild Horse
Arcadia Bluffs
Sand Hills
Kingsley Club
Architects Golf Club
Ocean Course
Friar's Head
Lost Dunes
Rustic Canyon
Musgrove Mill

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Tim Weiman

Mike_Sweeney

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2003, 02:28:46 AM »
Tim,

I definitely don't think Architects should be on this list, just wanted to suggest something different than the standard GCA choices.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

John Foley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2003, 05:04:46 AM »
Here's a question,

 Can a course be world class from 60 yards in w/out expansive chipping area's?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Integrity in the moment of choice

corey miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2003, 07:51:44 AM »
John Foley- Yes, Fenway.  Not sure i have seen any Tillie work that has what I would consider "chipping areas".

Are the nominees above truly "modern 60 yards and in" or just our preferred "best modern"?

I have played two courses with G. Childs (Split Rock,Byrne park?)  which have better greens than many that are often mentioned on this site imo.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

John Foley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2003, 07:55:26 AM »
Corey,

The answer is a definite yes. Maybe I should have stated it differently:

Do the green sites improve w/ the integration of chipping area's?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Integrity in the moment of choice

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2003, 10:55:29 AM »
Mike Sweeney:

Duly noted. I'll take The Architect off the list in my next recap. It is interesting to note that not that many courses have been nominated.

I've seen about half of those nominated, but have no clue whether the list is anywhere near correct. It would be nice to receive another ten or so nominations.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Tim Weiman

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2003, 11:48:40 AM »
Tim Weiman,

If Bandon Dunes is ranked 4th in the modern day listing, wouldn't it automatically follow that the course is great and makes the top 10 from 60 yards in ?

Or do you feel it achieved its lofty ranking due to its tee shot values ??  ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #20 on: June 05, 2003, 04:02:19 PM »
Pat Mucci:

Let me know if you would like to nominate Bandon Dunes. For the moment I'll hold off going on any tangents, if you don't mind.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Tim Weiman

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #21 on: September 11, 2008, 05:08:38 PM »
last bump today...
Logged
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

John Kavanaugh

Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #22 on: September 11, 2008, 05:18:13 PM »
Quote from: George Pazin on September 11, 2008, 05:08:38 PM
last bump today...

Hey George, you selfish bastard, why not go to page two and take a look at the excellent threads you bumped.  Being the Oakmont King why not at least answer the question about the Church Pews before you take over editorial control of the board.  I don't mind a bump when something is added to the discussion but to replace 20% of the front page out of some whim of boredom is no more than a cry for attention.
Logged

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #23 on: September 11, 2008, 05:38:25 PM »
Wow, the unforeseen effects of trying to be helpful... :P

I'd answer the Oakmont question if I knew the answer. I am not even among the top 10 most knowledgeable posters on this site about Oakmont, never have been, never claimed to be; I'm merely a fan. Nevertheless, I will try to find out the answer to the question.
Logged
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Top Ten Sixty Yards and In
« Reply #24 on: September 11, 2008, 06:10:29 PM »
Quote from: George Pazin on September 11, 2008, 05:38:25 PM
Wow, the unforeseen effects of trying to be helpful... :P

I'd answer the Oakmont question if I knew the answer. I am not even among the top 10 most knowledgeable posters on this site about Oakmont, never have been, never claimed to be; I'm merely a fan. Nevertheless, I will try to find out the answer to the question.

George,

Never mind Barney, I think he just forgot to take his Midol this morning.   8)

Interesting topic for best course 60 yards in.  I think the courses at Bandon as well as the other usual suspects like SH, BN, greywalls, Kingsley all have a good case for this.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up