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.


RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #25 on: January 25, 2008, 10:13:06 PM »
Quote
Scenario 1 - You step up to the tee. The fairway is clearly defined by rough, with the hole curving gently to the right. There's a bunker on the inside corner of the dogleg, and thanks to the elevated tee, you can see fairway safely beyond the bunker, which you know you can carry with a solid shot. You set up for a power fade - and hit it perfectly. The ball flies well past the bunker, falls gently to the right and settles in the middle of the fairway.

Scenario 2 - You walk over to the tee. A wide field lies in front of you, mowed mostly all to fairway height. You see a flag in the distance, but it's not at all clear what's the best way to get there. You've played the hole many times before, with mixed results from each side of the fairway: the green seems to favor an approach from the left, but there's a pot bunker, invisible from the non-elevated tee. You are a little uncertain as you decide to play left. When you hit the shot, it comes off perfectly as you envisioned, but as it bounds down the fairway, you're still hoping it doesn't bounce into that bunker lurking out there somewhere.

Scenario 1 sounds like a few of the holes at Torrey Pines.  Defined narrow fairway, carry bunker on inside of dogleg, or both sides pinching in.  You hit the perfect shot just at the distance enough that it must be hit well to carry, and you end up where you can see it, in the middle of the narrow FW.  So, I think that if you are competing at stroke play, you like everything defined and visable from the tee, know exactly what you have to do.... and if you are like Tiger, hit it about 1/2 the time like you'd want to (carrying trouble on inside of dog leg and in make it into FW).  The other half, Tiger don't pull the shot off, and you don't pull it off 3/4 of the time or more (assuming you are playing your correct tees and the carry is a good poke for you and for Tiger at his tees).  And, BTW, what is inside of the inside bunker of the dog leg?  Is it trees, high rough; another words what if you pure slice it, not power fade it? (which is what >80% of high handies will do) Power fade my butt.  Are you lining up with the left rough side to power fade?  My idea of carrying a bunker on the inside is to hit it straight over it!  I try to fade around a corner, not over a hazard on the fade side, but maybe I'm wrong and that is why I'm a 11-12.  ::) :-\ ;D

Scenario 2, you hit towards a preferred side, into an ambiguitous vision of field of play.  You know there is a small pot on the favored left side (line of charm sort of thing).  You can "choose to flirt with it" or try to play safer right.  You hit what you think 'has a chance to do well or flirt with the bunker' and you won't know until you walk out there a ways.

I like scenario 2 more as a match play player, or as a gamesman playing various games of match play, gambling type games, etc.  Anything except tournament stroke play.  It is nice to have the wider field to choose to play away from known trouble, and know that there is wider and more forgiving land out there, and it is only 'favorable' to challenge on the left side - not a sure thing with the uncertain flirtation with that small pot bunker hazard.  

But, my point is that in either scenario, we always frame these questions like we CAN choose to play up one side or the other.  In reality, on many days not even Tiger can just simply play a favored side and accomplish that favored side of a FW even 1/2 the time.  So, we talk like IF we can choose to do so -that is what we will get - a tee ball where we choose to play it to one side or the other, at our will.  

Come on folks!  Most of us are lucky and happy if we get either side of any FW at all!!!   ;) ::) ;D
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.

Scott Szabo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2008, 12:27:55 PM »

Come on folks!  Most of us are lucky and happy if we get either side of any FW at all!!!   ;) ::) ;D

Couldn't agree more!
"So your man hit it into a fairway bunker, hit the wrong side of the green, and couldn't hit a hybrid off a sidehill lie to take advantage of his length? We apologize for testing him so thoroughly." - Tom Doak, 6/29/10

Doug Ralston

Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #27 on: January 26, 2008, 02:12:52 PM »
I like #1 at lot, #2 a little. Blind shots and increased luck is fun occasionally, but it gets old to me after a while. Like the 230yd par-3 #16 at CP. I just hit and hope I judged the wind right, everytime I play it. What an awful hole!  ;)

And this from someone whose 'handicap' would likely be around 25-30.

Doug

PS: Really, if it's fun and beautiful, I'll enjoy it! The meaning of 'luck' and 'skill' in golf rather overlap for me.

Paul Sinclair

Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2008, 11:01:59 AM »
If you love golf, ya gotta love both of these holes. I like the feeling of seeing my ball in the middle of the fairway after hitting a good tee shot; I like the excitement of shambling up to a blind landing area hoping I'm in good shape. It doesn't make sense to me to say there is a preference for one or the other. Neither is "better" - they are both golf.

Wayne_Freedman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #29 on: January 27, 2008, 05:59:53 PM »
Number one.

I'm a visual guy. Blind holes make me nuts.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2008, 04:27:15 PM »
Part of the reason for the question is that obviously people play golf for different reasons.

Thomas wrote that strategy is the soul of the game. I think for far more people, camaraderie and execution are the soul.

It seems to me if you value you strategy - figuring a course out, if you will - you'll likely prefer the 2nd scenario.

If you simply like that feeling after you just pure a shot, you'll probably prefer the 1st scenario.

Not that there's anything wrong with either! I just think it helps to explain the widely differing views on some courses.
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

Jay Flemma

Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2008, 06:26:10 PM »
It depends...how are the greens?  All things being equal, I'll take two...except, of course, if one is Oakmont or Winged Foot.  I'll tolerate a little penal architecture for THOSE greens!

Peter Pallotta

Re:Which scenario do you prefer?
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2008, 08:56:06 PM »
Part of the reason for the question is that obviously people play golf for different reasons.

Thomas wrote that strategy is the soul of the game. I think for far more people, camaraderie and execution are the soul.

It seems to me if you value you strategy - figuring a course out, if you will - you'll likely prefer the 2nd scenario.

If you simply like that feeling after you just pure a shot, you'll probably prefer the 1st scenario.

Not that there's anything wrong with either! I just think it helps to explain the widely differing views on some courses.

Except, George, that in scenario 2 you can experience both the strategy and the shot-making. And in the 'scenario' I tried to paint, you can experience strategy and shotmakng AND untrammelled nature (or close to it). So, until I'm convinced that the three experiences are mutually exclusive, I guess I'm gonna keep asking for all three. And it seems to me that what appears to be the open and inclusive stance, i.e. let's have both types of holes, is in practice actually the restrictive one. It's the very dichotomy that your present,  and the very choosing of one or the other or both options, that to me is a sympton of that restriction; the forms of expression have become too fixed and formalized, with nature being represented as either a shot-making or strategic test, but in fact fully satisfying neither demand and with nature itself getting lost in the shuffle.
   
Peter    
By the way, I'm happy for and grateful for just about any course I can play, but that's a different issue. I thought this question was about what golf courses might be... and maybe about what they might've been but weren't, and why. But like I say, I've been singing that same song for a year now...  
« Last Edit: January 28, 2008, 10:04:50 PM by Peter Pallotta »