[A_Clay_Man]

I keep hearing (ok reading) some people using the term "unfair". This has always caused me to scrath my head and retort. "it's that way for everyone, so how could it be unfair?"

For those of you who have been bantying about the term, could you please describe in detail what and why you consider something UNFAIR?

[TEPaul]

Of course there's "unfair" in golf and it isn't minimized just because it's the same for everyone. I've definitely seen situations that are "unfair" to everyone, plain and simple.

The best example I ever saw (which I posted once before) was at Pebble in a good pro-am on hole #14 where the ball wouldn't come to rest anywhere around the hole. It was a total joke for everyone--many pros and good ams basically not being able to finish the hole and some (including the winner) eventually hitting a moving ball and taking a penalty as the only way to finish the hole!

That's totally unfair! It's more than that--it defies commonsense, it created about a 6 1/2 hour round, complete confusion etc!

So sure there's unfair in golf--but to degrees! That one just happened to be to the absolute Nth degree of "unfair"!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Paul,

I thought we had agreed a few years back that "unfair" was a highly complimentary term when discussing golf holes and course features.    Haven't most of the world's greatest courses and holes been described thusly at one time or another?

"Dumb" is a better term for what you described at Pebble.

[Jeff_Brauer]

What's fair?  Not golf and not life!  This is a great GCA topic!

How about this simple definition - "If there is one way to play a shot/hole, its fair, two ways, its strategic, and three ways, its flexible."

I agree with TEPauls example.  There should be a way to play a shot and finish the hole within the rules.  Thats absolute.

Some grey areas arise when players complain about :

1) Not being able to play a shot directly at the green from nearly anywhere on the course, including hazards.  The so called "double indeminity", ie a shot over a bunker lip but under a tree branch falls in this category.  A dogleg par 3 through heavy woods would qualify (don't laugh, I know of one)

2) Having to hit an "uncomfortable shot" to succeed.  This sometimes means a fade when they prefer a draw, or aiming out over water or out of bounds to get a shot back on the green.

3)Some players carry point one to the degree where they feel they should be able to aim at the hole - not just the green - from anywhere on the course.

4)Just about anything else that gets in their way!

Not sure I agree with any points in general, just reporting what I hear from golfers.

[19th Holer]

You've just finished 18, and they lock the door to the bar just as you reach for the handle.

[Brian Phillips]

19th holer,

Great reply and I totally agree.  This is a great topic and I promise I will come back when I have got the kids to bed tonight.

Missing you already Jeff!!!

Brian

[Bruceski]

Overhanging branches just ahead of the tee box that completely block a wide variety of drives.

[A_Clay_Man]

TePaul- I am hearing (ok seeing) that the pin placement on 14 at PB was extremely difficult and as Mike says DUMB. But was it really unfair.


The trees overhanging is just poor maintenance but still not unfair, is it?

The bar being closed is the best example because it was open for everyone else.

[Bruceski]

Overhanging trees that eliminate every conceivable drive that could hit the fairway not unfair? Why not just build a brick wall in front of the tee box? Still fair?

What about women's tee boxes that force a carry over a hazard that most amateur women couldn't manage?

[A_Clay_Man]

Once again Bruceski, If the powers that be allow the trees it should be up to you to figure out how to get around over under or thru.

I guess match play is the better game for proving that nothing is unfair, but still, who said it has to be wide open in front of you or even have grass, let alone mowed.

Where in the rules of this game does the word fair appear?

[Brian Phillips]

My friend and colleague Jeremy Turney who Tom Paul also has met has designed a hole with a overhanging tree.  The back tee is set way back with rock on the righthandside of the tee and all the way down the fairway is a road that is out of bounds.

Now when I play well which does not happen very often these days I hit a very high draw.  Everytime I come to this hole I ALWAYS hit the goddamn tree.  Jeremy chuckles and I load up another!!  As usual I hit it again!!

Is this unfair?  No, I am the idiot that doesn't take out the 2 iron and hit a fade floating over the road back into the fairway.

If the course gives the player many oportunies throughout the round to hit different shots from the tee then I have no grudges whatsoever with one or two tee shots forcing you to hit one type of shot be it a fade or a draw.

It is me being arrogant everytime I get to that tee thinking I can just get under the tree branches on that rock outcrop and cream a long drive.  And do you know what?  One day I will and hopefully Jeremy will be stood with me as usual!

Brian.

[Bruceski]

I guess nothing is unfair then. Strange concept, and I beg to differ.

One can't be asked to break the laws of physics. Further, poor maintenance and unfair setups are not mutually exclusive, in my opinion.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bruceski,

The difference in Adam's situation and Brian's is that in Adams, no one can hit a fairway (unfair IMHO) and in Brian's half the golfers (the fading half) can hit it easily, and the draw half cannot, w/o sacrificing distance by using an iron.

Is Brian's example "unfair?"  I think not, providing using an iron does not preclude getting to the green in two, say on a 480 yard par 4.

Adams mention of "who says there even has to be grass" reminds that Old Tom took the heather out of the through the green areas about 150 years ago.  He must have been getting some flak from locals that breaking their wrists hitting a good tee shot was somehow "not fair."

Blind shots like the Alps were once considered sporting, but now are considered by most as unfair.

The yardage book from St. Andrews makes the point that golf started in a time when warriors and potato famines wracked the country regularly, not to mention an infant mortality rate of about 50%, so couples had 10 kids to keep 5, etc.  (Of course they needed the five to work the potato fields, and I know at least three kids (mine) who would say that is unfair

Under those circumstances, it would have probably been trival to complain about a blind shot!  Furthermore, it would have reflected life as they knew it, whereas we can know the weather in an instant on the internet (providing we can get off this site - Ran - why not add a golf weather section?) and so we somehow think we should be able to see the golf shot before we hit.

It's clear that gradual improvement in  in club design, course design and maintenance technologies, combined with a more consistent economy have affected our opinion of "fairness" upwards!  As I read Ross, MacK and Tillie's writings, they were concerned about it too, although less technically capable of producing it in design in their day.  Thomas writes of a tournament on a course with a short par 3, where most competitors aimed at the pin, but three putted or couldn't hold the green, but the winner played to the safe side of the green and two putted!  Sounds like today's tour pros who feel they have a "right" to shoot at any pin from anywhere!

Perhaps the USGA slope rating standard of 66% of golfers being able to hit a particular green or fairway is a good one, but individual golfers will never agree on fairness, as their opinion is naturally too heavily influenced by how a feature affects their own game.  

[TEPaul]

a clay man:

Was that pin position I referred to on #14 PB unfair? Yes it was--there's no question about it unless you have some definition of unfair in mind that none of us know about! Basically there was no way for anyone to play it. If that's not unfair what exactly are you thinking about?

[Robert "Cliff" Stanfield]

Jeff great point from Thomas' book.  He later states that the hole was changed later much to his disapproval.  

Speaking of the pros wonder what Duval thinks of rocks in the middle of fwys?

Probably one of the most overlooked thing that is unfair is the cost of the greens fees and exclusivity of many of the great courses.  Especially like Pebble Beach and the must stay in hotel to play deal.  Its unfair to golfers of youth as well as family golfers.  I cant imagine the day I have to cough up 2 greens fees instead of one.

Another idea I got after Brauers note on famines etc in Scotland....things have not changed here much at all.....Scots dont complain about fairness or blind tee shots....they just play golf.  But then again not much to complain about when your club dues can be less thaqn 200 pounds for the year with the ability to have visitors play under your ticket for 10 pounds.

Seems the only thing they see as unfair is drawing the tee time behind the group of Perry Tour golfers.  Thats unfair!

[Bob_Huntley]

TEPaul:

I remember that pin position on No.14 at PB and it was grossly unfair. In addition it was probably the stupidest position of a pin on any hole that I've ever seen. The dumbest hole in creation in regard to the putting surface was on the original fourteenth hole at the Carmel Valley Ranch. It was so awful that Pete Dye, its creator, came back and changed it without charging a fee.

[Matt_Cohn]

Simple definition:

A hole or shot is unfair when good shots and bad shots are not appropriately distinguished.

Say you have an unreasonable target on a long par-4, a tiny green completely surrounded by bunkers and very firm. A poor shot finds the bunkers. But even a shot played almost perfectly will hit the green and bounce into the back bunkers. A bad shot and a good shot both end up in equal situations.

Does anyone have an example of where this definition breaks down?

[A_Clay_Man]

TePaul- I first heard the concept of a pin being unfair when it was too close to one of the edges of the green. Are the guidelines to set pins in the rules? I was always under the impression that either 6 or nine feet was the minimum. I once qualified for the International Caddie Cup because of what your calling an unfair pin. I was able to watch the three groups in front of me 5 putt from 5 feet below the hole. I was fortunate to have my second go in and another in our group birdied it. To top it all off this was all on the #18 handicap hole for the course. Was it unfair, yes, but only to those that missed and missed and missed and missed.

So, my definition of fair in this situation is: is it possible. Are you saying that the entire 14th green at PB is unfair?

After reading Jeff's concise post I've summized that we (society too) are turning into a bunch of pussies  . And I can't stand it when somebody cries when the ball doesn't bounce their way.

Isn't that the way the tree huggers started?

[John_McMillan]

Others have touched on a definition through examples, but here's a try at a generalization -

"A hole is unfair if it has a narrow variance in scoring - both well played and poorly played shots and tactics result in a similar score."

I'm not too familiar with the TEP example at Pebble, but the application of the definition would be that a great shot might land within inches of the hole, yet still be directed by the slopes to leave the same 30 foot putt that a fluffed shot off the tee might leave.

The romance of the term "unfair" on this site probably comes from times when golfers have mis-used the term to refer to situations where a well played shot with a poorly chosen tactic does not yield a low score.  So long as there is a tactical option which does yield a different score, a hole is not unfair.

[Mark_Fine]

Unfair is a bad word in golf and I never use it.  "Poor design" is a better choice of words.  Even with this, everything is relative.  A good shot to one is a marginal or bad shot to someone else.  It comes down to a matter of opinion.  I thought the set up at Bethpage was poor (not unfair) and I cited some of the reasons.  Others thought is was great.  Such is golf.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bruceski,

I'm with you.

And I'll bet that all those championing no such thing as "unfair" have cried foul and unfair in the real world when they played golf and encountered an unusual circumstance, like not being able to carry a tee shot 265+ yards in the wind and rain.

[Mike_Cirba]

I find it interesting that we're being asked to accept that as a generation, we should have a right to demand "fair" conditions of play simply because we do not face the harsh life that those who lived when the earliest courses were built did.

If anything, our relatively cushy lifestyles should make us seek something heartier as a challenge and adventure when we seek out leisure activities and our golf courses should reflect that.  

Probably the best example of the reasons for "fairness" was given by John M., who talked about a hole that did not differentiate between a well-struck and poorly-struck approach, which on the face of it makes sense.

However, even his example talks strictly about a single shot on that hole (the approach shot).  Is there truly no way to differentiate better play on the previous shot, or on subsequent shots??  Such a design as John describes might not be good architecture necessarily, but might not there be a preferred place to "miss"?  Whoever said that a par four couldn't consist of a chip (or explosion) and a putt in most cases??

Patrick brings up the example of the ultra-long forced carry, and once again I see the logic in his argument.  However, if no one can make the carry, how is that unfair??  Are we talking match-play, medal-play, or just someone trying to keep a card going as a personal score?  A forced carry that no one can make is silly architecture, and probably the longest forced carry I've seen recently is from the new back tee at Merion's 18th.  It requires a 240 yard carry, steeply uphill, to reach the fairway out of the quarry, but I would never call the hole unfair in any way.  Demanding, yes.  Exciting, yes.  Scary, yes.  But unfair?  

I honestly can say that I've never seen a golf hole in my life that I would consider "unfair".  I've seen plenty of holes that were eminently "fair", and it seems to me that a good number of those were also fairly unexciting and banal.  

My lord...we seem to have such narrow, stereotypical expectations on what a golf hole or course should be sometimes.  We also seem to think that we're supposed to "win" all of the time, or minimally have a fair chance of doing so.  If golf reflects life, as it does at it's best, is that expectation realistic??

Sometimes, you just have to figure out the best way to lose the least and with appropriate grace.  I would suggest that those of us who appreciate the history of the game and traditional golf should just hit our ball, find it, and hit it again.    

[Lou Duran]

MC,

You are much too pessimistic (or is fatalistic a more appropriate term).  Without a reasonable expectation of success, however relative, not many of us would be playing this silly game.

Call it unfair or poor design, most of us know it when we see it.  Jeff Brauer brings up the "double indemnity" example which is clearly unfair or poor design (Jeff- what were you thinking about when you built those silly mounds under the trees at the corner of the dogleg and on the front left of the green at Great Southwest #15?).

Brian, if you think that forcing a golfer to hit a sharp cut with a 2 iron or a high draw with the driver to get around trees and a rock outcropping immediately in front of the tee is good design, I don't think that I want to play your courses.  On the other hand, MC probably would like them (he thinks that Texas Star is a great course and its #9 hole features a huge oak in the middle of the fairway not far from the back tee requiring those exact shots).  Most of us have a difficult enough time hitting controlled draws or fades to moderately doglegged fairways.

Was the back pin placement on 18 at Olympic Lake during the US Open (I believe the last one there) fair?  The green has been redesigned, but it may just have been a poor location exacerbated by bad maintenance.

Is landing in a divot in the fairway unfair?  I guess if it happens to your opponent it is the "rub of the green".  I do agree that anyone who expects golf to be fair is playing the wrong game.      

[TEPaul]

a clay man:

Then I will define the circumstances of the pin position I mentioned on #14 Pebble Beach and why in the context of that tournament and your question I called that instance unfair.

The tournament was called the World Pro/am and I played in it once back in the mid to late 1980s with the pro from my club and two other good ams. There were teams from all over America and Canada--maybe even other countries. The tournament, as I recall, was a better ball of foursome at scratch and also a pro competition simultaneously. I think it was three rounds at Pebble and one at Spyglass.

On the last day our group got to about #9 at Pebble and everything stopped--what appeared to be completely! We waited so long we started looking around and could see that no groups were moving ahead of us and that there were many people at #14. We walked up to the green on #14 where many groups had collected to watch the group playing the hole.

The story (we heard later) was the super was off for the weekend and somebody who ordinarily did not do it had set the pins and in the case of #14 it was half way up the slope on the right. The members of each group would putt up the slope to the hole and the ball would filter back and off the green on the left--every single time. Players were trying to putt or chip the ball way up above the pin to see if they could hole it as it filtered back down past the pin and back off the green again. Every single shot appeared to come back eventually to the same spot off the green on the left.

I recall seeing some players (maybe pros) not finishing the hole and some heaving their putter into the bushes! I remember other players just hockey pucking the ball IN MOTION around the hole until they holed it! ETC, ETC. Apparently the pro who won the pro division hit his ball IN MOTION into the hole as it came back down the hill which apparently required that he hit it way above the pin, run up the hill and tap it in as it came back in motion by the pin!

In retrospect this (what he did) is a clear violation of the rules of golf but I have no idea how the committee handled this situation as to a violation (probably gave it to him anway out of embarassment).

I can't even remember now what we did to turn in a score on that hole (at least one of us did something to turn in a score).

It took us many hours to get to #14 once we went back to #9!

So this was by far the worst situation I ever saw in golf! Not only would the ball not come to rest anywhere near the pin from any direction but it wouldn't even stay on the green. I doubt you could have even PLACED a ball within a 10ft radius around the pin and have it hold!

I have seen pins in my career where ocassionally the ball would appear not to hold around the pin (even on the high side on an uphill putt) but nothing remotely like this instance.

I don't know how many hours it took to play that round but it was the longest of my life.

I suppose it would have been possible for a golfer to putt his ball at that 14th pin endlessly and at some point get lucky and hole it somehow but from what all of us could see that would have been a bit of a fluke.

There is language in the principle behind the rules of golf somewhere that speaks of normal shots exclusive of FLUKES as what's envisioned for playing golf.

So you can call a situation like the one on #14 PB, dumb if you want but not unfair. I would call it both!

And of course I'm not calling the 14th green unfair--just that particular pin placement that for some strange reason had been set well into a clearly unpinnable area of the upslope on #14.

[Brian Phillips]

Lou,

I probably didn't explain it good enough.  The 2 iron shot I described was the shot I usually can hit myself.  Others can hit the ball straight if they want to on the hole I described.

So all Jeremy has done is take away one type of shot and that is the draw.  He could have cut the tree down but it is a beautiful tree hanging from a huge piece of rock.  The hole does not stop anyone from hitting the ball straight, the tree doesn't hang over that far.

I have hit the tree many times but do not blame Jeremy one bit for leaving it.  Too blast the rock and the tree away would have been criminal.  Leave as much of nature as possible.

It is the only hole on the course where he has taken away a type of shot.  To me what he has done is not destroy nature which to me is VERY GOOD architecture.

Brian.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()