Is distance its own reward?

[Mike_Cirba]

Or should the architect try to provide "rewards" for the golfer who hits it both long and straight with things like turbo boosts, or speed slots?

[Garland Bayley]

Architects should provide turbo boosts, but not necessarily for long, and straight doesn't matter at all unless you meant to say accurate.

[Tom Huckaby]

GREAT question.

My feeling is a little of that goes a long way.  That is, it's cool to see it from time to time on a course, but if it's overdone, it's giving too much of an advantage to a player who already has an advantage to begin with.

I wonder how much of this you find on Doak courses... and man I'd be really interested to hear what he says about this.

I guess it is cool when one successfully finds one of these boosts or slots... the added reward is very fun... but if one has no chance to get there... and then sees a guy who normally hits it 30 yards past him suddently end up 80 yards in front, well... it's hard to call that fun - for the shorter golfer, anyway.  And remember there are a lot of shorknocker Huckabys in the world and precious few Matt Ward bombers.  So don't piss us off too much or we shall revolt.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

speed slots and turbo boosts, like everything else in architecture, are great if they're random and they fit the land.  If they're being forced on the land by a playing philosophy, they're no good.

What's cooler than a 500 yard par 5 with a turbo boost at 225 that takes a ball down another 50 yards and gives the relatively light hitter a chance to make eagle?  We all know that he inevitably gets too excited and goofs it up and makes 8 anyway...but why not give him the chance to butcher a par 5 being greedy like all the long hitters always do?

EXCELLENT response - I concur completely.

What I don't like - besides overabundance or forcing of this, like you say - is a speed slot only reachable at 275 or whatever.  Those who can hit it that far don't need any further advantage.

But put it at 225 and hell yes, let guys like me hang ourselves!  Great call.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

speed slots and turbo boosts, like everything else in architecture, are great if they're random and they fit the land.  If they're being forced on the land by a playing philosophy, they're no good.

What's cooler than a 500 yard par 5 with a turbo boost at 225 that takes a ball down another 50 yards and gives the relatively light hitter a chance to make eagle?  We all know that he inevitably gets too excited and goofs it up and makes 8 anyway...but why not give him the chance to butcher a par 5 being greedy like all the long hitters always do?

BINGO!

[Tom Huckaby]

Jeez shivas, you drew concurrence from each of me AND Garland.  That must be a first.  Be afraid.  Be very very afraid.  Or maybe re-think your response.

 

[Phil Benedict]

I agree with Garland that turbo boosts or speed slots can be positioned to help everybody regardless of length.  For example, everybody gets more distance on 10th at Augusta with a sweeping hook that favors the left center of the fairway.  Accuracy and shot shape are rewarded rather than distance alone.

In contrast, the old 15th (pre trees and new tee) had a turbo boost down the right side of the fairway that only helped long hitters.

I'm inclined to think the set up on the 10th is more democratic and therefore better.

[Garland Bayley]

Jeez shivas, you drew concurrence from each of me AND Garland.  That must be a first.  Be afraid.  Be very very afraid.  Or maybe re-think your response.

 

Tom,

You got that wrong. Shivas and you agreed with me, it's just that my response was pithy in that engineer/mathematician way that required you to make the proper inferences to get to the full statement that Dave eventually provided. 

[Tom Huckaby]

Jeez shivas, you drew concurrence from each of me AND Garland.  That must be a first.  Be afraid.  Be very very afraid.  Or maybe re-think your response.

 

Tom,

You got that wrong. Shivas and you agreed with me, it's just that my response was pithy in that engineer/mathematician way that required you to make the proper inferences to get to the full statement that Dave eventually provided. 

I can live with that.
It's still scary to have the three of us all on the same side.

 

[Garland Bayley]

Jeez shivas, you drew concurrence from each of me AND Garland.  That must be a first.  Be afraid.  Be very very afraid.  Or maybe re-think your response.

 

Tom,

You got that wrong. Shivas and you agreed with me, it's just that my response was pithy in that engineer/mathematician way that required you to make the proper inferences to get to the full statement that Dave eventually provided. 

I can live with that.
It's still scary to have the three of us all on the same side.

 

Dave may have his faults, but he is a decent learner. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Shouldn't the architect actually widen the fairway further out to account for the greater dispersion of lomger ree shots that are hit the same pct.offline than shorter shots?

Why penalize the guy with faster clubhead speed?

[Garland Bayley]

Mike,

It's not about penalizing any one particular player. It's about variety. Widening further out is fine, but can be balanced with the occaisional narrowing further out.

[Mike_Cirba]

Garland

Tell that to Rees Jones! 

[SL_Solow]

Additionally, if the long player thinks the risk of missing the fairway is too great, he can club down.  Choices and randomness are to be encouraged.

[Garland Bayley]

Additionally, if the long player thinks the risk of missing the fairway is too great, he can club down.  Choices and randomness are to be encouraged.

OK Shel, we'll make it your responsibilty to talk to Rees. 

[Phil Benedict]

Shouldn't the architect actually widen the fairway further out to account for the greater dispersion of lomger ree shots that are hit the same pct.offline than shorter shots?

I've heard this argument before.  The old Augusta widened out to accommodate longer tee shots.  Gary Player used to bitch about it.

I agree with Garland that long hitters always have the option of taking less club.  I don't think it should be an architectural principle that landing areas should widen futher away from the tee.

[Mike_Cirba]

What was wrong with the old Augusta?

[Garland Bayley]

What was wrong with the old Augusta?

Or put another way - What's Gary Player complaining about? Did he think he was supposed to win there every year?

[Phil Benedict]

What was wrong with the old Augusta?

According to Gary Player, it favored the long hitters too much.

I'm trying to come up with some sports analogy to address your point but I'm struggling.  Golf is basically the only sport that doesn't have a fixed playing field.  Pitchers who have a lot of movement have a harder time throwing strikes, but they don't give them a bigger strike zone.

I think players should make adjustments based on their ability rather than have the architecture adjust to accommodate different levels of ability.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Yes.

[Kalen Braley]

Mike,

Yes it is....

I mean c'mon, giving these guys extra room to hit is just nonsense.  Next thing your going to tell me is that bunkers are surrounded by rough so thier long bombs won't run into them, and the bunkers are made less penal so they can still go for the green, and greens are built flatter for these long bombers who have no touch on the green...

Oh wait a sec...   

I guess being a short to medium like hitter like me just makes it difficult all-around...its a long ballers game.  Even Corey pavin can hit em farther than most joes!! 

[Anthony Fowler]

I like the idea of the turbo boost for the short hitters.  It shouldn't be a guarantee but should require some accuracy and maybe the right shot shape.  I remember seeing Leonard (on TV) using an iron hitting it past 2 bigger hitters using drivers by hitting a low draw off a short-hitters power boost and thinking it was a great feature.  I'm tempted to say this was at Hazeltine but I don't remember for certain.

[Sean_A]

Turbo boosts are cool for any type of player.  Whats even cooler is that often, turbo boosts are there for everyone - its called a downhill drive.  However, often times the golden age archie would give it on the drive then take it away on the appoach! 

What is all this talk about randomness?  I would think that a random use of a feature which gives a turbo boost would be the last thing on an archie's mind.  I am sure are these things are planned.  I hear folks talk about random bunkering as well - bizarre.  If folks want random stuff why do we need archies?

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

...If folks want random stuff why do we need archies?

Ciao

To provide the proper randomization.

[Jim_Kennedy]

I hear folks talk about random bunkering as well - bizarre.  If folks want random stuff why do we need archies?-S. Arble

I don't think 'random', when used in the context of GCA, means the willy-nilly placement of  certain architectural devices like bunkering, rather, it's meant to convey the idea that 'randomness' is the antithesis of strict methodology, i.e. it saves us all from a life of golfing boredom.