Does hole location and how you fared that day determine your

[Patrick_Mucci]

assessment of the architecture ?

Mike Sweeney's comment on Yale and the hole location caused me to reflect on comments I had heard when some challenging hole locations were the fare of the day.

Do challenging hole locations and how the golfer met that challenge determine the golfers assessment of the golf course ?

On a member's course, why do some golfers love devilish hole locations while others run complaining to anyone who will listen, insisting that they never be repeated again ?

What's the line of demarcation for determining challenging versus foolish hole locations ?

What are some of the most challenging locations you've encountered ?

[Rich Goodale]

Pat

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich

[JESII]

Pat,

I think it would be difficult to play a course once and be qualified to bitch about it. Discuss it? Sure! But too many think they can give a thumbs up or thumbs down verdict after one playing and I just wholeheartedly disagree.

Bad hole locations are but one of the reasons.



"What's the line of demarcation for determining challenging versus foolish hole locations ?"

Simple...whether or not the ball will stop near the hole if you drop it out of your hand from shoulder height.

[Eric Morrison]

Most challenging? Recently at Winged Foot West with the hole locations in the exact spots from the 2006 U.S. Open Sunday round...ouch.

[Carl Rogers]

This thread is exactly what the 10th hole at Riverfront is all about.

The green is slightly angled to the right from the center of the line of play.  the green is fairly thin in its width.
There is a central bunker in the middle of the fariway.  2 bunkers guard the green, 1 is front left ,the other is right and middle.  If the pin is back right or middle , the best tee play is left and if the pin is front, then the best tee shot is right.

[Adam Clayman]

The only group I've seen bitch about hole locations are the better golfer. Their expectations seem greater than their ability to overcome a modicum of adversity. The cries of unfair are like beautiful music to the sportsman. In tournament conditions the guidelines of 6 easy 6 medium and 6 hard hole locations, how many of the 6 hard holes should push the players ability to the extent that their evaluation of the gca is affected? None! The whines are tell tales of their problems, not the courses.

[Stewart Abramson]

"What's the line of demarcation for determining challenging versus foolish hole locations ?"

"Simple...whether or not the ball will stop near the hole if you drop it out of your hand from shoulder height."

I like that response.  I am not fond of putts that barely miss dropping into the hole yet end up further away than where the putt started. Payne Stewart's putt at  the US Open at Olympic brings to mind a hole location that was perhaps beyond the "line of demarcation".  It should be noted that Olympic has since re-done the 18th green, reducing the slope  to make that location a more reasonable pin placement. My home course has two greens that allow for that kind of placement. The greenskeeper doesn't place the hole at those locations very often, but once or twice a year we get to gripe about it. It is an acceptable variation for a  round, but I wouldn't be happy if that was the mode.

[Anthony Gray]

 Pat,

  I love various hole locations. My home course never changes the tee markers so hole locations is the only thing that varies from day to day. I do not believe that it is mandatory for any ball on the green to allow for a two putt. I like challangeing locations that bring out the need to place your shot on certian areas of the green.

                          Anthony

[Mike Hendren]

Patrick,

When approaching my ball, waiting for others to putt and exiting the green, I typically look for recent hole locations that have not fully grown back in to get an idea of pinnable options and how they might affect play of the hole.  This mitigates the issue you raise.

Mike

[Peter Pallotta]

Pat

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich

Rich - thanks much. I'd never thought of that before. Like Mike, I typically look for recent hole locations and imagine other pinnable options; but maybe unlike Mike, on many courses I play I usually conclude that a different hole location wouldn't have made a difference in how/where I played my shot, or even from where in the fairway I would've like to have played it.   

Of course, if I have been misinformed by my interpretation of your post, I apologize...(no, wait...)

Peter

[Ken Moum]

For me it depends on the intention of the round.

Of more interesting (better?) courses I have played in the last couple of seasons, in at least two cases my group was interested in the details of the course and wasn't in a hurry to finish. That, combined with an uncrowded course, gave us time to look at putts and shots more than once.

As a result,  think I "understand" Black Mesa and Cottonwood Hills better than I do Apache Stronghold or Sugarloaf Mountain where, despite having the courses to ourself, my group had a brisk pace-of-play expectation.

In the former cases, we probably added 45 minutes to a 3.5-hour round just by fooling around with putts to other hole locations and chipping from various spots.

IMHO, my ideal examination of a great course would be a leisurely round on a empty course without a scorecard.

Those are my favorite rounds on my home course as well. I try to get out of a solo nine at sundown several times a summer, and enjoy every one of them. And I am still learning things about the course after 10 years as a member.

K

[Bill_McBride]

I'm with Rich - if you haven't played the tougher pin positions, you can't really appreciate them.  The first time I played Cypress Point, the greens had been punched recently, and they were kind enough to set the pins somewhat benignly.  It was pretty obvious there were some much more difficult hole locations out there.

On another tangent with regard to hole locations:

Last year our superintendent and professional started using a hole location system with a 1/2/3 designator and a dumb little sign by #1 and #10 tees that says, "Today's Pin Position #1."

Then you know the pins will be set front-middle-back, front-middle-back, etc, except that two greens that are wide and shallow are left-center-right.

That is so boring and predictable that it just pisses me off.  Anybody else want to comment?

[Adam Clayman]

Bill, It seems that after punching and sanding greens (old school style) benign pins would be the worst case. Wouldn't it be a lot more fun if the pin positions are at their extremes when the speeds are their slowest?

[Patrick_Mucci]

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich, is it your position that golfers are so unobservant visually and so limited, mentally, that they can't envision other hole locations and the play to them ?

[bstark]

  Hole location is such a great way to measure the strength of a golf course. Southampton has a new super and he has found numerous "new" pin positions on our greens. It really does bring back the teeth of the course. So many times after a round you hear guys talk about pin position. Along with squaring up the greens and firming up the course it has made the course two to three strokes tougher. No doubt it has brought back some of the great Raynor features into play.

[Sean_A]

Pat

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich

I disagree with this notion.  I think if a guy has seen plenty of great and varied courses he can imagine scenarios with a bit of observation. 

To answer Pat's question, how one plays can often effect their opinion of a course.  However, in the big scheme of things, best of lists are littered with difficult championship courses and often times these same courses bedevil folks on the greens.  So if anything, I think courses get a boost of opinion for being difficult, but strangely, as Pat suggests, folks will sometimes then complain about the greens - go figure. 

Ciao

[Bill_McBride]

Bill, It seems that after punching and sanding greens (old school style) benign pins would be the worst case. Wouldn't it be a lot more fun if the pin positions are at their extremes when the speeds are their slowest?

Don't get me wrong, they were still running around 10.    I guess they were worried about members hitting a bump/punch hole and missing a putt - none of the holes were cut on slopes.  I did play 5' of break on a putt from left to right on #4.

[Mike_Cirba]

No.

[PThomas]

The cries of unfair are like beautiful music to the sportsman.

The whines are tell tales of their problems, not the courses.

classic lines Adam!

[Michael Powers]

The only group I've seen bitch about hole locations are the better golfer. Their expectations seem greater than their ability to overcome a modicum of adversity. The cries of unfair are like beautiful music to the sportsman. In tournament conditions the guidelines of 6 easy 6 medium and 6 hard hole locations, how many of the 6 hard holes should push the players ability to the extent that their evaluation of the gca is affected? None! The whines are tell tales of their problems, not the courses.

Adam,
I believe a better formula for setting hole locations is to create a balance of hole locations (front, middle, back - left, middle, right).  This set-up creates an equal playing field for players who hit it low, high, left to right, and right to left while rewarding the player who can hit all types of shots.

[John Moore II]

Yes, I would say that hole locations and your personal play would affect your ability to assess the architecture. If I play bad and am hitting the ball into the other fairways and through the trees, I can't tell whats good about the architecture. Also, if the pins are in really funny positions it can be hard to tell intent of the design as well. 

But I also think its very hard to tell the true architectural intent by only playing a course once.

[Rich Goodale]

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich, is it your position that golfers are so unobservant visually and so limited, mentally, that they can't envision other hole locations and the play to them ?

Yes.  Unless, of course, they want to screw up the game they are playing (and that of their partners) by trying to be in two mental and social places at one time.  I know that good "raters" can do it, but that just reinforces my point....

Peter P.

You interpret me well, and add another interesting truth, i.e. that hole location does not really affect the scores of anyone but the very best players, and them only relatively insignificantly.  What it does do, however, which is important, is add to the experience of playing the course.

rich

[Gary Slatter]

If you have only played a great course once it is almost impossible to imagine how differently it might play with other hole locations.  For less than great courses, it is more possible.

Rich, is it your position that golfers are so unobservant visually and so limited, mentally, that they can't envision other hole locations and the play to them ?

Yes.  Unless, of course, they want to screw up the game they are playing (and that of their partners) by trying to be in two mental and social places at one time.  I know that good "raters" can do it, but that just reinforces my point....

Peter P.

You interpret me well, and add another interesting truth, i.e. that hole location does not really affect the scores of anyone but the very best players, and them only relatively insignificantly.  What it does do, however, which is important, is add to the experience of playing the course.

rich

Rich, years ago in the Bahamas when I hosted an annual  Bahamas Golf Championship I could influence the scores by an average of 4 shots by using fair pin locations on the right side of most greens.  Most of the better Bahamian golfers draw every shot, pins on the right were a challenge.  When we had events using our two courses by setting the pins I evened up the scores without the field knowing what I had done.  HOLE LOCATION can always influence scores and opinions.  Higher handicap players are more of a challenge.