[Lloyd_Cole]

"I just vomit when I hear 'em talk about the bump-and-run because you just can't do it here."
PETE DYE on American golf courses.
A guy in our pro shop was suggesting that something similar today. He said Ross didn't design New England courses for the ground game. I thought 'what a lot of nonsense' and then I read this.
Can you or can't you? And if not, why not?

[Mike Sweeney]

Wannamoisett #2 is a long 4 of 450+ and rather than put the green right behind the creek, Ross gave you some room so that you could bounce it in from an aerial location.



I don't have any pics here on this computer but Bald Peak's front 9 basically plays up and down a mountain and the holes going down are bounceable.

I would say the Ross courses along the coast (Wianno, Wannamoisett, Misquamicutt, .....) all have more ground options for a variety reasons including the ground that he had which was typically flatter than say The Orchards. However I am guessing The Orchards has a couple, I just don't remember specific holes to say.

[paul cowley]

Lloyd....its really about our climate and the various grass types inability to thrive under the dry conditions that 'bump and running' require.....not a lack of design.

I know most of what I design is ground game suitable......but it has to have a maintenance commitment to really shine....and that generally requires a knowledgeable Super and more money. Two low supply items when it comes to fast and firm.

Plus us Americans are too spoiled and as a consequence we've spoiled the game. I'm hoping we're moving back....but I'm not betting on it.

But in the meantime I'll just think back to my barefoot playing days of learning the game on the un irrigated fairways of an extinct course on Martha's Vineyard. When it got dry it was straw....and fun....and gone forever.

Pete's right.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Lloyd,

I know I design features that allow the ground game.  No one plays it.  Even in the picture above, in my experience, a good player would not even bring those small frontal bumps and swales into play with a running shot.  Why would then when with a 60 degree wedge, they can avoid all chances of those little bumps deflecting a ball some unintended direction?  The only way would be if that approach had a constant, predictable slope they could use, not a bunch of diddle bumps.  And, there is always the chance that the approach is wetter than the green itself which would just stop the ball dead.

I am not sure that even if greens dry out, that with balls and clubs these days it ever make sense to play the ground game in the traditional sense.  If the green was so dry that you thought a ball would roll 20 yards after impact, you would play the highest club possible and aim 20 yards short. You wouldn't aim 40 yards short and play for the roll would you?

So, I think its the equipment as much as the maintenance.  They aren't really even playing the bump and run in the British Open anymore under now normal conditions.  A few years ago, when the courses were affected by drought, maybe they were forced to.

The good news is, history and sentiment aside, I really don't think the ground game or the aerial game are either inherently more interesting.  Its still the same game of judging how the ground and wind effect your shot and getting it as close to the hole as possible.  Its just that the contours that might affect it are now within perhaps 10 yards of the hole, rather than 50.

[Ian Andrew]

Jeff,

"No one plays it"

Sure they do, players with low trajectories, older players who hiit longer clubs and people playing recovery shots from trouble at the sides.

They may not choose to play it from the center of the fairway - if they have the game - but everyone lese does.


Paul,

I played four courses in New York last week and on three of them I needed to hit at least one shot short on each and run it in. As long as greens are on grade or are close to it - that's an option I use. Only spongy approaches or sharp steep slopes prevent this.

[Anthony Gray]

  I think it is definitely an irrigation issue. The modern course are watered to the point that it takes climate and weather out of play. The variables that change the way the course plays are pin placements, tee markers, and weather. My home course plays the same except on an occasional windy day. There are contours around greens that would allow the bump and run but for some reason the rough is to high to allow it.

  I remember Jack saying that he designed Pebble Beach no 5 to allow a shot to the left to roll down to the green but was disapointed that they let the rough grow there.


  I also think with the new lofted clubs and the new balls that spin players feel high shots are more predictable than a bump and run that is effected more by the rub.


                                           Anthony

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ian,

You are correct. I was basing my answer on better players, and my frustration at designing features I thought they might use for the ground game, only to discover that no matter what I did, they used lob wedges and clearly felt it was the best option.

Anthony,

Glad to know JN has the same problems I have!  There are many examples, but I recall going up to the Quarry during grassing and the third green, which had a designed in kick in bank had been sodded to rough.  Apparently the super made that call saying he wanted the ease of growing in more sod. 

The good news is that the cross slope green still allows the aerial shot to roll right.  While you can't run it on using the aforementioned slope, it still takes some local knowledge to play the hole correctly to the high sided of the green.  Hence my comment in the first post.  It's still a fun shot to use green contours to get close to the hole, even if the ball isn't bouncing 20 yards short and left of the green to do it.  We just have to pull the ground slopes that affect a shot in closer to the greens than older designers did.

[Ally Mcintosh]

God bless Great Britain and Ireland... I recently witnessed one regular contributor on here putt from a full 60 yards off the green at Baltray... Ball finished 9 inches away...

You guys are missing out on so much 

[Anthony Gray]

 I still think the ball has alot to do with it. How many times have you hit that perfect shot and then the ball checks up.

                         Anthony

[Adam Clayman]

Pete's right.

Not this time Buckaroo!

[paul cowley]

Adam....I think Pete's right for the vast majority of North American courses.

You just have the privilege of playing one of the best exceptions!

Ian....our games are similar and I too love to invent shots...even when I don't have to. It thrills me to see a ball bouncing and running.

I get a bigger thrill pulling these shots off, but I'm far from a percentage player.

I think Jeff and Pete are both right for the majority.

[John Kirk]

I think Pete is generally right, assuming he is referring to a greenside "bump and run" shot, a lower trajectory pitch that is expected to roll farther than it flies.  Paul Cowley correctly diagnoses the "problem" as long, dark green grass.

Some of the great new courses have restored this feature to American golf.  You can do it on bent grass in the shoulder seasons.  It works decent on short, dry bluegrass, and very well on fescue all year long.

[Cliff Hamm]

[quote author=Jeff_Brauer link=topic=37338.msg766721#msg766721 date=1226406

I know I design features that allow the ground game.  No one plays it.  Even in the picture above, in my experience, a good player would not even bring those small frontal bumps and swales into play with a running shot. 

[/quote]

Have watched numerous Northeast Amateurs at Wanamoissett.  Never once have I seen the ground game utilized.  100% aerial game.  Ground game is a nice option for bogey golfers like me, but for the elite - never.

[Adam Clayman]

If Pete wants everything literal, as his feature interview exemplifies, he is wrong about it not being done on American courses. If we're gonna weaken his statement/argument to imply it's only on a majority of courses, it's not worth the lactic acid, is it?
I'd even argue that the majority of courses are not that modern, and a large percentage of those do allow for the GG option. I know I first learned it on one. Just because Pete has propensity for not allowing for the GG, doesn't mean he's accurate about it's non-existence.

[paul cowley]

OK Adam I give. I'goin to go get me a beer.

[Tim Gavrich]

It's funny how better players not only shy away from any ground-game shots they roundly dismiss it as dumb.  In practice I'll hit the occasional 105 yard knockdown pitching wedge to a front pin where I know I wouldn't be able to stop a sand wedge around the hole.  My playing partners make fun of me, then I hit it inside of their balls, and they don't make so much fun of me for a while (at least not about that).  It's really a lost art, and a good set of shots to have in one's arsenal.  But as anything, they must be employed prudently.

[Tim Gavrich]

Heck, one of the courses where I use the ground game most near home is Wintonbury Hills in Bloomfield, which bears Pete's association!

[Lou_Duran]

Except for the occasional accidental thinned or topped shot, is the low trajectory bump and run any easier to execute for the high handicapper?  I used to have the shot when I was stronger and played in windy conditions, but I find it much more difficult to hit today, particularly with clubs which are designed to get the ball up in the air.  In my opinion, the optimum playing conditions for the high handicapper are firm fairways, very soft, receptive greens, and inconsequential rough.   

[Brent Hutto]

Lou,

I think you have it about right. Within 20-30 yards of the green an option of bumbling the ball across the ground is a very desirable one for high handicappers (keeps them from swinging hard at a lob wedge) but at least in the USA asking then to hit iron shots other than your basic full swing as high and straight as possible is asking for trouble. Also agree on your recipe for "perfect conditioning" from the perspective of a double-digit handicapper trying to shoot a low score.

[Kirk Gill]

"I just vomit when I hear 'em talk about the bump-and-run because you just can't do it here."
PETE DYE on American golf courses.

Pete, "here" is an awfully big place. Lots of golf courses. I've done it here. I've done it there. I do it just about everywhere.

Sorry for momentarily channeling Dr. Seuss.

[Lloyd_Cole]

Thanks for all the input. I love that we never agree on anything.
I'm not much of a player but folk in the UK, AND locals here in New England are often full of awe and praise for my Philly Mick flop shot. I'm rather embarrassed that I've had so much practice at the damned shot that I'm now quite adept with it... Ask me to hit a 75 yard bump and run under the wind, however, and I'm found wanting (I was at Elie several times). I could play that shot in my sleep as a kid... I guess we do as the Romans do.
I love the idea of the ground game, but when I play I want to to win, and around here it's a pretty low percentage option.

[Tom_Doak]

Mr. Dye has yet to visit Bandon Dunes Resort.

He's right that Jack Nicklaus would never play a bump and run shot in America, though.  But, as Ian notes, all of our dads do (or did).

[Sean Leary]

Here in the Pacific NW bump and runs are really hard due to soft/wet conditions most of the year. When summer comes you can do it, but most don't have much practice the rest of the year do it seems daunting.

[Charlie Goerges]

I imagine bump and run as less than a full shot (i.e. running something on from less than 100 yards). I consider the ground game as a full shot and it encompasses the use of the ground to help the outcome. I break 80 maybe half the time and honestly I use the former far less often than the latter.

Now, I am a low-ball hitter, and I'm not a long hitter (carry driver a bit over 250) but here are a couple of examples where I'll run the ball on.

If the green is above me (though approx. on grade) and I'm outside of about 165 (a 7 iron for me), I'm running that thing on one way or another, I just don't get the spin to play it otherwise. There are exceptions to this, but I'd say that it's true 75% of the time.

On a redan-like green (inverse or otherwise) if there is water, bunker, or a steep slope guarding the front, I often find that I must run it on by bouncing it short. I am too likely to mis-hit the shot to fly over the trouble, but the angle of the green means I'll risk flying over the green on the un-guarded side if I take enough club to get to the middle or back. On a properly conceived redan, the slope short will help me run it on and all the way back to the hole. Again, this applies to me when the distance is more than about 160.

Probably 90% of players are at my skill level or lower, the vast majority end up needing the GG option, and end up using it, even if by accident. If it wasn't there on many average courses in this country, there would be far fewer players than there are in my opinion.

[Sean_A]

There is no doubt that in most circumstances, either in the US or not, for a competent, confident golfer, the best shot is the aerial route.  However, and I hope most accept this, the best golf is when a golfer must decide between the two (or perhaps more if you get into shades of gray) options.  I have been told time and again that grasses & climates in the US largely eliminate the ground game option.  If this is true, how come as a kid I was able to hit this sort of shot quite often?  Consequently, I ain't buying that the ground game can't be more catered for with conditioning/maintenance.  If you tell me that folks don't like the idea and so don't bother to make the ground game available - thats fair enough, but don't tell me it isn't possible - at least to a higher degree than now.

Ciao

PS  Pat Mucci - don't bother chiming in with your comments about climate - I grew up Michigan, live in England and fully understand that there will be many times when the weather won't cooperate.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()