Greatest course, despite the yardage

« **on:** June 17, 2009, 05:14:39 PM »

To challenge the greatest players we are now looking at courses of 7,500 yards or so. What is wrong with Royal Dornoch at 6685 yards or Swinley Forest at little over 6000 yards? I had forgotten Merion. Is this the shortest course still capable of challenging the world's best? Or have I scored an own goal by mentioning Merion yet again?

« **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:36:32 PM »

I played the Country Club in Brookline last week. Very cool experience.

The yardage from the tips is about 6600 yards and I think they stretched it to 6800 for the 99 Ryder Cup and 88 US Open. I was amazed at the thought that they played a Ryder Cup there so recently - and it was no birdie fest - and a representative US Open 20-years ago (278 was the winning score).

« **Reply #2 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:44:40 PM »

Mark:

Merion is around 7000 yards now, so it's not the shortest course.

« **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:45:49 PM »

This all turns on what you mean by "challenge."

If the idea is to keep scores high, hell let me place the pins at 6500 yard Pasatiempo and I can guarantee an over-par winning score. It's all about how evil one wants to make a setup... and Pasatiempo surely isn't alone in this. Grow the rough high, speed up the greens to crazy stimps, make them concrete, the boys would be "challenged."

It would also be pretty stupid as they'd never hit a club longer than a 3-hybrid. And that goes for pretty much any shorter course.

So if you mean challenge every part of the game - driver, fairway woods, all irons, along with short game - sadly it is gonna take more than 7500 yards.

That is UNLESS you simply don't care what the winning score is. But then again, if the pros blister Dornoch for a score of 265 or something over 72 holes, were they really "challenged"?

I'd say one can argue they were regardless of score... but it's always going to be a tough sell.

« **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:47:30 PM »

Prairie Dunes is 6700 or so yards and was no pushover in either the Women's, Senior Open, or the college events played there.

« **Reply #5 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:50:36 PM »

I don't think a course's greatness has anything to do with whether or not it can challenge Tiger. I think there are likely a bunch of challenging duds. Swinley is a great course, but no way it would challenge the pros .

« **Reply #6 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:52:15 PM »

At 6300yds and par 68 Rye can be pretty challenging especially in a breeze.

It has long been stated the toughest shots at Rye are the second shots to the 5 par 3s!

« **Reply #7 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:54:41 PM »

Henry - I'd say that goes without saying - ability to challenge Tiger MIGHT be a factor in greatness, but is far from necessary.

I remain curious about courses like Prairie Dunes, Pasatiempo, Rye, heck Merion before they lengthened it... yes the pros and top ams likely do not or did not or would not achieve low scores there, but is that all we mean by "challenge"? Is that the only facet to this?

I ask because as I alluded to before, I am imagining how the pros would play a tricked-up Pasatiempo... sure they would not go low, but they also wouldn't hit anything more than a 3iron (outside of very few exceptions). Is it really a "challenge" if they never hit a wood?

« **Reply #8 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:02:24 PM »

Huck:

None of them have actually hit a wooden club in 15-20 years.

« **Reply #9 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:09:33 PM »

Tom H - even a short links course can challenge the best provided there is a breeze. No breeze and a dry 7500yd links
is a pushover for the best.

« **Reply #10 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:24:10 PM »

Now now Tom D. of course you are right, but you also know what I mean.

And Mark, that is a good point... conditions do change things a lot, especially on links courses. But still... can a course exist that challenges all facets of the game and is NOT 7500 yards?

That's what I am trying to understand....

« **Reply #11 on:** June 18, 2009, 04:02:47 AM »

Mark,

When I first read the title of the thread, I thought you meant as in Bethpage is a great course even though its so long

Last years KLM Dutch Open at Kennemer at a length of 6,600 yards. Darren Clarke won with 16 under, then scores where 12, 11 then 9 under, and from recollection of watching it, none of the guys were really killing it. It was just great to watch some of Europe's top players playing an old Harry Colt course, being challenged but making birdies also. So maybe we don't have to have 7,000 yards plus every week on tour if the course is right?

Cheers,

James

« **Reply #12 on:** June 18, 2009, 04:13:45 AM »

Also remember some of these courses are 7300 yards and a 70 par, that translates to 7750 yards if it was a straight 72. Surely a cheaper option to keep a golf course more playable for all would be a tournament ball with limited flight.

« **Reply #13 on:** June 18, 2009, 06:03:32 AM »

Apparently Justin Rose played all 5800 yards of New Zealand Golf Club last week and didn't break par...

« **Reply #14 on:** June 18, 2009, 06:28:19 AM »

Quote from: Adrian_Stiff on June 18, 2009, 04:13:45 AM

Also remember some of these courses are 7300 yards and a 70 par, that translates to 7750 yards if it was a straight 72. Surely a cheaper option to keep a golf course more playable for all would be a tournament ball with limited flight.

+1

Just think of all the great courses that could host top level tournament golf again.

« **Reply #15 on:** June 18, 2009, 06:41:19 AM »

What would a championship winning score be relative to par at Rye?

With the first the only par 5 being 487yds for the pros the par would be 67. Level par being 268 is a tough ask. The lowest winning score in the Darwin Salver is 277.

« **Reply #16 on:** June 18, 2009, 10:42:52 AM »

One thing to remember if you have shorter courses, easier courses, wider courses more people will make birdies, but it is still hard to make better than a birdie, tougher golf courses demand more exacting shots and the cream rises to the top.
Player A ( a top amateur may shoot 64 around Rye but that same performance might translate to a 70 around a Turnberry set up for the Open) Player B (a top pro might shoot 64 around Turnberry set up for an Open) but its hard for him to be 6 better around Rye ie a 58. The real top courses do need these tougher courses.

« **Reply #17 on:** June 18, 2009, 10:47:25 AM »

Royal Worlington and Newmarket.

Dont know how many times i found myself with less than a 100 yards in, with a good lie in the middle of the fairway and still no way of getting it near the hole with those greens

« **Reply #18 on:** June 18, 2009, 11:46:27 AM »

I contend that we continue to underestimate how good today's professional player really is. They absolutely pillage any course under 6500 yards with anything short of a contrived set-up.

Bogey

« **Reply #19 on:** June 19, 2009, 05:38:24 AM »

Quote from: Michael_Hendren on June 18, 2009, 11:46:27 AM

I contend that we continue to underestimate how good today's professional player really is. They absolutely pillage any course under 6500 yards with anything short of a contrived set-up.

Bogey

Then how do you explain Rose not breaking par at New Zealand GC, which is about 6000 yards? Having putted the greens last week, they are true but nowhere near tour pace - the perfect combination for making plenty of putts. If it was purely about distance, he should have torn it a new arsehole.

« **Reply #20 on:** June 19, 2009, 06:08:00 AM »

Quote from: Tom_Doak on June 17, 2009, 06:02:24 PM

None of them have actually hit a wooden club in 15-20 years.

Have you missed Mike Clayton's articles about Geoff Ogilvy?

« **Reply #21 on:** June 19, 2009, 08:15:42 AM »

Quote from: Scott Warren on June 19, 2009, 05:38:24 AM

Quote from: Michael_Hendren on June 18, 2009, 11:46:27 AM
I contend that we continue to underestimate how good today's professional player really is. They absolutely pillage any course under 6500 yards with anything short of a contrived set-up.

Bogey

Then how do you explain Rose not breaking par at New Zealand GC, which is about 6000 yards? Having putted the greens last week, they are true but nowhere near tour pace - the perfect combination for making plenty of putts. If it was purely about distance, he should have torn it a new arsehole.

Scott- The reason can only be he played badly, Justin on form would 'make a new hole!'. He played 4 holes at our club before it rained and was +7, had he continued he may have made half a dozen birdies, they do score badly sometimes.

« **Reply #22 on:** June 19, 2009, 01:48:45 PM »

What about Royal Lytham? 6882 yards to a par of 71. The winning score in the Open is, on average, no lower than anywhere else, there are four par 4s under 400 yards, three of those very short, and a 494-yard par 5.

« **Reply #23 on:** June 19, 2009, 02:53:10 PM »

Isn't Cypress Point in the 6600 range? Or are we talking about courses for holding majors? If the latter, I would submit Sunningdale--Old for your consideration. Hard to think of many appreciably better golf courses out there.

« **Reply #24 on:** June 19, 2009, 03:24:46 PM »

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on June 17, 2009, 05:45:49 PM

This all turns on what you mean by "challenge."

If the idea is to keep scores high, hell let me place the pins at 6500 yard Pasatiempo and I can guarantee an over-par winning score. It's all about how evil one wants to make a setup... and Pasatiempo surely isn't alone in this. Grow the rough high, speed up the greens to crazy stimps, make them concrete, the boys would be "challenged."

Thomas, you and I have been in agreement with this one for a long time in regards to Pasa.

News:

Mark_Rowlinson

Phil Benedict

Tom_Doak

Tom Huckaby

Jeff_Brauer

henrye

Mark Chaplin

Tom Huckaby

Tom_Doak

Mark Chaplin

Tom Huckaby

James Boon

Adrian_Stiff

Scott Warren

Jamie Barber

Mark Chaplin

Adrian_Stiff

Josh Stevens

Mike Hendren

Scott Warren

Chris Kane

Adrian_Stiff

Mark_Rowlinson

Tim Gavrich

David Stamm

An Error Has Occurred!