Is 14 at Pebble among the elite par-5's in the world?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thanks Adam.  I was thinking that was a probable hole location for the US Open.  There will be some diabolical holes locations on that green especially when the USGA gets the green speeds up to 13-14 on the Stimp.

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat,

At the 2002 U.S. Open, the relatively flat greens at Bethpage Black allowed Tim Moraghan, the USGA’s former director of championship agronomy, and his staff to shave the grass as closely as possible. By Sunday afternoon, unofficial Stimpmeter readings were approaching 15.


Ron, having served with the USGA for over 20 years, including being involved in course set up to a minor degree, along with officiating USGA tournaments, I've never encountered an "unofficial" stimp reading.

Could you tell us what differentiates an "official" stimp reading from an "unofficial" stimp reading.

In addition, could you tell us what "approaching" means ?
Does it mean that the stimp reading went from 10 to 11 or that it was well above 14 but not quite 15.

Lastly, who took these "unofficial" stimp readings and where were they taken while the field was still competing on the golf course ?

[JC Jones]

Ron,

I tried to warn you

[Tim Bert]

Jordan

If you take #2 as a par 4, which it never would be in my world, then that's a mighty fine set of par 5s with the remaining three. To be fair I don't think that #2 is as bad as some though I wouldn't call it world class. Sand Hills quickly comes to mind as a course with 3 better par 5s. I'm sure there are a few others, but to me the par 5s at Sand Hills are the strong suit of an all-world course. 
The best set I have ever played.  I would put the set at Pebble a half-notch or full-notch below, whatever that means!

Tim,

What tees did you play on # 2 ?

Sand Hills par 5's better than PBGC ?  ?  ?   Do you feel that # 1 and # 14 are world class par 5's ?   Or should they be 4's ?

Have you played PBGC ?
If yes, from what tees ?
Tees selection might alter one's views on how a hole plays.

Patrick - I have played 3 rounds at Pebble Beach (2 different visits) and 4.5 rounds at Sand Hills (1 visit.)  I don't profess to be the expert on either but based on my experience I prefer the par 5s at Sand Hills.

A few caveats - I'm not a strong player, so some can dismiss my comments right off the bat.  On the trips to the courses in question, my handicap was probably between a 9 and a 13.  It was on the lower end of that spectrum at Pebble and the higher end at Sand Hills.

On these trips I would have been hitting my best drives 240-250 (wind neutral) with an occasional ball that might fly farther.  I played both courses from one set up from the tips (my card from Sand Hills shows 6,400 and my card from Pebble shows 6,350.)

So, the 14th at Sand Hills was playing 475, which was certainly not a par 4 for me.  It was a nice challenging 4.5, probably more like a 4.75 due to the bunkers and tiny green.  My distance left me just a hope of making it to the wonderful steep fall-off in the fairway if the wind was just right.  I only put one ball on the green in two on that hole, and it was my buddy's ball that I accidentally mis-played.  Oops!  

Throwing out #2 (but not dismissing it because as I mentioned I don't think it is a bad hole) then I'd stack up the other three in the following way:

Pebble #6 vs. SH #14 - The short, reachable yet still challenging par 5 where the 2nd shot is the most exciting on each.  The are probably also my favorite par 5s at each course.

Pebble #18 vs. Sand Hills #1 - While these occur at opposite ends of the round, they are both the "hold your breath, and pray you can ignore the scenery on your tee shot" kind of hole.  They are both mid-length par 5s from where I played.

Pebble #14 vs. SH #16 - The long par 5.

I could see a case for Sand Hills winning each one of those match-ups, though I could also accept anyone that viewed Pebble as winning those head-to-head match-ups.  For me, Sand Hills #14 wins by a slight nose though the difference is negligible.  I prefer Sand Hills #1 to Pebble #18 and I think that Pebble #14 vs. Sand Hills is close to a toss-up, though many Sand Hills fans will call me crazy for that one.

Hope that gives you some perspective where I'm coming from, even if you don't agree.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim,

The reason I asked is because there's a back tee on # 2, probably 60-80 yards short of the 1st green.

Many golfers never get to experience the hole from that tee, thus, # 2 can seem like a rather short, easy par 5.
But, from the back tee, it's a very good par 5 for the golfing universe.
All too often # 2 is evaluated from a forward tee, and I think that's unfortunate.

Similarly, there's a neat back tee on # 3 where the hole plays substantively different from the forward tees.

As to Sand Hills, you chose to order the comparison to suit your conclusion.
Why not take the par 5's in the order you play them, accepting your 3 against 3 comparison.
# 6 PB vs # 1 SH, # 14 PB vs # 14 SH and # 18 PB vs # 16 SH.
How would you evaluate that comparison ?

Preference is in the eye of the beholder, so I can't question your preferences, only your powers of observation and analysis 

[Ron Csigo]

Thanks Adam.  I was thinking that was a probable hole location for the US Open.  There will be some diabolical holes locations on that green especially when the USGA gets the green speeds up to 13-14 on the Stimp.

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat,

At the 2002 U.S. Open, the relatively flat greens at Bethpage Black allowed Tim Moraghan, the USGA’s former director of championship agronomy, and his staff to shave the grass as closely as possible. By Sunday afternoon, unofficial Stimpmeter readings were approaching 15.


Ron, having served with the USGA for over 20 years, including being involved in course set up to a minor degree, along with officiating USGA tournaments, I've never encountered an "unofficial" stimp reading.

Could you tell us what differentiates an "official" stimp reading from an "unofficial" stimp reading.

In addition, could you tell us what "approaching" means ?
Does it mean that the stimp reading went from 10 to 11 or that it was well above 14 but not quite 15.

Lastly, who took these "unofficial" stimp readings and where were they taken while the field was still competing on the golf course ?

Pat - My comments are based on an article that I read in Links Magazine relative to US Open green speeds. 

 http://www.linksmagazine.com/best_of_golf/features/u.s._open_too_fast_green_speeds_stimpmeter_print.html

[Ron Csigo]

Ron,

I tried to warn you

Thanks JC.  Please let me know if I should start waving the white flag.   

[Tim Bert]

Patrick - I didn't view #2 as a pushover or too easy for me.  The barranca was in the perfect spot for me, even from the 460 tee, that if I didn't hit the fairway I couldn't feel good about trying to carry it.  That left it as a three shot hole for me, even if it was Driver, 9-iron, wedge.

I didn't intentionally order the comparison to suit my conclusion.  I ordered them so we had a short par 5, a medium par 5, and a long par 5, which I think is more comparable than just taking them the order they occur in the round.  Either way, re-ordering the comparison will change the individual outcomes, but not how I feel about the entirety of the comparison.  As a sum of the parts, the Sand Hills par 5s win out for me.  Still, here's how I view the head-to-head you suggested:

6 PB vs. 1 SH - I'll take #6 by an eyelash.

14 PB vs. 14 SH - I'll take Sand Hills by a fairly wide margin.  I like 14 PB a lot, but 14 SH is one of my favorite golf holes anywhere as evidenced by my premature selection in the fantasy golf hole draft.

18 PB vs. 16 SH - Close call.  With the surrounding scenery maybe PB, but in isolation as a golf hole I think I lean toward 16 SH.  So, by the Huckaby system I take PB 18.  By the Mucci system I take SH 16.  Since I'm having the discussion with you, I'll go SH.  

[Michael Moore]

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat -

Frank Thomas, inventor of the modern Stimpmeter and former Technical Director of the United States Golf Association, indicates that the greens were measured at 15 feet on Sunday of the 2002 United States Open.

[Patrick_Mucci]

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat -

Frank Thomas, inventor of the modern Stimpmeter and former Technical Director of the United States Golf Association, indicates that the greens were measured at 15 feet on Sunday of the 2002 United States Open.

Michael,

In 2002 Frank Thomas had NOTHING to do with the USGA having retired in 2000-2001, so I wouldn't cite his views as The Gospel.

Frank Thomas didn't invent The Stimpmeter, it was invented by Ed Stimpson in 1935, in 1976 Frank merely crafted the stimpmeter out of aluminum.

[JC Jones]

Ron,

I tried to warn you

Thanks JC.  Please let me know if I should start waving the white flag.   

Depends on whether you enjoy the banter.  If you're like me and you get a kick out of it, by all means, never give up.  Though you are basically having a conversation with self proclaimed inhabiter of an asylum

[Michael Moore]

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat -

At the 2007 United States Open at the Oakmont Country Club, Jim Hyler, who was at the time the Chairman of the United States Golf Association Championship Committee, had this to say.

" . . . we ask for green speeds here of 13 and a half to 14 1/2 on the Stimpmeter, and that's exactly where we are, and we are going to work to try and maintain that green speed throughout the week . . . "

Isn't that interesting? Can you believe they would have the greens so fast?

[Jordan Wall]

I love the green because it affords good shot with a good birdie chance, and mediocre shots are penalized on par with how far off the shot was.

Jordan--

I would not say that's true.  Relative to the pin we saw today, a ball that lands ten feet left and a ball that lands ten yards left will end up in the same place.  Likewise, a ball that lands twenty feet right and a ball that lands forty feet right and twenty feet short will end up in the same place.

I'd love to see where the original green edges were.  The effective size of that green may well be under 1000 SF.

Tim,

There is no way the original size of that green was under 1,000 square feet.  That is beyond miniscule; Riviera's tenth has the smallest green I've ever played and I believe that to be around 2300 SF.

But, your first statement is not true.  JB Holmes put it ten feet left and below the hole, for an easy birdie putt.  The reason Goydos went down the hill was because he played the wrong shot, an almost impossible one, and paid the price.  If players go right, and take an extra club, they'll be on the back right of the green and not come down the slope.  That would be the prudent play, las what Dustin Johnson did.  However, it was the players who played to get exactly pin high, a foolish shot considering the risks of the hole location, that came back to the front of the green when they missed right.  They got exactly what they deserved.

On top of that, I've seen the hole many times in person and played it several.  I wouldn't call myself an expert on PB but I can tell you that the green punishes or rewards shot relative to there quality.

What surprises me is that more players didn't lay up to 95 yards, and spin it back.  That would have been the easiest play and would have afforded a great birdie chance considering the green has little slope on the top right portion.

[Jordan Wall]

Tim Bert,

To say Sand Hills has par-5's equal or better to those is high praise indeed.

I have not seen them in person, but if true than they would be in the elite class of par-5's in the world.


What other courses pose a set of elite par-5's?

How do they compare to those at Pebble Beach?

Shinnecock?

[Tim Bert]

Jordan - I might have this backwards, but I think Tim G was hypothesizing that the original green size was bigger than the current size.  His 1,000 sq ft reference was his view of the "effective" size of the top portion of the green that was in play on Sunday.

[Patrick_Mucci]

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat -

At the 2007 United States Open at the Oakmont Country Club, Jim Hyler, who was at the time the Chairman of the United States Golf Association Championship Committee, had this to say.

" . . . we ask for green speeds here of 13 and a half to 14 1/2 on the Stimpmeter, and that's exactly where we are, and we are going to work to try and maintain that green speed throughout the week . . . "

Isn't that interesting? Can you believe they would have the greens so fast?

No, I don't believe it and neither does Sir Isaac Newton.

At 15 on the stimp, a ball will NOT stop rolling when the slope of a green is 3+/- degrees, and the greens at Oakmont have 3 degrees or more of slope in them.

It's a matter of physics, not unscientific opinions.

If' you'd played Oakmont, surely you would have seen the fallacy in Mr Hyer's statement and wouldn't have been foolish enough to post it on GCA.com

I guess, seeing the error of your ways on Frank Thomas, you're seeking another source.

[JC Jones]

Pat,

Did you playin the US Open at Oakmont?  Were you there?  Did you perform a stimp test on the greens?  Do the greens have a consistent 3% slope or arey just 3% in places?

[Michael Moore]

Pat -

Why are you discussing a stimpmeter reading of 15, when you asked about, and got an answer to, readings of 13 and 14?

[Patrick_Mucci]

When has the USGA ever gotten green speeds up to 13-14 for a U.S. Open ?

Pat -

Frank Thomas, inventor of the modern Stimpmeter and former Technical Director of the United States Golf Association, indicates that the greens were measured at 15 feet on Sunday of the 2002 United States Open.

I'd like to know who measured those speeds during the round and on what greens.

Something I didn't factor in, but should have is the following.

At 15 on a stimp, with a 3 degree slope the ball will NOT STOP rolling.

That's without the influence of any wind.

On June 16th, in Farmingdale, from noon until 6:00 pm, winds were fairly steady out of the southwest at 15 mph.

When you factor wind into the equation, at 15 on the stimp, the ball will NOT STOP on green slopes of less than 3 degrees where the wind is quartering or behind the ball.

Hence, I think most references to stimp speeds of 15 on greens with 2 to 3 degrees of slope is more myth than fact.

[George Pazin]

Can't speak knowledgeably as to stimps and slopes, but I can say that 14 is the hole I most look forward to playing at PB someday, followed closely by #6, then 7-8-9-10 as a group.

I dread 18 because that means the round is almost over...

The only par 5s I can think of off the top of my head that I'd enjoy watching the big boys play as much are Oakmont #12 and TPC Sawgrass #16, and of course ANGC #s 13 & 15.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat -

Why are you discussing a stimpmeter reading of 15, when you asked about, and got an answer to, readings of 13 and 14?

To be accurate, something you conveniently overlooked, you cited readings of 13 to 14.5.

I don't buy the 14.5 reading on Oakmont's greens either, it's contrary to the laws of Physics, unless you're insisting that the Laws of Physics don't apply in your kitchen or at Oakmont

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jordan,

I don't agree with Tim's assessment of the Par 5's at SH and PBGC.

While I like the Par 5's at SH's, I think PB's offer more diversity and challenge and, as a whole, are a better grouping.

I especially like # 1 at SH, I think it's a great introduction to the golf course and I think # 16 starts the begining of a nice finish containing a par 3, par 4 and par 5, but, the group at PBGC is really outstanding.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

wonderful, strategic,demanding three shot par five.
The drive is not too demanding but where you place the lay up CRUCIAL.....that is really what makes the hole so demanding.
The green itself needs to be restored in size to what is was about ten yeras ago, as Faldo said on TV yesterday.
I am not convinced the area back left is being dealt with in the correct manner after watcjing yesterday's debacles...I will be keen to see what they do in that corner in June.

[JESII]

Pat,

What does that study say about the slope of a green and a stimp speed of 11 feet? What slope is required for a ball to roll endlessly at 11 feet on the stimp?

Obviously there are areas on Oakmont's greens with slope in excess of the number you just stated?

What did they do?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Pine Valley's par fives are rather hard to beat.....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

What does that study say about the slope of a green and a stimp speed of 11 feet? What slope is required for a ball to roll endlessly at 11 feet on the stimp?

Jim, it's between 4 and 5 degrees, probably closer to 4.5 degrees, and that's without the influence of any wind.

Obviously there are areas on Oakmont's greens with slope in excess of the number you just stated?

What did they do?

I would imagine that they avoided those areas.

Can you picture being above the hole on # 2 when the hole is cut high left ?
Can you imagine chipping, putting or pitching from above that hole location ?
I'm sure that there are others equally dicey.

JC and MM, have you ever played Oakmont ?