[Ian_L]

If we want a major championship venue that is also a great golf course, and if we want the modern professional to be rewarded for shot-shaping, strategy, and the like, doesn't it follow that this course should be extremely long?

We all love 60-yard wide fairways, but if you give a professional a 7,200-yard course with that kind of width, he will drive and pitch all day long.  If you make the course 7,800-8,000 yards long, however, the golfer will have to think about his position in the fairway, or he will have very challenging long iron shots into par 4's.  It seems to me that the only way to make the professional think (the way we want him to think), is to make courses very long.

This is all, of course, assuming that nothing can be done to roll back technology.

[Sam Morrow]

To make the pros think make a course shorter and tighter. See Harbour Town

[JESII]

Ian,

Maybe, maybe not. First and foremost you'll need firm greens with some contour. More than any other characteristic, this combination helps to dictate the players strategy as far back as the tee shot.

If a course has those two features, the total length can vary pretty wide depending upon where it falls in my opinion.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ian,

Pete Dye's been saying what you're saying for years. Just check out the back (championship) tee yardages at places like Kiawah and Whistling Straits for example.

[Sean_A]

Hmmm, I think the answer is TOC and not necessarily at its most recent longest length.  But then one can't often go far wrong by citing TOC in architectural matters.

Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think it has to be stupid long. Anything sub 400 they think about driving now, the fives have to be 600 and the short holes about 200 thats about 7500 for starters... which if you look most weeks is about what they are. They need to be narrow as well.

[Jamie Van Gisbergen]

I guess it depends on what you want out of the course. And how much whining you are willing to take from the players. 600 yard par 5's without something odd about them are reachable, or nearly reachable in two shots for much of the field; at most the 3rd shot will be a half-wedge. So a 600 yard par 5 is roughly equal to a 350 yard par 4 now.

How about this, give the pro's their 525 yard reachable par 5, but have the green be the size and shape of a VW Beetle. Give them a 560 yard par 4 with a large moderately contoured green. About a 120 yard drop-shot par 3, like #7 at Pebble and a par 3 of about 300 yards like at Oakmont.

Problem is, courses are not designed to test these guys. I have seen people complaining about the green on #7 at Augusta for the entire time I have been reading here; pro's hit 8 and 9 irons into that green, its not overly difficult for them. Guys are hitting 3 wood-6 iron over the green on 13, let me tell you something, that hole is not a par 5 anymore. Greens that were designed to accept 6 and 7 iron shots are now being approached with wedges and the challenge isn't there for wedge shots. #8 at Pine Valley has a good green to accept and challenge wedge shots.

Tell you what, just copy Pine Valley, add about 400 yards to it, with about 100 of those added yards being on #6 to bring Hell's Half Acre back into play, and call it a day. Why is Pine Valley so great? Its called variety, so few modern courses have variety. Why? Because they need to "make" some specific yardage and the only way people know how to do that is with a configuration like Adrian gives. I don't understand it, but whatever. So, how about 7500 yards, with 3 or 4 par 4's of 350 yards or less and table-top size greens, 2 or 3 par 4's of 500+ yards and one of those over 525; par 3's ranging from lets say 125 (and a tiny green) to 290; and par 5's from 550ish (reachable) to however long you feel comfortable making them bearing in mind that anything less than like 750 yards can be reached in 3 shots by probably 95% of the professional field. So...that's how to design a major championship course.

[Matthew Petersen]

What Pebble showed last year is it doesn't matter how long or wide the course is. If you get small greens, bake them, and throw in some wind they'll have all the trouble they want.

[Jud_T]

Of the Championship courses I've played, the ones that I feel are also enjoyable for us mere mortals are TOC, Carnoustie and Olympia Fields North.  

[Jason Topp]

I took a crack at assigning yardages to William Flynn's description of an ideal course. 

These distances assume relatively flat ground and little wind and I am a little fuzzy on the old terms for irons but used my best guess.  The result is a 7585 yard par 71 or 72 course - about what they normally play on tour now.  Doint the same exercise for my game (250 yard drive) yields a 6450 yard course for me - about the length I like to play.


Dividing this up into holes there would be say four short holes ranging from the mashie to the full wood shot. 170/195/225/250 (130/160/190/225)
One real three-shotter not merely a hole somewhere over 500 yards.  - 650 (550)
Two drive and full wood shot holes, one with a big carry on the drive as the premium with an easy entrance to the green, the other with accuracy on the drive but with the premium on a big carry for the second shot. 550/600 (470/470)
One drive and high spoon shot, accuracy off tee and carry to the green.  - 550 (450)
One drive and full shot to narrow entrance and slightly ter¬raced green.  - 500(450)
One drive and high midiron carry to green.  450 (420)
Two drive and full midiron run to green with narrow entrance. 450/450 (420/420)
One drive and high mashie iron carry to green. 430 (380)
One drive and mashie to narrow entrance. 430 (380)
One drive and mashie all carry to green.  430 (360)
One drive and mashie niblic to island green.  400 (330)
One drive and run up on narrow terraced green straight way. 450 (330)
One drive and elbow or cape type with premium on length of drive.  400 (320)


Total 7585

[Jamie Van Gisbergen]

Jason Topp--I will do a similar effort later today when I have more time, but a couple of problems I see with your effort are firstly with variety, only slight variety in the par 3's and very little variety in the par 4's. Second, 250 will not play more than a long iron for most on the tour; guys were hitting 2 iron on the 8th at Oakmont in the most recent US Open played there. And finally, 650 is not a true three shot hole for most out there nowadays. Bubba Watson, Dustin Johnson, and others can possibly reach that green in two shots depending on wind and turf conditions and its at most a PW for the rest of the field; 750 yards is probably a better number for that hole, say a 290 yard drive, 260 yard 2nd shot, and a 200 yard 3rd shot into the green. 650 would leave a 100 yard flip lob wedge.


Edit for hole configurations, I am not going to use the Flynn configuration because it doesn't quite yield the variety I want:
Par 3's- 135, 175, 210, 295
Par 5's- 750, 575 (one reachable, one full three shots)
Par 4's- 545, 500, 480, 465, 450, 430, 410, 380, 360, 345, 330, 300
Total yardage= 7135

Now, lets see if I can find a 'template' hole for how I wish these to play, one that many will recognize.
135= #7 at Pebble, true, #7 is shorter, but I mean the concept. Very short, but one that will really pucker the pro's
175= #12 at ANGC
210= #12 at Old Macdonald
295= #8 at Oakmont
300= #17 at Oakmont
330= #8 at Pine Valley
345= #6 at Pacific Dunes (not a direct comparison, I know, but a fair one)
360= #2 at Pine Valley  
380= #4 at Pebble Beach (another indirect comparison)  
410=  #3 at Pebble Beach (inland Cape hole)
430=  #8 at Pebble Beach (in strategy only, can't really replicate the cliffs)
450= #7 at ANGC  
465= #13 at Pacific Dunes  
480=  #17 at The Old Course
500=  #11 at ANGC
545=  #15 at ANGC (in it's present configuration as a reachable-by-most par 5/4)
575=   #18 at Pacific Dunes
750= #6 at Pine Valley (as I suspect it was originally intended to be played)

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think its quite hard to design a golf course today suitable for championship golf and normal play. The tee shot range is probably 100 yards per hole just for the men, that itself means some tees wont sit in a great place from the previous green, also at longer holes the second shots wont fit equally as well for both standards. We need width for lesser players whilst championship golf requires precsion and set up is tighter although I guess some of that could eb done with mowing heights. Tournament courses might be par 72 but the true SSS or par is very often 77 or 78. A lot these pro's are +10 handicap!

[Phil Benedict]

It will be interesting to see how Pinehurst #2 stands up to the pros in 2014 without the defense of high rough.  If they get firm conditions that may turn out to be the ideal course.

[Sean_A]

Phil

Yes, I was thinking about Pinehurst as a good example of an inland championship course.  Like TOC, a major part of the defense is at the greens and so f&f conditions make a huge difference. 

I think many of the suggestions are selling championship golf far short in thinking of protecting par as the goal rather than offering interesting choices which invariably lead to interesting recoveries.

Ciao

[Peter Ferlicca]

Look at Augusta, you just need to build WILD greens with tons of undulation and having them running at major championship speeds 13+.  Trust me if you are in the rough and have to a hit an approach in the right section, or an automatic 3 putt bogey, you will try to focus on hitting the fairways more.  The pro's will complain like crazy, even if the greens have the same amount of undulation as Augusta, but putting is the only way to put defense on the pros.  They hit is too good and too far nowadays for any length to be an issue.

[Jamie Van Gisbergen]

Look at Augusta, you just need to build WILD greens with tons of undulation and having them running at major championship speeds 13+.  Trust me if you are in the rough and have to a hit an approach in the right section, or an automatic 3 putt bogey, you will try to focus on hitting the fairways more.  The pro's will complain like crazy, even if the greens have the same amount of undulation as Augusta, but putting is the only way to put defense on the pros.  They hit is too good and too far nowadays for any length to be an issue.

Or you could make some of the holes shorter, like 8 at Pine Valley, or 14 at Pebble Beach, barely out of reach, and make them hit a wedge into a green the size of mattress...?? Just a thought.

[Peter Ferlicca]

I agree, but the only problem with that is pin positions.  If you literally have a green that is extremely small with a lot of players stomping their feet around all day on it you will have tons of spike marks.  Try to get 4 different pin positions and in a good area of the green will be a tough enough task.  PGA tour pros are all pre-madonnas, they expect everything to be perfect for them to shoot the best possible score.  If anything hinders that possibility they will complain a ton. 

[Jamie Van Gisbergen]

I agree, but the only problem with that is pin positions.  If you literally have a green that is extremely small with a lot of players stomping their feet around all day on it you will have tons of spike marks.  Try to get 4 different pin positions and in a good area of the green will be a tough enough task.  PGA tour pros are all pre-madonnas, they expect everything to be perfect for them to shoot the best possible score.  If anything hinders that possibility they will complain a ton. 

How much did they complain about #14 at Pebble last year? I know they complained about the green in general, but I don't remember them complaining too much about the surface itself, or am I wrong?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()