[jeffwarne]

Given that there is an element of luck involved in every respect my answer is "none of them" !

Fun to play, but as a fair test of golf I would say not the right thing... IMHO

What defines a "test of golf"?

Is knowing the course not a "test of golf"
Is being able to line up and execute a shot with a target in the mind's eye only-- not a "test of golf"?
Shouldn't a player have to choose between rough and fairway occasionally in order to get a preferred look or angle?
Shouldn't a player gain an advantage by playing a creative run up shot into a green running hard away from him?(despite the fact that he subjects himself to possible "bad luck" on firm but somewhat inconsistent turf.)
Isn't it a skill to recover successfully after such bad luck?

I played a nine hole course yesterday(twice) which has 8-9 blind shots and is quite firm.
Yet only one ball was lost (mine ) and we all knew it was not a good drive and that with the slope of the terrain that it most likely run into trouble
Losing the ball was bad execution, not "bad luck"
We played with a mid level handicapper who hit it where we told him to, he embraced the course and he played quite well.
Every ball hit ended up just about where we expected it to(the course wasn't quite as firm as usual so I had to adjust my advice and my own play accordingly.)

Would you want to date a woman who you knew everything about in the first 30 seconds?

This is why PGA tour golf is so freaking boring.....
we spend multimillions building long,huge hard courses embracing the "all out in front of you --look hard-play easy"mantra(for the pros not the schlubs)  to show whose di#$% is biggest..... then we make sure they're "fair"...
When we start determining champions on courses that are fun and challenge the mind as well, then perhaps golf can find its' way back from the new dark age where greens have to stimp at 13(with the requisite fair flat pin placements), bunkers have to be "fair", and ROUGH has to be the proper strain of bermuda so it's fair and predictable

[Tim Gavrich]

David--

I know I'm not the Tim you were addressing re: the third at Yale, but in order to have a view of the green, one needs to drive the ball well inside 100 yards, which is quite a poke to an increasingly narrow fairway from any of the tee boxes.  And as for the 10th, I don't know to whom I would ever recommend intentionally laying up short of the downslope in order to have a look at the green for the second shot, since it's pushing a 200 yard shot from that area.  I don't know what player would rather face that shot than a mid- or short-iron up the hill, frankly, so that "option" strikes me as a bit of a red herring.  Nevertheless, it's a fantastic golf hole.

[David Harshbarger]

Tim G.


Fair enough on the layup option on Yale 10.  But knowing that hole, at what point would you make that trade for the longer shot?  160?   150?  Uneven lies for the shorter approach?

Or better, at what point would you find the options balanced between taking a less advantaged clear shot and a blind shot?

Dave

[Mike McGuire]

I like partial blindness off the tee.

For example you can see a very short tee shot but a hill obscures the normal landing area. On a  super long tee shot the ball "appears". So if you can see it off the tee you crushed it. Everyone else is equal, even if there is a 40 yard difference.

Some how keeps things equal, at least for the walk to the hill.

[Sean_A]

Sean, is that a trade off you accept willingly?  Is it "fair" to ask the player to accept the rough as the penalty for a look?  It certainly is uncomfortable thinking about it.

David

I didn't explain myself well.  The 15th offers a better angle from the right rough, but it is blind from there.  The fairway is a worse angle, but offers partial visibility and it is quite close to OOB.  I don't mind the rather odd tradeoff, but I would make the fairway much wider to include the best angle to the right.  The hole is even more complicated, for reasonably long hitters, there is a large hollow up the right that if reached makes it very difficult to reach the green even with the good angle.  I know it all sounds rather funky, but the hole is very good - did I forget to mention the drive is blind?

Ciao

[Michael Goldstein]

JeffW +1

I love the Machrie.

[Matt Wharton]

To answer Anthony's original question I have always enjoyed the challenge of the blind 2nd shot!

[Jim Franklin]

Jim:

Had many blind shots after looking at your shoes at Dunes.  Do those count???  LOL

I use them to my advantage. A little wiggle here while my opponent is putting usually does the trick .

[David Whitmer]

My preference as well is for the blind shot to be the second shot on a par 4. But, I like it best when it comes at a point in the round where, from another hole, I have had the opportunity to see where on the green the flagstick is. The thrill for me is to climb the hill and see where my golf ball has ended up, but if I am hitting and have absolutely no idea where the flag is, that to me is not as much fun. I might as well play with no flagsticks in the greens.

[jeffwarne]

JeffW +1

I love the Machrie.

Michael.
I really liked the Machrie.
And it has lot of blind shots which were enjoyable (actually one of the few courses I've played more than once on a trip)

What I didn't like was the unplayable/unfindable rough right off the narrow fairways (not so much on the blind holes but on all the other holes)
Just needed another pass on each side of the fairway with the gang mower

[Anthony Gray]

  Great thread. I for one love the blind par 3. 15 at Cruden Bay is one of my favorites. The Holy Grail of golf is the hole in one and what better to add to the excitement than a blind par 3?

  Anthony

[jeffwarne]

David

Yes, rather oddly Burnham's approach to 15 is a better angle, but blind, from the short right rough compared to the fairway.  

Jeff

Other than your love of forced marches and your uncanny robot-like precision, I believe you are my kindred spirit of golf.  I tend to agree with you more than anybody about what golf should be.

Ciao

Sean,
I seem to recall I had 21 putts in our round at Ashburnham so the "precision" was from 40 yards and in.

As far as forced marches,I think we spend a similar amount of time on pub and golf, I just like to spend the" pub time" on extra golf
That's what those canned Guinesses are for!

On the blindness subject, it seems that very rarely does a good shot go unrewarded, it's the marginal one to the bad side(which may not be known the first time around)
Nearly always there are certain clues that direct the player who is not overly aggressive off the tee and some sort've aiming rock and/ or yardage indicator (or the player can simply walk up)

Strokesavers give me a headache but can be useful in the rare case that there are no visual clues to the first time blind shot

[Will Lozier]

Given that there is an element of luck involved in every respect my answer is "none of them" !

Fun to play, but as a fair test of golf I would say not the right thing... IMHO

There is a large element of luck on every golf shot.  And, since fairness is relative, what is unfair about a blind shot?  

[Melvyn Morrow]

What is unfair about a Blind Shot - why have hazards on a course, they are all unfair. But could it be down to the skill levels of those complaining about them, who seem always to be looking for the easy options and not quite grasping how the game of golf is played.

See what aids can do to a potential good golfer; have him fearing the shadows cast by the blind shots.

Melvyn 

[Dave McCollum]

Having just recently played Lahinch, RCD, Baltray, and other notables, I’m a fan.  I think I like blindness for the novelty and respect for tradition, in the sense that it takes guts for a club to resist the complaints of golfers crying about fairness in an age where blindness is avoided to a large degree in modern designs.   Hit the shot and say “let’s see what we got for Christmas.”  A caddie at RCD said “all shots are blind if you keep your head down.”

[Eric Smith]

  What do you like better? The blind tee shot,the blind second or the blind par three.

    Anthony

Anthony,

Probably either the blind par 3 or the blind tee shot. But which to choose?? I've had two aces; the first was a drop shot hole where I watched it hit right, skip once and suck back into the hole. The other was a blind uphill shot on a hole aptly named 'Blind Tom'. When I hit it, the guy playing with me, who was the head pro, said it might be an ace! Got to the green, saw the 'scud' ball mark 10 feet in front of the hole and knew where this one was! I guess I've always been more proud of that one which came during a very good round where I was playing with my boss and a couple of the members and I aced the most difficult 3 on the course. I'm going to go on record and say that my love for blind par 3's started here at the NLE Deane Hill Country Club in Knoxville, Tennessee!

I also like blind tee shots (in moderation), and just experienced one of the most thrilling of them all -- The Sahara at National Golf Links, where I sent my tee shot sailing over the sahara bunker, drawing ever so slightly, then found my ball resting on the putting surface 25 feet from the hole. A momentous occasion! and one that I've often dreamed about. The next hole, the Alps was confounding and torturous, though I somehow managed to skank my third shot (also uphill and blind) to a foot and made par the second time around! An absolute brute of a hole and I reckon it is the longest 420 yards I've seen.

[Tim Martin]

David--

I know I'm not the Tim you were addressing re: the third at Yale, but in order to have a view of the green, one needs to drive the ball well inside 100 yards, which is quite a poke to an increasingly narrow fairway from any of the tee boxes.  And as for the 10th, I don't know to whom I would ever recommend intentionally laying up short of the downslope in order to have a look at the green for the second shot, since it's pushing a 200 yard shot from that area.  I don't know what player would rather face that shot than a mid- or short-iron up the hill, frankly, so that "option" strikes me as a bit of a red herring.  Nevertheless, it's a fantastic golf hole.

Wrong Tim-Right answer. I agree completely with your thoughts on both 3 and 10. Two years ago they had the NCAA Regionals at Yale and I saw none of the studs trying to throat the drive into that sliver of fairway on 3 that would give you a look at the green. Anything that gets to the bottom of the hill is 7 iron in at most regardless of the angle. It makes no sense trying to lay back on 10 because even if you don`t make it over the downslope you can still lay up short of the greenside bunker and wedge on for your third. Even if you hit 10 in regulation the fun is just beginning depending on where you are on the green.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()