Real Strategy in putting (and chipping)?!

[TEPaul]

We've talked some in the past on here about a course with a few greens like NGLA's that could be considered what we've termed "greens within greens". When NGLA is in tournament set up it's very likely that if you happen to land on the wrong green within a green (on the wrong part of the green) your chances of getting near the hole is nil and your chances of two putting are not good (unless you sink a fairly lengthy second putt). We've also talked about how this kind of thing would probably not be acceptable (to most golfers) if built today although certainly many of us admire this kind of thing at NGLA because it has serious and sophisticated ramifications.

In essence this kind of "greens within a green" create a very interesting strategic situation and that would be to simply try your darnest not to hit that particular wrong green or part of the green. This could get very interesting strategically as the thinking golfer may have to look for some very interesting and unusual places to miss the shot when considering plan B if your plan A shot does not work out!

But recently I've seen a few new courses (neither open yet) that might take this basic idea to a more interesting level. In a way I might call it a compromise of the true "greens within a green" concept. That would be that although it seems that if you're on the wrong part of one of these greens there might not be a reasonable way to two putt but on much closer inspection (and experience) there just may be. And I think that these greens were actually thought through this way and designed and even tested for this. The fascinating thing is the way to go about it would be immensely creative! Things like putting many many degrees away from the hole to bring the ball back on some subtle unpinnable slope or contour somehow.

I'm not sure if I've ever seen anything like this and I don't know if I've ever heard of anyone designing such a thing into a green. But if this is what's been done I think it could be fascinating and would and could take some real imagination, creativity and also guts.

This kind of thing is different than NGLA's occasional "greens within a green" where two putting from the wrong place is not likely. With this kind of thing it would be likely but it would be very hard to figure out how to do. But if you could figure it out it would be doable. There may even be a couple of dramatically different lines to end up in the same place.

I might call this real and true strategy in putting! There might actually be some very real and dramatic risks and rewards too in the various strategic choices--and all from on the green! Who has heard of something like this before?

[Bill_Spellman]

Mr. Paul-
     I have seen the idea of "a green within a green" in a couple of instances (or at least I think I have) , although I never considered it in quite the same way. The old course at the Golden Horseshoe (R.T.J. with a Rees re-do) had sections in them where a makeable putt needed to be in the same section. The greens have never been fast that I can remember, so the strategy aspect was never at the level that you are refering to, but there were areas of the greens that needed proper thinking. The other one were some of the original greens at Kingsmill's River Course (Pete Dye) . If memory serves the eighteenth may have had seven levels and pockets in them. Whether this was done to create the idea of a green within a green (agwag) I can't say. Unfortunately I don't think these greens survived the renovations that each have undergone.  

[Rich_Goodale]

Tom

I think I know what you are getting at and also think I know at least one of the new courses to which you refer.  To me this is all about gravity and the "strategic" solutions to the putting/chipping conundra you speak about all relate in one way or another to some sort of "punchbowl" effect on or around the green? Is this not so?

If so (and I very much think it IS so), why have so few great punchbowl greens been built?

Rich

PS--I do not consider the 16th at NGLA to be a great punchbowl green.  Too simple and trivial.

PPS--there are some great ones, over on the auld sod.  The 5th and 6th at Elie, the 8th at Dornoch, the 11th at TOC, the old 9th (NLE) at Troon, etc.

[John_D._Bernhardt]

Rich, can you elaborate on this. I am very interested in this subject but really do not have any greens I can think of to contribute with.

[THuckaby2]

PS--I do not consider the 16th at NGLA to be a great punchbowl green.  Too simple and trivial.

Really?  And you consider 8 Dornoch to be a great one... hmmm... you know how I love to battle with you on all things NGLA, but this time I truly request education.  I don't see how 8 Dornoch is a great one and 16 NGLA is simple and trivial... is it just because 16 NGLA is more OBVIOUSLY a punchbowl, given how much more severe the slopes are?

That I could understand. Not agree with necessarily, but at least understand.

Cheers!

TH

[Rich_Goodale]

om

I just remember Geoff and my caddy taking out a few balls on the 16th after we had played, rolling them up various slopes from various angles and watching them all settle into the middle of the green.  Interesting, but not non-trivial.

[RJ_Daley]

Tom, if I understand you correctly, and what Rich has expanded upon, then I would think that #7 green at Crystal downs might qualify.  I also think, Stranz's work at Tobacco Rd at #s 7, 8, 15, 17 are in that realm.  Basically, if one has a boomer with distinct terraces, and one or both terraces has a punchbowl effect, that might qualify.  RTJ was noted for two and three terraced greens like Greensboro where the K-mart was played.  Didn't that course have exceptionally large and terraced greens with that "greens within a green" idea.  

Seth Raynor seems to have a bit of this greens within a green as did Langford work I've seen.  

I recently played a Bob Lohman new course here in Wisconsin (The Creeks at Ellington) that has some wildly terraced greens and a couple have soap dishes, which add to the fun of not likely making a two putt if on the wrong portion.  

I'd ask Mike DeVries if a "green within a green" is what he had in mind at a few of the complexes he built at Kingsley Club.

Of course cut/conditioning of turf-speed has a bit to do with this equation too.  And, the turf selection and cut of the surrounds to offer designed putting-chipping optionable areas around the greens is also part of the overall picture; isn't it?

[Rich_Goodale]

John B

Firstly--who won the Gridiron ("American Football") game on Saturday.  Was it your beloved Ocelots, or whatever, or was it those nasty Charity Workers ("Volunteers")?

Vis a vis the "punchbowl effect" (soon to be tripping off the GCA tongue as easily as "maintenance meld") consider the putt from the back of the 8th green at Dornoch to a front right pin position.  The direct route is up the hill to the left, dying the ball 3-4 feet above the hole and hoping it trrickkles down stiff.  In the real world, either you hit it too hard and are left with a 3-6 foot downhill/side hill slider, or you hit it too soft or too right and end up 10-15 feet below the hole.  However, if you hit the putt 10-15 feet RIGHT of the hole, at the right front bunker, and sling it around the slope at the front of hte green, you can end up lose with far less risk--IF you have the imagination and the balls to try the shot.  Some thing on the 11th at TOC, putting back to front.  Try to lag it, or try to put long and towards Strath bunker, just to the top, and then let it trickle back down to the pin?

Each of these strategies on these two holes carries a significant element of risk, which I don't see in any putting/chipping option on the 16th at NGLA ( Smiley face for Tom H )

[A_Clay_Man]

I not sure if it's a new concept and I site the 5th at CPC. When told to avoid long, I skulled the wedge   over. With the front pin my green caddy sugested one approach I chose another and ended up in the same place, near the hole. So, if the good Doctor used the gunsight effect perhaps it is just up to each of our creative abilities to see the other option.

[John_D._Bernhardt]

Rich, would the 11th at Pebble or the 5th at cypress achieve this end . neither is what I would think is a punch bowl green. The fighting tigers prevailed to become SEC champions. and yes to the cheers of the football world, mess up the horrible BCS plan.

[TEPaul]

Rich:

The two examples you mentioned at Dornoch and the old course are definitely the idea. And I suppose you're right that some bowlish dimension or part of one would be the most logical way to design this sort of creative putting green. But from the look of some of the greens that I'm speaking of a punchbowl exactly is not always necessary--but probably some form of bank combined with other things like a serious bump in one green. You can really let your mind wander on this type of thing though and to actually design various ramifications of this would really take some time, and testing and as RJ mentioned the correct mix of green speed etc. Actually a few others may look more like just swales--and that I wouldn't call remotely a punchbowl.

I would also assume that to perfect this kind of thing a super or his crew would definitely have to be familiar with a whole variety of things to set the pins correctly.

This obviously would be something probably exclusively for a private course as the experience factor would be high. The reason I thought of this is I was standing on a particular green and I asked if a section (swalish section) was pinnable--I was told absotutely it was. But if one tried to put from where I was standing directly to the pinnable section in the swale (maybe about 15 ft) the ball would likely have gone right off the green. But I was told that if I putted up the hill almost 90 degrees away from the flag and to a contour maybe 20ft away the ball would curl and come back down the swale to the pin. I might be a little off but this would turn something like a 15ft straight putt that you would just tap and still would go off the green into about a 40ft putt in an entirely different direction.

The reason I found all this fascinating is when I first looked at this I thought it just might be a "green within a green" where there was really no way to get from here to there without a serious comeback putt but was told there was a way that was designed and could I see it and figure it out.

I just found the entire concept fascinating and impressive!

Regarding the green on NGLA's #16. To just look at that green and roll a ball around on it and call it simple and trivial is missing just about all of the essence, creativity and cleverness of C.B. MacDonald, in my opinion. That is one green that should not be looked at in a vacuum. I would probably call it relatively simple too if it happened to be a the end of a hole that came down to it and the entire green was completly visible from the rest of the hole.

But MacDonald married that totally blind punchbowl green with a narrow center ridge fairway (from which the green is still blind) with two massive fairway bowls on either side from which the aiming point to the green is generally a cloud if you can find one!!

So that's a green that simply cannot be looked at in and of  itself, it has to be looked at in what connects to it from the approach shot area. It is totally brilliant compensation, in my opinion. If MacDonald happened to marry a couple of totally blind fairway approach areas with a blind "greens within a green" style green or even a extremely complex punchbowl green it would be much less than enjoyable, in my opinion--it would be sort of ridiculous! Take my word for it you can have putts on #16 that are extremely intense like something 30ft downhill you just have to blow on!

[Rich_Goodale]

JB

The closest I ever got to the 5th at CPC was the parking lot, and the only good thing to come out of that reconnaisance mission was a sterling silver fork with the CPC logo which we dug out from the dirt (there must be a story in there somewhere!).

The 11th at Pebble, on the other hand, I know well and love well (unlike the GCA gourmands who refuse to appreciate its simplicity and subtlety), and you are right, old Tiger Baiter, that its green fits the Paul/Goodale mold very, very well.....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale and Tom Huckaby,

I think the 16th at NGLA has been severly, negatively impacted by increased green speeds.

At super fast, almost every shot comes to rest in the same spots, whereas when the greens were slower, the come to rest shot pattern was more diverse.

What do you think ?

[Rich_Goodale]

Pat

I (like the Huckster) only played it once and played it when it wa very, very slow, so we don't know, and defer to those like you, who do so.

However, you are very right that punchbowl greens and 10+ stimpmeter's do not match.  Too fast and everything goes to the middle and it's more like miniature golf than the real thing.   Same for crowned greens, by the way, even if you didn't ask.........

[TEPaul]

Nah, even when #16 is real quick the ball may go to the middle side to side some, particularly when it gets high up on the left side but it sure doesn't go to the middle much  back to front so there is plenty to do if you didn't hit a good shot and hit it close!

The approach is total feel anyway, no matter how well you know NGLA because an approach is always blind! So you need a ton of experience to even get any feel for how it will turn out because who has ever seen their approach react on that green? Rolling a ball or putting it or watching the caddy roll a ball around that green isn't going to tell you all that much about an approach shot!

Pat, don't tell me you've stood above that green and watched group after group play that hole to see how approches react on that green---cuz I'm not gonna believe you!

[THuckaby2]

Rich - mark this day.

I understand what you're saying and concur re all the above.  No further battles, not re this issue.

One clarification though:

Yes, we played NGLA as slow as it can get... but it doesn't take much imagination to think of it fast - our afternoon round right next door showed how NGLA usually is.

I get what you guys are saying re these greens, in any case.  Very interesting.  Not many like this exist, period....

TH

[Matt_Davenport]

Tom,
During my first trip to ANGC for "The Tournament" in the Spring of '99, I witnessed what you are speaking of during the practice rounds.  With a pin on the front--lower level-- of the 18th green, many players will practice from above the hole, on the upper level, by putting out to the fringe on the right side of the green to allow the slope to feed the ball down to the hole.  It is amazing to witness the skill of these players as they routinely putt to tap-in range.  Seeing these events unfold, many in the crowd urged the players to putt directly to the hole.  In doing so, these putts finished 8-10 feet past the hole.  Strategy?  You bet!

I hope the 18th green wasn't changed dramatically, because the challenge of this golf hole is in the putting surface and its surrounds.  Some bunker work might be nice though...  I know the hole was lengthened, but that may be topic for another thread.

[Lou Duran]

I wonder how Ben Hogan would respond to this thread.  Is it being suggested here that a course with many of these types of greens would be a good thing?  Would these greens be limited to only holes where the approach shot is played with a short iron?  If not, what would happen to the speed of play and enjoyment of the game?  Do most golfers (low and high handicappers) remember more the good shots they hit during a round, or the number of three putts?  I suspect it is the latter.    

[Doug Wright]

TE,

Don't know if his other courses like have these features (I assume Pacific Dunes does) but Doak's High Pointe has a couple of great greens that feature the strategy you describe: #8  and #13. #8 is a large two tiered green with great slope in the back that can do funny things to a golf ball. The one time I played it I was on the front and had a helluva time figuring out how to get the ball to a back left hole position. Here's the description of #13 green from the GCA Course Description:  

"The single best green built in America in the past sixty years. A tremendous amount of thought and work went into the design of this green. The creative player can use the bold contours to help with the recovery shots around the green. Sometimes, the best way to get the ball close to the hole is to play almost 90 degrees away from the hole. If the green is firm, the back bunker is in play. Like a lot of Doak's greens, it warrants being played on numerous occasions to gain a full appreciation of the options available to the golfer."

Don't know who wrote the hyperbolic first sentence but it is a pretty good green   Also, #16 is cut from the same cloth.

I think greens like this are good if used in moderation (as in all things?). Overuse IMO conceals other weaknesses that may be present in the design.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Are you saying, on all those occassions that you played NGLA, that when you are walking up to, and standing on the 17th tee, you ignored the play of the group behind you, hitting their shots to the 16th green ?    

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I had a long post about that to Rich and it didn't submit and I lost it, but that's what I said. On #16 not only do I not remember ever seeing an approach shot from the group behind me I don't even remember seeing a group behind me.

At NGLA the only approach shots to greens I can remember are #1 (there's always a wait on #2 tee), #8 green from #9 tee and definitely #12 green from #13 tee and #13 green from #14 tee. Other than that the course always seems to flow and I can't recall seeing anything behind me.

I'm not very observant that way when I play golf and is probably one of the reasons I like to walk courses rather than play them to really analyze architecture.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

One day, a slow day if you can believe it, we're playing # 16,
leave the green and are almost to the top of the hill when we see one fellow, from the bowl, pull hook a terrible shot, it hits high on the hill, above the left green side bunker, bounces and bounces and bounces and ends up a foot from the hole.  The next golfrer sends a rifle shot right at the pin, it almost goes in the hole, hitting the flag stick and ending up about 20 feet above and to the left of the pin.  When they get up to the green, they both walk to the ball next to the pin.  
When the first golfer identifies it as his ball, he says to the fellow who hit the pure shot, see, I told you I hit a better shot than you did.  

Who can argue with results, only the enlightened few.

Some good viewing spots:

1  green from 2 tee
5  green from 6  tee
6  green from 7  tee
9  green from 10 tee
10 green form 11 tee
11 green from 12 tee.
Wear a helmet on 13 tee from # 12 fairway
13 green from 14 tee
14 green from 15 tee
16 green from 17 tee
17 green from 18 tee
18 green from 1   tee

I guess this says something about the routing and proximity of green to next tee.

I am so intriqued by George Bahto's comment that the 9th and 18th greens came so far back into the fiairway that I am definitely going to study that this year.  Let's get there early thursday.