If "A" purpose of a golf course is to provide a thorough examination of

[Patrick_Mucci]

The golfer's game, is the overall quality of the architecture determined by how many of the 14 clubs the golfer uses during their round ?

Yesterday, I had a good driving round and had to play from the white tees in a club match, and for non-recovery shots i used:

Driver
3-Wood
2-iron
5-iron
6-iron
7-iron
8-iron
9-iron
P-wedge
S-Wedge
Putter

I did not use my

3-iron
4-iron
L-Wedge

For recovery I did use my L-Wedge

On your most recent round, which of your clubs didn't you use, not counting recovery ?




3-

[Scott Warren]

Well, I only carry 12 clubs, so I'm cheating. And for a while I have wanted to have a set of irons made with 6* increments in the irons so I can replace 4i-PW + 52* and 56* wedges (nine clubs) with 24*, 30*, 36*, 42*, 48* + 52* and 56* wedges (seven clubs), leaving only 10 in the bag (driver, 5-wood and putter).

For non-recovery shots today I used.

Driver
5-wood
4-iron
6-iron
7-iron
8-iron
9-iron
P-wedge
52* wedge

I didn't use a 5i or my 56* wedge for non recoveries, though the 56* is strictly used for bunker shots and pitching inside 50m so it doesn't really get "non-recovery" usage.

So basically all clubs bar one that are used for non-recovery shots got used.

[Bart Bradley]

Pat

For a single round so much of this depends on wind, hole location, lie, etc.

It would take many rounds to determine how much variety existed in your club usage.  

Bart

[Sean_A]

Not that I think a measure of a good course is determined by how many clubs I used, but here goes

Driver x14
2 hybrid x5
5 x3
6 x2
8 x2
9 x4
PW x2


I rarely use a sand wedge without it being a recovery so I will x2 for using that club.

I didn't use my other SW or my 7 wood (quite unusual).

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bart,

I'm not so sure I agree, and if a course has it's tactical balance dramatically altered by wind direction, is that an indication of a flaw in the design ?

I think of Seminole, and how differently the individual holes play when the wind changes direction, yet, the overall tactical balance remains virtually intact.

Isn't that A mark of great architecture and routing ?

[A.G._Crockett]

Patrick,
Whatever I might have used yesterday, I am impressed that you own, carry, and use both a 2 iron and a 3 iron.  I haven't used even a 4 iron in years, and I'd have to think really, really hard to figure out when I last owned a 2 or a 3 (Eye 2's, I suppose?).  My hat is off to you.

Out of curiosity, what make/model are your irons?

[Patrick_Mucci]

AG,

Up until last year they were all  beryllium Ping Eye 2's

In the hopes of improving ball flight and distance my current set, 3-iron thru P-wedge are Diablo Callaways.

Just yesterday I was considering going back to all Pings.

I used my 2-iron twice, on #'s 4 & 18 at Mountain Ridge, hitting both greens from 195 and 180.

[Anders Rytter]

I hit very few drivers, but anyway.
I  have
Driver,
Spoon,
19* Hybrid
4i
5i
6i
7i
8i
9i
PW (46*)
48* Wedge
52* Wedge
56* Wedge

I used everything today, although the 48* was only used after i mis-hit my seccond shot on a par 5, going for the green but ended up way short.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Yesterday I used the following clubs in my round:

Driver x11
3 wood x3
21 degree raylor x3
4
5 x3
6
7
8
9
PW
52
56
60 x6
Putter (too many times to admit)

There were instances I judged the wind incorrectly, that being said the only club I would not have used is the PW.  Also on the 18th I used the 7 iron because my match was over and my friend saw a slope behind the hole and wanted to try and use it to bring the ball back to the hole...naturally I did the same and over clubbed to utilize the feature but I wouldn't have done so otherwise.

After yesterdays round I can assure you that good architecture does not necessarily result from the use of every club in your bag.  I wouldn't be surprised if the owner of the course placed a requirement on the architect stating every club in the bag must be used because of the belief that a great golf course uses every club in your bag. 

Maybe it can be said a course w/ poor architecture only requires the use of a few clubs, but even that I disagree with.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe,

If you hit driver - wedge. 9 and 8 iron, you would declare the course a well designed course ?

You would see NO flaw in the architecture ?

[Tim Martin]

Sheehy and Mucci are the only two guys left that carry a two iron and individually the only guy on their respective side of the pond. I am still playing the Eye 2 plus although recently I have been pining for something new.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe,

If you hit driver - wedge. 9 and 8 iron, you would declare the course a well designed course ?

You would see NO flaw in the architecture ?

Looking at the scorecard for Bandon Preserve I could see myself using just those clubs.  Admittedly the driver would probably stay in the bag, but maybe a bunt into the wind.  I do get your point though and chances are very high I would not consider the hypothetical course you describe a well designed course.

I still however stand by my statements.

Just because you only use 56, PW, 8, 6, 4, 2, driver on a hypothetical course can you say with certainty it was a poor design?

I think the distinction in the examples is your hypothetical course is probably very one dimensional.  My hypothetical course leaves potential for variation in thought and types of shots played.

From my real world example I played Trump National yesterday.  Before you asked the question it hadn't occurred to me that I hit every club in my bag.  In my mind it was primarily a driver wedge course where you better be down the middle, but I went back and ran through the shots I hit and found out I hit every club in the bag.

To contrast this with another LA area course, I could honestly play Rustic Canyon and at the end of a round look back and realize I only hit Driver, 3 wood, 21 degree raylor, 6, 8, PW and 60 degree.


On the topic of the 2 iron, the guy I play most of my golf with hits a 2 iron frequently.  The weird thing in my mind is he plays Pings but the 2 iron in his bag is a Callaway.

[A.G._Crockett]

Patrick and Joe,
Just a thought for both of you.  I just sent a set of well-used i5's (over 1000 rounds) back to Ping for "restoration".  They checked the lofts and lies, retumbled/refinished/repainted the heads, and regripped 9 clubs for $17 per club; returned in under two weeks.  They are now in gem mint condition, and I have I feel like I have a new set of clubs for $160 plus shipping.  Seems like both of you might enjoy these results with a set of old friends.

[Ken Fry]

Pat,

I don't agree with your original premise.  A golf course is only as good as making me hit every club in my bag??  I've never liked that analogy.  How can any architect plan on what any player may hit for clubs from any number of different tees?

It can be argued on a course's par 3 holes it helps to have a nice mixture of yardages or holes that require different clubs based on elevation change and predominant wind direction.

As you mentioned, a great golf course provides an overall tactical balance and a great routing.  Does that include working the ball with fades and draws?  Forcing a player to decide on risk/reward options?  Playing running shots when the course plays fast and firm as opposed to exact placement when the course plays soft?

I don't hit every club in my bag when I go to Crystal Downs, but it's still one of the best golf courses in the world.

Ken

[A.G._Crockett]

Pat,

I don't agree with your original premise.  A golf course is only as good as making me hit every club in my bag??  I've never liked that analogy.  How can any architect plan on what any player may hit for clubs from any number of different tees?

It can be argued on a course's par 3 holes it helps to have a nice mixture of yardages or holes that require different clubs based on elevation change and predominant wind direction.

As you mentioned, a great golf course provides an overall tactical balance and a great routing.  Does that include working the ball with fades and draws?  Forcing a player to decide on risk/reward options?  Playing running shots when the course plays fast and firm as opposed to exact placement when the course plays soft?

I don't hit every club in my bag when I go to Crystal Downs, but it's still one of the best golf courses in the world.

Ken

Ken,
Patrick started with a question, not a premise. 

To respond to that question, I'd say that while requiring that EVERY club in the bag be used certainly isn't a guarantee of great GCA, it's a start.  Maybe more to the point, it would almost certainly be an example of poor GCA if approaches required or allowed the same clubs over and over while other clubs went unused.

In any case, using all (or almost all) of the clubs in the bag is a lot more fun and a lot more interesting, and those are integral qualities of good GCA, aren't they?

[Steve Lang]

  So, in non-tournament golf, one should play from the tees that enable the use of the most clubs or the tees that afford the most fun and rate teh gca accordingly?

[A.G._Crockett]

So, in non-tournament golf, one should play from the tees that enable the use of the most clubs or the tees that afford the most fun and rate teh gca accordingly?

Steve,
You have carried this to its illogical extreme. 

A "thorough examination" is "A" purpose of a golf course.  One way to measure thoroughness of the examination, in part, might include using a wide variety of shots, right?  Not the only way, but worth considering, right?

We aren't talking about green contours and bunkering now, nor routing, nor a bunch of other things that are critical.  Just taking a look at one way to help assess GCA.

[Jim Nugent]

Joe,

If you hit driver - wedge. 9 and 8 iron, you would declare the course a well designed course ?

You would see NO flaw in the architecture ?

Sounds like ANGC in 1997 for Tiger Woods. 

[Pat Burke]

1. Dr  pw              10.    3 hyb
2. Dr  lw               11.    Dr   9
3. Dr  5 wood        12.   12  3 hyb
4. pw                   13.     3 wood   7
5. Dr  sw               14.    3 wood  7
6. Dr  5 wood        15.    Dr   lw
7. Dr  pw              16.     6
8. 4 hy                 17      DR
9. Dr  5 iron           18.    DR  3 hy

Dr, 3wood, 5 wood, 3 hy, 4 hy, 5, 6, 7, 9, pw,sw,lw     
Coto de Caza south   Only missed 8 iron!    Little surprised to be honest

[Jim Sherma]

Saying a course makes you use every club in the bag is great... unless you break one - I had the graphite shaft in my 6-iron snap under the grip and it seems like every other shot I've seen while waiting for the shaft to come in has is between 165 and 175  .

[Jason Thurman]

The answer to the original question is no, but it's also not a bad indicator. However, simply hitting all 14 clubs doesn't nearly equate to a thorough examination of the golfer's game.

After all, how much difference is there between a 3 and 4 iron? Or an 8 and 9?

To get to a thorough test of the golfer's game, a course must also put a premium on CONTROL with those clubs. It must ask for fades, draws, running shots, aerial shots, high shots, low shots, power, and touch throughout the course of the round. Whether you hit a fade with a 3, 4, or 5 iron is a bit irrelevant, but a thorough test would certainly ask for a long iron fade at some point. And also a long iron draw.

Ultimately, just hitting a shot with all 14 clubs is only scratching the surface of "thorough."

[Matthew Rose]

I played a 6700 yard par-71 yesterday and used everything except my 4-iron and my 2 hybrid (17 deg).... although the par-3s are generally the reason. I find the typical city muni course tends to have all the par-3s at 180-200 yards to compensate for the fact you hit wedges into pretty much every other hole.

So I hit 3 hybrid (21 deg), 8-iron, 5-iron, 6-iron to the four par-3s.

I had a 7-iron into one par-four (450 yards) and the rest were 9s or wedges.

The three par-fives were all 530-550, which is reachable for me under the right conditions. Two were into the wind so I couldn't get there. I was 20-30 yards short in two on both occasions after perfect drives. Of course, on the one that was downwind, I hit it in the rough and had to lay up.

[Steve Burrows]

The answer to the original question is no, but it's also not a bad indicator. However, simply hitting all 14 clubs doesn't nearly equate to a thorough examination of the golfer's game.

After all, how much difference is there between a 3 and 4 iron? Or an 8 and 9?

To get to a thorough test of the golfer's game, a course must also put a premium on CONTROL with those clubs. It must ask for fades, draws, running shots, aerial shots, high shots, low shots, power, and touch throughout the course of the round. Whether you hit a fade with a 3, 4, or 5 iron is a bit irrelevant, but a thorough test would certainly ask for a long iron fade at some point. And also a long iron draw.

Ultimately, just hitting a shot with all 14 clubs is only scratching the surface of "thorough."

I lean toward this explanation as well.  The mere fact the every club in the bag is used is perhaps on a vague indicator of the quality of the golf course itself.  It may speak to the variation in shot distances, but this is more of a mathematical solution than a design solution.  It speaks nothing to the diversity of experience on each hole, which is probably more appropriately related to the job of the designer.  It also doesn't account for the conscious decision to hit a running 5-iron as opposed to a fully struck, aerial approach with a 6-iron, for example.  Even over the course of 18 holes, I would be surprised if a designer could accurately account for all such scenarios, especially across all ranges of player ability, nor do I believe they should necessarily make it a priority to do so.

[Patrick_Mucci]

The answer to the original question is no, but it's also not a bad indicator. However, simply hitting all 14 clubs doesn't nearly equate to a thorough examination of the golfer's game.

Then what does equate to a thorough examination of a golfer's game ?

After all, how much difference is there between a 3 and 4 iron? Or an 8 and 9?

To get to a thorough test of the golfer's game, a course must also put a premium on CONTROL with those clubs.

That's inherent in the "thorough examination"

It must ask for fades, draws, running shots, aerial shots, high shots, low shots, power, and touch throughout the course of the round.

Would you list just five (5) courses that place that demand on the golfer ?

Whether you hit a fade with a 3, 4, or 5 iron is a bit irrelevant, but a thorough test would certainly ask for a long iron fade at some point. And also a long iron draw.

Ultimately, just hitting a shot with all 14 clubs is only scratching the surface of "thorough."

It's beyond "scratching the surface", it establishes the foundation.

[Jason Thurman]

The answer to the original question is no, but it's also not a bad indicator. However, simply hitting all 14 clubs doesn't nearly equate to a thorough examination of the golfer's game.

Then what does equate to a thorough examination of a golfer's game ?

After all, how much difference is there between a 3 and 4 iron? Or an 8 and 9?

To get to a thorough test of the golfer's game, a course must also put a premium on CONTROL with those clubs.

That's inherent in the "thorough examination"

It must ask for fades, draws, running shots, aerial shots, high shots, low shots, power, and touch throughout the course of the round.

Would you list just five (5) courses that place that demand on the golfer ?

Whether you hit a fade with a 3, 4, or 5 iron is a bit irrelevant, but a thorough test would certainly ask for a long iron fade at some point. And also a long iron draw.

Ultimately, just hitting a shot with all 14 clubs is only scratching the surface of "thorough."

It's beyond "scratching the surface", it establishes the foundation.

Pat, to thoroughly examine a golfer's game, we have to go well beyond ballstriking. But that's a given. A thorough test of ballstriking would do what I suggested - require different shot shapes, trajectories, and a balance of finesse and power.

That being said, I doubt there are five courses in the world that truly can THOROUGHLY test a player's ballstriking in a single round. Figure that most courses require somewhere between 18 and 22 full swings for the very good player, not counting drivers. That's a very small sample size. Over time, and varying wind conditions and playing conditions, there are plenty of courses that could provide that kind of test. Pebble Beach comes to mind among those I've played, as does Erin Hills and Wild Horse.

I agree with you that it establishes the foundation for a thorough examination, but your original question was "Is the overall quality of architecture determined by the number of clubs a golfer uses during their round?" The answer to that question is no, because if I can just hit a stock draw with every club the course hasn't provided that thorough examination. It's a start, but there's more to it than that. I don't think there's a neat, formulaic way to measure whether a course has provided a thorough examination.