News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #25 on: September 02, 2012, 11:49:50 AM »
Lack of trees.  I like trees and sometimes I like them when they get in the way and I have to work the ball around them.  I like courses with out trees as well.  Both are fine and not mutually exclusive.
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Mark Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2012, 04:48:17 PM »
proximity to water.

Too many holes in my mind are viewed as great just because they are near the ocean, even though in many cases the ocean doesnt come into play.

Any examples? Don't say 16 at Cypress.  I already got in trouble for that.


No it clearly comes into play there.

Here are a few just off the top of my head (dont hammer me if i miss a few).   Not saying any of these are bad holes,  most are pretty good, just not anywhere near as good as some people here think they are.   I know some people here think Pac Dunes 4 is the best hole at Bandon so that will create the most consternation.

Pebble 13 (only comes into play from the tips)
Arcadia 13
Pac Dunes #4, 12
Whistling straits 12
Chambers Bay 15 or 16th



Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2012, 04:50:22 PM »
strategy.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2012, 05:28:05 PM »
Ben says:
Quote
2) "Kickplates" or "sideboards" or whatever else you want to call it.  I understand and agree that Ballyneal #7 may be the coolest second shot in golf for the different options it provides with that huge mound.  But we pay too much attention to external contour around here like it is the sign of architecture genius.  Sometimes, it's just the right place to put a green and not rocket science.

Ben, your leave sojourn to DR to assist the crew on floating and seeding the Doak course... does that inform your opinion that 'sometimes, it's just the right place to put a green and not rocket science'?

I really can't agree that external contour is over-rated.  I'm not talking "Rees'es peices" willy nilly manufactured mounding, but either locating a greensite to take advantage of a natural and interesting surrounds of hummocks and hollows, ala Ross, or shaping a greensite and surrounds to present interesting external noses, humps and hollows.  This sort of design does not seem to me to be over-rated, IMHO. 

In fact, I wonder if you have been watching the TGC telecast today (or see the rerun tonight) where they have Brad Faxon talking about the changes to #18 green, where they shrunk it some 60% from the edges right up to the pond and the entire left side, to a series of graded out noses and hollows playing up to a raised green pad.  Hanse and Faxon apparently collaborated on making this approach on the final hole much more interesting.  They telestrated the scope of the work done to design-reshape (as opposed to find a natural situation) and in my opinion shows the real value of great GCA using the external green surrounds shaping to present some of the best of GCA attributes. 

So, in my opinon, one can't over-rate green surround shaping by design, or siting as a fortuitous find where one can locate an interesting green.  Then, it all comes down to the maintenance meld and HOC of how the interesting surrounds can be accentuated to add more to the fun factor.  That is why I love Wild Horse and its ilk so much.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Matthew Essig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2012, 06:46:09 PM »
I agree with Ben:

"1) Templates.  Get over it already.  They're cool.  So was Deion Sanders.  But no need to trot him out every time we need to sell something to middle aged football fans.  Just like we don't always have to trot out templates to explain golf holes."

and with Sean:

"My guess would be templates and strategy (which are linked) are drooled over too much; especially when we consider that it isn't clear a Biarritz or Short are really all that great in concept."

Sean said it perfectly. They are drooled over too much on this site. A course does not need a (reverse) redan, biarritz, short, alps, or any other template to be considered great.
"Good GCA should offer an interesting golfing challenge to the golfer not a difficult golfing challenge." Jon Wiggett

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2012, 06:51:51 PM »
Matthew, you'll need to point me to where anyone ever said a course did need any of those holes to be great.

Fact is they represent great strategies and fun shots and in the right place produce great holes.

What CBMac / Raynor / Banks courses led to to feel temllate holes are overrated?

Matthew Essig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2012, 07:19:33 PM »
Just cause templates are overrated in my opinion, doesn't mean I hate them. I agree that they are great strategic holes, but it seems like you can't go 2 threads before a template is mentioned or talked about on this site.
"Good GCA should offer an interesting golfing challenge to the golfer not a difficult golfing challenge." Jon Wiggett

Mark Saltzman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2012, 07:27:25 PM »
Using a template name, where appropriate, is a simple way to convey a lot of information in language everyone understands.

Colin Macqueen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2012, 07:45:56 PM »
Matthew,
I wouldn't mind seeing templates mentioned MORE on this site in the vein of the "Did it ever work?"  thread. 

I think a a series of threads defining the templates, discussing accepted or preferred strategies, dissecting their construction and arguing the toss on playability in days of yore versus now would be excellent.
Once the 10-12 (?)threads had run their course one could put them together as a neat wee essay ala Ian Andrews descriptions on his web page.

Scott .....why be a shrinking violet! Can you not initiate this for me!?

Cheers Colin
"Golf, thou art a gentle sprite, I owe thee much"
The Hielander

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2012, 08:42:58 PM »
RJ and Scott,

Perhaps instead of overrated, I should have said over-discussed. 

But I do think templates do an injustice to holes that were never meant to be discussed in those terms.  A lot of this is art.  Attaching a simplistic view of a golf hole waters down what maybe a unique concept.


Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2012, 09:21:04 PM »
Ben,

I do think templates do an injustice to holes that were never meant to be discussed in those terms.

What holes do you have in mind?

jim_lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #36 on: September 02, 2012, 10:43:42 PM »
I think I agree with most of the posts so far, especially about the overemphasis of the look of bunkers and the proximity of water. I could write a few paragraphs on both. Instead, I would like to offer a few that I don't think have been mentioned.

Pictures:   I am astonished at how often posters on this site rely on photos to offer judgements about courses. A lot of great courses don't look
               so great in pictures. Just look at the ads in the back of some of the magazines and you can find some mediocre courses that look
               great in photos.

Wind:  Many seem to think that wind makes a course. Excessive wind can be a much bigger problem than little wind. Courses that require wind
          can be pretty ordinary when then wind blows too little or too much. Most great courses don't depend on wind.

Elevation changes:  There are many outstanding courses on relatively flat ground. I don't know any with excessive elevation changes.

Creativity of design:  Too often new courses are criticisized for not having enough originality. What's wrong witht the tried and true "pure golf ?
                               The desire to be new and different can produce some crap.

Re strategy:   Sure, I like to see a golfer have to think on the tee, but most strategy starts with the second shot based on where the tee sholt
 comes to rest.

"Crusty"  Jim
Freelance Curmudgeon

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2012, 03:32:15 AM »
Jim

I think you are overlooking that if wind is present it will blow from different directions, thus making the same course, great or not, a totally different animal.  This has to be a good thing if variety/variability is at all deemed important in golf. 

I use photos to make judgements on where I want to play and for discussion purposes.  Call it an evil necessity. 

Creativity - that is a pandora's box.  One man's creativity runs circles around another's pure golf.  No creativity no architecture.

I couldn't agree more about flatish ground.  Ideal golf doesn't require anything like 50 foot elevation changes.  What this elevation does is create opportunities for archies to build the eye candy tee shot, but sometimes at the expense of a good walk.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2012, 04:32:38 AM »
Just cause templates are overrated in my opinion, doesn't mean I hate them. I agree that they are great strategic holes, but it seems like you can't go 2 threads before a template is mentioned or talked about on this site.

Matt,

Did it ever occur to you that templates get a lot of discussion here for the simple reason that they lend themselves so well to thorough discussion on a worldwide internet site didcated to gca?

If I start a thread about Road Holes, most posters here know what I am talking about, perhaps have played a few, and certainly know the original at TOC. So someone from the UK may feel suufficiently prepared to comment about the Road Hole at my home course in New Jersey, even though they never played the hole. By their vey definition, template features have ties to great holes. They have a hostory. They make for good threads.

Yet when I started a thread with photos about the Tillinghast par 5's at Ridgewood, the BEST set of par 5's anywhere, IMO, it got only a handful of responses. I was not surprised, because very few have played the course. And since these holes are NOT templates, there is little more for GCA.com members to say about them other than "I'd like to play those holes."

Michael George

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2012, 04:42:09 AM »
Walkability is WAY over-rated on this site relative to everyone else's view of golf that I play with who isn't a member of this site.

+1 Mac.   I prefer to walk, but 90% of the time, life gets in the way and I have a short leash from the wife and need to play as many holes as possible in 2-3 hour period.  For instance, yesterday, I had family matters until 5pm.  I went to play at my club at 5:30pm and played 18 holes with a buddy in 2 hours.  Can't do that walking.

Also, "moving dirt".  I honestly don't care how much dirt had to be moved in building a golf course.  Just build the best golf course that you can.  If you have to move some dirt, move it.  
"First come my wife and children.  Next comes my profession--the law. Finally, and never as a life in itself, comes golf" - Bob Jones

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2012, 08:52:01 AM »
Guess I'm the one doing all the overrating - walkability and the ability to play a course with one ball are two of my most important criteria. And I love template holes, both in real life, and theoretically.

On this site, I think being open-minded and willing to love all flavors of golf - loving both Thai food and steak and potatoes - are the most overrated characteristics of posters. Not sure what that correlates to on golf courses.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #41 on: September 03, 2012, 09:41:40 AM »
Guess I'm the one doing all the overrating - walkability and the ability to play a course with one ball are two of my most important criteria. And I love template holes, both in real life, and theoretically.

On this site, I think being open-minded and willing to love all flavors of golf - loving both Thai food and steak and potatoes - are the most overrated characteristics of posters. Not sure what that correlates to on golf courses.

I like George's comments.  Agree on both points.

In the same vein, I like Jim Lewis' remarks about elevation changes.  Big elevation changes make for dramatic, fun and picturesque golf holes, but these holes are impractical for a walkable golf course.

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2012, 10:00:42 AM »
My view is that just because a course is old doesn't mean its great. The architects of the classical era were certainly talented but just because they designed a course doesn't mean its great.  I know it may be blasphemous but I simply did not see what was so great about Maidstone when I played it about 8 years ago.  Yes, it did have some really good holes but it was way overrated to me.

Patrick_Mucci

Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #43 on: September 03, 2012, 10:43:10 PM »
Guess I'm the one doing all the overrating - walkability and the ability to play a course with one ball are two of my most important criteria. And I love template holes, both in real life, and theoretically.

George,

I find the "ability to play the course with one ball" to be one of the most over rated criterion ever posited.

Pine Valley
Pebble Beach
ANGC
NGLA
WFW
Shinnecock
Oakmont
Seminole
CPC
Pacific Dunes
GCGC

Are just a few where the golfer may lose a ball, two or three.

That criterion would seem to eliminate any water hazards, any OB and any other features like gullies or steep drop offs and heavy rough, in other words a rather benign course absent a high degree of risk.


On this site, I think being open-minded and willing to love all flavors of golf - loving both Thai food and steak and potatoes - are the most overrated characteristics of posters. Not sure what that correlates to on golf courses.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #44 on: September 04, 2012, 01:37:14 AM »
Guess I'm the one doing all the overrating - walkability and the ability to play a course with one ball are two of my most important criteria. And I love template holes, both in real life, and theoretically.

George,

I find the "ability to play the course with one ball" to be one of the most over rated criterion ever posited.

Pine Valley
Pebble Beach
ANGC
NGLA
WFW
Shinnecock
Oakmont
Seminole
CPC
Pacific Dunes
GCGC

Are just a few where the golfer may lose a ball, two or three.

That criterion would seem to eliminate any water hazards, any OB and any other features like gullies or steep drop offs and heavy rough, in other words a rather benign course absent a high degree of risk.


On this site, I think being open-minded and willing to love all flavors of golf - loving both Thai food and steak and potatoes - are the most overrated characteristics of posters. Not sure what that correlates to on golf courses.

Let's see now Patrick. Can one not play one ball around TOC without hitting it OB, into a water hazard, into a deep gully, or into heavy rough.
I also have to wonder why one could not play one ball around the original Pine Valley, ANGC, and Oakmont.
You can have very testing shots without OB, ball swallowing water hazards, deep gullies, and heavy rough. The only people requiring these features seem to be weak willed better players that can't stand the pressure of someone recovering from a poor shot and having the temerity to tie them on a hole. How strong is your will Patrick?
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #45 on: September 04, 2012, 10:03:36 AM »
George,

I find the "ability to play the course with one ball" to be one of the most over rated criterion ever posited.

Pine Valley
Pebble Beach
ANGC
NGLA
WFW
Shinnecock
Oakmont
Seminole
CPC
Pacific Dunes
GCGC

Are just a few where the golfer may lose a ball, two or three.

That criterion would seem to eliminate any water hazards, any OB and any other features like gullies or steep drop offs and heavy rough, in other words a rather benign course absent a high degree of risk.[/b][/size][/color]

I'm speaking of it as a theoretical goal. It's virtually impossible to make a course where you can't lose a ball at all, I just believe as a theoretical goal, it keeps things more honest. And I especially believe that dismissing it or not recognizing it often leads to bad things.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Mark McKeever

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #46 on: September 04, 2012, 10:44:41 AM »
"Being in the top 100"

Its amazing how much emphasis is put on this attribute.  There are A LOT of great golf courses not on this list.

Mark
Best MGA showers - Bayonne

"Dude, he's a total d***"

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #47 on: September 04, 2012, 01:42:00 PM »
proximity to water.

Too many holes in my mind are viewed as great just because they are near the ocean, even though in many cases the ocean doesnt come into play.

Any examples? Don't say 16 at Cypress.  I already got in trouble for that.


No it clearly comes into play there.

Here are a few just off the top of my head (dont hammer me if i miss a few).   Not saying any of these are bad holes,  most are pretty good, just not anywhere near as good as some people here think they are.   I know some people here think Pac Dunes 4 is the best hole at Bandon so that will create the most consternation.

Pebble 13 (only comes into play from the tips)
Arcadia 13
Pac Dunes #4, 12
Whistling straits 12
Chambers Bay 15 or 16th




?

Surely you didn't mean 13, but ... what hole did you mean?

David Bartman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #48 on: September 04, 2012, 01:55:35 PM »
Beauty
Walk Ability
Ground Game
Still need to play Pine Valley!!

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What is the most over-rated course attribute on this site?
« Reply #49 on: September 04, 2012, 01:59:22 PM »
I agree with those who have said strategy. Real ability to interact with strategy seems available to very few golfers today.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back