[Steven Blake]

This is somewhat related to a thread from last week that dealt with firmness of greens. I am going to setup a scenario that actually happened in which the player was angry his shot did NOT stay on the green.  I would like to hear what opinions people have as it relates this type of scenario.  Personally I love firm fairways and greens from both a playing perceptive and an agronomic perspective
Here it goes…
Player A is a scratch to +1 handicap, a long hitter who hits his 3-wood about 280-300 yards consistently and his driver longer than 300 yards.  He puts a good amount of spin his ball. Here in Wisconsin it has been dry and cool lately and the greens are firming up with the lack of rainfall.  Player A  is playing a slightly uphill 370 yard par 4 slightly downwind.  The hole is straight away and its only defense is a front right bunker.  Player A slightly miss hits his 3 wood into the right rough but still hits it hard.  For his second shot he has 90 yards over the bunker to the hole.  Because of his angle (coming in from the right) he cannot run the ball short of the green.  The ball is sitting in a good lie in 2 ˝ “ of light rough.  He executes a great shot hitting high landing just on the front of the putting surface.  But coming out of the rough he is unable to get the ball to check and it just rolls off the back of the green.   He believes that his shot should have stayed on the putting surface and should have been presented with a reasonable birdie opportunity.  He also believes that the greens needed to be watered to accommodate this type of shot.  Keep in mind had he drove his ball even in the left rough he could have run the ball short and had a chance to hold the green and had he hit the fairway he could have spun it enough to have it stay on.
Are the greens to firm?? Should he expect his wedge out of the rough to stop even though he took the wrong angle?  Firmness of greens has been an issue because of the drought… but the greens are healthy and really do not need water other than the fact people feel they cannot hold shots.  Should the greens be watered just for holding capacity of golf shot even though they are as healthy as can be?? Who is right because both have a legitimate reason for having it softer or firm?   
I ask these questions because firmness of the golf course is and can be a polarizing topic with the membership.  Some like softer and some like firmer…. Keep in mind I am not talking about green and brown … the putting surfaces above show no obvious signs they need water other than its firmness.  Should a superintendent have to water greens just to make shots hold on the green?

What say you . . .

[Matt_Cohn]

Is there anyone here who thinks this is unfair? I doubt you'll have anyone reply that way.

[Garland Bayley]

Another low handicap cry baby.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Won't go so far as to say crybaby, but really, isn't the player's job to hit the fw?  To know where you can miss and where you can't?  To adjust for local conditions?

What you appear to be saying is that no matter where you hit it, you get a chance for birdie, and no chance for a bogey.  I hear this a lot, but if there are no advantages or no consequences of playing to any position, where is the strategy?

[Mark Smolens]

I don't care what his handicap is, as you point out the only defense the course has in that circumstance is the firmness of the greens. When are we going to wake up in this country and realize that water is an extraordinarily precious resource, and stop using it to make greens soft enough to stop a golf ball?

My first trip across the pond was back in '83, a wedding in Ireland. I brought a buddy's clubs, and we wandered around in a rental car playing links golf (extraordinarily cheap back then). On the first hole at Ballybunion my buddy Rick, a huge hitter, smashed a three wood down the middle, leaving himself with 135 or 140 yards in, not much breeze. He hit his usual moon shot with a wedge, which proceeded to hit the middle of the green, bounce some 40' in air, and off the back into the long stuff. When the cackling stopped, he chopped out and made double. Adjustment necessary? No question. But unfair? No way.

[Matthew Petersen]

I can't imagine anyone here thinking these greens are unfairly firm. Not only did he play from the "wrong" angle, but he was coming in out of the rough. If he feels he is entitled to stop any shot on the green no matter the circumstances maybe he should just play home and play Tiger Woods 2012 on the XBox.

[Dan Kelly]

Should a superintendent have to water greens just to make shots hold on the green?

What say you . . .

Only if there's no way to hit the green from the legendary "Position A." And maybe not even then!

This is why I prefer greens with openings (large or small) in the front.

[Jason Thurman]

Sure it's fair. But he's not the only one, and it's hardly just low handicaps. I know plenty of 18+ handicappers who think every shot they land on a green should stay there.

[Mike McGuire]

I live in Wisconsin. A big majority of players around here would decree it unfair.
Most of the courses are soft most of the time. 'Good condition' means green.
Sad really.

[Dan King]

No reason to have to put up with unfairness of golf. Why doesn't he just pick up his ball and put it where he thinks he should have ended up? No reason golfers should ever have to put up with good or bad luck. Maybe what the game needs is judges, to help us determine what would have been different if not for the good or bad luck.

Cheers,
Dan King

However unlucky you may be, it really is not fair to expect your adversary's grief for your undeserved misfortunes to be as poignant as your own.
  --Horace Hutchinson

[Mark Pearce]

Not only is it fair but player A is an idiot.  He can hit a utility in the fairway and still hit a wedge on the green.  He hit a bad tee shot and got punished for it.  The conditioning seems to haveworkedwell.

[Garland Bayley]

Sure it's fair. But he's not the only one, and it's hardly just low handicaps. I know plenty of 18+ handicappers who think every shot they land on a green should stay there.

I play with a lot of 18+ handicappers, because I am one. I never hear the course is unfair from them. They understand that they are constantly putting themselves in positions where they cannot execute the shot required. I find the low handicappers I get to play with occasionally to be the ones with fair/unfair in their vernacular. What they mean by that is the situation required a shot they couldn't hit. So sometimes the game goes beyond your skills. Get over it.

[Jud_T]

Obviously his miss should have been left, not right.  He put himself in the one position he couldn't.  Knock it front left and short, get up and down for par and move on.  Alternatively, why didn't he hit Driver?  Might have been able to hold a lob wedge over the bunker.  I think the real problem is he felt that a short par four was a hole that he "deserved" a good birdie chance on.  Tell him to stop wasting money playing golf, head to the driving range and put a bunch of buckets every 10 yards from 10-320.  It's eminently "fair" and he gets a lollipop every time he jars one.  

[Mark Saltzman]

Guys, I get it, we all love fast and firm, but don't we need to ask some more questions?

The question of fairness is not determined by looking at this singular instance.  Yes, he drove it in the wrong place and paid a penalty.  I think everyone is fine with that.

But, is this a golf course that was designed to allow the use of the ground game?  Do many/any holes have fronting hazards that dictate an aerial approach? 

If so, can this great player keep a well-struck ball on the green after carrying the hazard?  More importantly, can a mid-handicap golfer keep his ball on the green in this instance?

Firm and fast can be a lot of fun, but, believe it or not, there are times when it can be too firm.

[Matthew Rose]

If I miss a fairway and have a poor angle in, I don't have anybody to blame but myself.

If conditions make greens hard to hole, then I have no problem with that as long as that's consistent and that the approaches are sufficiently maintained to allow it.

I'm about a 2 handicap, for whatever that's worth.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I'm with Dan!

About the hole:
A 4,400 sft slightly crowned green isn't easy to hit, especially from A's position.

If it were me, I'd shorten the hole for a number of reasons, one of which is it would really screw with Player A at times.

Cheers

[David Federman]

Examples of too firm and fast - 7th at Shinnie at the Open; 18th at Olympic before redo; otherwise, don't hit it in the rough if you want to hold a firm green.

[BCrosby]

Everyone is playing the same course under the same conditions, right?

So in what sense could it be unfair? Or, unfair to whom, exactly?

Bob

[BCrosby]

No reason to have to put up with unfairness of golf. Why doesn't he just pick up his ball and put it where he thinks he should have ended up? No reason golfers should ever have to put up with good or bad luck. Maybe what the game needs is judges, to help us determine what would have been different if not for the good or bad luck.

Cheers,
Dan King

However unlucky you may be, it really is not fair to expect your adversary's grief for your undeserved misfortunes to be as poignant as your own.
  --Horace Hutchinson

Well said, Dan.

[Carl Johnson]

"Should he expect his wedge out of the rough to stop even though he took the wrong angle?"

Of course not.

[Dan Kelly]

Everyone is playing the same course under the same conditions, right?

So in what sense could it be unfair? Or, unfair to whom, exactly?

Bob

Right on, Bob!

Could we all agree to campaign for the expungement of the words "fair" and "fairness" from the golf-course lexicon?

Every time I hear them, and I hear them often, I have to restrain myself -- and to paraphrase Dean Wormer: "Fat, drunk and self-restrained is no way to go through life, son."

What people mean by "unfair," when it comes to design or maintenance, is usually just "stupid" (though occasionally it's "brilliant" -- another overused word).

Dan

[BCrosby]

Dan -

Please allow me to agree with your agreement with me. [Emoticon goes here, if Dan permitted them.] 

When people talk about the 'fairness' of this or that aspect of a course, moralistic labeling is being substitued for much harder analytical work.

Bob

[Matthew Essig]

Another low handicap cry baby.

Also known as almost every professional.

[Steven Blake]

All great replies ... here is the problem

If player A could not hold the green what do you say to the 15+ hanicaps?  Golfers really believe that a shot hit in the front or middle of the green should hold the green.  Should they take up darts instead??

Or here is another common response .... "the greens are like concrete ... the muni down the road has better greens because you can hold any shot into them and they still putt nice"

My reason for bringing this up is ... How do we change the golfers perspective on how the game is to be played?  I can tell you a few reasons why I would want this from an agronomic perspective but who llistens to the superintendent.... no one ... its members/golfers talking to members/golfers that can change this?? USGA .. TV .. Masters ... i dont know

[David Bartman]

is it fair, absolutely, everyone has to play the same conditions.  The low handicapper missed the fairway and on the wrong side to force a carry over the bunker.

Was this the first hole of the round?  If not, could he reasonably assume that the greens were firm that day before missing his drive in the rough behind the bunker? 

The other question is weather it is the right course conditions for that course's participants?  One would have to know the range of their skill level as well as their desire for challenge or ease? 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()