[Tommy Williamsen]

I have been looking a scorecards of the players at MV this week.  I can't remember when I have seen more doubles and triples in a golf tournament, not a major.  I have played MV 8 or 9 over the past 25 years and have watched the course make some changes. My own  scores haven't changed much but I wonder if it hasn't gone from a very strategic golf course to a more heroic or even penal course.  Penalties for missed shots are pretty severe.  Then again players seem to try a lot of risk reward shots, especially on the par fives. I don't think you can argue that the course isn't strategic because there are a variety of ways to play many of the holes.  But has the balance shifted to more of a penal course?

[Carl Rogers]

It seems to me one of those courses that always been proclaimed as "great" but seems to require the continuous high dollar make over on an ongoing basis to keep it "great".

Next project: I really think the landing zone of the 17th hole is really pointless.  Why not re-work that into a modified right to left 'cape'?  Certianly not not another left to right hole.  and ... The 18th hole as a tee shot lay-up ... why?

[Tom_Doak]

I have not played Muirfield Village in many years, but I always thought that was a great set of par-5 holes ... like the par-5 holes at Augusta used to be, where the good players almost had to go for them, but were equally likely to make 3 or 7 in doing so.  Especially at the 15th!

As to whether you label it heroic or penal, I don't know, I think those labels are oversimplified anyway.

[Tim Rooney]

Though the greens do not have (6)ft of break,as the MV bashers attest, their subtle contours w/hi-stimp speed provide chipping/putting nightmares(TW).The greens exhibit slightly more Po indicative of this yrs Cols spring;however,this is a Special Golf Course.Hole 17 was changed practically (10)yrs ago,and 16,last year------don't see the issue.
Interesting the Golf Channel comentator mentioning the MV back (9) playing the toughest on the PGA tour,last year?    

[noonan]

It seems to me one of those courses that always been proclaimed as "great" but seems to require the continuous high dollar make over on an ongoing basis to keep it "great".

Next project: I really think the landing zone of the 17th hole is really pointless.  Why not re-work that into a modified right to left 'cape'?  Certianly not not another left to right hole.  and ... The 18th hole as a tee shot lay-up ... why?

What course does the PGA tour play that does not require tweaks to stop the pros from going 22 under in 4 rounds?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I have not played Muirfield Village in many years, but I always thought that was a great set of par-5 holes ... like the par-5 holes at Augusta used to be, where the good players almost had to go for them, but were equally likely to make 3 or 7 in doing so.  Especially at the 15th!

As to whether you label it heroic or penal, I don't know, I think those labels are oversimplified anyway.

Tom I agree that the par fives are really strong.  I can't go the the greens in two but the second shots on 2 and 11 are pretty difficult.  The tee shot on 15 is pretty scary tight and needs to be in the fairway to get to the landing are of the second shot. Seven is the most benign of the the lot.  2, 11, and 15 are great risk reward par fives.  The risks are pretty substantial but the rewards can be an eagle or easy birdie. They just require an heroic shot.

[Matthew Petersen]

How many of those big numbers were the result of the architecture and not just the speed of the greens?

I didn't see much of the action, but I saw plenty of highlight suggesting most of the big numbers Tiger put up were actually the result of pretty basic things like 3-putting from 7 feet.

[Tommy Williamsen]

How many of those big numbers were the result of the architecture and not just the speed of the greens?

I didn't see much of the action, but I saw plenty of highlight suggesting most of the big numbers Tiger put up were actually the result of pretty basic things like 3-putting from 7 feet.

[Tommy Williamsen]

How many of those big numbers were the result of the architecture and not just the speed of the greens?

I didn't see much of the action, but I saw plenty of highlight suggesting most of the big numbers Tiger put up were actually the result of pretty basic things like 3-putting from 7 feet.

When you make as many doubles and triples as Tiger did poor putting hurts.  Bunkers also made a difference.  I saw more buried lies in bunkers this week than I have in a long time.  Many of the doubles, however, came from shots in the water or from difficult lies around the greens.  The quickness of the greens seemed to hurt chips and pitches a lot this week. I think maintenance caused some of the difficulties.
So is it penal architecture or penal maintenance?

[Matthew Petersen]

How many of those big numbers were the result of the architecture and not just the speed of the greens?

I didn't see much of the action, but I saw plenty of highlight suggesting most of the big numbers Tiger put up were actually the result of pretty basic things like 3-putting from 7 feet.

When you make as many doubles and triples as Tiger did poor putting hurts.  Bunkers also made a difference.  I saw more buried lies in bunkers this week than I have in a long time.  Many of the doubles, however, came from shots in the water or from difficult lies around the greens.  The quickness of the greens seemed to hurt chips and pitches a lot this week. I think maintenance caused some of the difficulties.
So is it penal architecture or penal maintenance?

As I think about it, there are a lot of heroic shots out there. All-or-nothing over water types. Though the par 5s all seem pretty good strategic holes. And plenty of just plain penal (drive on 18) too.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()