[archie_struthers]

 

Sorry but fall conditions are a funny thing. Every year my handicap seems to drop precipitously right about now. Been lousy all year and all of a sudden started to hit it ok and yes my handicap is dropping again, just in time to have to live with it all winter LOL!

I'm thinking lots of players who were weaned on fast greens like I was really relish the increase in speed and conditioning here in the NE/ Mid Atlantic this time of year. Superintendents can turn of the sprinklers and disease isn't a daily worry. We had lots of trouble this summer with pythium , aka root rot on many of the fairways in our area. Now that the sun angle has changed and the nights are cool , supers can be pretty aggressive with heights and grass will germinate again.

Funny how people who tend to  over read break tend to start putting much better with the firm and fast conditions , and their scores reflect this uptick in made putts . Having  spent so many years caddying at PVGC , it's hard not have a brain that's conditioned to read more break into the putts. Also , the run out we see this time of year really helps those whose short games shine relative to their GIR's .

[Lou_Duran]

A.G.-

Will's point nearby is a good one.  "It all depends ....", in this case on the design of the course (which, hopefully, takes the best advantages of the site).

Holding all other things equal (c.p.) , I agree that the "lesser" player will have greater success from a shorter distance.  The key here is the c.p., that is, if firmer conditions gets such a player into positions such as in an "imperfect" bunker or behind a tree.

My biggest concern is on and around the greens where the high handicapper generally has the most trouble (I know that there must be some exceptions).  With moderately soft greens AND some cushion in the fairways, the little spin he typically puts on the ball will hold his better shots.  I've seen some miserable rounds by fairly decent, 10-15 handicap golfers who couldn't adjust to the firm greens.  The long man may not be very good with his short game, but with F&F greens, he becomes pathetic, and frustrated.  Maybe a key is the second F, but who wants to play 7' greens?

Archie,

I am one of those who tends to over read break.  There aren't that many of us, and, like you, I'd much rather get the ball started on the line than worrying about how hard to hit it.  Of course, where I play, greens seldom get to 11'.

[archie_struthers]

 

Lou , distance helps but putting really changes scoring. I'd rather have them really slow or fast.

[Peter Pallotta]

Lou describes it well, above.

JES - thanks for remembering that other thread; I was trying to raise the question: if a goodly number of dedicated golfers can't control their golf ball consistently enough to score well under certain conditions (e.g. F&F), and if such goals like scoring well are at least part of what keeps dedicated golfers engaged and coming back to the golf course, isn't there an argument to be made (a commercial as well as philosophical one) for deferring to their needs instead of to the designer/maintenance team's wants and ideals.

Peter

[JESII]

I remember...didn't take the time to post (I don't think) but I couldn't disagree more with that sentiment.

Wouldn't mountain climbing be more popular if the mountains were flatter?

[Peter Pallotta]

If mountains were flatter mountain climbing wouldn't exist, or if it did exist the climbers would look more like me than Sir Edmund Hillary. If F&F conditions were virtually non existent, the "Sir Edmund Hillarys" of the world (say, you) would still play golf and would still consistently beat, say, the likes of me -- and, while you Sirs wouldn't have as much fun as you might otherwise, a whole range of guys like Me would have the satisfaction of scoring better, which might have us coming back (and coming back in greater numbers) and which -- re: the economic health of the game -- would be good for everyone. As I say, I'm not fighting hard for this but do think it worthy of some (speculative) consideration.

Hope you and the family are well

Peter

[JMEvensky]

If mountains were flatter mountain climbing wouldn't exist, or if it did exist the climbers would look more like me than Sir Edmund Hillary. If F&F conditions were virtually non existent, the "Sir Edmund Hillarys" of the world (say, you) would still play golf and would still consistently beat, say, the likes of me -- and, while you Sirs wouldn't have as much fun as you might otherwise, a whole range of guys like Me would have the satisfaction of scoring better, which might have us coming back (and coming back in greater numbers) and which -- re: the economic health of the game -- would be good for everyone. As I say, I'm not fighting hard for this but do think it worthy of some (speculative) consideration.

Hope you and the family are well

Peter

Peter,being a higher handicap mountain climber might have more downside than shooting 88.The hazards are a bitch to play/climb out of.

[JESII]

Peter,

It's my opinion that the game is so expensive exactly because those in charge try to make everyone happy (and make a buck doing so)!

[Carl Johnson]

F&F.

Fall play seems to bring out Faster and Firmer conditions.
Less rain, less humidity, less stress on the turf, so why is there a resistance to get conditions F&F through out the year as much as Mother Nature will permit.

I think I figured it out.

F&F accentuates errors which in turn inflates scores, and golfers want lower, not higher handicaps.
Well, at least most golfers want to improve.

So, is F&F it's own worst enemy ?

I am not going to let go of this.  The obsession with "What's your handicap" kills the fun of F&F (and more).  I am not in Pat's "most golfers" category.  I do not care what my HC is (except that it's accurate according to USGA guidelines).  I just want to win my match, and, sorry, but F&F gives me an advantage (at least I think so, which is all that counts).

Beyond F&F, what about tough set-ups?  Don't want those either?  I played Sunday with my usual suspects, after the final round of the club championship was over.  The course was set up tough for the club championship.  Our four-ball all played over our HCs - there was a lot of head hanging.  But two of us won (moi included) and two of us lost.  Why should not that be the end of the story (and the beginning of the next)?

For a guy who doesn't care about handicaps, it sure seems like you play a lot of handicap adjusted matches

In fact, that's all I play except on very rare occasion, or when I'm just touring a course.  I care about the handicap system - great system for allowing players (note, I did not say golfers) of differing abilities to compete in interesting matches against each other.  But I think that's all it is.  It's an option.  Sure, a player with a 4.3 index is a more skilled player than one with an 17.8 index, who is a more skilled player than one with a 26.6 index.  So what?  A better way to measure skill would be to do away with the handicap system and let everyone play stroke, according to the rules.

[Carl Johnson]

Patrick,
IMO in the South on bermuda grass the situation is the opposite.  Our courses play longer this time of year as we near the growing season, and handicaps go up, not down.  The fairways are lush and soft, and the rough is brutally high and thick;  [Non-professional solution: Cut the fairways and roughs shorter.  and don't water as much.  Works in Piedmont North Carolina.] at times the maintenance staffs can't keep up with mowing schedules because of pm thunderstorms [Can't think of a solution here, other than to change the mowing schedule, which may not be practical, I realize].  

This time of year, I have to hit driver more and 4W less off the tee, and the rough is essentially a one-shot penalty.  [Above I mentioned cutting the rough shorter.  Another tread asked about fairway mowing heights for Bermuda.  What about rough mowing heights for Bermuda?  Don't know.  Our superintendent says that the problem with the Bermuda rough in late season is less the cutting height than that the grass leaves grow more vertically, to "reach for the sun" in the prime growing season, which in turn means that the ball will drop lower, as compared to when the leaves grow more horizontally.  Don't know if this is correct, but it makes sense to me - a layman.  Although we keep our Bermuda fairways tight with close cutting even now, the rough can be troublesome.  Solution - just play golf and let your handicap be what it be.  Or just stay out of the rough ]  Fewer GIR's, higher scores, higher handicaps.  Courses here play longer and tougher until the weather gets cold at night and the bermuda goes dormant.

F&F for us comes in the first part of winter when the bermuda goes dormant but before things get soggy, then again in spring and early summer when the bermuda comes out but before the heat really builds and the turf goes crazy again.

P.S. - some players prefer the firm and fast Bermuda, cut tight, while others like the lush and soft.  How does a club deal with this dilemma?  Solution: on the par 4s and par 5s, alternate cutting right and left sides of the fairways shorter/longer.  You want tight, hit right.  You want soft, hit le(o)ft.  And vice versa on the next 4/5.  Of course, this also brings the very narrow fairway issue into play.  You think I'm kidding?

[C. Squier]

F&F.

Fall play seems to bring out Faster and Firmer conditions.
Less rain, less humidity, less stress on the turf, so why is there a resistance to get conditions F&F through out the year as much as Mother Nature will permit.

I think I figured it out.

F&F accentuates errors which in turn inflates scores, and golfers want lower, not higher handicaps.
Well, at least most golfers want to improve.

So, is F&F it's own worst enemy ?

I am not going to let go of this.  The obsession with "What's your handicap" kills the fun of F&F (and more).  I am not in Pat's "most golfers" category.  I do not care what my HC is (except that it's accurate according to USGA guidelines).  I just want to win my match, and, sorry, but F&F gives me an advantage (at least I think so, which is all that counts).

Beyond F&F, what about tough set-ups?  Don't want those either?  I played Sunday with my usual suspects, after the final round of the club championship was over.  The course was set up tough for the club championship.  Our four-ball all played over our HCs - there was a lot of head hanging.  But two of us won (moi included) and two of us lost.  Why should not that be the end of the story (and the beginning of the next)?

For a guy who doesn't care about handicaps, it sure seems like you play a lot of handicap adjusted matches

In fact, that's all I play except on very rare occasion, or when I'm just touring a course.  I care about the handicap system - great system for allowing players (note, I did not say golfers) of differing abilities to compete in interesting matches against each other.  But I think that's all it is.  It's an option.  Sure, a player with a 4.3 index is a more skilled player than one with an 17.8 index, who is a more skilled player than one with a 26.6 index.  So what?  A better way to measure skill would be to do away with the handicap system and let everyone play stroke, according to the rules.

So, it's uncouth to ask you what your handicap is at a cocktail party, but you'll be asking for mine on the first tee so you can collect your 10 shots a side? If I'm reading your last sentence correctly, you're advocating that everyone count ALL their strokes instead of a max allowed score dictated by your current handicap?  Sounds like even more strokes will be given up.

Though I read your argument as one who is a bit embarrassed about their handicap, you do sound like an excellent partner for a member/guest

[Carl Johnson]

F&F.

Fall play seems to bring out Faster and Firmer conditions. . . .

So, it's uncouth to ask you what your handicap is at a cocktail party, but you'll be asking for mine on the first tee so you can collect your 10 shots a side? If I'm reading your last sentence correctly, you're advocating that everyone count ALL their strokes instead of a max allowed score dictated by your current handicap?  Sounds like even more strokes will be given up.

Though I read your argument as one who is a bit embarrassed about their handicap, you do sound like an excellent partner for a member/guest

Sorry I am not as clear as I'd like to be.  You are misreading me - my fault.  Seriously.  For HC purposes I go by the rules as best I can.  I wouldn't report more than the maximum allowed under the ESC rule.  In my experience it tends, with others, to go the other way.  A friend I play with regularly is in the 8 ESC max category, but he won't post more than a 7 - says he doesn't feel right about it.  Fine, but when I'm his partner in the next match, I have to accept that and go on (as I did today).

One can argue, as many, many do, about how the HC system works - whether it's really "accurate," or "fair."  The neat thing is that it is not mandatory.  I have a good friend who is a good athlete who does not play golf.  He says, "I do not understand why anyone would play handicaps."  That's sort of him also saying (because I know him), "Why would anyone play golf?"  My answer is, "You don't have to.  Golf lends itself to many ways to play, many games, and playing HC competitions is your choice.  You can play on your own terms."

Sure, the HC system isn't perfect, but I think it's one of the great things the governing bodies have come up with.  ESC score caps are easy.  The hard part is knowing what to post when you don't finish a hole.  The "rule" says to post what you would have made.  What about a meaningless five footer for boggy that you pick up?  Do you post one or two over?  Or do you putt it out and post the result?  I'd say that's a little tricky, because if it doesn't count, is it a real putt?  You may say sure, because I want a low score = a lower HC.  Frankly, I'm no so sure.  For me this is a tough call.  Your advice would be appreciated.

I play a game weekly that is HC based, with modifications.  Certain higher HCs are allowed an extra stroke or two beyond what the USGA HC "rules" call for.  We know it, and that's fine for our weekly game.

Invite me as a partner to your member-guest any time.  If there are 24 teams, I'll give you slightly less than a 1/24 chance of winning, guaranteed.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SO, it's the opinion of some that MERION, for the U.S. Open, plays easier when it's F&F then when it's soft.

That with every OPEN and weekly PGA events, the courses play EASIER when they're F&F.

I watched the Walker Cup.
It rained heavily on Tuesday.
They ate the course up on the subsequent practice rounds.

How'd they do as the course got faster and firmer on the weekend ?

I want to know, what mid to high handicapper scores lower when conditions really go to F&F.

Bring this wunderkind forward, also bring cash, as we'll bet on his ability to play to his handicap or better.

[C. Squier]

Pat, I think some confuse f&f and "not soft". "Not soft" conditions are easier to score for most, but when a course gets truly firm and fast, I doubt many score better.

[Sean_A]

F&F is always relative to the area we speaking about.

Ciao

[Brent Hutto]

It does "all depend".

Firm and fast vs. wet and soft for a short hitter can provide prodigious distance increases. At home I probably hit 3 or 4 drives per round over 200 yards with the majority being right around 195-200. On very firm and dry links courses a couple weeks ago I was hitting 4-woods to stay short of bunkers 280+ off the tee on a few occasions. So the ability to get 50 yards of extra tee shot distance or to bounce and roll an approach shot the final 20 yards instead of having to fly it onto the green can make a huge difference.

But that extra roll is just as likely to result in a ball rolling into the rough or into trouble over the green as it is to work out advantageously. So firm and fast giveth shorter clubs into the green but it taketh in the form of more shots played from the rough or from difficult spots around the green.

Keep the fairways wide, the rough playable (findable?) and high handicappers who are also short hitters will benefit. Narrow the fairways, grow the rough, surround the greens with trouble and a high handicapper will struggle. Even moreso the high handicapper who is NOT a short hitter.

So yes, it all depends. On a course in the northeastern USA designed for something close to target golf with soft fairway and moderate firmness greens I can see that firm and fast would amp up the difficulty considerably. Ankle deep rough adjacent to narrow, winding and/or dogleg fairways and greens with contour surrounded by bunkers and still more long rough make firm and fast all "taketh away" and no "giveth", I'd reckon. On the public course I learn to play on with wide fairways, minimal and unirrigated roughs and virtually no bunkers around the smallish greens the firmer and faster the better. I could tell from about my third or fourth round of golf that on a course like that, the more roll and bounce of the ball the lower my scores were going to be.

Generalizations are almost impossible given the wide variety of things called a "golf course".

[archie_struthers]

  


Very interesting thread  !   I'm thinking that firm and really fast  is harder for today's tour players than it used to be . Despite their prodigious length , the bomb and gouge works better when conditions are soft, as evidenced by low scores whenever it rains on tour.

Pat uses Merion as an example. I remember thinking after round two when everyone was beefing abut the pins and it being tricked up that they must have known it wasn't so, or they just didnt know the golf course well enough.  There were lots of pins left that were much harder that hadn't been used . I thought -8 would be the number at the end , but was way too low.

The equipment has changed , and the balata balls reacted a lot different than the rockets we use today. Every once in a while you find one and its just amazing how different they curve and spin. The old pros could use the shape of the shots to widen the fairways , and you saw the ball moving a lot more left to right and right to left depending on the shot. The Open that  Retief Goosen won at Shinnecock might have rewarded someone who played a softer pellet .

The modern swing certainly seems superior but effectively limits creativity in shotmaking . Never saw Bubba Watson in person , but he might be one who still plays intuitively.

[Adam Clayman]

F&F has lost out to the whiney bitches who only know one dimension of the sport, and their score. But it's not all their fault. The equipment isn't currently conducive to playing creative shots, just high soft ones.

I'm a believer in the big world theory, but, when thoughtful designs get watered down, playing antithetical to their nature, it's game over for the sportsmen among us, who value F&F, and will adapt after a rain.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat, I think some confuse f&f and "not soft". "Not soft" conditions are easier to score for most, but when a course gets truly firm and fast, I doubt many score better.

CSquire,

I tend to agree, true F&F presents an unusual challenge that few have experienced.

I had some guest to GCGC recently, two had never seen the course before.
One was a low handicap the other a mid-teen handicap.
I don't know that they ever adjusted to the conditions which were a far departure from their home course.

Time after time their approaches and recoveries ran long with the mid-teen handicap never getting the hang of it..

[archie_struthers]

   

Agree with Adam that the equipment has been changed significantly , in concert with the bomb and gouge mentality.  Most golfers  would not accept really fast and firm conditions as the best , with green lush and verdant the ideal .

For those of us who really enjoy it , get out and play the next couple of months as fall is the only time we generally can enjoy our favorite playing conditions in the northeast and mid Atlantic states.

[Carl Johnson]

 

Agree with Adam that the equipment has been changed significantly , in concert with the bomb and gouge mentality. . . .

Equipment question for expert F&Fer's - Do you go with typical contemporary equipment of matched iron sets?  I expect the real experts still use forged blades with steel shafts, but I'll bet many of us, particularly some of the older gents, will use hollow back irons with graphite shafts - I do.  But they don't give me the feel I want for chip and run, so I also carry a very old Powerbilt forged 7 iron I found and use that for chip and run.  For me that works better.  Any other personal speciality equipment preferences for F&F ground game?

[Thomas Dai]

Good points made above about F&F and equipment. The old balata ball could be made to swerve all over the place and curved or held-off against the wind to make it land softly or released to gain more roll. The modern ball just seems to want to go pretty straight. As for drivers, roll was an important aspect with wooden headed clubs, not really the case these days. And as for irons, modern big headed, deep cavity backs don't seem so good when there's little fairway grass and, when coupled with todays ball, they arn't so easy to play subtle bump-n-runs or curved shots with.

I'd like to try modern clubs with balata balls however, that might make for an interesting experiment. For example, back in the 1980's-90's I played Ping Eye-2 irons and could work the ball very nicely with them when playing a balata ball. I've since tried the identical irons but with the modern ball and they arn't so effective at playing subtle curve-ball.....or maybe it's just me getting older!

Interesting thread Pat. Well done for starting it.

All the best.

[Adam Clayman]

Carl, Yes, I use forged blades. That "no feel" effect never endeared me to go with a whole set of cavity backed. I do find it most resourceful to use a hybrid or fairway metal for putting from off the green. Truly well maintained F&F courses that maintain their collars properly make using another club, a rarity.

Patrick, I've seen many a low capper never figure it out either. Judging the "thump" is another aspect of the sport, the masses want to have handed to them on a silver platter.

I've learned not to complain too much because winter does come and they have to turn that system off, sometime.

[JESII]

F&F.

Fall play seems to bring out Faster and Firmer conditions.
Less rain, less humidity, less stress on the turf, so why is there a resistance to get conditions F&F through out the year as much as Mother Nature will permit.

I think I figured it out.

F&F accentuates errors which in turn inflates scores, and golfers want lower, not higher handicaps.
Well, at least most golfers want to improve.

So, is F&F it's own worst enemy ?

Pat,

You make a faulty correlation from lower scores to improvement. Stick with me here!!

If you change the game from one of firm and fast to soft, slow and green you've changed the game and made it easier.

Certainly there are people that can fool themselves into thinking that performing better, in an absolute measurement, means they have improved but that's all they're doing.

Similarly, you wouldn't say the guy that shoots 78 from the mens tees is better than the guy that shoots 80 from the championship tees, would you?

So, I agree that people want the game to be easier, but why not just make the hole bigger? That way we can have healthy grass too!!!

[Jud_T]

Guys,

Firm and fast helps the higher handicap because his biggest impediment is distance.  I hit the ball 220 max in really soft conditions and 250+ in proper F&F.  This is by far the biggest difference to me.  Maybe my short game is better than average for my hdcp level, but isn't distance the biggest determining factor in course handicapping criteria?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()