[Rich Goodale]

I played Pebble Beach a couple of weeks ago in an all-walking 4-ball consisting of me and my wife, a guy from Tennessee and a guy from Colorado.  The first three of us carried our own bags and the 4th guy took a caddie.  I think the caddie was a reasonably good one, but he added at least 30 minutes to our round (we were second out at 7:10AM, and finished 15-20 minutes behind the first group, who got around in the Mucci-attested PB standard of 4:30).  So how did our caddie manage to slow us down?

Well, in general he ignored the 3 or us who weren't hiring him, and obsequiously pampered his man (who was a decent golfer who was having a bad day).  To keep his man happy, he ignored etiquette by continuously walking in our line of sight whilst we were ready to hit our shots, letting his man hit multiple mulligans whilst we were ready to play, letting his man putt out and reading all putts, even if they were 2-footers just to save going into double figures for the hole, walking in front of us at blind driving holes (e.g. 3, 15) which prohibited us from playing until he found a place to stand and indicate to his man the ideal line for the tee shot by standing and waving his arms in the line of play, giving his man mini-lessons after every wayward shot, etc., etc. etc.

One thing I do have to give him is that he had the balls to come into my face 5 minutes or so after I had shaken his hand on the 18th, doing all but holding out his hand to let me know he would appreciate a pourboire....

Thank god all our playing companions were good folk (including his man), Josie and I managed to play reasonably well (her 1st time, and she played to her 16 handicap) and the weather was as good as it ever gets at Pebble.  75-80 degrees, a gentle zephyr from the south which warmed up the 1st tee by at least 10 degrees just as we stepped up to hit (no joke, it was an amazing meteorlogical phenomenon), and a course which (except for the disappointingly patchy rough) was in prime condition.

The caddie did not diminish the golf course, but he did diminish his employer and his profession.  IMHO.

Rich

[archie_struthers]

 

A really good caddy understands that his (or her) player performs best when they are totally engaged . So the best thing to do as a caddy is let your player read his own greens and if asked , respond to the query . No really professional caddy runs the show, he aids and abets his client if they desire. If the caddy is forward and finds an errant tee shot , it might be the difference maker if you play for score,

[Rich Goodale]

Not sure if you were referring to my post, Archie, but one of the "etc. etc. etc." things our caddie failed to do was even pretend to know or even search for where one of our drives on the 16th was even though he was standing in the left rough no more than 20 yards from where the ball must have landed.

And, you are dead right when you say "No really professional caddy runs the show, he aids and abets his client if they desire."  I've hired fewer caddies than I have fingers on my two hands over my 40+ year golfing life, and most of those hires was due to necessity (i.e. the Club or mein host required it).  The only two of these that I remember fondly were an ex-miner at Muirfield with only 3-fingers on his left hand (I have the normal complement) who guided me around my first tour of that great links and a semi-stoned-out dude at Cypress Point who figured out early that I was playing well and just handed me my clubs and answered respectfully and sagely the few questions I asked of him.

Slainte

Rich

[Joel Zuckerman]

I played Deepdale just the other day, and what could have been an epic disaster score-wise was mitigated slightly  by the knowledgeable caddy.
Granted, he drove the cart while my buddy and I walked, and he rarely had a wet towel on his person so getting a clean ball to putt with was problematic.
But the greens are so tricky, and the pins so tucked that day, that we would've been completely adrift without his  experience and knowledge. I'm talking about 25 foot putts that would end up 70 feet past the hole, off the green.  20 foot putts towards 6 o'clock when he would urge us to hit the putt 2-3 feet towards 3 o'clock and let it break down to the cup,
I would guess that even Tranquill Richard would have been frustrated trying to puzzle this all out on his own!

[Tim Martin]

A really good caddy understands that his (or her) player performs best when they are totally engaged . So the best thing to do as a caddy is let your player read his own greens and if asked , respond to the query . No really professional caddy runs the show, he aids and abets his client if they desire. If the caddy is forward and finds an errant tee shot , it might be the difference maker if you play for score,

I recently had a caddie who was first of all a very nice guy but offered up every type of advice imaginable and talked somewhat incessantly.  I was very close to telling him to tone it down but because we we playing in a twosome I thought it would be awkward and ruin the day.  At $120 per bag you would think this guy would know better. It was clear that he felt he was enhancing the experience.  

[V. Kmetz]

Reading the subject of this thread and many of the replies, I feel like no on this site has ever played a spirited match for money...

Here's what REALLY happens at "Great Golf Course CC"...

1.  The visitor who wants "shut-Up/speak when Spoken to" is accommodated...

2.  ...until he or she sees another player, with a different ethos (or the host) prospering on the advice (usually a green read).

3.  ...doesn't want to be left out of the party (especially if multiple members of the group are fairing well)

4. ...is usually asking for reads and club calls by the 4th hole.

Whether its the wretchedness of wanting to win some gelt, or the vain fact they want to report a good score on GGCCC, its hard to watch one be aided while you deny yourself.  More to the enjoyment part, who are you going to high-five for a great read or chastise for a narrow miss (as one sees others doing) or share empathy with for the fortune of an outcome?

Golf is a social/public game when no caddie is present.  No mode of thinking or viewpoint or style of conduct or disposition is going to change that.  When a caddie is there, the society increases by 1-4 persons.

Many times reading these threads that pertain or involve caddies, I get the feeling that the vocal "caddies superfluous" contingent are just dour, humorless people who treat the cognitive reverie of the game and the architecture of the course as their own intellectual property.  

Perhaps I'm a bit more wizened and withered than those salesman/pro jock who caddies 300 rounds a year (I resent a lot of these guys too, because its an act) at a summer and winter-season spot, but I'm simply there to give people a good day...I instantly "like" the people I caddy for, am assigned to...I don't care what the money is after regular rates are tallied, but on balance the extra money comes.

I caddied for the musician Graham Nash a few weeks back...Despite his golfing limitations to do so, I could tell he wanted to figure it out on his own...but he was scuffling...then came the 6th hole where he drove in the right rough inside a dogleg and had a choice of recovery out to the left, leaving a 120 yard 3rd shot OR a risky play weaving through the edge of a tree-line, that would have to be played like a low punch skirting some trunks.  I could tell that prudence dictated the recovery play to a him, but it was gnawing that he hadn't had a chance to spread his wings and "DO" somethign so far i nthe round...it was all recoveries and compromises and bland double bogeys to that point.  He sighed and asked if I thought he could pull off the risky shot at the green.  

I said, "Graham, it's not 100% but the best wisdom I know if you want to have a chance at the green and a par, is to take dead aim at the middle of that trunk 60 yards ahead of us, if you aim at something, you'll never hit it."  He looked at me not knowing how to take it, but selected a 5 iron punch, took dead aim at the tree, whistled by the trunk and his ball came to rest 20 feet from the pin, sank the putt for birdie and was the happiest aging rock star for a few hours...

Mission accomplished.

cheers

vk

[Lou_Duran]

David Royer,

A caddie can't diminish those things that make a golf course great.  How good the caddie is and how well his principal communicates what is required of him (the caddie) can affect our enjoyment and perception/appreciation of the course.  I find golf to be very difficult and having good information, specially when it is my first time, allows me to focus entirely on my 50+ swing keys  .

Messrs. Choi and Hutto indicate that they prefer finding their own way.  Presumably they don't suffer the consequences of their perceptual mistakes on their scorecards.  Me, I much prefer to find the ball in the landing zone or in the hole after being given a line by my caddie and making a good stroke than relying totally on my wits and being quite wrong.

James, my caddie on #2, was in the top two or three I've ever had carrying my bag (though Goodale and I share some Scottish cultural traits, it would probably take more than two hands and feet to count the number of caddies I've hired).  He might have missed a couple spots on the greens, but I was probably wrong half the time on the direction of the break, and nearly always on the amount.  He didn't diminish my appreciation of the course at all, but added to my enjoyment of the round (maybe not $105's worth).

I would find the US Open much more interesting if the pros would be prohibited from getting advice from their caddies AND put on the clock once it was their turn to putt.  If the course is F & F, those could be some long rounds.  

[Terry Lavin]

High school caddies add little other than the chance to help a kid out, but an experienced caddie on a great course adds measurably to my experience. Getting advice on angles of attack and tricky putting lines is always appreciated.

[JimB]

I think Mark's post here answers the OP well. I thought it was a very interesting take.

One of the biggest mistakes in my golfing life was taking a caddie the day I played TOC.  As you know, I'm a fairly short hitting straight hitter.  Every hole the caddie gave me a line, and I hit it.  I shot 71 and really (for me) didn't miss a shot all day.  Not only did I not hit it in the trouble, I didn't even know it was there.  I missed so much of the experience of figuring out how to get around The Old Course that even putting it at 18 is a stretch.  

[Brent Hutto]

Messrs. Choi and Hutto indicate that they prefer finding their own way.  Presumably they don't suffer the consequences of their perceptual mistakes on their scorecards.  

Scorecard?

When I'm playing solo rounds on golf trips I do keep a running Stableford score in mind each round. And when I play multiple rounds at a course I try to keep up a sort of "eclectic" tally of which holes I've made birdies on pars on versus the ones I've still to conquer, so to speak.

But no scorecard for me. Not on vacation, not ever.

[Steve Lang]

  Does a course review by Ran diminish a great golf course?

[Tim Martin]

Despite my previous post I am a big fan of caddies and although I have drawn the occasional lemon they almost always enhance the experience for me.

[Richard Choi]

Lou, as I have said before, the joy of getting fooled by a well designed feature greatly outweigh the pleasure I get from one or two less strokes. I see no point in a hacker like me caring a great deal about scoring.

And, V, I think many great folks around here who have played a round with me will vouch that I am far from a dour sourpuss on a course. Not wanting to hire someone to carry my bag is not a result of some personality disorder.

The thing that really confuses me are the people who despise lasers and even yardage markers but have no problem with caddies. That makes no sense to me.

[Colin Macqueen]

Dear VK,
'Tis oft thought that the Scots are "dour and humourless' but this is just a mistaken caricature!
I for one don't think of myself as a slap-dash, happy-go-lucky chap but to be thought of as "dour and humourless" because I want to play my own game hurts me to the quick! I am almost certainly a greater hacker than most on this board but I do like to know that it is my effort and mine alone that contributes to the match result or my medal score. To me that is exactly where the fun is.

Orra best,  Colin

[Rich Goodale]

"Reading the subject of this thread and many of the replies, I feel like no on this site has ever played a spirited match for money..."  V. Kmetz

Mt. Kmetz

I, for one, have played many a spirited match for money, mostly for just a golf ball or 1£, but sometimes for sums of money that would significantly exceed even the greatest (non-pro tour) caddies daily earnings.  In none of those matches has a caddie been present.  In fact, none of the rounds which I chose (or was required) to take a caddie involved any  money changing hands between myself and my playing partners.

As for dourness, I can vouch that neither Richard Choi nor Colin Macqueen nor Lou Duran (to mention some of the commenters above) are at all dour.  Au contaraire!  Each are enjoyable playing companions, each able to club themselves and read their own putts, and recognising (as Richard C. has noted above) the great thrill of discovery when you make a great read or even make a horrible one.  You learn and you move on, smiling....

And finallly, as for caddie reads, I have seen many more bad ones than good ones.  Ask Lou Duran about his "caddie" at "Top 5 in the world GC" (TFITWGC) who gave him a read on a 25 foot putt which broke at least a yard away from the line his caddie was suggesting....

All the best

Rich

[V. Kmetz]

CM, RC, and RG...

You very well may NOT be dour, humorless sons of guns, but that's the way it reads to me whenever we get to this recurring thread.

CM,

I meant no insult to one of my fox-hole, oft-ardent supporters, but I do take issue with the "mine and mine alone" portion of your reply. I hear that way too much from all walks of Golf..."My score," "My Day" "My swing" "My experience"...and while its just a grammatical device to take possession of words and ideas...when it comes to the emotional heart of the recreation, something's lacking.  It is not just caddies...as I said before Golf is  a social game - the "publicness" of it, whether for tournament or a foursome, is one of the grand emotions it lets you synthesize and re-invent...your triumphs, humiliations, agreements, arguments and conversations within it are part and parcel of the thing itself.  A denial of the value of Caddies on such a basis is no defense, to my mind.

RC,

You or I are not responsible for the symmetry or logic of those who "like caddies, but resist lasers and yardage books" so I can't definitively answer for their systems of thinking, but I do notice that the difference between the aid of a caddie and the aid of another technical development is the difference between something human/machine; they do not aid in the same way...a laser or yardage book (or...3-dimensional hologram of the putting surface with arrows and instructions for that matter!) cannot tell you about grains or speed relative to putts you have played before, cannot remind you that the opponent lies 4 in the fringe, and therefore a commercial lag to within 5 feet is as good as a bomb, cannot tell you that though the wind "feels" into the face on an approach, it's downwind above the treeline and up by the target, cannot let you know that if you must miss; it must be to the right on this one and left on this one...cannot help you find the ball....

RG,

...which brings me to RG's brief exposition of his match history vis a vis gambling.  I think the experience I use as comparison is colored by the fact that I caddie for a huge stakes game 2-3x times a week in the summer...every shot, certainly every putt, is worth $200-300 ( a little more on the Back 9) and lost balls can result in almost a $1000 loss depending on the hole.  Even though its monopoly money to them, it would be unthinkable to not go out with a caddie, the best one the yard has to offer. Indeed I watched about 20,000 of their shots this summer and lost three (3) balls in toto...and I still hear shit about those three...  Of course they and that experience are extreme (they know that they don't play golf as much as gamble with Golf) and it is akin to being a favored dealer in a casino, however the ethos of that (I want to win this match for money) is common amongst the 5000 loops and 1000x I've played in the last 30 years.

Perhaps more to say later...

cheers

vk

[Sean_A]

VK - the desire to win a match at our level should not hinge on the value of the bet.  Because rich guys toss around $100 notes doesn't make the match any more important than the guys playing a $1 nassau.  The bottom line is caddies for most is an economic decision.  Its no secret that caddies are overwhelmingly associated with expensive private clubs and very high end public courses.  I would be happy to pay a kid $25 to carry my bag for 4 hours - thats about all it is worth to me because I don't associate golf with the service industry and I would prefer to keep the two separate.  I would be very displeased to hand over $100 for a guy to carry my very light bag, do menial labour and offer advice for a game which I don't take seriously.  Sometimes I do it as a means to an end (IE part of access to a course I want to see).  That does not in the least represent what golf is for me and I suspect the very large majority of golfers.  On the other hand, I don't care if guys like dropping money on caddies, more power to them.  Live and let live.

Ciao  

[V. Kmetz]

SA,

Indeed, clear and understandable...but this topic (and its many variants) has not been motivated by Live and Let Live, has it?

Living has been going on...but some must express their displeasure with it, and make a tortured "topical" reference, as pertaining to GCA.

For my part, I would never say anything again, if others did not...but I have no inclination to let disparagement pass when it occurs.

cheers

vk

[Sean_A]

Okay, I guess I didn't take the title very seriously.  Of course great architecture is great architecture regardless of how golfers choose to approach the game.  I can understand the divide in wanting all the help one can get in producing the best score and the concept of live and learn.  I fall somewhere in the middle - meaning free advice is welcome  .

Ciao

[Carl Nichols]

I think Mark's post here answers the OP well. I thought it was a very interesting take.

One of the biggest mistakes in my golfing life was taking a caddie the day I played TOC.  As you know, I'm a fairly short hitting straight hitter.  Every hole the caddie gave me a line, and I hit it.  I shot 71 and really (for me) didn't miss a shot all day.  Not only did I not hit it in the trouble, I didn't even know it was there.  I missed so much of the experience of figuring out how to get around The Old Course that even putting it at 18 is a stretch.  

Seems to me that Mark's mistake was in (apparently) asking the caddie just one question, i.e., where to hit it -- rather than all of the other questions he could've asked about the course. 

[David Davis]

The last time I was required to utilize a caddy I simply couldn't believe how bad he was. No matter what he said or advised nothing went in. Not a single putt. At the end I handed my putter to him and said,"kid you've got to be the worst caddy in the world."

The caddy turned back to me and said,"Sir, that would be too much of a coincidence!"


I always instruct my caddies to kindly let me play the game and only offer advice when I ask. I like to know the line on the tee shots, especially if I'm only playing the course once and it's not obvious.

[Marc Westenborg]

Maybe slightly off subject, but just for fun, I recently caddied for a chap called Steve Van Vuuren during the English Senior Open at Rockliffe Hall - a course I designed.
I questioned him on whether any of my attempted design methods to develop false distance perceptions had any impact on his game? The answer, a resounding "NO". His caddy and him work out the distance and stick to it religiously; no matter if the pin appears closer or further. "But does it not impact you swing psychologically in any way" I asked? Again the answer was a resounding "NO"
I suppose I knew this was the case for the Pro’s anyway but still disappointing to hear.  So in professional golf and professional caddy’s, without doubt they diminish a great course to a certain extent.
Hopefully the other 99.9% of golfers are still fooled but “distance perception” design techniques??

[Lou_Duran]

I suppose I knew this was the case for the Pro’s anyway but still disappointing to hear.  So in professional golf and professional caddy’s, without doubt they diminish a great course to a certain extent.
Hopefully the other 99.9% of golfers are still fooled but “distance perception” design techniques??

Can it be construed from the above that a course's "greatness" is inversely related to the golf IQ of its players?  Is the architect's ability to deceive more or less important than designing and building features that most can see but still challenge?

Dr. Mac was famous for his "camouflaging", though much of the deception that I've seen of his work is on and around the greens.  Pasatiempo garners cult-like devotion on this site is such a course, with King Putter participants gathering above the 18th green and delighting in the three and four putts from nearly everyone.  On one occasion, the HP joined my group for a quick 9, and he birdied five of the holes.  His comment: you have to know where and how hard to hit it.  If they slowed the greens down and one played the course regularly, would that diminish its greatness?  I think not.

The pros will know all the distances and breaks at Pinehurst #2 next year.  There will be little deception.  If conditions are F & F, the approaches will have to be flown to the right spot or punched with the proper weight to have a chance of holding the green for a putt at birdie.  Miss a green on the wrong spot, and the recovery will require great precision.  No secrets will be kept from the players.  Its greatness will not be diminished.

[Jason Connor]

On the very rare occasions I play with a caddy, I always try to make my own read for a putt and then run it by my caddy to see what he thinks. If the caddy's read is different from mine, I defer to his.

That way you are engaged as an "active participant," but you are also likely to sink a few more putts!

DT

That's exactly what I do.  And I enjoy it. best of both worlds.

[Brent Hutto]

No secrets will be kept from the players.  Its greatness will not be diminished.

I've said many times on this forum that if the putative "greatness" of a course depends on fooling a player who has never seen a certain hidden feature before then that's a pretty poor notion of "greatness". A golf course is not a child's pop-up book whose purpose is to stimulate an "OOOOH!!!" reaction when something unexpected appears out of nowhere.

I'll offer an inverse definition of greatness. A great course should reward a careful, thoughtful player's 100th round just as much as ones first round ever. If all it took were hidden swales, dead ground and contours in putting greens too small to see from 150 yards it would be very straightforward to built a great "pop-up book" course.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()