Golf Architecture and Lack of Talent

[Mike Hendren]

Many of you cannot fathom this, but there are golfers out there capable of a:
Top
Smother hook
Double-Cross
Chili-Dip
Bladed pitch
Push-fade
Excavation (big-time fat)
A couple of birdies
All in a day's work.  

[Joe Hancock]

Would you rather play a course that demands a well struck shot all the time, or a course that sometimes allows a skulled 8 iron to end up by the hole? Of course, maintenance has as much to do with that as architecture, but still....

Just the other day I hit an alcohol induced worm burning skull (never left the ground) from 155 yards on #15 at Kingsley with a 9-iron to ~6 feet.

I almost felt bad about it until I remembered I was getting a stroke on the hole.

I was vividly remembering a shot I hit on #4 @ Kingsley when I made the above post. Funny how architecture and tip-top turf conditions make a bad shot so memorable.

[JC Jones]

Many of you cannot fathom this, but there are golfers out there capable of a:
Top
Smother hook
Double-Cross
Chili-Dip
Bladed pitch
Push-fade
Excavation (big-time fat)
A couple of birdies
All in a day's work.  

throw in a shanked putt and you've pretty much summed a round for me.

[Joe Hancock]

Many of you cannot fathom this, but there are golfers out there capable of a:
Top
Smother hook
Double-Cross
Chili-Dip
Bladed pitch
Push-fade
Excavation (big-time fat)
A couple of birdies
All in a day's work.  

throw in a shanked putt and you've pretty much summed a round for me.

When should I come up for a match, even up?

[George Pazin]

Of no relevance whatsoever, Bogey, save for (in the case of quality architecture) providing that poor soul with definitive confirmation and assurance that his wounds are indeed self-inflicted. A strong medicine that, and a bitter pill to swallow -- a slow road to perdition for those who refuse it, but for those willing to swallow it the sure and narrow gate to a fuller enjoyment of the game. 

Peter

I disagree with my friend Peter entirely.

The point of golf course architecture is accommodation. Not pandering, simply providing an area to accommodate the mishit. That doesn't mean without penalty, it simply means without penalty strokes, wherever possible. Whenever and wherever possible, the architecture should accommodate the missed shot. It may mean a missed shot, but it shouldn't mean a missed shot plus a penalty shot.

Golf is a weird game. The game itself is discrete, yet the best courses provide non-discrete solutions. Took me 15+ years to figure that out, but at least I did. Most don't.

[JC Jones]

Joe,

It was not I who went radio silent 2 weeks ago when I was in Michigan.

I know you and the perm are scared 

[Colin Macqueen]

Many of you cannot fathom this, but there are golfers out there capable of a:
Top
Smother hook
Double-Cross
Chili-Dip
Bladed pitch
Push-fade
Excavation (big-time fat)
A couple of birdies
All in a day's work. 

".....throw in a shanked putt and you've pretty much summed a round for me."


Ah, yes Michael, my game in a nutshell! And I did notice you kindly omitted The Hosel, my nemesis, but JCJ has had the courage and  temerity to shine the light of day on this blight ...... but a shanked putt whoa!

Cheers Colin

[Lyne Morrison]

Should arcuhitecture primarily influence the destination (i.e., score) or the journey?    While "both" is the obvious answer, please pick one or the other and explain.  Thanks.

Bogey
(soon to go by "Pick-Up")

The architectural journey influences the destination, and the 'influence' of the journey should not be underestimated.

Ideally, said journey should be player inclusive, provide a reasonable yet manageable degree of challenge for the average player along with the potential to score - this delivers the critical fun factor that directly influences a players desire to return.

Where these elements fall short, so too does the architectural script and 'the journey' experienced by the player.

Lyne