[John Chilver-Stainer]

I just read on the PGA Website that Jason Day is concerned about a weakness he has with over-drawing his 3 wood.
This week at TPC Sawgrass he expects to have the driver taken out of his hands at least 3 times and possibly 6 times.


From the normal 14 drive opportunities he is being forced 6 times to play below maximum from the Tee and play his dodgy 3 wood or other club.


Should the players have their drivers obsoleted this many times or should there be more non-driver tee shots?
OR should they just grip down!?!

[BHoover]

Maybe the driver and ball simply go too far? When Norman and Zoeller finished -24 and -20, respectively, in 1994, I don't recall them being forced to take less-than-driver on many holes.

[Matt Kardash]

It's because a lot of the holes are S shaped. When the course was built it was plenty long for the pros to bomb away with drivers. However, in the past 35 years the course has only been lengthened maybe 100 or 200 yards. The result? The course now plays shorter than Harbour Town and players now drive it through the doglegs. There are a few holes that need to eventually be lengthened at some point.
Only 15 years ago the 9th was still unreachable in 2 shots. This week you will see pros go for the green with an iron. The 18th hole went from a pretty long par 4 to a driver and a sand wedge.

[Thomas Dai]

Golfers spend money on clubs and balls and fitness etc with the aim of hitting the ball further and then..........we spend more money to length courses. Crazy. Roll the ball back.
Atb

[jeffwarne]

Golfers spend money on clubs and balls and fitness etc with the aim of hitting the ball further and then..........we spend more money to length courses. Crazy. Roll the ball back.
Atb

Naaah, just shave the banks, speed up the greens-after redoing them 27 times to accommodate the speed to make them "fair"(and any other labor intensive pursuit one can think of...)
to "protect par" and maintain the illusion-




rather than addressing the 800 pound gorilla in the room

[Peter Pallotta]

I say:  just wait patiently for 30 more years, at which time the course will feature an array of short Par 4s and an abundance of quirk, and tour pros will praise it as old school and gca.commers will marvel at the genius of Pete Dye in creating a course that has stood the test of time and continues to provide fun and challenge for all levels of golfers...

[Tom_Doak]

When the course debuted on Tour in 1982, the players had a field day critiquing it.  I asked Mr. Dye at the end of the week what was the most interesting criticism of it, and he said Howard Twitty [one of the longer hitters then] had complained it was "too short."  Pete thought he was probably right.  So that's always been there, at least for the longest hitters.  And now, of course, most guys are long hitters.

[Jeff_Brauer]

It's an interesting question for general design.  Frankly, at TPC I am surprised it's that few.  I would be okay conceptually with 3-4 times where the driver is an option, but probably not the best play.  6 strikes me as too many, although, and again, if driver can be hit, but the golfer elects not to because of narrowness, hazard, etc., that may be okay. 

But, if the short doglegs are forcing it, it won't be popular.  Courses from the 1920's (Colonial, Medinah pre Rees) got unpopular on the tour due to 200 yard doglegs and shaped shots.  The pace of obsolescence seems to be increasing.

When I interview average golfers, the standard response to "How many times is it okay for the gca to take the driver out of your hands?" is "0".  Some may say once, but it's rare.  We all dig the long ball, even tour pros.

I wonder if just a little tree clearing here and there on those gently angled fairways would be all that is needed to recreate the originally intended challenge somewhat further up the fairway? (Haven't been there in a while)

[A.G._Crockett]

It's an interesting question for general design.  Frankly, at TPC I am surprised it's that few.  I would be okay conceptually with 3-4 times where the driver is an option, but probably not the best play.  6 strikes me as too many, although, and again, if driver can be hit, but the golfer elects not to because of narrowness, hazard, etc., that may be okay. 

But, if the short doglegs are forcing it, it won't be popular.  Courses from the 1920's (Colonial, Medinah pre Rees) got unpopular on the tour due to 200 yard doglegs and shaped shots.  The pace of obsolescence seems to be increasing.

When I interview average golfers, the standard response to "How many times is it okay for the gca to take the driver out of your hands?" is "0".  Some may say once, but it's rare.  We all dig the long ball, even tour pros.

I wonder if just a little tree clearing here and there on those gently angled fairways would be all that is needed to recreate the originally intended challenge somewhat further up the fairway? (Haven't been there in a while)

Jeff,
Out of curiosity, when you ask the question in the third paragraph, is there any implication of what the second shot length will be?  Since I've never been a pro, I don't know how much it matters to them, but speaking ONLY for myself having second shots that are as long (or almost as long) as the tee shot on a hole where I couldn't hit driver is not much fun. 

[Tim Gavrich]

The course will play 7,215 yards this week, par 72. The playoff score last year was -12 (which is neither especially low nor high, as "winning" scores go), and the finish to the tournament was one of the most entertaining all year. It's really hard to fit the blind "the ball goes too far!" narrative in amongst those fact, but that will never stop many on this site, which is fine I guess. You guys are like Old Faithful.


The truth is that the recent technological changes to the golf ball have made TPC Sawgrass more interesting. Players can now reach the 9th in two? Best of luck with that, as small as the green is and as challenging shots around that green seem to be. Yeah, watching the entire field hit a sand wedge into that green would be sooo much more interesting...


The pros hitting a club or two less into 17 than they used to? That makes them feel more aggressive, which makes the hole all the more dangerous and exciting. Fowler's cojones and great execution on that hole basically won him the tournament.


Re: the course's "S-shaped holes," where players hit their tee shots through the fairways, wouldn't it be EASIER for them to fit their tee shots around those curves with a shorter-flying, higher-spinning ball? As it is, players who can shape their shots have a distinct advantage over the brutish bashers. Isn't that what we want?


With all due respect, you guys are picking on the wrong golf course.

[Kalen Braley]

Well Boo-Hoo for Jason,

How about the guys who are dodgy with their chipping around the greens?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their putters?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their long irons?

I like Jason's public persona, but he lost a few points on this one....

P.S.  He must really hate the par 3s...no drivers there either! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

It's an interesting question for general design.  Frankly, at TPC I am surprised it's that few.  I would be okay conceptually with 3-4 times where the driver is an option, but probably not the best play.  6 strikes me as too many, although, and again, if driver can be hit, but the golfer elects not to because of narrowness, hazard, etc., that may be okay. 

But, if the short doglegs are forcing it, it won't be popular.  Courses from the 1920's (Colonial, Medinah pre Rees) got unpopular on the tour due to 200 yard doglegs and shaped shots.  The pace of obsolescence seems to be increasing.

When I interview average golfers, the standard response to "How many times is it okay for the gca to take the driver out of your hands?" is "0".  Some may say once, but it's rare.  We all dig the long ball, even tour pros.

I wonder if just a little tree clearing here and there on those gently angled fairways would be all that is needed to recreate the originally intended challenge somewhat further up the fairway? (Haven't been there in a while)

Jeff,
Out of curiosity, when you ask the question in the third paragraph, is there any implication of what the second shot length will be?  Since I've never been a pro, I don't know how much it matters to them, but speaking ONLY for myself having second shots that are as long (or almost as long) as the tee shot on a hole where I couldn't hit driver is not much fun.

AG,

I asked that question of average golfers.  They just pull out the driver.....and most get really offended when they can't!  I didn't ask, but I don't have the impression that the average guy even relates it that far to the second shot.

I do agree to nearly everyone, it seems more natural for the tee shot to be longer than the approach.  A 3 iron, 3 Wood hole would be an abomination.  Yeah, no rules against it, it just doesn't seem right!

[Pat Burke]

I played in two players championships in 96 and 97
Hit three wood on 1
Three wood on 4
5 wood or three wood on 12
And three wood occasionally on 18


I was about mid pack distance wise

[JESII]

Drop the mic and walk off stage...














Seriously though Pat...on the topic of hitting less club off the tee at your level. Do you see it as poor architecture? Gimmicky? Or a signal that a change (to the ball or the course) would be best?

[Peter Pallotta]

Jim - from a hacker's perspective I'd say that golfers at the level Jason, Pat, and you play at should be able to shape their tee shots -- if not with a hot faced modern driver and a spinless new ball, then at least with a 3 wood. From Nicklaus' playing day's perspective, I'd say Jason may have just talked himself out of the tournament

[Andrew Buck]

Well Boo-Hoo for Jason,

How about the guys who are dodgy with their chipping around the greens?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their putters?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their long irons?

I like Jason's public persona, but he lost a few points on this one....

P.S.  He must really hate the par 3s...no drivers there either! 

Well, all the top players have to do 20 - 25 minute media sessions, and they're bound to be asked what challenges the course presents them, especially someone like Jason who hasn't played great there.  I haven't watched the interview, but I doubt he was complaining about the course as much as expressing some of the ways it challenges him. 

[JESII]

Peter,

I hope my comment then question to Pat wasn't misconstrued.

We all sit here b.s.ing about what should/could happen and Pat succinctly lays out what does happen. The ultimate 'drop the mic' moment!

My question(s) were sincere...and I agree with you that Jadon Day should be able to turn the ball to fit a hole better.

That said, each golf course favors one type of player over the others...maybe TPC favors the ball control guys!?!

[Kalen Braley]

Well Boo-Hoo for Jason,

How about the guys who are dodgy with their chipping around the greens?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their putters?
Or the guys who are dodgy with their long irons?

I like Jason's public persona, but he lost a few points on this one....

P.S.  He must really hate the par 3s...no drivers there either! 

Well, all the top players have to do 20 - 25 minute media sessions, and they're bound to be asked what challenges the course presents them, especially someone like Jason who hasn't played great there.  I haven't watched the interview, but I doubt he was complaining about the course as much as expressing some of the ways it challenges him.

Andrew,

Fair enough, my first reaction was in fact overdone.  I went and listened to his interview and he certainly wasn't complaining about having to hit his 3w....just mentioned that it was the one club in his bag that he's the least comfortable with and that he'll have to use it more.

Seems like a very honest admission and I give him kudos for that....so I officially retract my last post! 

[Jon Wiggett]

John,


I do not think it is a problem that players need to hit a variety of clubs off the tee not just the driver. It is the player that needs to adapt their game to the course not visa-versa.


Tom,


I bet that Mr. Twitty didn't win the tournament and that the winner did not complain about the course being too short.


Jon

[Sean_A]

Does it matter in the slightest what the pros do?


Ciao

[Jon Wiggett]

Does it matter in the slightest what the pros do?


Ciao

Yes.

[Sean_A]

Does it matter in the slightest what the pros do?


Ciao

Yes.

Let me guess...just about as much as par matters  [size=78%].[/size]


Ciao

[Matt Kardash]

Does it matter in the slightest what the pros do?


Ciao

Well, this was a course that was built for the pros to play on, so I presume if there is any course in the world where it does matter what the pros do then I guess it would be this one.

The fact of the matter is that this course plays not as Dye originally intended; both in terms of length and presentation. I thought this group was all about preserving the designers original intent? If the 9th was meant to be unreachable in 2 shots then that is what was intended.

[Pat Burke]

Seriously though Pat...on the topic of hitting less club off the tee at your level. Do you see it as poor architecture? Gimmicky? Or a signal that a change (to the ball or the course) would be best?



Not sure I can answer that as an all or nothing, good or bad thing.
There are certainly holes I am forced to hit less than driver on that I love.
But there seemed to be times when holes are built to purposely limit the distance a player can hit it for no reason other than limiting that.


I played a lot of golf at La Quinta Hotel way back when I could still, see my toes.  Loved the place.  There was some serious fun on the Mountain and Dunes, but at the same time, I always felt the Mountain had a lot of fairways that just ended in a drop off in to rough.  When we played the state open there in the late 80's, it was basically like most of us hit our approached from the exact same spots on numerous holes.  As much as I liked the place, I wasn't a fan of that.
I'm a huge fan of holes that tempt me to squeeze a driver in sometimes, even if it's borderline stupid to try.  Kingston Heath is a favorite, and always seems to offer opportunities to do something stupid with driver, while giving great options for well placed tee shots further back...could play there every day


When I was working with my Srixon irons last year, I was informed that my 167 yard 6 iron was only being hit with 13 mph LESS than Keegan Bradley was!  The speed being generated by the kids is mind numbing. 

[Peter Pallotta]

Jason shot 63 today. I guess guys *used* to talk themselves out of contention in Jack's day,, but maybe the sports psychologists have solved that...

Good posts, Pat, here and on the dogleg thread

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()