Tim:
Low handicap player, are you?
I don't agree with your point. People are different and it troubles me when they think everyone should think like they do.
If you need to focus on your score so your mind doesn't wander from the design, that's fine. Like Sean, I get more out of watching others' approach shots and how their different angles and trajectories play out. And if you have three other golfers to play with, that's a lot better data set than just concentrating on your own score.
Tom,
Thank you for taking the time to post. I am actually a very average player indeed! In fact, I believe I play off a very similar handicap to that of Mr. Mackenzie (maybe the only similarity between us!).
I’ve thought overnight and this morning about your’s and Sean’s statements about watching others to understand angles and trajectory. In theory this works, and you are right. To give an example, I played recently at my home course with a +3 handicap. He relied on me a lot for lines, and I sometimes put him in the wrong spots because I underestimated his ability. For example, he almost drove it into a bunker 40 yards short of a green (on a par4) that most are trying to clear for their second! It was a joy to watch, and made me appreciate bunker placement more because some bunkers had double impact – well positioned for the average player to challenge on a second or third shot, but also well placed to challenge a tee ball / second shot for the better player. In this respect, I do believe this could be a superior way to appreciating design.
However, two issues I have with the theory above. 1. It supposes that you are playing with others. For your confidential guide, I am guessing there are times when you play by yourself, or with others who are a similar handicap? In this case, how do you try to maximise the appreciation for the design of the course?
2. And this point may be controversial
J But if I am trying to appreciate the design of a course, certainly I can speculate as to how it will play for others by watching them play, but I will never know their thoughts to playing the course as well as my own. For example, if I am watching my +3 buddy play a course, I still don’t know if he is having a good day/ a bad day; if he is taking on a 1-100 shot or a routine standard shot, etc, etc. If he lands in a bunker, I can speculate at weather the bunker is well placed, but it may be that he hit an abnormally bad shot, and therefore, it actually wouldn’t challenge most players of his ability. My point being that I would rather contribute my thoughts on a course design from the perspective of someone who was my ability, and would rather the +3 and 20 handicaps give their thoughts on course design from their perspective. That is why I discredit the Golf Digest rankings. A good golfer who plays with me can watch and make observations about how the course plays for a 10 handicap, and may be right. But he/she won’t be more right than I will…because I am the 10 handicap! I would speculate that this is close to the reason why architects like Pete Dye work(s)ed with pros like Jack Nicklaus.
All that said, I do believe that there are those who have an eye for this sort of thing, and imagine that a lot of those who learn the most from observational data will be right here on GCA. I just don’t think that 99% of us have that ability…yet! Maybe it is learned. I will certainly try to pay more attention to my partner’s games as a result – especially when I am playing a new course.