News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #75 on: August 20, 2019, 01:04:16 PM »

OT-With respect and apologies to Jon Wiggett, you can rail all you want that greens themselves are stationary objects and are not slow or fast (but rather high or low stimp readings) but that's how 99.99% of the golf world talks and quite frankly is a lot better way to describe them than by referencing "high or low" "stimp" readings which only further would serve to elevate that dastardly device and the dreaded word "stimp"..



Jeff,


you might be okay with using what is clearly misleading language but I am. If using the term 'fast green' is so great for you can you please explain what about the green is fast?




D_Malley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #76 on: August 20, 2019, 02:08:27 PM »
"I'm always amazed, in a perceived era of "protecting par" that slowing the greens down (which good players hate-see Tiger) is never considered-especially when combined with the other taboo of actually using interesting sloped hole placements."
This exactly what the PGA tour did at Aronimick when they hosted Tiger's tournament The AT&T
I remember several of the pros struggling with short putts that had alot of break in them.
4-8 foot putts where the speed and amount of break have to be matched perfectly can be very challenging and I think this is what is missing when you have very flat greens.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2019, 02:41:49 PM by D_Malley »

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #77 on: August 20, 2019, 02:20:06 PM »

OT-With respect and apologies to Jon Wiggett, you can rail all you want that greens themselves are stationary objects and are not slow or fast (but rather high or low stimp readings) but that's how 99.99% of the golf world talks and quite frankly is a lot better way to describe them than by referencing "high or low" "stimp" readings which only further would serve to elevate that dastardly device and the dreaded word "stimp"..



Jeff,


you might be okay with using what is clearly misleading language but I am. If using the term 'fast green' is so great for you can you please explain what about the green is fast?

Jon,

I don't think Jeff is off base on this one, given we all know what he's referring to when he says 'faster".

 But if you want to be more precise, a stimp meter is just effectively measuring the coefficient of friction for a specific green. The lower this value, the further the ball will travel as its slowing down less quickly.  So a green where the putt runs out further (with the same initial velocity) has a higher negative acceleration and is "faster"

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #78 on: August 20, 2019, 02:36:04 PM »
Jon,


You've gone on with this topic in the past and feel strangely compelled to defend something about it. Might just be your exemption criteria for GCA.com's Hall of arguing-for-the-sake-of-arguing Fame...


Anyway, as you initially (and accurately) described the initial velocity off the stimpmeter as being the highest. Maybe you could tell me at any moment after that, which ball is going faster; the one on a slow green? or the one on a fast green?  Maybe you could use 1 second after launch. Which ball is going faster 1 second after launch? How about 5 feet after launch? Which one is going faster at that point? Obviously, the ball on a faster green is going faster at every point after launch until both have stopped rolling.


That's why the term fast is appropriate even if the sentence doesn't please you.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #79 on: August 20, 2019, 02:56:11 PM »
Jim,


If two putts are both going to finish 5 feet past the hole which putt is going slower at the hole? Obviously a putt on a fast green is going slower at the hole considering it requires less energy to travel the remaining five feet.

Bob Montle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #80 on: August 20, 2019, 03:09:49 PM »

you might be okay with using what is clearly misleading language but I am. If using the term 'fast green' is so great for you can you please explain what about the green is fast?

How about longer?   Or further?   :o
 ;D
"If you're the swearing type, golf will give you plenty to swear about.  If you're the type to get down on yourself, you'll have ample opportunities to get depressed.  If you like to stop and smell the roses, here's your chance.  Golf never judges; it just brings out who you are."

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #81 on: August 20, 2019, 03:35:15 PM »
Jim,


If two putts are both going to finish 5 feet past the hole which putt is going slower at the hole? Obviously a putt on a fast green is going slower at the hole considering it requires less energy to travel the remaining five feet.

John,

The problem with that is its not comparing like things.  A putt that goes 5 feet past the hole on a "slower" green will need to be struck with a higher initial velocity than the faster one when struck from the same starting point.

One of the primary reasons they invented the Stimp was to hold that variable constant...
« Last Edit: August 20, 2019, 03:36:52 PM by Kalen Braley »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #82 on: August 20, 2019, 03:38:46 PM »
Jim,


If two putts are both going to finish 5 feet past the hole which putt is going slower at the hole? Obviously a putt on a fast green is going slower at the hole considering it requires less energy to travel the remaining five feet.


If we’re hitting it that far by, definitely leave the pin in...at least you should.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #83 on: August 20, 2019, 03:57:21 PM »
Jim,


I used five feet to illustrate the point. Five feet past on a 13 stimp ain’t needing no pin. On an 8 stimp it do. Wonder why?

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #84 on: August 20, 2019, 04:00:22 PM »

Anyway, as you initially (and accurately) described the initial velocity off the stimpmeter as being the highest. Maybe you could tell me at any moment after that, which ball is going faster; the one on a slow green? or the one on a fast green?  Maybe you could use 1 second after launch. Which ball is going faster 1 second after launch? How about 5 feet after launch? Which one is going faster at that point? Obviously, the ball on a faster green is going faster at every point after launch until both have stopped rolling.


That's why the term fast is appropriate even if the sentence doesn't please you.
i think 'fast' works for greens with higher stimp readings: apply the same force to the ball, and it will move much faster and farther there than on a green with lower stimp measure.  Similar to ice being a faster surface than a carpet.   

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #85 on: August 20, 2019, 04:09:44 PM »
Come on Jim...don't you know you'd have to hit a ball much faster on carpet to go the same distance as on ice...




John - Jon Wigget used initial velocity as his benchmark, as it should be in this conversation.


The real issue is that it flat doesn't matter what term is used, flattening greens so they can allow for the faster greens viewed as better is plain old stupid. Keep the undulations and get the greens as fast as those undulations will allow is my preference.

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #86 on: August 20, 2019, 04:16:50 PM »
Does anyone know what the term laid out means?
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #87 on: August 20, 2019, 04:21:22 PM »

Kalen,


I doubt that will ever happen, so don't waste time thinking about it.  And, it would be like telling doctors to go back to "blood letting" (depending on how much of a rollback we are talking about....but even going back a decade in medicine would be a real step back, no?)


It's up to designers (and maybe clubs instructions to their supers) to design for the situation we can foresee, like Ross leaving space for new back tees (even if 100 years later, it has proven it wasn't enough)


Maybe the worst analogy I've ever seen. Sorry for being so blunt Jeff, but come on. Doctors are trying to save/improve lives. Golf is a game played on a playing field that has been drastically affected by technology. Baseball doesn't allow aluminum bats, race cars are frequently limited in some fashion, etc., etc.


You can cheer on the "advances", or hate them. That's everyone prerogative. But at least be honest and accurate about the issue.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #88 on: August 20, 2019, 04:23:25 PM »
Does anyone know what the term laid out means?




HAHAHA

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #89 on: August 20, 2019, 07:35:29 PM »
Come on Jim...don't you know you'd have to hit a ball much faster on carpet to go the same distance as on ice...

Yes, because the carpet is so much slower than the ice. 

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #90 on: August 20, 2019, 11:52:06 PM »

Kalen,


I doubt that will ever happen, so don't waste time thinking about it.  And, it would be like telling doctors to go back to "blood letting" (depending on how much of a rollback we are talking about....but even going back a decade in medicine would be a real step back, no?)


It's up to designers (and maybe clubs instructions to their supers) to design for the situation we can foresee, like Ross leaving space for new back tees (even if 100 years later, it has proven it wasn't enough)


Maybe the worst analogy I've ever seen. Sorry for being so blunt Jeff, but come on. Doctors are trying to save/improve lives. Golf is a game played on a playing field that has been drastically affected by technology. Baseball doesn't allow aluminum bats, race cars are frequently limited in some fashion, etc., etc.


You can cheer on the "advances", or hate them. That's everyone prerogative. But at least be honest and accurate about the issue.



Geez, George, in this day and age of "fake news" and "sound bites" you have to make bold statements to be heard.  That anyone here would actually compare any golf design theory or result to much more important things.....wait, we do that all the time here!  Never mind.


In reality, I never said whether I hated them or cheer them on.  I do neither, and just accept the results because no one has made me king of golf......


Back on topic, I guess it will be interesting to see how TD's Houston course holds up, given he is prone to contouring greens that treat putts like babies treat diapers.  It will sure be a good test of the "more contour and maybe (TD would have to weigh in) slower greens" will be tougher.


I think Geoff S has the right idea, without drastic course changes.  Rotate the events more.  Even hard courses, like Firestone, saw tour scores come down when played year after year.  4-5 year separations might take away some of the players course knowledge (especially if the course is tweaked a bit every time)


Also, based on Tiger's comments, maybe it's not the ball, maybe its the size of the driver head that lets all players swing harder.  Go back to small driver heads (I think I might have whiffed one the other day had I not been playing a 450 CC head driver....) so that only hard, accurate swingers can belt it out without getting in trouble.  Even that might not help.  Saw a Phil stat where he hit fw about 41% and greens at 67%.  Figuring 4 par 3 holes, that's 5 fw out of 14, but 12 greens.  Obviously the rough doesn't hinder proportionally.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #91 on: August 21, 2019, 09:51:58 PM »
Despite the generally negative sentiments expressed in this thread, TV ratings for the BMW championship were excellent, according to this article:

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2019/08/bmw-championship-ratings-nbc-golf-channel/

"Moving out of the NFL’s shadow paid off for the BMW Championship.Sunday’s final round of the PGA Tour BMW Championship, the second event in the FedEx Cup, averaged a 2.1 rating and 3.15 million viewers on NBC — marking the highest rated and most-watched round of the tournament since the final round in 2012 (2.5, 3.6M). That year, Phil Mickelson won and Tiger Woods finished third."

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #92 on: August 22, 2019, 10:12:17 AM »
Despite the generally negative sentiments expressed in this thread, TV ratings for the BMW championship were excellent
Suggesting we're in our own little bubble, passionate about something that means little or nothing to the viewing public. 



Peter Pallotta

Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #93 on: August 22, 2019, 12:22:50 PM »
On the other hand, Jim, it goes to show how statistics can be misleading, ie if memory serves, that viewership number is about half of what the women’s free skate portion of the US Figure Skating Championship typically garners. Which suggests that the only reason we have golf on CBS every weekend instead of figure skating is because the ‘target audience’ for the latter doesn’t buy nearly as many Cadillacs or as much Viagara as the former!

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #94 on: August 22, 2019, 02:52:41 PM »
Peter, in 2017 the US Figures Skating championship final day drew a 1.8 rating.  The third round 2018 BMW event drew 1.7 rating -- and the final round at East Lake last year drew 5.2 rating.  Nearly three times as much as the figure skating.

Tiger Woods pushed those ratings, which won't happen at this year's Tour Championship.  Still, golf gets numbers nearly every week of the year, while the figure skating only comes up once or so.  And if you look at the majors, the numbers really jump. According to Statista.com, here are viewership numbers for final rounds of the 2018 majors...

US Open................... 5.1 million
Open Championship....6.5 million
PGA..........................8.5 million
Masters.....................13 million

From 2 to 5 times more than figure skating. 


My main thought was that the viewing public doesn't care much about golf course architecture.  They like the drama, the great play, their heroes winning or (tragically) losing. 
« Last Edit: August 22, 2019, 02:59:27 PM by Jim Nugent »

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #95 on: August 22, 2019, 06:32:48 PM »
Does anyone think these birdiefests are captivating drama?


I mean...unless there is some incredible human interest story or Tiger attached.


Quick...who finished 2nd and 3rd at Medinah??
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #96 on: August 22, 2019, 07:08:06 PM »
The guy who finished first last week looked spent during his first round today.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #97 on: August 22, 2019, 09:38:34 PM »
Does anyone think these birdiefests are captivating drama?


I mean...unless there is some incredible human interest story or Tiger attached.


Quick...who finished 2nd and 3rd at Medinah??

Cantlay and Matsuyama.  There's one on every crowd.  I happen to watch the final round, and noted that three players finished at -20 or better.

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #98 on: August 22, 2019, 09:41:46 PM »
The guy who finished first last week looked spent during his first round today.

I'm under the impression that Thomas is generally fighting some swing problems.  I don't think he's very precise right now, despite hos great performance last week.

I grudgingly admit the skewed leader board looks intriguing after one round of the East Lake tournament.

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Defenseless Medinah
« Reply #99 on: August 23, 2019, 10:27:10 AM »
In the pre-tournament coverage, Robert Damron picked Koepka over Thomas this weekend largely because of the difficulty of winning two weeks in a row. Think about that. If Koepka (or someone else) wins this week, can they look back and say it’s good they didn’t win the BMW because they had enough left in the tank to win at East Lake. And win about $13 more!  Crazy.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2019, 10:32:30 AM by Terry Lavin »
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken