|
Post by Violinguy69 on Jul 14, 2019 8:05:25 GMT -5
Prediction:
Next tournament has 144 greens for two rounds and everyone complains.
|
|
|
Post by grinder12000 on Jul 14, 2019 8:12:34 GMT -5
I’m in the process of making 15 weather scenarios for conditions. Cold fronts. Warm fronts. Rainy weekends, hot heat waves and so forth. Numbers can be tweaked and so forth
|
|
|
Post by lessangster on Jul 14, 2019 8:39:56 GMT -5
Prediction: Next tournament has 144 greens for two rounds and everyone complains. Everyone except me 😊 we get so many fast and very fast greens it would be nice to have a change, combine that with soft conditions.
|
|
|
Post by grinder12000 on Jul 15, 2019 20:04:01 GMT -5
All I wish is realism in a tournament. If it’s 144 the next 3 next day MAX should be like mid 150s. Not 187 lol. Or that I have ever seen that. If it’s slow keep it on the slow side the entire event.
I think designers have a say don’t that? You can only tweak the default?
|
|
|
Post by amusedokie22 on Jul 16, 2019 10:05:03 GMT -5
The last few tournaments I’ve played on the CC Tours we’ve been getting course settings of firm, firm, fast or very firm, very firm, very fast or combinations of with the odd medium thrown in for one round. Is there any chance we could use soft, or slow settings some rounds. I know the slow green setting can cause problems for some but it is a variation you get on a normal golf course. Just lately all we seem to be getting are courses played of the tips with variations of firm/very firm or fast/very fast how about now and again playing rounds on a slightly shorter course that rewards accuracy not length but played under soft/very soft fairways and greens and maybe medium to slow greens. Any time we play a course on slow/soft settings, people complain about that too. There's no way for these folks to win. As a designer, I design at 187 to try and avoid yellow/red pins under any conditions, and then publish in a non-default 170s since that seems to be what most schedulers want - because players go nuts if green speeds go below about 150. I'm I'm new @ this, so forgive perhaps a stupid question. What do the "187," "170's," and "150" mean?
|
|
|
Post by lessangster on Jul 16, 2019 10:41:44 GMT -5
Any time we play a course on slow/soft settings, people complain about that too. There's no way for these folks to win. As a designer, I design at 187 to try and avoid yellow/red pins under any conditions, and then publish in a non-default 170s since that seems to be what most schedulers want - because players go nuts if green speeds go below about 150. I'm I'm new @ this, so forgive perhaps a stupid question. What do the "187," "170's," and "150" mean?
Speed of roll on the greens with 187 being about the fastest and 150 being about medium speed I think you can go down to 119. On a 187 speed green that’s snooker table flat if you did a full backswing and hit it the ball should roll 187 feet, on the same green set at 150 the same ball should only travel 150 feet with the same stroke. It’s a way to simulate slow wet greens by setting them under about 130 but no body uses slow greens on the Tours because the top players don’t like them slower than 144.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 17, 2019 11:40:02 GMT -5
The range of green speeds is 101-187.
The discrete options offered by the game are:
Very Slow: 101 Slow: 119 Moderate: 144 Fast: 163 Very Fast: 187
Almost all courses published these days have a default green speed above 144, and most of those are above 163.
Speaking about the Challenge Circuit:
We have rarely used a green speed that was more than the next discrete value up or down from the default. In other words, if the course has a default green speed of 170, we would almost assuredly use Fast (163), default (170) and Very Fast (187) greens throughout the event. This allows us to offer varying conditions while maintaining the course's playability and challenge.
We have been more aggressive in varying the green firmness. We've had several rounds with Soft greens (usually paired with the slowest greens for the week and overcast skies) and several events with wide variations in firmness between rounds.
Most often, the terrain firmness has matched the green firmness each round.
|
|
|
Post by lions67 on Jul 21, 2019 19:18:13 GMT -5
As long as I never have to play on 101-104 green, I’m happy. Those speeds are like putting through glue.
|
|
|
Post by fadgewacker on Jul 22, 2019 11:29:30 GMT -5
FWIW (which is likely to be little) - I'd never change the green speeds from default, only changing up the conditions regards firmness. Slowing and speeding the greens really messes with the playability and quality of the playing experience on the greens, IMO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2019 16:06:30 GMT -5
Nah sod that Fadge. I love playing courses in all different conditions. A good course should be able to play in all conditions.
|
|
|
Post by fadgewacker on Jul 23, 2019 3:13:39 GMT -5
Nah sod that Fadge. I love playing courses in all different conditions. A good course should be able to play in all conditions. I agree, it should, but there are so many courses that are good, yet go to sh%$ when you mess with the green speeds. What you should be able to do, and what you are able to do with the tools on offer are different things Os.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 23, 2019 11:41:06 GMT -5
there are so many courses that are good, yet go to sh%$ when you mess with the green speeds. Please name some, and provide the default green speeds and the green speed at which the course went "to sh%$". I would like to know the pattern, so maybe we could avoid it next season. To be clear, the feedback from season 4 was that it sucked that the conditions didn't vary from round to round, and that many people wished we could go back to TGC1. I'll remind you that the conditions varied wildly in TGC1 - especially considering the insane firmness of Firm greens. I do not believe that modifying the green speed from fast to very fast (for example), or vice versa, has such a drastic effect that it turns a good course "to sh%$". Convince me otherwise. Come with data.
|
|
|
Post by fadgewacker on Jul 23, 2019 12:26:10 GMT -5
there are so many courses that are good, yet go to sh%$ when you mess with the green speeds. Please name some, and provide the default green speeds and the green speed at which the course went "to sh%$". I would like to know the pattern, so maybe we could avoid it next season. To be clear, the feedback from season 4 was that it sucked that the conditions didn't vary from round to round, and that many people wished we could go back to TGC1. I'll remind you that the conditions varied wildly in TGC1 - especially considering the insane firmness of Firm greens. I do not believe that modifying the green speed from fast to very fast (for example), or vice versa, has such a drastic effect that it turns a good course "to sh%$". Convince me otherwise. Come with data. Alright Robocop. Give me a little time to retort. I’ll provide the evidence you require to verify my passing comment. I’m not attacking schedulers (far from it), simply stating fact that on PGA this year, there have been times where changing green speed from default (you know what default is, I assume) created situations where the course played somewhat unnaturally I.e. balls hanging on slopes that were meant to feed a good shot to the hole... that sort of thing. Sadly, I’ve not encyclopaedically logged each green speed vs course vs speed change... if that’s information you want, feel free to trawl the PGA threads for the snippets of info. Otherwise, take what I’ve said as a bit of inside info... otherwise discount them as the ramblings of a disruptive wanker.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 23, 2019 15:05:12 GMT -5
I don't think you're attacking schedulers, but you're making baseless claims. If you want to see change, give us some information that supports your claim. Otherwise, "cool story, bro."
I get that "playability" is subjective, but at least if you come with something like, "on Augusta, the green speeds were dropped from the default 177 to 119, and on Hole 16, my ball got stuck on the slope that was meant to funnel the ball down to pin 4," we have something to go on. If we know what doesn't work, then we'll avoid it.
|
|
|
Post by fadgewacker on Jul 23, 2019 16:32:30 GMT -5
I don't think you're attacking schedulers, but you're making baseless claims. If you want to see change, give us some information that supports your claim. Otherwise, "cool story, bro." I get that "playability" is subjective, but at least if you come with something like, "on Augusta, the green speeds were dropped from the default 177 to 119, and on Hole 16, my ball got stuck on the slope that was meant to funnel the ball down to pin 4," we have something to go on. If we know what doesn't work, then we'll avoid it. Christ - I was making a general observation, on topic, in a quiet moment during a very busy working day. I haven’t the time, nor the inclination to catalogue past issues regards this (it’s been a long, hot day), but take the Deere Run event the other week... hole 6. If you’ve not heard about it I’d be surprised. Left alone, at default speeds, that kind of rubbish isn’t happening, certainly not to that extent. An extreme case, sure, but there are many other cases where ramping up or slowing down the speeds make a mockery of otherwise excellent course greens. Unable to hold with any kind of shot, or unable to use the slopes as intended. The slowing of the speeds plays havoc with downhill putts not taking break for a portion of the putt too... but it’s just another part of my cool story. It happens at default, it’s a HB thing, but tweaking the speed down makes it worse. Take from my comment as little or as much as you will, I really couldn’t care less how baseless you believe my claims to be, but designers set green speeds for a reason (maybe some designers could comment). Some courses, generally the ones with less creative options around the green seem to handle the sped changes with less obvious deviation. A selection of the ones we play on PGA don’t.
|
|