wmr5277
Amateur Golfer
Posts: 226
TGCT Name: Vitaly Potapenko
Tour: PGA
|
Post by wmr5277 on Feb 1, 2019 13:18:27 GMT -5
You know I dig your work but what kind of logic is "if you try to hit it close, that's dumb, hit it farther away" good shots should be rewarded, not punished. I like this course as I do all of you and fickett's work but just disagree that hole locations have to be right next to false fronts etc. My favorite course of yours is still Crawford but the green on #6 was just bogus on the falose front and up hole location and I think you have an addiction to those types of setups I don't think it's a designers job to police scores and if it is it can't be just due to funky hole locations or green setups. Courses are ALWAYS going to get wrecked. Trying to add treachory to every hole location is just fake defense in my opinion. Again, you are the man and I'm 1% the designer you are, but we just disagree on hole location logic
I agree with the sentiment that funky greens are kind of wacky, but I have several things to say about this -
1.) The 6th at Crawford mines is not a good green.
2.) The logic is not "if you try to hit it close, that's dumb, hit it farther away", but rather "if you try to hit it close, you will probably end up worse than if you try to play away from the pin to the fat of the green." There is usually a chance of hitting it within a few feet on all the pins at Conservatory, but even if you execute a perfect mechanical shot, you'll still not get close if you try to take on the short side of every pin. There is luck and uncertainty involved in taking on most pins, and if you're not willing to take the risk, you should play to the center of the green. Those who do will always have a make-able putt for birdie, assuming they execute the safe shot well.
3.) Courses are not always going to be wrecked, but there is a culture that says that anytime anyone finds a course frustrating (meaning they can't birdie 12 holes a round), it must be a problem with the course. So we don't see courses that actually challenge players on these tours with any other skill besides executing a perfectly straight Fast-Fast shot that judges the wind. Strategy is pretty much non-existent.
4.) Every hole location should have treachery, but not in the same way. There should always be something to punish a player who doesn't think, and to reward a player who takes the time to think about where the best chance of getting a birdie putt is from. Your "#3" point may be most accurate thing ever said on these forums. Don't know if it's possible for me to agree more. Haha.
|
|
twoplanetsaway
Weekend Golfer
Posts: 94
TGCT Name: Peter Jones
Tour: Euro/TST
|
Post by twoplanetsaway on Feb 1, 2019 15:04:25 GMT -5
I loved this course! It's difficult but not for gimmicky reasons. Yes, the pins are tucked but there is usually some kind of backstop or side slope to help funnel your shot towards the hole. Just a highly enjoyable experience that requires thought and precision. Great job!
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Feb 1, 2019 18:24:40 GMT -5
Setting aside the specific ongoing discussions in here....
If person 1 is demanding person 2 see things in the way they do, person 1 should be - at a bare minimum - at least open to the possibility that the opinions of person 2 aren’t unfounded.
There’s no 1 way, and that goes in more than 1 direction
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Feb 2, 2019 4:56:42 GMT -5
Setting aside the specific ongoing discussions in here.... If person 1 is demanding person 2 see things in the way they do, person 1 should be - at a bare minimum - at least open to the possibility that the opinions of person 2 aren’t unfounded. There’s no 1 way, and that goes in more than 1 direction But ultimately there is a three box rule for TGCT standards of tournament play. There are so many pins with two box area's before you hit red/yellow slope or false fronts and run off's etc. I'm not sure if the rangering criteria has changed or if rangers are incorrectly interpreting the box rule, but I'm pretty certain the three box rule means having three boxes of green grid EXCLUDING the box that the pin is in. The pin box wouldn't even count as a box because the pin is located smack, bang in the middle of it. So in terms of tour standards, it's wrong. That said, CSU isn't wrong at all, outside of tour play. I think he does a great job of challenging the best players. The course looks phenomenal. Tee to green is pretty solid and there are many holes with good tee game strategy. If CSU wants to build courses that challenge people, I wish him all the best and to continue doing so. It's just that when it comes to tour play, I personally find it unacceptable, and a regression into the era of TGC1 through to about a quarters way through TGC2, when we were playing tricked up courses often to try and keep low scores at bay. A good challenge for top players? - Yes. A good challenge for the tours? - No.
|
|
|
Post by rob4590 on Feb 2, 2019 5:38:26 GMT -5
But ultimately there is a three box rule for TGCT standards of tournament play. There are so many pins with two box area's before you hit red/yellow slope or false fronts and run off's etc. I'm not sure if the rangering criteria has changed or if rangers are incorrectly interpreting the box rule, but I'm pretty certain the three box rule means having three boxes of green grid EXCLUDING the box that the pin is in. The pin box wouldn't even count as a box because the pin is located smack, bang in the middle of it. So in terms of tour standards, it's wrong.
As a ranger - I think what you are trying to say here is wrong - the rule for the tour is that we report any yellow or red inside the 3x3 box (thus the box that the pin is IN, plus the (8) surrounding ones) - so you can be just over 1.5 boxes from a red slope and it is totally legal. Any less than that - and it's then up to the scheduler to make the call. Generally we also report any pins less than 2.5/3 boxes from the very EDGE of a green...
So I think your definition appears to be rather incorrect....
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Feb 2, 2019 6:20:06 GMT -5
But ultimately there is a three box rule for TGCT standards of tournament play. There are so many pins with two box area's before you hit red/yellow slope or false fronts and run off's etc. I'm not sure if the rangering criteria has changed or if rangers are incorrectly interpreting the box rule, but I'm pretty certain the three box rule means having three boxes of green grid EXCLUDING the box that the pin is in. The pin box wouldn't even count as a box because the pin is located smack, bang in the middle of it. So in terms of tour standards, it's wrong.
As a ranger - I think what you are trying to say here is wrong - the rule for the tour is that we report any yellow or red inside the 3x3 box (thus the box that the pin is IN, plus the (8) surrounding ones) - so you can be just over 1.5 boxes from a red slope and it is totally legal. Any less than that - and it's then up to the scheduler to make the call. Generally we also report any pins less than 2.5/3 boxes from the very EDGE of a green...
So I think your definition appears to be rather incorrect....
So I spent a whole year of rangering doing it wrong? 😂. With that in mind, I honestly think that we're not giving enough green space if that is the rule, as you can see from the comments about this course and my personal experiences as a player/designer.
|
|
|
Post by Terry Grayson on Feb 2, 2019 8:20:25 GMT -5
Is conservatory club hard on the tour version, yes... Is it unfair or tricked up no.... Is it difficult to get close to some of the pins, yes especially on pin four
I love the differing opinions on the course. from all sides and I am not saying I am right with that statement above, thats just my personal opinion.
This is a tough golf course, those that pin seek and want to shoot -16 on it arent going to like it those that dont give a rats hind end like me that love the course because of its difficulty will love it
these fellas built an absolute gem of a course, even warned about how hard it is... Tricky or gimmicky pins, not in my opinion I personally think its the most real life course we have ever had in this game...
Bottom line is if you are a designer in this game you are going to have some folks that really like the course or really dislike the course all dependent uponst whatever they shoot the time they play it. That is what is so unfair... Some scream they want a challenge, but when they are given a challenge and they dont shoot -16 then the course is tricked up the course is gimmicky etc etc... Not all say it that way but a bunch do, and that is a slap in the face to the designers....Thats the unfair part...
Then you will have some that usually shoot -16 and play this and dont shoot that low and they will still love it...
differing opinions are great, I happen to disagree with some notions that this course is tricked up artificially, I think it is a wonderful course, but does that mean I am hating on those in this thread that called it tricked up, no I sure am not....
I appreciate the effort these fellas put into this course, and I believe most if not all feel the same way....
I think I am going to go play it in high winds pin 4 maxed out everything...
Good discussions....
|
|
|
Post by scampi00 on Feb 2, 2019 9:28:33 GMT -5
I thought the course was great. Looked wonderful, excellent sculpted and laid out.
As to the difficulty. I dont play much and therefore suck but I found the course fair.
I thought the greens were a little small for my taste and it was clear from the get go that each pin had a spot but I never felt cheated away from a pin. If I found myself further from the pin, I felt it was my mistake and not the courses.
I will say that it was very clear from the get go that this course was designed to be tough and maybe forcing the difficulty a little bit. That being said I shot 1 over and felt that's a far more realistic score than what most courses endure.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Feb 7, 2019 7:36:37 GMT -5
Lovely, lovely course. I hit a -1 and i play off pro clubs, so i'm pretty chuffed with that! Great challenge, loved planning my shots, (kind of!) loved scrambling for pars, loved being nervous over 4-8ft par savers, simple but elegant sculpting. Truly a wonderful course. Good for a major, i'd say...
quick sidenote- saw a guy saying you should be able to go straight for pins; maybe that's a taste thing, but in pro golf, there are plenty of courses on tour, defo majors (which is why i recommend this for a major course) where you don't aim for pins. Two reasons: first, on a tough course, pars are good, so leaving long birdie putts is being happy with par, hoping for birdie; second, planning for the greens and letting your shot fall towards the hole is a known golf hole strategy, nothing "tricked" about it...
|
|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Feb 7, 2019 9:58:02 GMT -5
But ultimately there is a three box rule for TGCT standards of tournament play. There are so many pins with two box area's before you hit red/yellow slope or false fronts and run off's etc. I'm not sure if the rangering criteria has changed or if rangers are incorrectly interpreting the box rule, but I'm pretty certain the three box rule means having three boxes of green grid EXCLUDING the box that the pin is in. The pin box wouldn't even count as a box because the pin is located smack, bang in the middle of it. So in terms of tour standards, it's wrong.
As a ranger - I think what you are trying to say here is wrong - the rule for the tour is that we report any yellow or red inside the 3x3 box (thus the box that the pin is IN, plus the (8) surrounding ones) - so you can be just over 1.5 boxes from a red slope and it is totally legal. Any less than that - and it's then up to the scheduler to make the call. Generally we also report any pins less than 2.5/3 boxes from the very EDGE of a green...
So I think your definition appears to be rather incorrect....
The 8 box rule has been set in stone for a long time from my understanding, and the greens at Conservatory were specifically designed to abide by this rule, through rigourous playtesting as jwfickett will corroborate.
However, the 2.5-3 grid rule from edge of the green is news to me, but I have obviously been out of the loop for a while as to designing PGA-level courses so I will need to get caught up on the new rules. Since Conservatory is being vetted for PGA-level play, it may take some inching away from green edges. All pins are at least 3 boxes from the edge perpendicular to the line of play, but I think we might have some that are a half-box short on the diagonal. I have been chatting with coruler2 to get this fixed in case the PGA wants to bring an event here.
|
|
|
Post by theclv24 on Apr 30, 2019 9:29:18 GMT -5
Just played this recently. I did not play the Tour version, so I guess I played the standard version?
Excellent visuals on every hole, layers on layers. Really liked the planting, too, and kind of the "bunches" of trees here and there. Definitely a look that I have trouble capturing, so I was taking notes. Also I'm sure it required patience and work... the different texturing of the heavy rough areas really added to the atmosphere.
The hole designs were really good, I felt like I almost always couldn't put my drive where I really wanted to. I also liked the green shapes with the MacKenzie-like knobs here and there. I find myself continually reverting to more oval shaped greens, so another thing that I have to remember to think about.
My only fault would be the green designs and contouring. It felt like all 18 greens were the same, with a back tier, middle tier, front tier, heavily sloped from back to front, and with all of the tiers being quite small. I understand the merits of this design for challenging the best players and keeping scores in check, but for an average level player such as myself, I found it tiresome facing 30-60 foot putts the entire round and hitting to the same style of green at the end of every hole. A little more variety in design would have kept things spicier for me.
|
|