MikeB
Amateur Golfer
Posts: 255
TGCT Name: Mike Branca
Tour: Elite
|
Post by MikeB on Jun 8, 2019 10:57:07 GMT -5
So why is it 100 feet? If you can putt, you putt. If you cant, you chip or flop. Seems pretty simple.
Here's a big problem I have with this 100 foot rule. You're limiting designers on greens. I have to look around the green, measure 100 feet from any hole on a top tier, and make sure I can putt from there on 144 greens. So you have a fight between designers and players who think it's their right to reach all par 5's in 2, and if they do hit the green then it must stay within 100 feet, no matter what or else it's a bad design (despite this being a possibility in real life, yet fictional courses cant do it).
What's the downside? That someone is 101 feet away and putting downhill and cant chip it now?
|
|
|
Post by hoosierjoe on Jun 8, 2019 13:00:47 GMT -5
Leave it as is. If your are > 100ft from the pin, you have mismanaged your approach, simple as that. This just leads to people chipping/flopping over slopes and going against the way the course was designed to be played. To me its no different than leaving yourself an in between pitch into a green vs laying up shorter for a normal wedge that would be easier to control. As for slower greens and uphill putts, there should be accountability on the course selectors for that. Courses with large greens and severe undulations shouldn't be slow speeds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 14:14:42 GMT -5
Imop the top tours should have no grids and no approach cam considering they are the best of the best.
The rule should be the only time you are allowed to not use a putter on a green is if you are obstructed. That's it. As said above if you leave yourself a 100 foot putt you mismanaged the hole. It's on you. I have played over 500 rounds and can't even recall a putt over 70 feet. With no grids I'm more worried about a 10 footer then a 50 footer. 50 footer is easier to read ππ.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Jun 8, 2019 15:18:14 GMT -5
When you say "mismanaged" your shot, I only have to point you to this upcoming week's course for the US Open. Sure if you mismanage your shot and not hit the 1x1 landing spot, you will pay the price of having it roll and roll and roll, all cause you missed that 1x1 spot.
As for designers, they can have 200foot long greens if they want. They can even have tiers. They key is if a course has that, then the schedulers shouldn't be making the events with slow greens. Back in TGC 1 and 2, the schedulers could only schedule the speed that the designers set the greens at, but that is no longer the case. All of this honestly shouldn't be an issue if the Rangers and Schedulers were doing their jobs properly. When I Rangered and I saw courses that might pose a problem, I would take pictures and make notes saying exactly that, greens slower then "X" you are going to have issues getting up some tiers.
It is one thing if the green is just big and your max putt rolls up 20 feet short. I could live with that. It is when you have to go up one really big or a couple tiers, max power it and not only does it not make it up all the tiers, but it turns around and dumps ya back where you were.
Seriously the stupidest part of the rule is to have to intentionally knock the ball off the green because no putt you could make will make it anywhere near the hole. SO knock it off the green so you can then chip/flop. Being forced to do that because of an artificial limitation of the game is really stupid. If you were able to hit a putter 50-100 yards, that would be different. Anyway I think that is why Doyley ended up making the 100 foot rules because he understood a person shouldn't be penalized to have to intentionally putt off the green, just to get the ball up by the hole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 17:17:20 GMT -5
Sounds like a horrible course.
Again I have not had a put longer then 70 feet that I can recall. That's playing blind and very aggressive. You have grids, a magical unicorn that takes you to where your ball is going to land, pin marker, putt marker with exact elevation, a trackman that follows you around the course, wind speed, and even a awesome bright yellow tracer if you want one.
But that's not enough. Let's have chipping on the greens!
I have no skin in the game though. Really don't care because I'll never play assist golf. Rather watch MSNBC all day π
|
|
|
Post by Giraffe72 on Jun 9, 2019 6:30:13 GMT -5
The rule is fine as it is. The one proviso is I think schedulers need to take the greens in to account when setting the speeds. Without revisiting a much debated event earlier this season too much, we had one on CC-PRO with very slow speeds on multi tiered greens. The reason given was the 'greens are a hazard.' That doesn't work for me. I have no problem with the concept of being in tough positions on the green where 2-putts are improbable but you should at least be able to get it there! That was totally down to the conditions, not this rule.
|
|
|
Post by Celtic Wolf on Jun 9, 2019 6:36:04 GMT -5
The rule is fine as it is. The one proviso is I think schedulers need to take the greens in to account when setting the speeds. Without revisiting a much debated event earlier this season too much, we had one on CC-PRO with very slow speeds on multi tiered greens. The reason given was the 'greens are a hazard.' That doesn't work for me. I have no problem with the concept of being in tough positions on the green where 2-putts are improbable but you should at least be able to get it there! That was totally down to the conditions, not this rule. Hey I quite liked that much debated event from earlier this season, I finished 8th in CC-B on that one. But I don't think it was down to me playing well more a case of coping better than others.
|
|
|
Post by grinder12000 on Jun 9, 2019 9:37:12 GMT -5
How do you know a green has a 3 foot elevation from 200 yards away IRL. Does a little number pop up on your GPS? Which one do you have as I want to get that one. IRL = In Real Life Thank you for telling us what IRL is, much appreciated. A pet peave of mine is weekend hackers (no offense, I just mean 18+ handicappers who enjoy golf but are generally not very good) coming on a video game golf forum and expertly explaining what golf is like IRL thinking they are schooling somebody. So thank you for schooling me on what golf is like IRL. From your response I thought you might need some schooling since you missed the IRL spot. Sorry. I guess you just canβt read. My bad. I live in a golf course and if you falsely believe a 18 handicap golfer is bad you are clueless on what non handicap golfers do. Maybe you need to get out more funny story. We watched a guy break his driver after his 4th bad attempt of a drive LOL then he whipped out is dong and peed on the tee. The joys of watching golfers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2019 10:11:44 GMT -5
The rule is fine as it is. The one proviso is I think schedulers need to take the greens in to account when setting the speeds. Without revisiting a much debated event earlier this season too much, we had one on CC-PRO with very slow speeds on multi tiered greens. The reason given was the 'greens are a hazard.' That doesn't work for me. I have no problem with the concept of being in tough positions on the green where 2-putts are improbable but you should at least be able to get it there! That was totally down to the conditions, not this rule. Agree it is up to whoever runs the society to set the course up. If you want to change green speeds from what the desinger intended it's on you to test it out. I have had a couple hiccups on my society when I ramped up the green speed to 187 from 163. One was at Deere run by HB. Forget what hole but a lot guys took 10s. Since then if it's set to fast I don't raise it to very fast unless I test the course. Imop 175 ish is a great green speed. I can then take it down to 163 or raise it to 187. Problem is we can't choose that speed. What societies need is a slider for greens speed. Then you could take 163 greens to say 173 instead all the way to 187. Too much of a gap.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jun 9, 2019 12:03:30 GMT -5
Agree it is up to whoever runs the society to set the course up. If you want to change green speeds from what the desinger intended it's on you to test it out. I have had a couple hiccups on my society when I ramped up the green speed to 187 from 163. One was at Deere run by HB. Forget what hole but a lot guys took 10s. Since then if it's set to fast I don't raise it to very fast unless I test the course. Imop 175 ish is a great green speed. I can then take it down to 163 or raise it to 187. Problem is we can't choose that speed. What societies need is a slider for greens speed. Then you could take 163 greens to say 173 instead all the way to 187. Too much of a gap. I agree with your points. Just wanted to note that, in this specific instance, the default green speeds were 133, and for the specific round where this became a problem, the speeds were set to "Slow" (119). It isn't that we deviated from the default speed by a great deal. This isn't something comes up often and HB could resolve the entire issue by increasing the max power of a putt (by increasing the max initial speed of a putt, not increasing the speed of the greens themselves).
|
|
|
Post by Giraffe72 on Jun 9, 2019 14:59:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Jun 9, 2019 23:23:36 GMT -5
Oh yeah plan to see that happen on many occasions.
|
|