|
Post by mvpmanatee on Jul 20, 2020 10:06:59 GMT -5
Muirfield Villiage is going to be changed and they are starting the work right after the players step off the course today. Jack Nicklaus is not happy with many of the holes - and I thought to dwell some on two of the holes on this course: Lets have a look at two quite similar holes on Muirfield Village - 5th and 11th. Two par 5, water stream on the left of the fairway that comes to the greens so you have water in play on layups and approach shots. The main difference on these two holes are the tee shot. On the 5th, you have a dogleg right with the stream on the far side of the tee shot. The stream is not in play since players are forced to play either a fairway wood or long iron because of the dogleg. Compare this to the tee shot on the brilliant 11th - a straight tee shot with the water stream on the left in play all the way - any hook will be in there. The fairway gets gradually more narrow as you get futher down the fairway. On the 5th, you want to be more to the right of the fairway for best angle for the approach shot - not so on the 11th. You get the best angle the more you are to the left and flirting with the water. If you land too much right on the 11th, you will be blocked by trees and you have the option of fading around them, which is very risky with water all the way on the left side of the green - or layup. I know many fantasy designers here would be tempted to put a fairway bunker in the middle of this fairway - and that would be a mistake similar to the 18th on Sawgrass. You ruin the tee shot. The narrow landing area on the middle to left side is still there without the bunker, but having a bunker there would eliminate a great risk/reward option for the player - forcing a layup. Important to note how the green slopes on these two holes - right to left towards the water. This is important, because you can use the slope on the approach to get the ball rolling towards the pin (important to make that left side the best on the 11th) - and also serve as a way to have that fade shot stay on the green. And the slope makes any miss too much to the right a hard chip down the hill from the rough - making the approach shot a more risky shot with limited landing area. The 5th has more water in front, so it is better to come from the right. The slope on the green also makes spin control important on layup approach. Since you on the 11th must layup on the left fairway, spin control becomes important as your shot is across water onto the slope. Too much spin can make that ball roll back into the water. I know that we don't have the correct spin physics in the game - and I believe it to be due to too firm greens even on soft settings. But in real life - this becomes an important aspect of the strategy for the layup. The player needs to choose correct distance on their layup. Jack Nicklaus is not happy with the 5th - and the reason is that the hole has forced the driver out of the hands of the player. The tee shot is just bad design. So this hole will be changed to a par 4. A correct decision in my opinion. A very good example on how forcing a club out of the players hands is bad design. Oh, there changing 5? Probably a bit of an unpopular opinion, but that’s disappointing. Like, that’s literally one of my favorite holes in the world. I mean, I guess I don’t really care what they do with the tee shot as long as the green complex and creek remains similar. It’s such a beautiful hole- attending the Memorial every year, it’s always my favorite hole to sit by the green and watch. Supposedly they are leaving the green complex but making the tee shot easier to cut off more, leaving players with more of a 5/6 iron in to the green and making it a "true par 4". It will effectively play very similar from the green's point of view, but it would just remove the walk in the park birdie that most pros make there. I agree though, one of the best holes on the course because of that green.
|
|
|
Post by linkslover on Jul 23, 2020 2:54:37 GMT -5
Unless it's a short par 3, forcing a wedge or short iron of the tee is always a terrible idea.
|
|
|
Post by PicnicGuy / BobalooNOLA on Jul 26, 2020 15:22:23 GMT -5
" forcing a wedge or short iron of the tee is always a terrible idea"
I'm in disagreement, only because of this logic - most Par 5 holes will force a wedge or short iron shot at some point, there's only so many possible ways to play, say, a 540-570 yd hole with a hazard fronting the green. Almost every player will end up hitting a short iron or wedge as a third shot, right ? I guess some might play 3i-3i-6i or something, but highly unlikely, IMO.
If you can "force" hazards to be carried, you can "force" a range of clubs on the tee, in my world.
I say go for it !
|
|
|
Post by 15eicheltower9 on Jul 26, 2020 16:45:30 GMT -5
" forcing a wedge or short iron of the tee is always a terrible idea"
I'm in disagreement, only because of this logic - most Par 5 holes will force a wedge or short iron shot at some point, there's only so many possible ways to play, say, a 540-570 yd hole with a hazard fronting the green. Almost every player will end up hitting a short iron or wedge as a third shot, right ? I guess some might play 3i-3i-6i or something, but highly unlikely, IMO.
If you can "force" hazards to be carried, you can "force" a range of clubs on the tee, in my world.
I say go for it !
I just played a par 5 on a course I haven't played in ages. It has a double dog leg. The drive I used to be able to cut the first corner with a driver. But now the trees that line that side are taller. The only club I can use off the tee is a five iron. The second shot used to also be a shot where you could clear the trees if you wanted, but they're all taller, so the second shot is a forced nine iron. It leaves a wedge in. I hated every bit of it. Every shot was a mindless formality. A random stranger in the parking lot after actually asked me what i thought of the hole. That's how bad of an idea forcing clubs is. Edit: There's 54 holes on this course. None of them are all that good. This is the only hole i've ever had a discussion about with anyone, because it's the worst idea on a course full of bad holes. Another edit: Apparently 27 of the holes are now part of a separate course. So there's only really 27 on this one.
|
|
|
Post by SkinniePost on Jul 26, 2020 16:49:51 GMT -5
I just played a par 5 on a course I haven't played in ages. It has a double dog leg. The drive I used to be able to cut the first corner with a driver. But now the trees that line that side are taller. The only club I can use off the tee is a five iron. The second shot used to also be a shot where you could clear the trees if you wanted, but they're all taller, so the second shot is a forced nine iron. It leaves a wedge in. I hated every bit of it. Every shot was a mindless formality. A random stranger in the parking lot after actually asked me what i thought of the hole. That's how bad of an idea forcing clubs is. Forced Shot > Forced Club Selection
|
|
|
Post by jacobkessler on Jul 26, 2020 16:52:55 GMT -5
" forcing a wedge or short iron of the tee is always a terrible idea"
I'm in disagreement, only because of this logic - most Par 5 holes will force a wedge or short iron shot at some point, there's only so many possible ways to play, say, a 540-570 yd hole with a hazard fronting the green. Almost every player will end up hitting a short iron or wedge as a third shot, right ? I guess some might play 3i-3i-6i or something, but highly unlikely, IMO.
If you can "force" hazards to be carried, you can "force" a range of clubs on the tee, in my world.
I say go for it !
But see, even if it’s highly unlikely, you’re still not forcing it on the player. And with forced carries, a lot of pro courses you’ll see forced carries, but typically public or resort courses designed for amateurs will allow for the player to hit around the hazard if they don’t want to go over it.
|
|
|
Post by PicnicGuy / BobalooNOLA on Jul 26, 2020 17:55:37 GMT -5
Man, I wish I had encountered more of those options in my playing heyday of the late 80s-mid 90s.
So.Many.Balls.Wet. LOL.
I get it now, that we're talking 'rules of design for the lowest common denominator'. That's no fun for me, other e-golf designers can have those gigs, I suppose.
I've been fortunate to play with the 2 scratch golfers in the family, and was always impressed by their ability to (for example) loft a 3 iron up by changing ball position in their stance, or stiff-arm a closed wedge and keep it low with a shitton of spin. They would chuckle at 'forced shot=forced club'
Do you guys ever watch the 'Experion Golf' guys on YouTube. The club pro on those is always challenged to play with one club, or old clubs, or some such. He doesn't seem to be so 'restricted' by that.
Anyhoo ... you design your way, I design mine.
|
|
|
Post by SkinniePost on Jul 26, 2020 18:04:11 GMT -5
(for example) loft a 3 iron up by changing ball position in their stance, or stiff-arm a closed wedge and keep it low with a shitton of spin. Thx for the examples of forced shot selection vs. forced club selection.
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Jul 27, 2020 8:43:27 GMT -5
Man, I wish I had encountered more of those options in my playing heyday of the late 80s-mid 90s. So.Many.Balls.Wet. LOL. I get it now, that we're talking 'rules of design for the lowest common denominator'. That's no fun for me, other e-golf designers can have those gigs, I suppose. I've been fortunate to play with the 2 scratch golfers in the family, and was always impressed by their ability to (for example) loft a 3 iron up by changing ball position in their stance, or stiff-arm a closed wedge and keep it low with a shitton of spin. They would chuckle at 'forced shot=forced club' Do you guys ever watch the 'Experion Golf' guys on YouTube. The club pro on those is always challenged to play with one club, or old clubs, or some such. He doesn't seem to be so 'restricted' by that. Anyhoo ... you design your way, I design mine. I think you kind of just gave a great argument against forcing a club selection. By saying your family members can loft a 3 iron up by changing the ball position, well ask why would they do that if the name of the game is simply hit a target? They could just hit a stock 4 iron and be in the same position. If you design with the idea of a hole being 3i-3i-PW and nothing else, you are not allowing the scratch golfer that you mentioned to gain any advantage by using their imagination, over the average 5 handicap that can hit a stock 3 iron pretty consistently every time. Give a scratch golfer a hole where hitting 3 iron is forced, is the course's way of saying that it doesn't really care about your arsenal of great golf shots because none of them will gain an advantage over someone who can't hit those shots. I play to a handicap of 1 right now, and every time I would rather play a hole where I can try to hit a high fade, or low draw, or an extra spinny wedge to gain any slim advantage over my two best friends who are 3 and 4 handicaps and can't control those same shots as I can. By forcing everybody to hit to a target, you are removing the advantage that the best players might have from hitting the heroic shots. PS. i don't mean to use this as a way of justifying a better opinion of the game, just simply as an example case of why I believe this. of course we all have different opinions and thats what makes golf so great.
|
|
|
Post by PicnicGuy / BobalooNOLA on Jul 27, 2020 12:27:55 GMT -5
In the example someone had above (I'm not pasting it all) why couldn't they turn a longer club than a 5-iron or 9-iron around the offending ('oh, look, they grew !') trees they now can't power over ? (they didn't mention any other hazards involved, so I'm assuming it's all playable fairway) Maybe that's a lousy example on their part, because 'working the ball' seems the obvious solution. Seriously, why not ? If you can't execute fade or draw more than 45 degrees L/R, maybe that's on you, not the designer ? I've played with guys who can turn it 60 degrees (wind& lie dependent, of course), haven't you ? Anyway, this is kind of pointless - I'm not in the real life design business, and I won't be teeing it up with you guys IRL, so you won't have to hear me snicker at comments like 'Now I can't carry the trees, I only have one possible shot here'. Of course, I'm like at least a 20 hcp IRL, so whatever you choose, I'd be admiring. Awaiting the next time someone says "it MUST be this way" on a subject, so I can say "really ?". Stay well, shoot low, all, Then there's this guy ... www.countyogigolf.com/who-was-count-yogi.html
|
|
|
Post by 15eicheltower9 on Jul 27, 2020 13:00:41 GMT -5
In the example someone had above (I'm not pasting it all) why couldn't they turn a longer club than a 5-iron or 9-iron around the offending ('oh, look, they grew !') trees they now can't power over ? (they didn't mention any other hazards involved, so I'm assuming it's all playable fairway) Maybe that's a lousy example on their part, because 'working the ball' seems the obvious solution. Seriously, why not ? If you can't execute fade or draw more than 45 degrees L/R, maybe that's on you, not the designer ? I've played with guys who can turn it 60 degrees (wind& lie dependent, of course), haven't you ? Anyway, this is kind of pointless - I'm not in the real life design business, and I won't be teeing it up with you guys IRL, so you won't have to hear me snicker at comments like 'Now I can't carry the trees, I only have one possible shot here'. Of course, I'm like at least a 20 hcp IRL, so whatever you choose, I'd be admiring. Awaiting the next time someone says "it MUST be this way" on a subject, so I can say "really ?". Stay well, shoot low, all, Then there's this guy ... www.countyogigolf.com/who-was-count-yogi.html Its a 90 degree turn and the distance you lose playing a 90 degree fade (if you could even call it that) would still put you 2 strokes out from the green, because the same is true of the second dogleg. Its a forced mid to long iron depending on the golfer off the tee. It's impossible to cut the angle out of the second dogleg because of the tree line. It's actually a stellar example of forcing a club. And why it is not smart. The example you turned it in to is actually how it used to play and an example of a good tee shot. Options.
|
|
5150
Caddy
Posts: 36
|
Post by 5150 on Sept 10, 2020 6:35:17 GMT -5
I recently played a par 5 finishing hole that presented a choice (not forced) off the tee. It plays about 500y. Dogleg left, with a break in the fairway about 230y out that dips down maybe 15 feet. It’s not a penalty area, but it is rough and leaves you with the potential for a downhill lie if you don’t carry to the far side. The green is guarded by water short, long and left with the only bailout being short right - and, if you’re on the downhill lie, you’ll tend to pull the ball left, away from the bailout.
The choices off the tee:
-Driver, but you need enough carry/roll to get you across the depression or at least to the uphill side. If you leave driver out to the right you run thru the dogleg.
-Hit about a 200y shot (4hyb for me) short of the depression. Leaves you another 200y shot for a 100y approach.
I thought it was a thoughtful design, and as others have said, invites options instead of forcing a certain shot.
|
|
M. Rose
Caddy
Double your pleasure! Two new courses today.
Posts: 40
|
Post by M. Rose on Sept 11, 2020 7:30:39 GMT -5
Personally I'm not a fan of anything that forces a layup off the tee, especially on a par-five.
I have no problem with at least one being unreachable, though.
If I have four on a course, then I will make one unreachable, one very reachable, and then the others may be reachable in certain circumstances or if played a certain way. I might go something like 525, 545, 570, 600.
|
|