|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Jun 19, 2015 7:46:37 GMT -5
I'm not sure I understand the argument about rakes. Even though TGC has its problems with regards to rules and such, you always get relief from rakes and moveable obstructions in real golf, and since we can easily avoid placing rakes on tournament courses, i would recommend we just avoid putting rakes on courses at all, since the ball tends to get trapped under and around them.
I would never take anything away from a course that has rakes put on it, because I think they look cool and I like seeing them, but since the rules don't allow for proper relief, I just think we should leave them off of our tournament courses.
Edit: just saw the bit about chipping on green. I think it should be allowed at all times. I'm cool with the decision to outlaw it, but I think that's contrary to the rules. I don't think its bad sportsmanship in its own, only if you decide to do it to spite the course or the rules and DQ yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2015 8:18:30 GMT -5
Are people really that bad at lag putting that they'd prefer to chip? Surely you get more control with a putt?
Anyways, my thoughts are I like a tough test but not one where there is trouble absolutely everywhere on every shot.
Long par 4? Bigger fairway than a average par 4 and not as many hazards. A short par 4 should have trouble everywhere off the tee.
Long carry over a hazard? The next shot should be rewarded with an easier approach shot compared to if you just layed up.
There's nothing worse than bunkers everywhere, especially on a long par 4. Garden at Canterberry Hills is a good course that should be amazing if it wasn't for the excessive use of bunkers.
Some designers concentrate on difficulty off the tee when they should put more emphasis on difficulty on the green complexes. If you happen to have a tough driving hole ease up on the green complex.
It's a tough balancing act indeed and we all have different opinions but we all play the same course though so I guess there is no such thing as unfair. Ive been guilty of saying 'unfair' before when I should really have said 'unrewarding'.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on Jun 19, 2015 11:50:33 GMT -5
Apples and oranges, Dawg. One is avoidable by design, one is not. Putting in rakes = bad design for a tournament course. Chipping on green = bad sportmanship. Again, I agree to disagree with you. Rakes are no worse than any other poorly placed object. You hit a rake in a sand trap ... well that is just a bad shot and you shouldn't have hit there in the first place. It was unlucky. Period. End of story. Same can be said about yardage markers in the middle of the fairways. It is unlucky. Maybe the game doesn't allow for the relief (YET) ... but it's no more unfair than staring down a right to left break on the green ... and you cannot see the hole because your golfer is blocking the shot to set up the proper line ... And your retort here will be the same predictable response.  Don't really believe in luck.... And, It's not that I have anything against rakes per say (even if I had one kick my ball into a bunker the other week in a tournament) - all the clutter that has no value for the play of the course equally have no place in the field of play on a competition worthy TGC course. HB should make sure that their "golf simulation" follows the rules of golf where possible. But, we'll just have to disagree.... As long as I get the last post.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2015 12:31:09 GMT -5
Lol ... simple solution to cure rakes for HB, would be to turn off the collision aspect of them, yardage markers and cart signs. This would allow their use and not interfere with all errant shots.
I'll give that some overuse them. I had my spell using them. .. I still think a couple add to the realism and thus have their place in the game. And since rakes are usually found near a bunker, you shouldn't be near by them in the first place. Just another part of the hazard.
And now, I will let you have the last reply on this issue
LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on Jun 19, 2015 12:46:06 GMT -5
Tried to resist the urge to post... But:
No collision would a brilliant work-around.
|
|
|
|
Post by boynsy on Jun 19, 2015 18:55:12 GMT -5
I know that we're sort of pushing the boundaries here too, but sometimes hitting a rake in the bunker IS more of a penalty anyway. I've seen people move their balls my removing the rake that it was up against, and I believe that this is at least a one stroke penalty in real life. And as Bubba Spieth said, you shouldn't be going near the bunkers in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on Jun 19, 2015 19:26:27 GMT -5
Its not a penalty - but ball must be replaced after removing the rake. It's a movable obstruction, rule 24-1.
|
|
|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Jun 19, 2015 19:28:10 GMT -5
I know that we're sort of pushing the boundaries here too, but sometimes hitting a rake in the bunker IS more of a penalty anyway. I've seen people move their balls my removing the rake that it was up against, and I believe that this is at least a one stroke penalty in real life. And as Bubba Spieth said, you shouldn't be going near the bunkers in the first place. Rule 24-1 (USGA) allows you to move a rake in a bunker and no penalty if the ball moves while removing. There is no situation in the rules where a rake would ever come into play unless you hit it with an approach shot, in which case that's rub of the green. But it's always moveable with no penalty. |
|
|
|
Post by boynsy on Jun 19, 2015 19:28:19 GMT -5
Isn't that only true if you mark your ball before moving the rake? I thought if you moved the rake and it caused your ball to move, that was a penalty.
EDIT: You've actually quoted the rules at me, I'll admit I was wrong here!
|
|
|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Jun 19, 2015 19:50:57 GMT -5
Isn't that only true if you mark your ball before moving the rake? I thought if you moved the rake and it caused your ball to move, that was a penalty. EDIT: You've actually quoted the rules at me, I'll admit I was wrong here! This is a good point actually, I'm not entirely sure but I believe without marking you still get free relief. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on Jun 19, 2015 21:27:42 GMT -5
Marking the balls position (not lifting it as that would be a penalty unless the ball is in or on the obstruction) before touching the obstruction is best practice to avoid disputes - but not nessecary.
|
|
|
|
Post by rod81simo on Jun 19, 2015 21:43:15 GMT -5
Marking the balls position (not lifting it as that would be a penalty unless the ball is in or on the obstruction) before touching the obstruction is best practice to avoid disputes - but not nessecary. Yeah, you can't touch the ball but if it does happen to move with the removal of the rake then you are to replace the ball as accurately as possible to the original location and lie, meaning that if it was a fried egg lie, then if will still be a fried egg lie.... |
|
|
|
Post by boynsy on Jun 21, 2015 15:11:55 GMT -5
Are people really that bad at lag putting that they'd prefer to chip? Surely you get more control with a putt? Anyways, my thoughts are I like a tough test but not one where there is trouble absolutely everywhere on every shot. Long par 4? Bigger fairway than a average par 4 and not as many hazards. A short par 4 should have trouble everywhere off the tee. Long carry over a hazard? The next shot should be rewarded with an easier approach shot compared to if you just layed up. There's nothing worse than bunkers everywhere, especially on a long par 4. Garden at Canterberry Hills is a good course that should be amazing if it wasn't for the excessive use of bunkers. Some designers concentrate on difficulty off the tee when they should put more emphasis on difficulty on the green complexes. If you happen to have a tough driving hole ease up on the green complex. It's a tough balancing act indeed and we all have different opinions but we all play the same course though so I guess there is no such thing as unfair. Ive been guilty of saying 'unfair' before when I should really have said 'unrewarding'. Under normal circumstances I agree with you in regards to the hard shot/ easy shot mentality, although there does need to be a variety of degrees of difficulty within the holes too. Sometimes, following up a hard tee shot with a hard second shot can create a good, challenging hole, and sometimes an easy hole can be a nice break for the player, particularly if it's a good looking hole with interesting features. That being said, any hole that is a 'breather' should appear early in the round in my opinion, and 16, 17 and 18 should really make your players work for birdies. |
|
reebdoog
TGCT Design Competition Directors
Posts: 2,742 
TGCT Name: Brian Jeffords
Tour: CC-Pro
|
Post by reebdoog on Jun 22, 2015 10:39:39 GMT -5
See I want one of those last three holes to be a birdie hole at least. It gives you moments like you had at the open this year where there is still a chance for more than one guy going down the stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by boynsy on Jun 22, 2015 11:50:43 GMT -5
See I want one of those last three holes to be a birdie hole at least. It gives you moments like you had at the open this year where there is still a chance for more than one guy going down the stretch. I have two, slightly contradictory responses to that. Firstly, in my opinion anyway, most 'traditional' golf courses should include a par 5 within the last 3 holes which is, intrinsically, a birdie or better chance if you play it well (my school of thinking is that courses should probably finish 5, 3, 4 with 17 being a signature par 3 (think Sawgrass)), and the other two holes shouldn't be un-birdie-able with a decent approach. Secondly, if the last three holes are punishing mistakes (once again, think Sawgrass with all the water), people are still in with a chance when making pars, because there is no guarantee that other people in contention are making their pars. It might be slightly less exciting to watch, but I think it ramps up the pressure on every single shot, and at that point in the tournament, birdies should be like gold dust. Oosthuizen's 6 birdies in 7 holes would have been far less impressive if everyone else on the course was making similar surges towards the end. In addition to this, if you have easy birdie holes, there isn't much chance for someone to move forwards. Even if a hole sees lots of birdies, statistically (unless it's a par 5) it is not going to see many eagles, if any. Therefore, nobody really gains anything from the hole, and there is the possibility they may lose. Basically, testing players while still rewarding good/ risky shots, in my opinion, provides the best chance for late leaderboard changes and the most drama towards the end. |
|
