|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 13, 2016 14:58:02 GMT -5
I just did southern hills and kept adjusting so the ball didn't Bounce like it was rubber but still kept the speed maxed out and it plays very fair your never gonna have realistic scores its a video game hello I believe more Sunday pin placements help keep scores down you still get rewarded for good shots Thats a very good course |
|
|
|
Post by nocturnal on Sept 13, 2016 15:05:08 GMT -5
There is absolutely zero chance to make everyone happy. I believe that the administration here is trying to keep courses from being one tricky ponies. The limitations of settings for firmness in this game combined with the unbelievable ease of hitting straight shots and the high % of lengthy putts dropping are what bring about these dilemmas. The biggest issue is with RCR courses. Designer's hands are tied when trying to recreate an accurate version of a real venue...to a point. I recreated East Lake and the biggest problem I faced was that the tee shots are not challenging. Angles to attack pin from are really the only consideration needed or hazard to navigate.....so the greens are the courses only defense. Most of the greens at East Lake slope back to front. This immediately gives you 2 things to consider. Medium firmness greens will result in dialed in approaches with short putts for birdie. This means that the better option would probably be firm greens right? Well the greens in general are on the small side at East Lake (unlike links style courses) so the only way to hold them is to tilt the greens to borderline solid yellow around the whole green or exaggerate (or add) tiers to slow ball down. This also results is a lot of rear pins placements and/or shots that require you to land the ball in front of the green. That's no good either. The compromise for me was to use medium firmness and tuck pins as much as possible, place pins near changes in sloping to force safe shots or bailout areas to avoid more sever sloping, encourage shots to be played below the hole, and to create a bit more overall slope to make the inevitable plethora of short putts more than kick in formalities. I realize that a lot of people see firm/firm and medium "tricked up" courses equally bad but with the current limitations with the designer and the game in general, it is tough (especially with RCR courses) to create a course for the elite golfers that we have here that play realistic with somewhat realistic scoring. When you look at the TGCT PGA/Euro stats vs the RL Pro Tours, every type of course we play, regardless of the level of difficulty or settings used has higher FIR, GIR, and putting percentages so what's is big deal anyway?  |
|
|
|
Post by Airik3333 on Sept 13, 2016 15:27:20 GMT -5
Good points above.. To me it wont matter.. The same people bi@tching about the courses right now will still be bi@tching about getting beat down.. I can hear it now..
"This sucks.. I shot my career best 50 under and still lost the tourney by 15 shots"
"You have to birdie every freakin' hole around here to be competitive"
"These greens are too flat ! You can't see the subtle breaks in them and that cost me 5 shots this week.. follow my ghost and you will see how many lip outs I had because it's impossible to read flat greens.. Follow my ghost, you will see"
"These designers are tricking us by making these greens flat with little biddie breaks you cant read"
"That's it I am done.. I am burnt out on trying to read these greens.. They are so freakin' soft that you get no roll out so you can't tell what the break is doing "
|
|
|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 13, 2016 15:52:27 GMT -5
I love a good rant post of someone complaining about people complaining.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Sept 13, 2016 15:55:23 GMT -5
I truly get the feeling that this decision was made more for the non-elite players who want to feel that they can be competitive if they shoot lights out. There is more of a chance for them doing that in medium conditions than there is on firm conditions. Lets face it 7 or 8 players pretty much dominated both tours taking over 70-75% of the tournament wins, maybe more. Ian dominated the Euro tour by over 11 million dollars and got so bored he moved over the PGA mid way through cause his lead was so big with the hopes of winning the Fed Ex Cup and guess what he is a win away there as well. He is better than even odds to win since only the other 4 top 5 players can win it all with a win, should they out play him by a shot. If you look at the tournaments the field has been much closer and competitive in non-firm conditions. Too many people, including myself are finding it tedious at times shooting four fairly good rounds and still barely cracking the top 30. In my last tourney I shot lights out for one round, reasonable (for me) for two other rounds and fell about 6 shots short of what I felt was a reasonable score for round 2. If I had shot it, I take 7th. Even if I took my best practice/tournament scores (I played the course about 20 times over four practice rounds) I still wouldn't have cracked the top 3. So if my best rounds that I can shoot in the most ideal conditions wouldn't even get me a win, it weighs heavily on whether I'd like to continue or not. So I can honestly understand this decision. Hopefully because of it we'll have a lot more people in contention at the end tho I would like to make a suggestion. A decision like this will undoubtedly end up with more people tying for first. I'd like to see an extra 9 holes put in as a playoff or something similar.  Put a poll up to see if folks would be interested in playing an extra nine if they think they might be competitive for a win. |
|
|
|
Post by yaters on Sept 13, 2016 16:09:52 GMT -5
I realize that a lot of people see firm/firm and medium "tricked up" courses equally bad but with the current limitations with the designer and the game in general, it is tough (especially with RCR courses) to create a course for the elite golfers that we have here that play realistic with somewhat realistic scoring. When you look at the TGCT PGA/Euro stats vs the RL Pro Tours, every type of course we play, regardless of the level of difficulty or settings used has higher FIR, GIR, and putting percentages so what's is big deal anyway? I don't understand this point of view. Not trying to be argumentative, but who cares if the course plays realistic and has realistic scores? It's a video game and we are playing against each other, not against what the IRL tour pros would do. Protecting a course that has medium firmness by trying to make the greens and pins unrealistic is also....unrealistic to IRL golf, right? I totally agree that people will complain no matter what the course is like, but the pursuit of making the game behave like real golf just doesn't add up to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Doyley on Sept 13, 2016 16:42:18 GMT -5
I truly get the feeling that this decision was made more for the non-elite players who want to feel that they can be competitive if they shoot lights out. I think everyone reads the announcement and applies it to their personal situation - but it really was made with the entirety of TGCT in mind. So it applies just as much to CC events as it does Web events as it does PGA/Euro events. Some tours are better equipped (PGA/Euro) to handle firm courses than others (CC) but there has been a common thread across the board - max firm greens are not a good representation of what we expect the game of golf to be. That is the meat of the issue - and if it doesn't feel/play like golf while playing a golf game then we're not doing ourselves any good to keep using these courses at the pace we are currently at. Me personally - I like fast greens and have no issue adjusting to firm greens. But I'm just one person in a sea of TGCT members - and it's not difficult to see which side of the scale would win on a league-wide medium firm vs max firm vote. I've talked with the schedulers - they are well aware that the next issue that bumps up to #1 (now that firm got chopped down to size) is the "tricked up greens w/ super hard pins on slopes". So that part of this discussion has not been ignored - it's just not the focus of this announcement. |
|
|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 13, 2016 16:58:46 GMT -5
I truly get the feeling that this decision was made more for the non-elite players who want to feel that they can be competitive if they shoot lights out. There is more of a chance for them doing that in medium conditions than there is on firm conditions. Decisions like this for reasons like you mention have been taken for quite a while. Sure jus look at the courses selected for the big events recently and coming up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 17:06:24 GMT -5
Well, after taking a couple of hours to play No Man's Sky and having time to think about this whole subject, I realized, quite simply, that I'm a dinosaur. I grew up during a time (the 60s) when things that were hard stayed hard and you worked to get better at them. They didn't get watered down. Kids didn't get "participation" awards. Today, things have changed. We need to make things more fun instead of challenging in order to keep people's interest because of all the varied things there are to do today. You are competing with a multitude of options. So people don't have the time or the patience to do something that takes more effort than they're willing to put into it. That's the reality. I've put in over 2,800 hours into this game to try to get to where I am, which isn't all that wonderful anyway. But I earned it. Nobody handed it to me by making things "easier" for me. It's what I was used to and it's what I expected. Thus, why this decision comes as such a shock to me.
But it shouldn't.
I may have grown up in the 60s, but this is the world I now have to coexist with.
Whatever Scott and the rest of the crew thinks is best, I'll support it. And thus, when I ranger courses, I will do so with that in mind. Otherwise, I can't do my job properly.
I just hope that this was ultimately the right decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by tastegw on Sept 13, 2016 17:20:06 GMT -5
I personally like the change.
will most likely get back in to playing.
but one thing is still bothersome, and that is the notion that designers need to design their courses with the top players in mind.
That is silly if you think about it. Less than 5% of the players playing your course is a top player, why not design it for the other 95%+.
who cares if top players rip your course.
|
|
|
|
Post by HeMan1202 on Sept 13, 2016 17:21:29 GMT -5
Well, after taking a couple of hours to play No Man's Sky and having time to think about this whole subject, I realized, quite simply, that I'm a dinosaur. I grew up during a time (the 60s) when things that were hard stayed hard and you worked to get better at them. They didn't get watered down. Kids didn't get "participation" awards. Today, things have changed. We need to make things more fun instead of challenging in order to keep people's interest because of all the varied things there are to do today. You are competing with a multitude of options. So people don't have the time or the patience to do something that takes more effort than they're willing to put into it. That's the reality. I've put in over 2,800 hours into this game to try to get to where I am, which isn't all that wonderful anyway. But I earned it. Nobody handed it to me by making things "easier" for me. It's what I was used to and it's what I expected. Thus, why this decision comes as such a shock to me. But it shouldn't. I may have grown up in the 60s, but this is the world I now have to coexist with. Whatever Scott and the rest of the crew thinks is best, I'll support it. And thus, when I ranger courses, I will do so with that in mind. Otherwise, I can't do my job properly. I just hope that this was ultimately the right decision. Lol, you gotta see the irony your comment seeing as how much you p!$$ed and moaned about the difficulty when you started and accused people of cheating because they were beating you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 17:27:19 GMT -5
Well, after taking a couple of hours to play No Man's Sky and having time to think about this whole subject, I realized, quite simply, that I'm a dinosaur. I grew up during a time (the 60s) when things that were hard stayed hard and you worked to get better at them. They didn't get watered down. Kids didn't get "participation" awards. Today, things have changed. We need to make things more fun instead of challenging in order to keep people's interest because of all the varied things there are to do today. You are competing with a multitude of options. So people don't have the time or the patience to do something that takes more effort than they're willing to put into it. That's the reality. I've put in over 2,800 hours into this game to try to get to where I am, which isn't all that wonderful anyway. But I earned it. Nobody handed it to me by making things "easier" for me. It's what I was used to and it's what I expected. Thus, why this decision comes as such a shock to me. But it shouldn't. I may have grown up in the 60s, but this is the world I now have to coexist with. Whatever Scott and the rest of the crew thinks is best, I'll support it. And thus, when I ranger courses, I will do so with that in mind. Otherwise, I can't do my job properly. I just hope that this was ultimately the right decision. Lol, you gotta see the irony your comment seeing as how much you p!$$ed and moaned about the difficulty when you started and accused people of cheating because they were beating you. When I first started, I didn't understand the game. I didn't understand the tour format. And I didn't play very well, which I also couldn't understand. I've learned a lot since then. If you want me to have the same opinion that I had when I was totally clueless, fine. If you also want to pick a fight with me, message me privately, I'll send you my address and a round trip ticket so you can come here and do it to my face. But I'm getting tired of the attitude around here. That, in all honesty, puts me off more than the courses do. Trust me, I'll stop playing because of the rudeness around here long before the courses piss me off. Now, if you want to continue this, feel free. But this is my one and only response to you. I'm done with the bickering in this place. |
|
|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 13, 2016 17:28:24 GMT -5
I personally like the change. will most likely get back in to playing. but one thing is still bothersome, and that is the notion that designers need to design their courses with the top players in mind. That is silly if you think about it. Less than 5% of the players playing your course is a top player, why not design it for the other 95%+. who cares if top players rip your course. True that |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 17:29:54 GMT -5
Seriously, people. It's a new rule we will all live under. No need for personal attacks ever. The very reason why I like TGCT is because of the focus on the tours and not personally going after others.
|
|
|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 13, 2016 17:36:05 GMT -5
Seriously, people. It's a new rule we will all live under. No need for personal attacks ever. The very reason why I like TGCT is because of the focus on the tours and not personally going after others. The last few pages of this thread has looked like a thread from the HB forums. Really poor form from a few. Jus as well it wasn involvin a few of the Euros or the ban hammer wudda been slammed down a few times |
|
Put a poll up to see if folks would be interested in playing an extra nine if they think they might be competitive for a win. 
