News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
I read Thomas Dunne's articel in Links where in part he writes, "The issue is that at Harbour Town, the nature of those shots are frequently dictated to the player, and that far too often the demand is to hit it dead straight, or else. Does a true shotmaker’s course limit the player’s options? Sure, in the course of every round the player will probably have to manufacture at least a couple of wild, thirty-yard hooks or slices around trees. That’s shotmaking, all right, but it’s of the forced variety rather than the imaginative."

https://www.linksmagazine.com/links100_course_of_the_month/

I guess I would say if a course dictates varied types of shots it is more of a shot maker's course than one where players can hit their favorite shaped shot on every hole.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2018, 04:14:53 PM by Tommy Williamsen »
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2018, 04:35:57 PM »
To me, a shotmaker's course is one where you are rewarded off the tee and at the green, if you can hit a fade or a draw.


It shouldn't be just about carving it around trees, although trees on the approach can play a role.  It's more about whether the greens reward one or the other, due to angle or tilt . . . so that it tempts you to go for the ideal shot, rather than to just rely on your normal pattern.


I was very happy to hear my new consultant talk about shotmaking in our first conversation . . . the men on Tour hit it so straight and so high now that I thought it was gone for good.  But maybe not  ;)

Peter Pallotta

Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2018, 04:41:12 PM »
Tommy - I think these days it all comes down to the greens. No matter how little the modern golf ball spins (especially off the driver), and no matter how many high-launch-low-spin hybrids we have in our bags, if the fairways are merely reasonably wide then a set of large and meaningfully-contoured greens and variously-challenging hazards & surrounds will still offer us the opportunity to shape our golf shots on almost every hole we play -- as we'll be approaching those greens from different angles and hitting to different pin positions almost every day. 
Peter   

Edit - just saw TD's post before I hit 'send', but I swear I came to my ideas independently!  :)
« Last Edit: October 20, 2018, 10:04:47 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2018, 09:32:04 PM »
One of the reasons that I am such a fan of Hope Valley (Ross) is that although a draw or fade is not dictated on every tee, one or the other is almost always preferable and the greens are large enough with sufficient contour that the pin placement can “dictate” the best shot shape and flight.


Only good players who can maneuver the ball need apply. I am not one, but still appreciate the strategic challenge.


Ira

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2018, 10:21:25 PM »
 8)  didn't Hogan put it simplest?  Draw to a back pin, fade to a short one...
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Mike_Clayton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2018, 10:59:22 PM »
Or low to a back pin and high to a front one. Draws to a left pin and a fade to the right pin.


Seve was the greatest shot maker I saw - especially with the club many saw as his worst. He could hit the most incredible shapes and flights with his driver all to suit the demands of the wind and the shape of the holes.


For those who know the 10th at Wentworth I watch the Martini Tournament in 1980. The pin at the par 3, 10th was way on the right behind the trees.
Every player either went straight at the left quarter with a long iron (it was cold and damp and back when a 3 iron went 190 yards) or flew it straight over the trees and directly at the flag.
Seve took a 3 iron, aimed at the front left of the green and sliced it 30 yards around the trees to 10 feet



It was one of the greatest shots you could ever see but for him it was commonplace.
Of course it doesn't help that the ball is now so much more difficult to curve.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2018, 09:34:24 AM »
Mother nature should be the only dictator.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Kyle Harris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2018, 10:03:59 AM »
Dictated shot: Fade
Fairway lie: Draw
http://kylewharris.com

Constantly blamed by 8-handicaps for their 7 missed 12-footers each round.

Thank you for changing the font of your posts. It makes them easier to scroll past.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2018, 02:40:29 PM »

I've always thought that any given shot is best if the shot pattern is not strictly dictated, but at least strongly suggested. As I have mentioned before, in working with tour players, only a select few great ones really worked all the shots.  JN and others generally prefer to perfect one shot type and practice it to perfection.  Faldo was one who went with what the architecture dictated as the highest percentage shot for success/lowest chance of failure.

Those type of players assess the wind (blows left, play right to left), lie, left lie suggests right to left, and situation of target, i.e., green angles left usually presents the most favorable target on a right to left shot pattern.  As Jim Colbert once exclaimed, "If the wind is left, the target is left and the lie is left, smarter guys than me, but I'm pretty sure I am going to hit a draw." 

As opposed to Kyle's post above, shot makers prefer all (or most) of the signals suggest a shot, then they hit it.  Colbert likened it to coming to an intersection that had both a stop sign and green light.  Which do you think you should do?  Of course, some architects think its a good idea to present a mix of signals to confuse the golfer, add doubt, etc.  And yes, good players like the signals to align because it does clear their mind and allow focus on execution.


Aside from left to right and right to left shot patterns, other players have stressed how they consider high and low (pretty simple, really, tail wind = high, headwind, sidewind = low) ground contours (look for the speed slots for more roll, or hit into a counter slope if too steep cross ways) and high spin/low spin, sometimes trying to reduce spin into the wind, because it tends to add it, but then sometimes reducing it downwind to "chase a shot" all the way to a back pin.

Of course, around the greens, a variety of sand, rough, mounds and fw grass areas lets the short game shot maker with different strengths shine a few times per round.

I consider a shot makers course on where nearly every type of shot is strongly suggested on one hole or another, and through the course of the round each is the preferred shot with the highest chance of success. Thus, over 18 holes, the golfer with "all the shots" should have an advantage over one who doesn't, at least over the course of a competitive tournament or season.  It doesn't have to be the arbiter of shot making every single round.

Lastly, the details count.  The question becomes how strongly to favor a certain shot vs. what to do about the vast number of players who don't possess "all the shots."  A typical example is a hole with a green 60 feet wide and 100 feet long, angling 30-45 degrees left, suggesting approaching from the right side of the fw, and usually with a sand bunker/hazard left side.  A draw will best fit the green shape (the long dimension angling right allows more room for error short and long, vs. coming across the width from the right side, in this case.)

I would typically add containment back left as an extra inducement to come in from the right.  But what about those coming from the left?  Do you screw 'em, really creating the advantage from the right, or arrange things to help out the mere mortals coming from the other side?  I can tell you the potential for "golfer on architect unpleasantness" often stems from situations where a golfer feels they have no shot. :o

Typically, a green angling left is higher at the back right, to promote visibility, so that golfer is probably at least has a 2% upslope to help stop his shot.  That seems fair enough, giving them a way to hold the green on a short depth target.  That same upslope helps the golfer from the right side aim far right and use green slope to roll a shot down to the hole, allowing further room away from the sand bunker left. If the wind is right to left as per above, coming from the left it may straighten the fade and maybe even add some spin, increasing the odds.


My debate is always what to do with the greens surrounds on the right side.  Choices (from least to most forgiving) are additional sand or other hazard, a fall away slope that kicks long shots away from the green, a level open area leaving a reasonable chip for up and down, or containment mounding similar to the back left.  Of course, there is no one blanket answer, even conceptually.  My tendency to add hazard would be more likely on a shorter hole, trending up to more containment on long iron approach shots.

Conceptually, if the shot is 170 yards, they probably need 17+ yards depth, and have about 20 yards to stop the ball, a max of about 15% room for error, not as much room for error as from the right, where there is 33 yards of depth to accommodate the slight miss, which is 50% margin for length error.  Adding hazard or a fall away rough bank makes the shot from the left of the fw, presumably with a fade about half as makeable (see math above) translating to the "half stroke penalty", perhaps?  Maybe more.

Adding containment makes a miss long from either side a chip from just off the green, probably negating the problem of missing long, while maintaining the harder shot from the left, because you can't come up short.  So what, a quarter shot difference?

To some, narrowing the difference between a shot from the proper side and the other side to something negligible is good design.  It lets you play the hole any way you want, with only minor inconveniences.  To others, a shot makers course would really differentiate the difference between preferred shot and others with greater penalty.  And, in a few extreme views, if the penalty for hitting the wrong side of the fw is too severe, it is really penal design masquerading as strategic design, because there is really only a small target to hit off the tee no matter how wide it may look.


Obviously, getting that balance right is pretty important in creating a shot makers course, at least IMHO. 
« Last Edit: October 21, 2018, 03:06:13 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2018, 04:20:52 PM »

And, in a few extreme views, if the penalty for hitting the wrong side of the fw is too severe, it is really penal design masquerading as strategic design, because there is really only a small target to hit off the tee no matter how wide it may look.


Obviously, getting that balance right is pretty important in creating a shot makers course, at least IMHO.


By that logic, any form of penalty on a tee shot would count as "penal design".


I don't like that phrase generally because it means different things to different people.  Personally, I wouldn't say something is penal unless you are penalized on both sides of the ideal target ... but others might counter that it's more about requiring a carry to get to said target!

Peter Pallotta

Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2018, 05:14:58 PM »
Jeff, Tom -
I think that as long you don't penalize a straight shot, everything else is just fine. Let the advantage always go to the golfer who can draw and fade the ball, but as long as the less skilled golfer doesn't feel *disadvantaged* by a straight shot, everyone will be happy/have fun.
P
« Last Edit: October 21, 2018, 05:28:17 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2018, 09:13:18 PM »

And, in a few extreme views, if the penalty for hitting the wrong side of the fw is too severe, it is really penal design masquerading as strategic design, because there is really only a small target to hit off the tee no matter how wide it may look.


Obviously, getting that balance right is pretty important in creating a shot makers course, at least IMHO.


By that logic, any form of penalty on a tee shot would count as "penal design".


I don't like that phrase generally because it means different things to different people.  Personally, I wouldn't say something is penal unless you are penalized on both sides of the ideal target ... but others might counter that it's more about requiring a carry to get to said target!


I think penal architecture is both, forced carries and bowling alley hazards /harsh rough. The real question is how much width is necessary to negate bowling alley rough.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Fraserburgh, Turnberry, Isle of Harris, Benbecula, Askernish, Traigh, St Medan, Hankley Common, Ashridge, Gog Magog Old & Cruden Bay St Olaf

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2018, 12:57:21 AM »
Tommy,IMHO this type of subject makes people think more than they should about a design and thus they try to justify via formulas what makes a "shotmakers" course.  99.9 percent of golfers would not have a clue.  I think there are always at least two moving variables involved determine the shot needed.  One is the individual golfer himself and the other is the hole location on any specific green.  Let's think of a football field for a moment.  Each field is the same and yet a passing team uses it differently than a running team.  Could you consider the quarterback the "shotmaker" and the defensive coordinator the architect?  The quarterback is on the field but based on where his last play ended he calls a play based on what he determines the defensive scheme to be.  It's different everytime and it is usually determined based on the stronger skills or talents of the team.  I see a golf course the same way.  My other question to ponder would be how we define "shotmaker".  Is Bubba Watson more of a shotmaker than a Jim Furyk or some other guy that keeps the ball in play?  We will never have to see the shots played by a Bubba or a Phil from a guy who plays the game from the middle of the fairway.   So I guess I consider all courses to be shotmaker courses.   ;D cheers...
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2018, 10:42:31 AM »

Mike,


Yes, for average players their variation in tee shot distance and location from day to day, and varied pin positions on gently rolling greens should make each hole different enough each day for variety.  Agree 99.9%.


Strategery is mostly for the top 1-5% (I get my ideas from top club players, not the PGA Tour) as to what constitutes a good playing course.  And, they are the tastemakers so to speak, so you can't ignore them.  Also, one reason I use kick plates often is that the average player likes it just as much when they can pull off a creative shot, and have the same thrill of getting close to the pin on a risky shot as a good player.  Like you say, they may not know just how risky it was.....


I consider a balance of shots that rewards length, accuracy and creativity (usually short game, but shaping longer shots) with an emphasis on the latter 2.  Length is its own reward.


So, I guess we all think things through differently.


« Last Edit: October 22, 2018, 10:49:34 AM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2018, 11:00:06 AM »
So, I guess we all think things through differently.
Jeff,I agree with the above statement.  Kavanaugh issue really put it in perspective that so many saw it in an entirely different light...
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

David Ober

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2018, 11:21:41 AM »
To me, a shotmaker's course is simply one where excellent tee to green play is highly rewarded and missing a green often leads to a bogey. A course where, if an expert player misses 8 or 9 greens, it's going to be tough to shoot par or a couple under. In other words, you better have control of your golf ball into the green on a shotmaker's course.


Courses like this would tend to have a high slope relative to length. A 7,000 yard course with a 140+ slope, for instance. Doesn't mean it's a good design. Doesn't mean it couldn't be considered "overly penal." But that is how I define a "shotmaker's course."


On the opposite end of the spectrum would be a fairly simple design with mostly flat areas around greens, bunkers that are not exceedingly deep, and light rough surrounding greens. Typically a course like this would have a low slope relative to its length. A good example would be the old Rancho California Golf Course (formerly SCGA Golf Course, among other names). It's a Robert Trent Jones Sr.(?) design, I believe. 7,050(?) yards with a rating of 74.4 and a slope of only 136(?) with large, (relatively) easy to putt greens. A good player can scrape it around there and shoot around par hitting 7 - 9 greens.


Miss that many greens at some courses, and it's a 76 to 78 for even an expert player on many courses that I would consider "shotmaker's courses."

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2018, 07:56:39 PM »
Tommy,IMHO this type of subject makes people think more than they should about a design and thus they try to justify via formulas what makes a "shotmakers" course.  99.9 percent of golfers would not have a clue.  I think there are always at least two moving variables involved determine the shot needed.  One is the individual golfer himself and the other is the hole location on any specific green.  Let's think of a football field for a moment.  Each field is the same and yet a passing team uses it differently than a running team.  Could you consider the quarterback the "shotmaker" and the defensive coordinator the architect?  The quarterback is on the field but based on where his last play ended he calls a play based on what he determines the defensive scheme to be.  It's different everytime and it is usually determined based on the stronger skills or talents of the team.  I see a golf course the same way.  My other question to ponder would be how we define "shotmaker".  Is Bubba Watson more of a shotmaker than a Jim Furyk or some other guy that keeps the ball in play?  We will never have to see the shots played by a Bubba or a Phil from a guy who plays the game from the middle of the fairway.   So I guess I consider all courses to be shotmaker courses.   ;D cheers...


Mike, it is a very useful analogy, but I would add a qualifier. In football, both sides of the ball can adjust on every play. In golf, the architect gets to set the routing, green siting, etc. only once, and the Superintendent gets to set the pins only once per day. Both of those make the challenge of challenging shot makers even more difficult.


I would only add that the 1985 Bears defense was the equivalent of Winged Foot for the 1974 US Open...or vice versa.


Ira

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2018, 10:38:07 PM »
I play Harbour Town a lot and in my mind it is definitely a shotmakers golf course because it requires/demands all kinds of shot shapes and variety off the tees, into the greens and around the greens.  It is all right in front of you not tricked up by the architect.  Is accuracy important, of course it is but accuracy is important on almost any course that requires shotmaking. At Harbour Town you are constantly faced with all kinds of different tee shots and “recovery” shots requiring imagination and creativity.  That to me is what defines “a shotmaker” in the first place.  Harbour Town is far more that hitting the ball straight.  Even a ball hit straight on many of the holes can leave a golfer perplexed with the need to hit their approach high or low or right to left of left to right due to the trees, bunkers and hole locations/green orientations.  Long and straight gets the job done at most any course (very few I can think of where it doesn’t) but at a shotmakers course like Harbour Town even that might not always be good enough.






Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can a course be called a shotmaker's course if the shots are dictated?
« Reply #18 on: October 24, 2018, 11:07:01 AM »
Mark -

"Shot makers", "requires/demands", "all right in front of you", "requires shot making"

You need to get in touch with the USGA Open Committee...they would love you!

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back