[Mark_Fine]

Geoffrey,
For those guys there is little defense on a hole like that.  If he can pull off that shot, God bless him.  If you make the difficultly (risk/reward) any harder, then the other 99.99 % of golfers who play there will struggle to finish the golf hole let alone play it.  
Mark

[GeoffreyC]

Tim- we agree (although in thinking it might have been Charles Howell and not Mike Weir).

I respect David's argument and I understand it and think he articulated it well (although I don't agree with it)  . I'd actually like a piece of David M's bet.

I'm not sure I'd go as far as "Presumably, the situation you described on #10 at Riviera qualifies as an event where a skilled golfer wasn't challenged off the tee."  I just happened to remember this example of a truly important situation at perhaps the single most strategic short par 4 in golf that could illustrate David's idea. Weir or Howell (highly skilled players) didn't feel intimidated enough on this hole of all holes to layup with the tournament on the line.

Mark- The hole is perfect for 99.999% of golfers but I think I made a point about the basic argument discussed in this thread.

[Tim_Weiman]

Geoffrey:

On another post you asked if I wanted to give a quantitative assessment to back my often - and perhaps, obxiously repeated statement - that a course considered Top Ten within sixty yards couldn't possibly not be considered Top 100 material based on the failure to challenge skilled golfers off the tee.

I think that is possible - maybe even easy to do. Are you still interested or just pissed over my "broken record" mantra?

[A_Clay_Man]

Weren't it charles da third who hit the bunker shot from 40 yds rt on #10 at this years LA LA open?

[DMoriarty]

This "top 10 from within, 60 top 500 from without" just doesnt make sense, at least not a Rustic.  The green complexes are great because of the options they afford the golfer hitting into them.  Take away the width of the fairways and you are left with pretty greens that dont work.

Take RC 12.  Complimented for its great green in same breath as it is criticized for its excessive width and lack of challenge/interest off the tee.  OK, so lets leave the green alone but build a new tee box to make it a long par 3, or even a short one.  Where would you put the tee so the green was still great, or even made sense?  
  In line with the existing tee?  No way.  I'd guess that over 80% of the balls would end up short or long, even if the hole was no more than 90 yds.  I would not wager that I could hold 2 in 10 shots from just about anywhere on this line.
  Somewhere on the first 50 yards of the existing fairway?  A little easier, but still almost impossible for the vast majority of golfers, unless they intentionally miss the green short, then chip or putt from there.  Not ideal for a par 3.  
  The only possible tee I can think of that doesnt make the hole impossible or eliminate much of its allure is about 80-120 yds almost straight right.  About in the safe layup spot, and even this tee would make a portion of the right side somewhat inaccessible-- a big loss on a green this small.    

  So that is what I don't get about the top 10/top 500 comment.  If some are basing their assessment on how the greens putt, then they really misunderstand the greens and the course.  

  Lose the width the great green goes with it.      
 
 

[Mike_Cirba]

David Moriarty;

I agree with you, but if you have the ability to play it as a par three from 340 yards, where's the interest for the "skilled golfer"?  

If I can drive the 10th at Riviera, and have a slight lefthanded fade on most of my shots, being able to keep them all within a 20 yard margin for error where my worst shot will finish 20 yard left of the hole, hole high, then I quickly get bored by the lack of interest therein. ;

Damn...I hate doing being sarcastic, truly I do.

I hope David Wigler knows I'm just busting on him.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Can't openess off the tee be highly illusory ?

Take for example the 3rd hole at Pacific Dunes.

It looks as wide as a few football fields, but if the pin is on the far right of the green, isn't that really a narrow fairway or prefered LZ ?

Shouldn't one evaluate actual width in terms of, or in relation to effective width ?

[TEPaul]

"Can't openess off the tee be highly illusory ?
Take for example the 3rd hole at Pacific Dunes.
It looks as wide as a few football fields, but if the pin is on the far right of the green, isn't that really a narrow fairway or prefered LZ ?
Shouldn't one evaluate actual width in terms of, or in relation to effective width?"

Pat:

Congratulations, I think you just figured out strategy that's intentionally less than apparent on wide and sometimes unencumbered fairways!  

You might be getting there slowly but at least you seem to be going in the right direction!    

[ForkaB]

Tom

With all due respect, neither you, nor I, nor 99% of all golfers are long enough to think about reaching PD#3 in two.  So, isn't the "narrowness" caused by the bunkers on the left mostly meaningless?  If you have most of your brain cells working, don't you just hit it out to the right off the tee, tack back to the left with a wood/long-mid iron for the desired approach angle and distance, etc.?

[Tom_Doak]

Rich,

You're probably right that 99% of the players at Pacific Dunes should just go to the right on the third tee shot and not worry about getting to the green in two.

However, I can assure you that far more than 1% of the golfers who play there, think about getting there in two, and try to go left.

[David Wigler]

INTEREST not challenge.  INTEREST not Challenge.  INTEREST not challenge.  Repeat it with me Tim.  Is it so hard to at least allow me to defend the argument I want to make?  

#10 at Riviera is an extremely interesting hole with many thoughts.  There is real benefit in laying up, as the miss is extremely penal.  Every miss at #12 at R.C. is in a fairway collection area right.  There is no harm in missing thus no interest in the shot.  This is not just about #12.  On 12 of the 14 holes, you can just blast away with impunity. (Also, I notice that no one has brought up #3 (Which I hit with a 3-wood and I assume even short hitters drive onto (3 in my foursome did).  This is also not about better vs. worse golfers.  Everyone blasts away at RC and it is probably fun for them as most do not care about strategic options.  This is about excess width and lack of creativity off the tee.  Something Tim, you would earn the right to disagree with me about if you would JUST GO PLAY THE COURSE!

As for #12 bet, Mr. Moriarty, you completely missed my point (Which Geoffrey Childs expressed so much better than me) and did not read what I wrote.  I said I would "guess...".  On average, I hit 8 fairways per round and have six misses go right.  I will take your $1,000 bet and send the check to Ran tomorrow.  Here is the bet.  You put the pin wherever you want.  I hit first and hit driver 10 times.  You hit whatever club you feel will get you to the "Preferred spot 80 yards out."  Since my index is lower than yours is, we will eliminate putting.  Closest to the pin in two wins and I have to win 7 out of 10 times.  I hit a ball OB left; you can putt off the tee and win.  Frankly, I could not care less if I only hit the green twice and balloon 8 balls pin high, twenty yards right.  I am going to beat you on the second shot because mine is shorter and easier.  That is a hole that lacks interest.  Send in your check!  Furthermore, let's stop referring to this as a 340-yard hole.  My ego is not that big.  As the crow flies, it takes a shot of 265 (My best guess - If Tommy or Geoff is reading this, please correct me) to get to the front edge.  340 is way out to the right and down the middle of the fairway.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Yes, I'm moving slowly in the right direction.

However, I do take solace in the fact that when you finally get there, I will have already arrived some time earlier.

This is due to the fact that I recognize that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, while you're still serpintining with Shelly.

Tom Doak,

I considered it, and tried it on two occassions. unfortunately, I hit the two worst drives of the trip.  Fortunately, the 12th fairway was there to bail me out.

I think the pin, the wind, and your drives on the first two holes predispose your decision, unless of course TEPaul is your caddy, and in that case the prefered drive is deep into the gorse, where TEPaul will be lost for hours, allowing you to return to the clubhouse for a caddy who knows something about golf, the course and architecture.  

[Dan King]

David Wigler writes:
Furthermore, let's stop referring to this as a 340-yard hole.  My ego is not that big.  As the crow flies, it takes a shot of 265 (My best guess - If Tommy or Geoff is reading this, please correct me) to get to the front edge.  340 is way out to the right and down the middle of the fairway.

Robert Trent Jones said every hole should be a difficult par but a comfortable bogey. But why not have a hole that is a difficult birdie but a comfortable par. Since par numbers are meaningless in the grand scheme of things, what would be so terrible with that? But if that doesn't suit you, just call it a par 3.

Would your opinion of this hole be different if the card had said it was a par 3? Would we be talking about this being one of the greatest par 3s in golf?

Dan King

There's a tale that's told, presumably apocryphal, about a round of golf that Arnold Palmer and Ben Hogan played in 1960. On the first hole, Hogan scored a textbook par-3. Palmer's drive came to rest in a tree stump; his second shot made it to the edge of the green; and he holed a 40-foot putt for par. On the second hole, Hogan's drive split the fairway; his second shot was on the green; and he two putted for another classic par. Palmer's tee shot landed in three inches of water; he blasted his second shot out onto the fairway; his third shot came to rest several feet beyond the green; and he chipped in for par. On the third hole, Hogan executed four more near-perfect precise shots for his third par in a row. Meanwhile, Palmer's tee shot landed in the rough; his second shot landed in a bunker; and his third shot bounced into the hole for a birdie. Whereupon Hogan turned to Arnold and demanded, "Look dammit; we're here to play golf. Stop fooling around."
 --Jerry Izenberg

[David Wigler]

Dan,

You have just summed up why I keep trying to get everyone to change the word from challenge to interest.  If the card listed 12 as a par 3, it would be among the most challenging in the world.  It still would not be an interesting hole IMO.  #14, and #18 are both interesting tee shots with multiple options and requiring thought.  They were my favorite holes on the course.  #6 while not as challenging (If #12 was a par 3) is infinitely more interesting in how to approach the green.

[Pete Lavallee]

For a hole with little interest off the tee, the 12th at Rustic certainly does stimulate a lot of discussion. I find the strategy can only really be formulated with multiple plays, and that the designers were wise to leave the hole in its' current state, to flesh out any posible refinements, similar to Thomas adding the greenside bunkers to the 10th at Riviera, after witnessing how the hole played for at least a year. Although I like the hole the way it is now, a fairway bunkering scheme could make it even better, by providing the interest that David and Tom want without unduly penalizing the average player.

I have a question for David. I have had the pleasure of playing with him, and his swing does effectively eliminate the left side of the golf course. For this reason the 12th plays right up his alley as he can bomb away with almost all of his misses finishing safely to the right of the green. However, what if the hole was a mirror image, with the road and OB running down the left side. In this case now, when you bomb away, your two misses finish OB, your four near misses leave you short sided, knowing you'll have a hard up and down for your 3, and you still have 4 eagle putts. Does this hole have more interest to you?

[DMoriarty]

DavidW

You are right to not take my bet, as it is a suckers bet all the way.  I only suggested the bet because your prediction was so outrageous that the outrageousness cannont explained just as an overestimation of your own skill.  So I could only opine that either 1) you do not remember the hole, or 2) you remember the hole but you dont really understand it at all.  

 Your latest post reenforced my opinion above.  

  As to your suggested bet, no thanks. I try not to bet against those much better than me, except for my weekly donation to David Kelly.  But your suggestion was worth a laugh, especially the part about how your index is lower than mine so we will dispense with . . . putting.  I'm not a great putter, but I dont think I would lose the majority of strokes on the greens, especially at Rustic.  Your suggestion also further reenforces my above opinion.  Getting the right putt is the whole point of most of Rustic, so dispensing with the putt would be the last thing I would do if I were trying to understand the course.  

Plus, the question isnt how well you would do compared to me, it is how well you would do compared to you.  So how about YOU BET YOU.  
     I'll set the pin and caddy for you.  You 10 hit irons toward a spot I designate in the fairway, and then ten shots at the green, trying to play the shot as I suggest.  You then hit 10 balls trying to drive the green and give yourself a chance at eagle.  You putt everything outside of the leather.  We add the gross scores and if the layup score wins, you donate $1000 dollars to CGA.com.   If going for it wins, then pay yourself whatever you want. The only catch is that you have to try, and that you have to really go for the green-- for eagle-- on all ten drivers. No intentional "misses" right.  

[David Wigler]

David,

I will give it my honest effort, but that is a lose/lose bet.  How about; I win with my driver and YOU donate the $1,000 to GCA.  I would have no idea how to intentionally miss right.  I hit a long fade.  All my misses go right.  It is the Bruce Lietzke theory on driving.  Control your game and eliminate half the golf course.

I made no predication only a guess and I was trying to be fair about putting.  Putting is the real strength of my game.  If you want to add putting to the equation, all the better to prove my point.

PeteL,

Very interesting question.  It would be much more challenging if OB was right.  It would also be more interesting for me as I would have to decide to go for it and risk OB or not.  In a match I was losing, I might risk the shot but if I was winning, I could play safe.  This is why I did not want this argument to be #12 in a vacuum.  Let's look at #3, #7, and #12.  All three can be driven.  All three have a safe bail out on a slice right.  I remember reading somewhere that something like 90% of golfers play left to right.  If #3 or #7 was inverted, than #12 works better for me.  Because all three require the same shot and can be had with the same miss, that is where my lack of interest comes from.

[DMoriarty]

No thanks David,  not for $1000.  While I am sure you'd try your hardest, I would never bet $1000 in a contest pitting anyone against himself.  To do so would be foolish.  Plus, I offered the thousand dollar bet because I was absolutely sure that I could not lose.  I don't think you can win with this last proposed bet but it is possible that you will.  I was looking for a sure thing.  

  By the way, I think driver has an advantage that would not normally exist.  I think most your drives will end up beyond the green.  The shot from there is definitely a feel shot, and the opportunity to hit multiple shots from there will give you a big advantage you would not normally get during the course of plays over many days or months.  

  Just to be a sport though . . .  so long as you actually aim at the pin or at least try to hit the middle of the green on all of your drives, and so long as you give your best efforts on the Lay-up, I will bet up to $250 dollars, with the loser paying $250 toward defraying costs of next spring's King's Putter and/or toward any Open GCA event which Ran might choose to hold at Rustic.

  But hypothetically, if we do try this, will we learn anything?  Would any of the results below alter your opinion of the hole:
   a.  Driver is well under par and wins big.  
   b.  Driver has a few disasters and Lay-up wins big.  
   c.  Driver and Lay-up play the hole fairly evenly.  

As for me, I would expect the answer to be somewhere in between b. and c., with the pin placement I have in mind.  

If option a. wins big, I will be surprised and will definitely reconsider whether the hole is as strategically interesting for long hitters as I think it is.  

What about you?  Will any of these results change your opinion?

By the way, you never told me if I was correct on my guess as to your last eagle putt.  

Let me know if you accept the challenge.  

As to Pete L's question.  Don't most long hitters hit a draw?  Do you evaluate the hole the same or differently for them?

[David Kelly]

David W.,
If you say that you aim directly at the green on #12 and play RH with a fade, how do you negotiate the tree that is about 50 ft. in front of the black tees and effectively shields a direct line between the tee box and the left side of the green?  Do you just go over it? The farther up the black tees play the more it becomes a problem.

Being a LH fader it isn't much of a problem for me but many right-handers I play with are forced to play down the middle and use a draw to get close to the green.

[David Wigler]

DavidM,

I would take that bet any day.  I suspect A as a lock but would not be shocked at C.  Basically. I do not hit my driver much less accurately than my 4-iron.  I would bet on one disaster with each club.  On the other nine, I just cannot accept that I would be better off 80-100 yards from the green than on or within 20 yards of the green.  The only way it would change my mind is if I really was playing well and executed 10 high fade drives.  If I could not beat 10 smartly played irons by 2-3 strokes, than I would admit I was wrong.

I am not trying to avoid your eagle question.  I cannot find it.  Please repeat and I will try to answer it.

As for most long hitters, I think you are incorrect.  Look at the tour.  The guys famous for their long accurate driving Tiger, Els, Price, Vijay, etc. play fades.  The only big hitter who consistantly plays draw that I can think of is Duval.  Again, the stat may be incorrect but I believe it is 90% of golfers play left to right.  I think I answered the second part of the question in my response to Pete.  Eliminate 12 in a vacuum.  Do you believe that three drivable par fours, all with hazard left and bailout right is design variety?  Do you want to make our bet on #3 as well (I will use a 3-wood)?

DaveK,

I only played RC once.  I do not remember the tree.  For whatever reason it did not enter my thinking on the hole.  I do not know how it relates to the tee position.  In that same line of thinking, Tommy tells me that when I was out, they were working on the back tee on #7.  He assures me that from the true back tee, I would not dismiss it as a drivable par four.  I will take his word on that.

[Pete Lavallee]

David W. your point that the 3 driveable par 4's all have a hazard to the left and bailout to the right is valid. Would your opinion of the variety change if 3 and 12 were bunkered to punish the bailout left and make a player really lay back if he goes right, and the back tee at 7 was in play?

[David Wigler]

Absolutely!!

[George Pazin]

I for one am glad this thread went on so long - I think I finally understand David's position.

Just one more question: Do you think the fact that you are a good putter maybe had as much to do with your lack of interest in the tee shot situation? In other words, maybe a long hitter who's not very proficient with the flatstick would be better off considering which way to approach the hole.

[David Wigler]

George,

I cannot answer that.  Maybe?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

George,
That is a GREAT question!

Early last year, for about the first three or four months the course opened, it was a learning experience for all--Here you have a brand new course, with a brand new crew, and a really talented young superintendent that is trying to explain to a first time course owner what he is going to need, from staff to equimpment to run this golf course.

They have done a remarkable job, and in truth, given the owner, Jeff Hicks deserves the GCA Medal of Honor.

But in that beginning, some of the pin placements that were being utilized were being laid-out, at least on the front nine, were pretty easy, and in fact as the greens got faster through the year, as they matured, they lost a lot of pins because of the phenominal contours of these greens. Jeff told me two weeks ago, that he hopes to never have them that fast again, because frankly they don't need it. I haven't played the course in two weeks, and while it has had a good chane to get past the first major aeration of the year, they were getting to a perfect pace about 11:00am during the day, after the wind picked-up further and the dampness from dew and watering disappated.

I can't begin to tell you how many times I have tried tolet people figure these greens out on their own, on their first trip out, just so they can have that healthy respect, and more then anything, memory of how far their putt had broke the last time they played there. David doesn't need help there. He knows how to respect of Rustic Canyon with his comments of being Top 100, which in my opinion they are Top 25, and that is being conservative. I think no matter his opinion of the course in two weeks, he will walk away knowing more about the course then he knew before, and it will make him want to return again, and again, and again to learn more about it, and in because in truth, Rustic Canyon for guys like all of us is like a drug. You might not feel it your first time, but you'll start to feel it more on your second and third and fourth and fifth, and so on and so on and so on.

I hope I can be with him when he does feel it too, because this course truely is a miracle in a land that doesn't believe in them, just like a saint in the streets of Detroit or Pittsburgh, and generally speaking, I think David is one of this wesites personable characters. Anybody who mets him will feel the same.

Hopefully on the tee Sunday, June 15th you'll be hearing David, David, David & Tommy are now up!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()