Making Course difficult for Pros

[drdel]

I read with interest the debate in the Feb edition of GM on whether courses should be made harder for the Professionals on Tour.

IMO there is a bit too much of the 'hit-and-hope' behaviour, especially with 'T' shots and expecting spectators to help locate balls. Thus I think their game should have a greater focus on accuracy.

Would a simple and cheap solution be to impose a one shot penalty for missing the fairway? It would not require any cost or mods to the course.

 

[Crow]

Smaller headed drivers are all that's needed.

 

[Wolf]

Just set the courses up tougher, narrower fairways, more penal rough better placed hazards.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I've always thought making the spectator ropes the OB edges. Would focus their minds on accuracy and help defend some courses.
Of course I know it will never happen

 

[Curls]

I've played on courses in the States where if you did miss the fairway by a mile, and you shouldn't cos its a mile wide, you still have a decent shot at making the green. No proper rough, trees widely spaced so you always have some shot on. But any time they grow the rough (at the US Open for example) the players complain, so the fairways are widened and rough thinned out.

To be fair though, if you've ever seen a tough pin position on a green running 13 on the stimp, you'll realise that while they do spray it around a bit off the tee they are laser accurate with their approaches, cos there are very few on here that could get anywhere near them. We're talking tiny landing zones. And they hit them. So yeah tech has come a long way but these guys are really, really good.

I agree some resort courses won on -25 do nothing for the soul, I can't watch those tournaments. I'd rather watch them struggle around a windswept links, putting their fantastic skills to the test. But spectators and TV viewers like the roar of birdies, it's more exciting for the non-masochists.

If you’re looking for those, this forum is not a good sample group.

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

They don't make pool or billiards tables more difficult for pros.
They don't make bowling lanes more difficult for pros.
They don't make tennis courts more difficult for pros.

If I were a golf architect, I'd design everything at between 6000 and 6300 yards.
Wasting 150 acres on a course designed for the best 100 players in the world is absurd.

Let's all play on the same track and let the scores reveal the true differences in our skill levels.

 

[Grant85]

I read with interest the debate in the Feb edition of GM on whether courses should be made harder for the Professionals on Tour.

IMO there is a bit too much of the 'hit-and-hope' behaviour, especially with 'T' shots and expecting spectators to help locate balls. Thus I think their game should have a greater focus on accuracy.

Would a simple and cheap solution be to impose a one shot penalty for missing the fairway? It would not require any cost or mods to the course.

That's absolutely not a solution that is going to on the agenda of any governing body.

Courses are already harder for pros, and where you see Dubai this week... -5 leading and +3 missing the cut after 18... it is fairly typical of a Pro event.
This is a 7,353 yard par 72 course. Compare that to a members club, which might stretch out to 6,300 yard par 72 on average.

I'm sure if all the scratch guys at your club, or even at county level were to play this course in a medal once a week, they'd be adding 2 to 5 shots onto their handicap within a few months.

The biggest test for pros is when conditions get firm and fast. Pros like to fly a ball onto a green and if they are in the fairway, they can pretty much stop it from 200 yards... and you even see plenty of guys stopping a 3 wood 320 yards on a putting surface. With a 430 yard par 3... a Pro can bomb one 320 yards and even if they are in the rough, as they are only 100 yards away from the front of the green... can still gouge a wedge on and have a birdie putt or an easy par. If they are in the fairway, then they have a great birdie chance.

When it's firm and fast like at Royal Melbourne for the Presidents Cup and like we see at some Open Championship and US Open events, it becomes a different test and it matters much more, not only that you are in the fairway, but you have the right angle into a pin. I think we then see the most accurate players and the best iron players excelling in these conditions and length off the tee becomes less of a factor.

Unfortunately on tour, we don't see conditions like this very often and it tends to be well watered, lush golf courses.

Ultimately firm and fast conditions is what is required to take a 7,000 yard course, like they do at the Open Championship most years, and make it a good test for the pros.

 

[patricks148]

what most courses do esp in the US, have greens that a receptive,

That's absolutely not a solution that is going to on the agenda of any governing body.

Courses are already harder for pros, and where you see Dubai this week... -5 leading and +3 missing the cut after 18... it is fairly typical of a Pro event.
This is a 7,353 yard par 72 course. Compare that to a members club, which might stretch out to 6,300 yard par 72 on average.

I'm sure if all the scratch guys at your club, or even at county level were to play this course in a medal once a week, they'd be adding 2 to 5 shots onto their handicap within a few months.

The biggest test for pros is when conditions get firm and fast. Pros like to fly a ball onto a green and if they are in the fairway, they can pretty much stop it from 200 yards... and you even see plenty of guys stopping a 3 wood 320 yards on a putting surface. With a 430 yard par 3... a Pro can bomb one 320 yards and even if they are in the rough, as they are only 100 yards away from the front of the green... can still gouge a wedge on and have a birdie putt or an easy par. If they are in the fairway, then they have a great birdie chance.

When it's firm and fast like at Royal Melbourne for the Presidents Cup and like we see at some Open Championship and US Open events, it becomes a different test and it matters much more, not only that you are in the fairway, but you have the right angle into a pin. I think we then see the most accurate players and the best iron players excelling in these conditions and length off the tee becomes less of a factor.

Unfortunately on tour, we don't see conditions like this very often and it tends to be well watered, lush golf courses.

Ultimately firm and fast conditions is what is required to take a 7,000 yard course, like they do at the Open Championship most years, and make it a good test for the pros.

TBH i don't think you would even need it to be 7000 yards if the greens were firm and it was a premium to hit the firm fairway, look at where they played the Presidents cup in Auss, less than 7000 and still a challenge, long courses with soft greens just playes into the hands of the bombers

 

[Grant85]

what most courses do esp in the US, have greens that a receptive,



TBH i don't think you would even need it to be 7000 yards if the greens were firm and it was a premium to hit the firm fairway, look at where they played the Presidents cup in Auss, less than 7000 and still a challenge, long courses with soft greens just playes into the hands of the bombers

Yes. Obviously in the UK, you can't guarantee that there will be firm and fast conditions - even in July. But the years there is, the R&A absolutely lean into it and try and get things running, which is great.

Not sure what the scoring at Royal Melbourne would have been like in a 72 hole strokeplay, but there were certainly plenty of short holes causing plenty of problems given the conditions and undulations both on and in front of the greens.

 

[garyinderry]

Smaller headed drivers are all that's needed.

How the governing bodies allowed them to get to the size they currently are is beyond me.

I hit my mates sldr mini at the range on Sunday. That would have been a decent size to stop at.

 

[rulefan]

The 7353 course would get a Course Rating of about 75. That is a scratch player's target. I guess the slope would be about 150. A +8 pro would in theory play off about +11 to 'play to his handicap'

 

[howbow88]

I was listening to the Sky Sports podcast earlier, and 'Radar' remarked at how PGA fairways are so wide that you could comfortably land a 747 on them. A slight exaggeration of course, but from playing in the US myself, courses out there do seem incredibly 'user-friendly'. Not only are fairways massive, but there's very little deep rough.

I think pros hitting long and straight should be rewarded. When they hit it long but 50 yards right though, they shouldn't be.

 

[Deleted member 23344]

I played in Phoenix once and mentioned to my cousin, who lives there, that there was very little rough on the course that we were playing. She pointed out that they keep the rough to a minimum as no-one dares go into it, given the likelihood of scorpions and rattlesnakes ??. I know that is not the reason why PGA courses have nice wide fairways for the pros, but there are sometimes factors that us brits might not necessarily consider.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I read with interest the debate in the Feb edition of GM on whether courses should be made harder for the Professionals on Tour.

IMO there is a bit too much of the 'hit-and-hope' behaviour, especially with 'T' shots and expecting spectators to help locate balls. Thus I think their game should have a greater focus on accuracy.

Would a simple and cheap solution be to impose a one shot penalty for missing the fairway? It would not require any cost or mods to the course.

A few things - why do the courses need to be “harder” ?

And seriously - a one shot penalty for missing the fairway ?

If they want to bring the scores down then just thicken up the rough , put the pins in tough places

 

[ADB]

A few things - why do the courses need to be “harder” ?

And seriously - a one shot penalty for missing the fairway ?

If they want to bring the scores down then just thicken up the rough , put the pins in tough places

Growing up the rough would just disadvantage (further) the shorter hitters as missing a fairway would be more penal than the longer hitters getting a short iron behind the ball in longer grass. I actually think shorter grass is better, especially round the green - more run offs. I think courses should be made more strategic rather than harder - especially when it comes to the tee shot.

 

[IanM]

They all play the same course.

Lowest score wins.

As long as a tournament isn't reduced to being a putting contest, why make it harder?

 

[sunshine]

Growing up the rough would just disadvantage (further) the shorter hitters as missing a fairway would be more penal than the longer hitters getting a short iron behind the ball in longer grass. I actually think shorter grass is better, especially round the green - more run offs. I think courses should be made more strategic rather than harder - especially when it comes to the tee shot.

Growing up the rough disadvantages those who hit the ball in the rough.

Golf is a sport and good ball striking is one of the skills that should be rewarded. Chicks dig the long ball.

I agree with you that run offs around the green are more interesting than thick rough.

 

[fundy]

could always dial the ball back so that hazards are where they were meant to be when the course was designed rather than them just being bombed over

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

Growing up the rough disadvantages those who hit the ball in the rough.

Golf is a sport and good ball striking is one of the skills that should be rewarded. Chicks dig the long ball.

I agree with you that run offs around the green more interesting than thick rough.

I would consider speed of play when optimizing course design.

Nothing that adds time looking for balls sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[Trapdraw]

Dial the ball back, reduce the size of the driver head, ban hybrids and 56 degrees is the highest lofted wedge. Hopefully this would allow classic courses to be able to be used again for tour events. It would move it away from being a solely power game it is now tour.