Golf isn't fair

[playa]

In Australia we don't have super long courses so our greens provide the main defence on many holes. The Oz Open was played at Royal Sydney a couple years ago and the opening hole is a short par 4 reachable with 3 wood by long hitters but with a well guarded sloping green. During the tournament most of the field laid up short and left of the bunkers to set up a simple chip and putt birdie. Some guys went for the green in the hope of an eagle, but most of those guys ended up dead and had to settle for par. I don't recall any of the guys who went for the green and roled off into trouble whining and moaning about fairness. They knew the risks and rolled the dice, nobody put a gun to their heads. What does everyone here want to see, soft receptive par 5s where the long hitters demolish the course? IMO, good course design rewards great shots but punishes shots that either are not hit in the right spot t or not hit with right shape or trajectory. Holmes played a shot that was a 50/50 chance of holding that green. He was a bit unlucky but that's what risk/reward is about. Boo f#$&*ing hoo.

[Smith65]

[b][color=#282828]I don't disagree with some of what you are saying but in this instance, the length and par of the hole mean nothing. He hit a six iron, carried it about 210 into the front left part of the green. It then proceeded to roll over thirty yards, then through the fringe, then through rough, into the lake. The ball had zero pace on it- literally damn near stopped.[/color]
[color=#282828]If you didn't watch the video I linked, check it out. Even the commentators stated that the hole was NOT designed that way. And if a ball was moving at such a pace that it trickles off the green, the fringe/rough would prevent it from going in the water. That was per the designer or superintendent...[/color][/b]

[color=#282828]hogans, I did watch the video. I don't really care that he hit that with a 6 iron. He hit it with side spin, and side spin is going to make the ball move in the direction of the spin. That is physics. This isn't the only hole where balls move slowly and still continue to move either due to stimp or slope. I named a lot of greens above that have played to more penal scores by far than this hole/green plays. We are going to have to agree to disagree. [/color]

[Smith65]

[quote name='playa' timestamp='1426104140' post='11123333']
In Australia we don't have super long courses so our greens provide the main defence on many holes. The Oz Open was played at Royal Sydney a couple years ago and the opening hole is a short par 4 reachable with 3 wood by long hitters but with a well guarded sloping green. During the tournament most of the field laid up short and left of the bunkers to set up a simple chip and putt birdie. Some guys went for the green in the hope of an eagle, but most of those guys ended up dead and had to settle for par. I don't recall any of the guys who went for the green and roled off into trouble whining and moaning about fairness. They knew the risks and rolled the dice, nobody put a gun to their heads. What does everyone here want to see, soft receptive par 5s where the long hitters demolish the course? IMO, good course design rewards great shots but punishes shots that either are not hit in the right spot t or not hit with right shape or trajectory. Holmes played a shot that was a 50/50 chance of holding that green. He was a bit unlucky but that's what risk/reward is about. Boo f#$&*ing hoo.
[/quote]


We have a hole at my club like that. Everyone who has been a member a long time lays up, but all the newbies or guests go for it. Those who lay up play the hole at least 1 shot better on average than those who go for it. The lesson to be learned is that not all holes are designed to see players make low scores. Some of them are designed to weed out those who think they can do what others can not, and then put 1 or 2 extra strokes on their card.

[rony]

[quote name='playa' timestamp='1426104140' post='11123333']
In Australia we don't have super long courses so our greens provide the main defence on many holes. The Oz Open was played at Royal Sydney a couple years ago and the opening hole is a short par 4 reachable with 3 wood by long hitters but with a well guarded sloping green. During the tournament most of the field laid up short and left of the bunkers to set up a simple chip and putt birdie. Some guys went for the green in the hope of an eagle, but most of those guys ended up dead and had to settle for par. I don't recall any of the guys who went for the green and roled off into trouble whining and moaning about fairness. They knew the risks and rolled the dice, nobody put a gun to their heads. What does everyone here want to see, soft receptive par 5s where the long hitters demolish the course? IMO, good course design rewards great shots but punishes shots that either are not hit in the right spot t or not hit with right shape or trajectory. Holmes played a shot that was a 50/50 chance of holding that green. He was a bit unlucky but that's what risk/reward is about. Boo f#$&*ing hoo.
[/quote]


This was a good post and "Spot On." Like they say, "Mess with the Bull, and you get the Horns!" We have a saying over here in the States as relates to Sports: "It's OK to be a "HotDog." But if you are, you better be good!"