Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Better golf on better courses???


Note: This thread is 5732 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

My latest blog entry got me thinking. http://thesandtrap.com/forum/blog.php?b=236

After having a great round playing Poppy Hills in Pebble Beach for the first time, a round I will never forget, I wonder how many of you'all feel like your game improves with the quality of the course?


Btw- tried to search for this topic, but better, golf, and courses may be a little broad.

In my bag:

One for slicing
One for hooking
One for knocking it in the cup


Posted
Mine does definaltly. Better conditions always make for better scoring. I feel like i have more options for shots at higher end courses. The designs are usually better, the greens are more predictable, and horrible lies are rare.
THE WEAPONS CACHE..

Titleist 909 D2 9.5 Degree Driver| Titleist 906f4 13.5 degree 3-Wood | Titleist 909 17 & 21 degree hybrid | Titleist AP2 irons
Titleist Vokey Wedges - 52 & 58 | Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport 2 Putter | ProV1 Ball

Posted
I rather play a course that is in better condition than play a course thats might be more interesting asthetically, especially if the greens are good. My favorite course i have been on was Firestone North in Akron, ohio. It was absolutely amazing to play, and it kicked my butt. I don't mind saying it, i deserved to be humbled once in a while and it did. The one course i really want to play is the Quarry in South Canton, Ohio. New course, about 3-4 years old. But its built in an old quarry, so elevation changes everywere, but its suppose to be just an amazing course.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I don't necessarily score better, depending on the difficulty, but I do "play" better.......it's nice to have good lies in the fairway, grass on the teeboxes, greens that roll true, and manicured traps.....adds to the enjoyment and experience....

Posted
Any top quality course will be more enjoyable to play than the average Muni somewhere, especially if its well maintained & has challenging holes. Some of the best tracks I have played havent even been over 6500 yards but superb course design has made my golfing experience increase tenfold. Where I live now (Yorkshire,England) has an abundance of Dr Alister Mackenzie designed courses, for those who dont know he designed Augusta National, Cypress Point, Royal Melbourne etc so Im very lucky to be able to not travel far & play exceptional courses. They dont make me score any lower but they are a joy to play.

What's in my Titleist RC10 Cart Bag? Driver: Nike Sasquatch Sumo Square 5900 10.5* Aldila VS Proto 65 stiff shaft
3 Wood: Nike SQ Mach Speed 15* Hybrid: Nike 5H Ignite 23*
Irons: Nike Ignite 4i-Sw Wedges: Vokey Design 252*-08 / Oil Can Spin Milled 60*-08
Putter: Odyssey White Ice 2Ball CS 34"...


Posted
Dr Alister Mackenzie designed courses, for those who dont know he designed Augusta National,

Correct me if I am wrong, but didnt Bobby Jones design Augusta?

Kyle Paulhus

If you really want to get better, check out Evolvr

:callaway: Rogue ST 10.5* | :callaway: Epic Sub Zero 15* | :tmade: P790 3 Driving Iron |:titleist: 716 AP2 |  :edel: Wedges 50/54/68 | :edel: Deschutes 36"

Career Low Round: 67 (18 holes), 32 (9 holes)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I'm so bad, that I DEFINITELY DO NOT play better at better courses. I play better when there is no water and no sand (or very little of either!). But it's definitely more awe inspiring and fun on the better courses I have played, which ultimately means more to me.

|Callaway X460 draw-biased Driver|Taylormade Burner 3W|Adams Golf Idea A7 19° Hybrid|Adams Golf Idea Pro Gold 23° hybrid|King Cobra Baffler 29° hybrid|Taylormade Burner 6i|Adams Idea Tech A4OS 7i|Mizuno MP32 8i|Pro Select Blaze II 9i|Callaway Golf Forged Chrome 48° PW|Oncourse Target Series...


Posted
Correct me if I am wrong, but didnt Bobby Jones design Augusta?

Bobby Jones created it.....but Alister Mackenzie designed it.

In my Ogio Budlight Bag
Taylormade R11 Driver | Big Bertha Diablo 3W | Tight Lies 5W & 7W |
Big Bertha Diablo 24 degree hybrid | Slingshot 4D 5-PW, AW Irons | SV Tour 56* wedge |
Detour Newport 2 | Noodle Ball | Golf Logix GPS


Posted
Pretty much all the time for me. Better lies in the fairway, predictable lies in the rough. The sand is in good shape and consistent. The greens typically roll better and are more consistend through the round. Tee boxes are in good shape. All of these things add to the experience and beg for better play.

The big thing for me is the consistency. I want a ball hit from the fairway to react the same each time. I want the greens to be the same speed. If I am in the rough around the green on 3, I want the rough to be the play the same on 12 around the green.

I don't demand that a course be perfect, and can play fine just about anywhere. But I will score/play better on the better courses because of these reasons.

I will judge my rounds much more by the quality of my best shots than the acceptability of my worse ones.


Posted
I find that I play better on better courses. I find the greens easier to putt on and I think part of it also is that Im just more inspired to play my best.

Whats in my :sunmountain: C-130 cart bag?

Woods: :mizuno: JPX 850 9.5*, :mizuno: JPX 850 15*, :mizuno: JPX-850 19*, :mizuno: JPX Fli-Hi #4, :mizuno: JPX 800 Pro 5-PW, :mizuno: MP T-4 50-06, 54-09 58-10, :cleveland: Smart Square Blade and :bridgestone: B330-S


Posted
I find that I play better on better courses. I find the greens easier to putt on and I think part of it also is that Im just more inspired to play my best.

Yeah, Poppy Hills ispired me to play my best.

In my bag:

One for slicing
One for hooking
One for knocking it in the cup


Posted
Nothing as displeasing as having to hit an iron off a jacked up, not so grassy dirt heavy fairway. Better yet, having your ball land on a green that is not well kept and having it hit a dirt patch on the green and fly 30 more yards over the green isn't too pleasing either.

DST Tour 9.5 Diamana Whiteboard
909F3 15* 3 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
909F3 18* 5 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
'09 X-Forged 3-PW Project-X 6.0 Flighted
CG15 56* X-Tour 60* Abaco


Posted
Bobby Jones created it.....but Alister Mackenzie designed it.

Thank you for the clarification.

Kyle Paulhus

If you really want to get better, check out Evolvr

:callaway: Rogue ST 10.5* | :callaway: Epic Sub Zero 15* | :tmade: P790 3 Driving Iron |:titleist: 716 AP2 |  :edel: Wedges 50/54/68 | :edel: Deschutes 36"

Career Low Round: 67 (18 holes), 32 (9 holes)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
A good friend from college who is now a golf pro once told me that "only shitty players play shitty courses."

"Getting paired with you is the equivalent to a two-stroke penalty to your playing competitors"  -- Sean O'Hair to Rory Sabbatini (Zurich Classic, 2011)


Posted
Yes, definitely can play better in the courses that are well maintained ( Fairway / Bunker / Green ).

So far all my good rounds were from better golf courses.
What I Play:
913D3 9.5°Diamana Kai'li 70 Stiff  "C3" | 910F 15°, Diamana Kai'li 80 Stiff "D2" | 910H 19°,  Diamana Kai'li for Titleist 85 Hybrid Stiff | Titleist 714 AP2 4 to P Aerotech Steelfiber i110 S | SM4 Vokey 50.12, 54.14 & SM5 60.11K| 34" Edel Umpqua + 40g Counter Weight
 

Posted
Great topic.

No doubt better conditions = better golf. I'd love to see a study done on that, in fact. Maybe take a representative group of players of varying HC's, put them on a sampling of courses with similar yardages/ratings/slopes but a range of different conditions, and track their scores.

Such a study could actually be useful for the industry. Golfers naturally prefer good conditions to poor, and typically pay a premium for nicer courses. But if there was empirical evidence that they actually score better under better conditions, that could be pretty powerful for marketing etc.

Then again, the industry is currently moving away from the ridiculously lush conditions that require boatloads of water, pesticides, fertilizer, etc... So maybe now's not the best time.

Cheers,
Sean

Posted
Pretty much all the time for me. Better lies in the fairway, predictable lies in the rough. The sand is in good shape and consistent. The greens typically roll better and are more consistend through the round. Tee boxes are in good shape. All of these things add to the experience and beg for better play.

Yeah I have to agree for all the same reasons.

But if you can get good playing courses that are a little on the rough side then it makes it that much easier when you get to a well manicured course.

In my SasQuatch carry bag.
909D2 9.5* (Aldila Voodo Shaft)
FT 3W 15* (Fujikura E370 Shaft Stiff Flex)
FT Hybrid 21* Nuetral (Fujikura Fit On M Hybrid Stiff Flex)
FT Hybrid 24* Nuetral (Fujikura Fit On M Hybrid Stiff Flex)Irons: X22 Tour 5 thru PW (True Temper Dynamic Gold S300) 2* upright (also...


Posted
For me, it's all in the tee box. If I'm on a bad tee box, I can't seem to shake it. The way it feels to have bumps and humps under your feet, the way you sometimes feel like you need a jackhammer to get the tee in the ground and worst of all when you know the ball is above or below your feet. I can handle most other things pretty well such as poor yardage markers, bad fairways, etc. But if you put me on a course with horrible tee boxes, I'm not finding too many fairways.

Driver: taylormade.gif Tour Burner 9.5*
4 Wood: taylormade.gif200 Steel 16*
Irons: taylormade.gif Burner '09
Wedges: taylormade.gif RAC TP Satin 54*, 58*
Putter: odyssey.gif White Hot Tour #9  Ball: bridgestone.gif B330


Note: This thread is 5732 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • I have a couple of trips planned, although golf was a secondary component in each.  In February we're going to visit some friends near Naples, so Mary Anne and I have added on a few days to stay and play at Streamsong.  Then In March we're going to Hawaii (again), and will almost certainly get in a few rounds there.
    • My next golf trip will probably be a short one, but I’m really looking forward to it. I’m thinking of staying relatively close, picking a spot with a few solid courses and making a long weekend out of it. For me, the best golf trips are about good courses, relaxed vibes, and time away with friends.
    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.