[Martin Del Vecchio]

My understanding of the Cape hole is that an option is presented on the tee:  the more aggressive you get on the tee shot, and the closer towards the hazard you are willing to hit, the shorter the resulting second shot.

In watching the play on #16 today, it looks like a 'fake cape' hole.  It may appear that being aggressive off the tee will pay off with a shorter second shot, but the reality isn't quite there.

Is this a common design feature on a 'good' course?  I see it often on what I consider 'cow-pasture' courses.

[Michael Dugger]

I have been inclined to look at the "essence" of the cape hole as something that is entailed in the tee shot.

I.E.  Cut off more of the water for a shorter/better angle for your second.

From my perspective, the 16th at Oakland Hills presents water as a challenge in the approach, not in the tee shot.

Thus, I find it hard to classify that hole as possessing the "essence" of a cape, fake or not.

 

[Doug Braunsdorf]

From where the lake is situated, there is still plenty of fairway past it, the fairway wraps around the lake to the green.  

I don't think it comes into play at all on the approach for the better player--but it does on the tee shot, as evidenced by Fred Funk earlier today.  I'm not sure what the distance is from the tees to the edge of the hazard.

I doubt this was a feature in the original Oakland Hills when Ross laid it out--did RTJ dam a small stream to create it?  

I would just classify it as a simple risk reward--i.e. a drive down the left, into the 'neck' of the fairway, gives the player a shorter approach--but a player laying back short of the water will be left with a slightly longer approach.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()