Is wide better?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I know we have discussed this many times before but I couldn't resist resurrecting it one more time.  It was spurred on by the discussion of The Dunluce course at Portrush.  Before I discovered this site I wanted fairways narrow because I felt that wide fairways just encouraged bombing the ball without regard for where it was going.  I still believe that.  On the other hand Wider fairways and well designed greens complexes allow the better player to plot his way around the golf course.  BUT isn't there a time when narrow fairways are a good design feature to rrequire shotmaking off the tee?  Dunluce is a prime example of that.

[cary lichtenstein]

Balance is what makes a golf course great. A couple of narrow fairways, without OB are always fun, too much, and most people will hate it.

[A_Clay_Man]

TW, I view it in this context. Wider fairways removes the definition of where to hit it. ergo, Narrow fairways define exactly where to hit. This definition, actually assists the better ball striker and makes it easier for him. Wider, always seem to confuse the player, no matter what level, by not pre-determining his line. Also, implied width causes the creative shotmaker to have multiple options on how to acheive the task at hand. A better ball striker is likely so caught up in his aerial game, thinking along the ground, isn't really a factor, is it?

[TEPaul]

TommyW:

In my opinion, the question of wider or narrower fairways is a question that one should never generalize about. In other words, "standardization" on almost any golf course should never be applied to the question of fairway width. If any club would take the time to analyze any of its golf holes in the context of functional width to reflect the maximum strategic concept of any hole they'd do a far better job of answering how best to apply this question of fairway width to the holes of their course. And if they did that intelligently they'd likely come to the realization that fairway width on their holes should be vastly different in width.

Good examples would be NGLA's #1 and #15 compared to say #2, 3, 5!! 8, 10, 16 and 17. The strategic concepts of the former are basically distance options off the tee and never called for that much fairway width to maximize their hole's strategic concepts but the latter are both distance and direction options that need far more fairway width to effectively sustain all their strategic concepts and options.

This is why I disagree with what Matt Ward said about Dunluce. The fairways on that course are very different from one another in width---some are narrow and some aren't and that's the way it's supposed to be.

[mike_malone]

 Having played NGLA one day then Bethpage Black the next, I vote for width.

[TEPaul]

In my opinion, real fairway width simply allows an architect to offer more potential options and strategies on a golf hole. In that way width should probably be considered somewhat of a luxury but at the same time a golf course shouldn't have too many holes like this for variety's sake. It's always good to throw in the occassional hole like NGLA's #15 that's called "The Narrows" for a reason.

But here's a question for you all. Does anyone know a hole anywhere that has loads of fairway width and sort of three very distinct options between left, right and middle where the middle is clearly the worst option? I can't really think of a hole like that but in concept and theory it sounds like something could be done that way that'd be really cool!

[Brian_Gracely]

Tom_Paul,

Wouldn't #14 or #16 at The Old Course somewhat fall into your description where there is an option left, right, middle, but middle (especially of the same length as left or right) is the worst option?  

[Marc Haring]

Talking of TOC, why is it that #1 is regarded as about the most pressured tee shot in golf when there is so much room?

[A_Clay_Man]

Dave Shivas Schmidt, I don't believe my sentiments above, are new to the golf world. As a matter of fact, I think Robert Tyre Jones espoused a similiar doctrine. As far as me not knowing shit, it's true.

[Brian_Gracely]

Talking of TOC, why is it that #1 is regarded as about the most pressured tee shot in golf when there is so much room?

I think it has to do with golfers overwhleming fear that if they hit one OB left, that their game will go downhill as quickly as Ian Baker Finch's game did.  

Otherwise I have no idea...

[BCrosby]

Tom -

In addition to Brian's TOC holes, would the "Bottle Hole" at NGLA count? Never played it, but on paper it looks like the middle option is the least attractive.

Are there any examples of wide fairways where the middle option is the least attractive solely because of features at the green?

You may have hit on a litmus test for well designed width.


Bob

[Brian_Gracely]

Are there any examples of wide fairways where the middle option is the least attractive solely because of features at the green?

Would #13 at Rustic Canyon fit this model?  Especially if the pin is directly behind that center bunker?

[mike_malone]

 Bob,
 I agree with you on the "bottle" hole. BTW  I aimed at the bunker ,thinking I would come up short, but went straight into it. Luckily I rolled out into the light rough,"felt" it was a five iron;hit it to four feet for bird. Thanks for giving me a chance to brag!

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy W:

Courses that overdose on the close proximity of rough and sometimes HAY are not soundly prepared or even designed IMHO. The greatness of having courses with some degree of width -- I'm not suggesting that courses have Kansas wide fairways at all times -- is that it reduces the inane nonsense in looking for balls over and over and over again.

Dunluce at Portrush is a superb course -- it doesn't need the "extra" help of man's and be doctored to include narrow fairways that are engulfed with HAY-like grass that accelerates the likelihood for the searching of golf balls.

Adam makes a sound point about the nature of narrow fairways -- it simply says you must hit the ball HERE and only HERE. Appropriate width encourages playing angles.

Let me also mention that recovery is part and parcel of the game. Narrow fairways with extremely penal rough only causes a standard pro forma SW or PW extrication from that position. I find that sort of golf quite limiting.

I never suggested on the Dunluce / Portmarnock thread that Dunluce be as wide as say TOC, but this desire to have man's hands intrude and "strengthen" the layout with narrow fairways and HAY like rough is truly overkill IMHO and wrongly placed on such a wonderful layout.

[TEPaul]

"Tom -
In addition to Brian's TOC holes, would the "Bottle Hole" at NGLA count? Never played it, but on paper it looks like the middle option is the least attractive."

Bob:

I wouldn't say the Bottle Hole has a middle option as the middle is an inline bunker scheme.

"Are there any examples of wide fairways where the middle option is the least attractive solely because of features at the green?"

That's precisely what I'm talking about and I believe Brian has hit upon an excellent one---Rustic Canyon's #13. That's interesting as could be to me because I spent a good bit of time out there on that hole with Geoff Shackelford and Jim Wagner talking over the best possible way to make an extraordinary amount of unencumbered fairway width fronting that green work in some interesting way to dictate postioning the ball for a third shot depending on where the day's pin was. I don't remember talking about making the middle the least atttractive postion but we sure did talk a lot about how to make postioning the ball for the day's pin matter in play. I've never played the hole because it wasn't built then so it'd be nice to know how it does work.

"You may have hit on a litmus test for well designed width."

I think there are many interesting ways to use width---the most obvious being just putting things inside it to dictate various options but like a few of the holes at Rustic the most interesting to me is to try somehow to use massive unencumbered width where positioning the ball has nothing to do with the shot at hand but the next shot (logically what goes on with the green).

[Tommy Williamsen]

Great suff guys.  It seems to me that wide fairways demand better designed greens complexes.  Unfortunately many of the new courses I play just have wide fairways and large bland greens.  It is just step up hit a drive.  It doesn't matter if its left or right, because the geen will receive most any shot.  A course like NGLA or TOC demand good shot making both off the tee so that the shot into the green has the best angle.  If the greens are boring at least narrow the fairway so that at least the tee shot needs to be accurate.

[BCrosby]

Tom -

I hesitate to bring up his name , but didn't Behr do a piece on the line of charm v. the line of instinct where he demonstrates the ideas by placing a bunker in the middle of the approach to the green? Thus encouraging play down the sides of the fairway?

The notion was that Behr wanted wide fairways coupled with bunkering in the green surrounds that deterred you from taking the "line of instinct" down the middle.

Bob

[Gary_Nelson]

I think if you are going to offer a wide fairway and want to retain some strategy, the green should be tilted severely sideways.  This effectively narrows the "wide" fairway due to the severity of the approach shot.  

Big hitters can bang away.  Smart players have to hit toward the edges of the fairway.   Approach the green from the "wrong" side and you should have a damn hard time holding the firm and fast putting surface.  

We see a lot of severely sloped greens from front to back. Why don't we see more severely tilted greens from right to left (or vice versa)?

[BCrosby]

Gary -

Agreed. Tilting greens east/west would works too. I would also like to see more of it. Although I think that there is in fact a fair amount of that on good courses .

The bottom line is that if you build wide fairways (a good thing) the onus is on the designer to come up with really, really, really imaginative greens and greens surrounds. Absent that, you are left with a dull hole.

Bob

[TEPaul]

"Tom -
I hesitate to bring up his name , but didn't Behr do a piece on the line of charm v. the line of instinct..."

Bob:

Did I hear you call Max?

Max Behr did more than just do a piece on it! The "line of instinct" and the "line of charm" was at least Max Behr's phraseology, and probably his unique idea in the sense of applying the concept in a semi-scientific manner to the art of golf course architecture. Alister Mackenzie gives him ample credit a number of times for this applied architectural concept! (Some believe Behr may've been a far greater influence on the likes of the West Coast architects and others such as Mackenzie, Thomas, Jones, Hunter et al than we've previously known!).

Personally, I think the concept of the "line of charm" is a tad misnamed. The concept and architectural design tool should probably more accurately be called the "line(S) of charm".

Here's why. First of all, it isn’t the “line of charm” versus the “line of instinct”. Behr believed that by removing the “line of instinct” as a reasonable option from the golfer by putting something like a bunker in it CREATED the “line of charm”, or, in my opinion, more accurately created the “line(S) of charm”. To Behr the “line of instinct” was commonly the direct line to a hole or a target---eg the line and direction the player instinctively wanted to go or take. By removing that “line of instinct” by placing a hazard of some sort directly in it the architect was able to create up to four “line(S) of charm”---eg short of it, left of it, right of it, or directly over it!

This is one of the reasons Behr was an advocate of more fairway width rather than less---eg it allowed the architect the luxury of creating a more interesting problem or problems  within that fairway width and more solutions for the golfer to find and use within that fairway width!

[G_Tiska]

Tommy

The Bridge is a great example of a course with wide fairways
some 45 yards [#1] and greens with no imagination. There is nothing to think about on any tee shot. Tee it high and let it fly!!!
Contrast that with East Hampton and Frair's Head, it's no contest, which is better to play!!!

[TEPaul]

"Tommy
The Bridge is a great example of a course with wide fairways
some 45 yards [#1] and greens with no imagination. There is nothing to think about on any tee shot. Tee it high and let it fly!!!
Contrast that with East Hampton and Frair's Head, it's no contest, which is better to play!!!"

George:

It's sure true to say you should know that far better than any of us on here. The Bridge is definitely a different case both as a design and as a club. I've never played the course only saw it that one time with you in the finishing stages just before it opened. All I can say about the Bridge and the subject of width or tee shots or whatever is some of those tees were so dramatic and so high they just made you want to grab a couple of balls and launch a drive out into the blue horizon and watch it basically sail out and down over the world. Tee shots like that are sort of exhilerating I guess but they are different---it reminds me of the 1st hole at Pittsburgh Field Club where it would seem to be sort of hard to aim since you actually have to look so far down to pick out something to aim at.

I should also remind GCAers that despite some of my super OT posts over the years like all that stuff about stock car driver Glenn (Fireball) Roberts really does come together with golf and architecture somehow. Matter of fact it all comes together because of The Bridge G.C. One time Rees Jones told me to go see The Bridge when it was just about finished but hadn't opened. I had a really hard time just finding the place and eventually I found this big chain link fence that just happened to have the gate open so I drove way up in there and came to the top of the land that looked all over God's creation.

As I got out of my car and started looking around I got this weird sensation I was experiencing some type of deja vu and then it hit me I was looking right at the old Bridgehampton road racing track and the straightaway that came uphill and down past the old pit area. The last time I'd been there was about 40 years before and that was the last time I saw my old friend and idol Fireball Roberts from Daytona Beach as he went screaming past the pits in his famous purple stock car (pretty damn odd for a Long Island road racing track). About a year later Fireball was killed.

At that point George Tiska came up to me and asked me what the hell I was doing on this highly restricted place. He then very kindly gave me a tour of some of the golf course.

But Fireball Roberts flying down a straight at about 175 MPH and 40 years later a golf course---that was one of the oddest juxtapostions imaginable! Really eerie actually!