Tee Direction and Positioning

[Dunlop_White]

I have a question about the relationship between tee direction and tee positioning. Often, sets of tees are not located on the mid-line of a golf hole. Instead, some are offset from the centerline of play. Assuming these tees are simply cut at grade on a relatively flat surface, which do you prefer.....all tees squared-up parallel to the centerline of play as in Example 1, or all tees squared-up facing the target as in Example 2? Any insight or rules-of-thumb would be appreciated.

Example 1


Example 2

[Michael Moore]

Dunlop -

I like the latter.

But don't get this group started on orienting the golfer to the supposed target. They'll tell you that this is spoon-feeding at its worst and that tee boxes pointed into the woods are a magnificent and clever design strategy! And that level tee boxes are the devil's work!

[Pat K]

Dunlop,
          Why does the tee have to be aligned with the landing area? It's fun if a few, not many, are a few degrees off center. It's just another dimension of the mental aspect of golf.

[Kirk Gill]

I think that part of the fun that an architect can have playing with a golfer's mind comes from misdirection. Not only in the orientation of the tee box, but in the way that hazards and seemingly hazard-free areas are presented.

So to answer your question, it seems to me that some inconsistency in the orientation of the teeing areas would be called for. Sometimes, they could present an obvious angle of approach, and other times be used to misrepresent a "preferred" angle.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

In this country the actual tee markers are usually placed by a member of the greenstaff after cutting the grass on the teeing ground.  It is a matter of luck if these happen to be exactly at right angles to the intended direction of play.  Locally, at Wilmslow, the tee markers are wooden logs, heavy enough to stay in place without the need for a spike to locate it - until a golfer trips over it and moves it a bit....

Never trust a tee marker or teeing ground.

[Bill Gayne]

Mark,

I second never trusting the tee box or markers.

Dunlop,

In the drawings I would really be indifferent because they are void of hazards, slope, and angles for the next shot. When all of these elements are introduced it does make a difference that can either aid or trick the golfer.

Imagine a long bunker running up the left side then example 2 would aid the player playing the forward set of tees. Imagine a fairway sloped left to right than example 2 would trick the forward player and result in the ball running out of the fairway into possisbly the rough or hazard on the right.

[BCrosby]

Dunlop -

I think you go with example 2. That choice becomes more obvious as you offset the tees even farther. Put them at 20%+ off the centerline. If you don't aim them back towards the centerline they end up aiming off the course.

At Sand Hills, for example, that is how they aim tees when they are offset.

Bob

[Martin Del Vecchio]

I think that part of the fun that an architect can have playing with a golfer's mind comes from misdirection. Not only in the orientation of the tee box, but in the way that hazards and seemingly hazard-free areas are presented.

Kirk, I used to think that intentionally misaligned tees were a neat strategy for the course designer.  But then I thought that they would only work once, after which the player would adjust.

But then I witnessed a 9-man playoff at a qualifier at Red Tail (in Devens, MA), which started on the 10th hole.  The 10th is a long par 5, with a slightly uphill tee shot.  To the right is a road and some abandoned military buildings; thus, the road is marked OB.  And yet the tee marker points you directly at the buildings.  It's a subtle thing, and it isn't as obvious as it sounds, but it's definitely there.

Each player had already played the hole that day, and presumably successfully, since they were in contention for a spot.  But of the 9 players who teed off, 3 knocked their balls OB, and 2 others hit their balls so far left that they were in the trees, and effectively out of the hole.

So I guess that such mind games work when there the players are under pressure, which I think is a good thing.  

[Tom_Doak]

I'm not a big fan of rectangular tees, as nearly everyone here must know by now.  And I'm not a fan of intentionally misaligning tees, either.

But if I had to choose between the two options presented, I'd choose the first, because the other tees would look better from the perspective of the back tee if they were all aligned together.  When they're all at slightly different angles, they look very strange on the ground, like a badly-done perspective drawing.

That's why I don't like rectangular tees to begin with.  Too many straight lines in view.  I'd feel differently if there were only one teeing ground, as was the case in the old days; but with four, the shape is just too distracting.

[PThomas]

Michael Moore -- you stated that many on this site think level tees are the  work of the devil...do many really believe that?

I can understand tees that don't point me right down the middle,but I thought level tees were a "given"

[Kyle Harris]

I love subtle offsets like that on all aspects of a golf course, tees especially.

I feel this is a great way to break up the center line of a hole or to get inside the golfer's mind a bit. The 16th tee at Lulu is a bit offset in such a way and it definately biases the player down the right side. This all goes into my thoughts on "paralellism" in golf.

Take the major axis of the tee, and set it parallel, but offset from the major axis of the fairway or green. I'll post a few renderings of what I am talking about when I get the chance.

George Thomas touched somewhat on this example in Golf Architecture in America. His parallel lines were oblique to the line of play though. Whereas the Lulu example is with the line of play.

The first hole on the Blue Course at PSU features an almost square tee that is two "tee boxes" wide. The left side tee box is down the centerline of the hole and the right side tee box points down the right edge of the fairway. I've seen tons of people tee off there, and it seems that the hole plays more difficult when the tee box is on the right side than down the middle. To me, that variety of options is ideal for the course setup/architecture synergy.

[Dunlop_White]

Unfortunately, I am in the minority and prefer Example 1. Like Doak, I think sets of square tees look much too distasting and awkward on the ground when they are all aligned toward the target from varying offset angles. Real messy! I think you could probably get away with it if the tees were spread out far enough apart that all these different directions were not visible from the same perspective, like the back tee. I would have to side with Kyle Harris that offset tees look better if they are set parallel with the major axis of the fairway or green. Just fits my eye.

[Michael Moore]

Paul -

That was a gross overgeneralization of this group.

There are several threads in the archives regarding tee box grading, in which Tom Paul has some wistful remembrances about certain "ball above feet" tee boxes in the old days that set you right up for the "goin' draw" that was needed.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dunlop,

I favor example # 1.

The tees in example # 2 create an awkward or uncomfortable set up for me.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom Paul has some wistful remembrances about certain "ball above feet" tee boxes in the old days that set you right up for the "goin' draw" that was needed.

In Texas, we call the goin draw a runnin beauty duck hook.....

I recall a renovation project where a well known Tour player was a member, and he said that "Everyone knew" that you never line rectangular tees up partially staggered, i.e. where the right side of the forward tee is inside the left side of the back tee.  Apparently, as Tom says, this is quite a visual distraction for the best players in the world.  I would have never guessed that, since the back tees are merely a rumor to me as a golfer.......

Most tend to believe that you can get away with more misdirectcion with rounded tees than square ones.  In other words, if you build a rectangular tee, most feel it ought to aim to the center of the fw, whereas you expect no directional help from a round or free form tee.

That said, even with round tees, I find I can use any angle or orientation providing the furtherst point of the front curve is on line with the center of the fw.  That seems to orient the bow of the boat, as it were, and intuitively line players up, even if they are on a part of the tee that points well right or left of the target.

[Dunlop_White]

Jeff,

If partially-staggered rectangular tees (where the right side of forward tee is inside the left side of back tee) is a visual distraction, think about how awkward it would be if the same front tee was tilted a bit to the right to face the target?

Kyle,

Curious, but did you ever find what George thomas wrote on paralellism in golf?

[Kyle Harris]

Dunlop,

I'll have to get back to you on that and borrow my boss's copy of the book. I seem to remember it was in regard to a hole that could play as a par three or a par four depending on tee location.

[Kyle Harris]

Here is a photo of what I consider to be ideal in tee box positioning.

This is the first hole at Schuylkill Country Club (Ross). Note how the two forward tees flank the hole and that both the tee positions can be intermingled on either tee box without much variance in distance.

Also note that the tee box I am standing on (in the foreground) envelops the hole and can offer much variety for the back tees in terms of angle of play. The original fairway stretched to the tree line on the left side and maybe a few yards into the trees. But the back tee and the left tee both have a left side bias.

A great example of what I call "parallelist setup."