[BCrosby]

Rich -

That someone figures out a loopy way around a hazard does not convert what is a penal hole to a strategic hole, at least not in any non-trivial way.

Bob

[ForkaB]

Bob

To bring it to the level that you Southerners are at in the heat of the football season:

"When it's 4th and 17, the best strategy is often to punt."

Walter Camp, after playing the Biarritz at Yale GC.

[BCrosby]

Rich -

If you are suggesting that Southern Football (following the capitalization rule I learned in grade school) is anything but penal, you have not spent much time in the South.  

Bear Bryant once said, "Strategy is for Mama's boys and members of the Philadelphia School." Or something like that.

Bob

[PThomas]

1.The Ocean Course (definitely the hardest course I've played)

2. Whistling Straits

[Robert Kimball]

1.The Ocean Course (definitely the hardest course I've played)

2. Whistling Straits

I had the "pleasure" of playing TOC a few years after opening, it is was unbelievable how difficult is was back then.

Remember, Dye has come back a few times and "softened" it up. And if they wanted to, they could play the sucker at around 7,700 yards using certain tees.  
Looking forward to the PGA, that should be fun, at least for the gallery.
 

[PThomas]

Rob - I played it7 years ago...I went back a few years ago after it had "supposedly" been softened up...I couldn't play, cause they were redoing the greens, but they let me drive around and it didn't look much, if  any, easier to me

[SL_Solow]

I share the difficulty in evaluating this question when there does not appear to be a consensus regarding the term penal.  A course can be very difficult without being penal.  Conversely a course form the penal school can be relatively easy.  For me, a course is penal when there is no alternative route to avoid hazards short of wasting a stroke or where there is essentially only one route to the hole and failure to navigate that route results in a significant penalty.  Whether any course that has a preponderance of holes with these characteristics can be called great is an interesting question.  However one that qualifies and that will truly test your game is Medinah #3.  As those who have followed my periodic arguments with Shivas will attest, it is not one of my personal favorites.  But I do respect it  as a test.  Its penal nature is clear resulting from its length, narrowness and trees which limit one's ability to hit recovery shots.  The greens are also quite difficult.  Again, not my favorite but an example of high level penal architecture.

[Tom Huckaby]

OK, maybe it's due to the dunce cap Matt Ward gave me earlier today, which I proudly wear, but I don't get it.  Why is it so tough to define penal architecture?

Is it any more than just severe punishment of off-target shots?

Why does it need any further complexity?

Now as for whether this makes a golf course "tough", well that depends on the golfer.  Johnny Straight-Shooter eats these courses up; Willy Wildboy gets killed; Sammy Strategic-thinker gets bored.

What am I missing?

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Huck:

I love you partner -- no offense meant. It just seems you are stuck with this idea that no other option exists for the other thread we discussed. I'm sure you will see the light soon enough.

Regarding penal architecture -- in my mind -- it's when holes are very limited to what you can do. You must hit the shot required and little else. The slightest weakness / mishit wil be dealt with severely.

The famous quote from the Fownes / re: Oakmont certainly applies when penal architecture is discussed.

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt:

No offense taken.  
As for light to be seen, well... I'm certainly open to that.

Now as for penal architecture, it would seem we are in agreement.  Why is it difficult to define?

TH

[BCrosby]

"Is it any more than just severe punishment of off-target shots?"

I think it is more complicated than that. Strategic courses also severely punish off target shots. The difference is not simply the degree of difficulty.

I think the relevant difference is that on penal courses you are required (whatever your playing ability or strategy) to negotiate the hazards presented. On strategic courses the negotiation of hazards is optional. Hazards are presented such that you can opt out. Risks on good strategic courses are elective. On penal courses they are not.

Which is why strategic courses are almost always more fun for mediocre players. They can play away from trouble. The flip side - and this is the beauty part - is that a good strategic course may also result in higher than normal scores for the aggressive scratch player.  

Penal courses do not offer you the opt out option. Your playing choices are more narrowly circumscribed. Hazards dictate play. Think hazards tight to the line of play, narrow fairways, forced carries, cross bunkers/water. Heck, think US Open setups.

Having said the above, I can't think of a course that is purely penal or purely strategic, though most are more one than the other. Nonetheless, they are concepts that have had a long and useful life and can still shovel a lot of architectural coal when used properly.

Bob

   

[Tom Huckaby]

Bob:

Great stuff.  Understood.

However, none of that gets me to move away from my definition of penal architecture as simply "severe punishment of off-target shots."  What you've described is how this plays out; why it is different than strategic; and which is better for which type of golfer - all of which are very deep issues.

I still find the definition of the term to be quite simple, though - and it surprises me the difficulty people here are having with it.  Perhaps this is a case of making way too much of a very simple concept?

Not that that's ever happened before in here - no way, never.

 

TH

[John Goodman]

Rich -

If you are suggesting that Southern Football (following the capitalization rule I learned in grade school) is anything but penal, you have not spent much time in the South.  

Bear Bryant once said, "Strategy is for Mama's boys and members of the Philadelphia School." Or something like that.

Bob

things pretty penal on the Plains this week . . .  

[James Bennett]

From my limited knowledge of golf course architecture, I understand penal to refer to a style.  It does not, by itself imply difficulty.  A strategic hazard could be a tougher recovery than a penal hazard, although it doesn't have to be.

IMO, a penal hazard for a tee-shot is more likely to be located in the rough than in the fairway, and be located some distance form the desired line of play.  This could be flanking bunkers, or a tree-lined fairway, but both will be a fair way from the desired line of play (centre of fairway.

At the green, penal bunkers are likely to be located on the wings of the green at say 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock, some distance from the pin.  I doubt that a good shot would run into such a bunker.

I think it was John Low who compared a (?strategic) bunker to a fire.  One gradually gets braver and braver, getting closer and closer to the fire (the hazard) and the more rewarding warmth (line of play) until eventually we get burnt.  A penal bunker is often placed where you don't need to go, whereas a strategic bunker dares to be challenged by the best of shots.

The other category of penal is the 'must carry - no other option'.  In the 'olden' pre-'golden' days, this may have taken the form of a cross-bunker (which could be shallow, or could be severe).  Tom Doak used #12 at Augusta as a poster-child of a penal hole.  No matter the ability of a golfer, they must encounter and overcome Rae's Creek.

So, IMHO, for a course to be regarded as a great penal course, it must satisfy two criteria.  Firstly, the design must empahasise penal more so than strategic and heroic.  secondly, it must be regarded as great.  Sounds like some of the modern tour courses to me.

James B

[Gerry B]

My list would include:

Merion East
Carnoustie
Bethpage Black
The National in Toronto
Pine Valley
Oakmont
Pinehurst #2 -the greens anyway

[JNC Lyon]

Oak Hill (East)

[Steve Lapper]

My list would include:

Merion East
Carnoustie
Bethpage Black
The National in Toronto
Pine Valley
Oakmont
Pinehurst #2 -the greens anyway

I'm quite surprised that nobody here has added the likes of :

Medinah
Butler National
Southern Hills

Metedeconk
Old Marsh
Koolau

 to the mix. All the above have severe features that don't just displace the golfer, but instead, impair, disrupt and siable the player over the course of MOST of their holes. All the above (and most of what has been discussed in this thread) have been described as big, tournament-style tough courses, but can it not be said that the Myopia Hunt Club's of the world
are equally diabolical and penal?

If Merion is considered penal (and I believe it can be considered such when it's conditioning is geared to such) then smaller, very strategic designs (i.e. Myopia, Kingston Heath, Pittsburgh Field CLub, etc...) also fit the bill.

Perhaps it is that very nature, a combination of strategic premium and penal hazards, that defines greatness...not vistas and tradition? For me, those are the types of places I could easily paly over and over again with no sense of repetition.

[ForkaB]

Maybe the definition of a "penal" (or VERY HARD!!!!) course is how well you shoot on it when you are playing good (or "well" in case Huntley or Kelly are "listening"....).

I played TPC Sawgrass in 1982, soon after it opened.  I was about a 7 at the time, and had played Sawgrass CC (which used to kick the pro's butts) the day befrore and shot 79.  I played better at TPC and was lucky to break 90, without any "unfair" result or being unable to hit the 17th on my 1st attempt.

A few years later, Pete Dye and Dean Beman "strategized" (i.e. softened) the course and I was able to go under par one of the last times I played it in 1988.

I remember both of those rounds very well, for obviously various reasons.  I'm not sure which course was "better" however......

[Lou_Duran]

Jason Topp says: "It is interesting to me that people seem to be equating "penal" with "tough."  I have always understood the term "penal" to mean that there is one way to play the hole and you either succeed or fail."

I may fall into this camp to the extent that in my definition a penal course under normal conditions is always tough whereas there are tough or difficult courses which may not be necessarily penal (Yale, Bethpage-Black, Colonial).

With very few exceptions, there are multiple (more than one) ways to play a hole.  #16 at CPC can be played with medium and long irons to the left, a fairway metalwood to the hole, or a driver to somewhere on the very large green.  Even #17 at the TPC- Sawgrass can be played with a variety of iron shots and even just a putter.

The main differentiation I make between penal and strategic design, other than the latter offers more options, is the consequence of failing to execute the chosen shot.  A penal hole or course penalizes that shot much more severely (reaching into the pocket for another ball), whereas the other still leaves some hope for recovery.  

Bad rounds on penal courses generally result in very high scores (high 80s, low 90s for a low to mid-single digit player).  On other courses, the same player can be hitting the ball badly but score closer to his average.  

Subject to the caveat that it is dangerous to make broad generalizations based on limited exposure, Winged Foot- West just seemed relentless in punishing even the marginally bad shots.  With the dense rough, difficult bunkers, and complicated greens, my objective on some recovery shots was just to save bogey, nevermind thinking about par.

The five finishing holes, I think all played as par fours for the US Open, are nothing short of brutal.  Mishit the drive in any of the last three and it will cost at least one stroke.  Miss the green on the wrong side, again, it costs at least one stroke.

Regarding Spyglass, with the wind blowing the stretch from 2 to 5 can be a nightmare on the scorecard, provided that you are playing by the rules and marking down all strokes.  #3 in a swirling 20 mph wind is frightening, as is #5.

The inland holes require distance of the tee as well as precision.  In the normal soft conditions, the ball doesn't go anywhere and there are a lot of really bad places for the forced second shots to find.
 

[Tom Huckaby]

Fantastic!

I too am very puzzled with equating "penal" directly with "tough".  And when I tried to simplify the definition many posts back, what I meant was exactly what Lou just said, ie :

The main differentiation I make between penal and strategic design, other than the latter offers more options, is the consequence of failing to execute the chosen shot.  A penal hole or course penalizes that shot much more severely (reaching into the pocket for another ball), whereas the other still leaves some hope for recovery.

Well explained, my friend.

As for the courses discussed, I absolutely concur re WF-West - that was penal to the max, but in a MUCH "cooler" way than the more common type of penal architecture seen all over.  That is, at WF-W, the penalty wasn't immediate and doled out in penalty strokes; rather due to the fantastic wild greens and green sites and angles required, the penalty was delayed and not as obvious.  To me that's the type of penal golf that all types ought to be able to enjoy.

As for Spyglass, it's a combination of penalty strokes/delayed penalty, described perfectly by Lou.

TH

[henrye]

Others have mentioned its "greatness" on here before, but certainly Rye has to be considered when discussing Penal courses.  Waist high rough, lightning quick undulating fairways and bunkers that closely resemble manholes.

[Tom Huckaby]

Sean:

OK, let's not get carried away with that aspect of it, at least not in the effort to DEFINE the term.  I do think that part helps in differentiating it from strategic, but in terms of definition, I continue to believe one need go no further than this:

Penal golf course architecture means off-target shots are severely punished.

How one takes it from there depends on what subject one has in mind.  But for defining the term, it really needs no more than that.

TH

[Tim Gavrich]

Can we really refer to an entire course as penal?  In my opinion, great courses have a mix of holes; some outrageously difficult, other legitimate scoring chances.  To me referring to a whole course as "penal" disqualifies it from being a truly great course.  To me, the terms "great" and "penal" seem mutually exclusive.

But perhaps we might consider stripping down the definition of "penal," as Mr. Huckaby seems to have done.  This 5-6-aspect business seems a little non-concise, with all due respect.

Here's how I define "penal" design:
A hole is defined as penal when the consequence of a shot played with any less proficiency than is required by the hole/shot is at least a half stroke (i.e. a greenside shot expected to be converted as an up-and-down less than half the time).

Some penal holes I've played:
#13 at Pawleys Plantation--A 125-145 yard shot to a small peninsula green surrounded by immediate marsh on the left, and in front and back.  Very simple; hit the green or make no better than a bogey (usually a double).
#9 at Hotchkiss--I may not be a huge fan of this hole, but it sure is penal by my standards.  You will often hit as many tee shots as it takes to hit the fairway.
#14 at Triggs' Memorial Golf Course--160-yards downhill.  The green sits on a pedestal and most balls which do not find the green will yield very few pars.

One more thing from my end: I personally consider all good holes 'strategic design.'  Any decent golf hole requires some kind of sound strategy in order to make par or better.  In my mind, even penal holes are still very strategic.  Sure, there may be only one viable strategy, but it's there.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim - I'm with you - it would be a rare course indeed that is wholly penal.  This does need to be assessed on a hole by hole basis, perhaps even shot by shot.

And well said re this:

One more thing from my end: I personally consider all good holes 'strategic design.'  Any decent golf hole requires some kind of sound strategy in order to make par or better.  In my mind, even penal holes are still very strategic.  Sure, there may be only one viable strategy, but it's there.

By strict definition every golf hole is strategic.  A decision does need to be made on every golf shot, even if that decision is VERY obvious.

TH

[mike_malone]

Without a full shot option a hole or a course isn't strategic. Rich's example of #18 at Merion is a case in point. If you can't carry the quarry and reach the fairway it isn't an "option" to hit it to a forward tee and then go from there. It is your only choice , so it is penal.

   When I think of PVGC off the tee I see options to take a less heroic line. The "penal" nature of the course comes from a mishit of that heroic effort. So, it is a strategic course with severe penalties for mistakes. More strategic courses would just create unfavorable angles with more trouble for the next shot,say ,for example, Hidden Creek.


   I doubt a totally penal course would rise to greatness IMO because there is no intellectual challenge just a physical one.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()