[Brendan Dolan]

This upcoming semester I am taking Introduction to Psychology, and am interested to hear about any elements of design that you have seen that makes you question yourself on the golf course.  There are the obvious ones, like bunkers and mounds that look closer to the green then they actually are that can cause problems when pulling a club.  But what are some of the other less used tricks that you have seen?  I feel that an ideal golf course should  constantly make the golfer think, so what are some of your favorite psychological tactics in golf course architecture, and where have you seen them?  Thanks,

Brendan

[Forrest Richardson]

Dr. Ed Sadalla has written about golf architecture and psychology. I invited him as a guest author in both of my books, Routing the Golf Course and Bunkers, Pits & Other Hazards. If you cannot find them in a library, or wish to avoid the high cost of these titles, drope me a note and I can send you some excerpts.

Sadalla writes globally about human DNA and our association with the landscape. About the hunt — and its profound correlation to golf. And specifically, about water, hazards and even situations such as the first tee, that intimidating space on any golf course.

Sadalla is an environmental psychologist and avid golfer. I have plans to do a book with him on the subject. But first I plan on recovering from this latest book project!

[Steve Curry]

Brendan,

I think much relevance could be found in Jung's theory.

"Integration gathers many into one." C.G. Jung

The golf hole as the centre, greens-mandalas, the game is just another form of soul searching.

Steve

[Tom_Doak]

Brendan:

There is a short chapter in The Anatomy of a Golf Course about psychology.  It could be an entire book on its own if you wanted it to be!

There are so many effects:

The little pond in front of the tee that causes an inordinate number of topped shots;

The off-balanced bunkering that causes people to miss a green to one side;

The offset fairway which causes people to miss the fairway because they were subconsicously playing straight for the green;

and so on.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Forrest's Psychology Sections were too deep for this boy to understand........

I like Tom's examples and will add one more.....

Any parent knows that the best way to avoid a toddler temper tantrum is to give him a choice.  You don't say "No, you can't have dinner now" you say, "Do you want your dinner at six or seven tonight?"  Any kid will magically stop crying to consider his options.

The same is true of golfers (and I am not saying they are childish)  Let them have a choice of whether to aim at the pin, carry the water, etc. or not, and there are few complaints.  However, if you force them to hit a particular shot, you will hear complaints forever.

[Brendan Dolan]

Thanks for the feed back.  Forrest and Tom I have both of your books and have thoroughly enjoyed them.  I will have to touch up on psychology parts in both of them.  Tom and Jeff, I agree with both of your comments on how a designer can effect a golfers thought process, but can you maybe elaborate on them.  What are some of the better examples of holes that you have designed, where you have used some of these psychological tricks, and why does it work well?  Thanks for the help.

Brendan

[Garland Bayley]

...
The little pond in front of the tee that causes an inordinate number of topped shots;
...

Does the pond cause the topped shots, or do we notice the top shots because they end up in the pond?

[BCrosby]

Tom Doak says:

"There is a short chapter in The Anatomy of a Golf Course about psychology.  It could be an entire book on its own if you wanted it to be!"

Agreed. In fact you could make the case that one of the distinguishing features of great courses is the psychological swings they engender. Less good courses are more psychologically neutral.

Unsettled, delighted, uncomfortable, unsure, intrigued, mesmerized, tempted, shamed, exhilarated and haunted are some of the states of mind invoked by great golf designs.

Not so great designs are flatliners, psychologically speaking. You get neither the heights nor the depths.

Bob

[Craig_Rokke]

I think that any design feature that lures us into thinking we can pull off a Superman shot with a Clark Kent swing (ie reachable par 4,
cutting the corner over some trees etc).

I play in an outing at Pocono Manor each year, and there is a dog leg
that entices about 1/3 the golfers to try to hit it "over the forest"
to cut maybe 75 yards off the 2nd shot. If 1 in 10 execute that shot, I'd be surprised.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Craig,

Ah yes, the sucker play!  I use that one often, with alternate fairways, etc.

As Tom mentioned, loading up one side of the green with bunkers forces play to the "safe" side.  Its always kind of cool to make sure that easy chip shot has a steep downhill contour to make it difficult.

I also think one really deep bunker plays with the mind. (Think Royal St Georges No. 4)

As posted on an Augusta thread, a wide fw with a creek beside it like ANGC 13 can play with ones mind.

A false front green makes the golfer take an extra club to clear, and then can make the downhill approach putt come up short, in an effort to avoid de-greening it.

Given how much putting plays with the mind anyway, I think slightly varying the green contours on each green (I will leave it to supers or nature to vary speed) can make a golfer question each short putt. (I didn't need to leave the last one that far outside the hole! ARRRRRRGG!)

Of course, contrary to popular opinion, I really think there is not much a gca can do to torture most golfers more than they already torment themselves.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()