[Phil Benedict]

There is another thread lamenting the decline in the use of deceptive features in GCA.  I wonder about the relevence of deception once a player gains some familiarity with a course.  For example, how long does it take to figure out that a bunker that appears at first look to front a green is actually well short of the green, and adjust accordingly?  Once a player makes this adjustment, the bunker becomes superfluous except regarding mishit shots.

[Jon Wiggett]

Philip,

I think that most GCAs use many tricky features to encourage the golfer to think, although many such features are more a product of chance than deliberate choice.

An example of such a feature which comes to mind is the 16th tee on the Burma Road, Wentworth. This tee lines up into the edge of the trees to the left and not at the fairway. I am sure it was not the archies wish for it to be so but it does have the efeect of causing more players to end up to far left than would be normal. Even the pros have problems with this when they forget to calculate it in.

I believe the original reason for bunkers 30 yards or so short of the green was to allow the player  to clear them with a long club and still stop the ball on the green. This was in the heady days before irrigation softened up many courses making such bunkers obsolete

[Adam Clayman]

Phil, When one plays by eye, ignoring the modern ritual of researching exact yardages, well designed and placed humps and hollows, between you and the target create a never ending form of deception. Examples like a hell bunker or A.W's Tarantula, can still be subliminally distracting causing those mis hits.

[Phil Benedict]

Jon,

It occurred to me after I posted this topic that one deceptive feature that is difficult to adjust to is a tee that is out of alignment with the target, whether intentional or not.  My guess it that this is so because proper alignment is one of the harder fundamentals in golf, and very few of us get it right.  I think that the vast majority of right-handed golfers are aligned right of the target.  

[BCrosby]

Well designed deceptions can wreak havoc for a lifetime of play.

The rational side is always debating with what your eyes are telling you.

To prahrase the punchline from an old joke, who are you going to believe? You're lyin' eyes or the yardage book?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phil,

As your tee out of alignment idea suggests, there are some who figure out deception in a few tries, and others who never get it.

While not deception per se, I have seen flat greens that require you to hit it short and roll out to find the front pin, but have had playing partners who never do anything other than find the distance to the pin, fire it, chip from behind the green, and bitch the whole time.  They never even consider taking a club less.

So its a matter of degrees, and you are really wondering if you would use it anymore, since it seems that each golfer can only have at most, only one "Ah HA" moment.  I guess if the course had no other similar moments, it might be worth it, just like the teacher being happy at reaching just one student, even if boring all the others.

[Jeff Doerr]

Phil,

I still find the fore bunker a mind entering foe. I know that there is 20 yards between the bunker and the green, but I also know I do not want to miss my shot and end up with that long sand shot.

The other shot is the temptation to skirt a hazard, to bite off a little more than I can chew. You know the safe play is out to the middle of the fairway - to the wide spot, BUT the temptation is there to turn the drive over a hair, to carry that one bunker and set up a wedge instead of a 6 iron.


Hole #7 at Ghost Creek Pumpkin Ridge illustrates both of those concepts.

The tee shot is uphill and open straight away. You can see the bunkers lining the ridge and are tempted to go farther left and shorten your approach.

Once on the fairway, a conservative tee shot can leave you a mid iron in. Now you confront fore bunkers and a green that slopes slightly away from you. In the summer, when the course is firm, the play is just short of the green in the ample chipping area allowing for the run up.

I never tire of playing this hole.

[BCrosby]

I don't consider offset tees deceptive. Do others?

I like offset tees. I wish they were used more often. But I wouldn't think they ever fool anyone.

Bob

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon,

It occurred to me after I posted this topic that one deceptive feature that is difficult to adjust to is a tee that is out of alignment with the target, whether intentional or not.  My guess it that this is so because proper alignment is one of the harder fundamentals in golf, and very few of us get it right.  I think that the vast majority of right-handed golfers are aligned right of the target.  

It is one of the reasons why a solid pre-shot routine should always include picking a pin point target and the golfer should align himself up to it. Most of us will take any obvious line laid out such as the edge of the teeing ground if we don't conciously choose a target.

I think using such things to make the course harder is not in the spirit of the game.

[Kalen Braley]

On this same vien of chat about how to play certain holes.

Does anyone know how to play the 18th at PacDunes when it has the front left pin position?  Assuming you have a third shot that is 60 yards or longer into the green. I've looked at it and haven't figured it out.  

[Gary Slatter]

I don't consider offset tees deceptive. Do others?

I like offset tees. I wish they were used more often. But I wouldn't think they ever fool anyone.

Bob

They always fool women!

[Mark Bourgeois]

Search for the "suppressio veri" thread!

Some types of deception persist, while others don't. Some of it comes down to the nature of the deception.

For example,wide open, "unframed," area behind the green seems to persist as deception - especially if there is a clubhouse or parking lot behind the green!

Mark

[Lou_Duran]

Features like hollows or bunkers which make approach shots appear closer than they really are.

Gradual slopes which make the effective length of the approach longer, particularly effective when there is a lack of background like with a skyline or fortress green.

Bunkers or other hazards that appear to be too far out to reach but are not (Brauer's Tangle Ridge #15 on the left), or reachable when they're not (creek crossing #8 fairway at the same course).

[Tom_Doak]

Anything which makes a green deceptive to read is good forever, unless the golfer goes out with a level.

[Bill_McBride]

The third hole on the new Pensacola CC, 360 yards, has a cross bunker at 280 yards that effectively hides the green so all you can see is the top half of the flagstick.

The course has been open since November 9th, so by now I know the green and how it's shaped and receives shots, but the fact that I can't SEE the green still keeps that uncertainty in your mind.  That makes it hard to fully commit to the shot and in turn makes it hard to get close.  So far my only birdie there was when I holed a 50' putt over the ridge dividing front from back, from the back half to a front pin.

That cross bunker and the ridge it's built into won't ever go away, so I think it will continue to be a problem for keeps.



This picture was taken before the course opened (no pin) and from farther back up the fairway so you can see the green.  From inside 150 yards you can't.

[Phil Benedict]

Maybe blindness remains a factor no matter how frequently you play the course.

[Lou_Duran]

"This picture was taken before the course opened (no pin) and from farther back up the fairway so you can see the green.  From inside 150 yards you can't."

Bill,

I probably would like the hole more if it had a challenging spot in the fairway from which you could see the green.  There is a hole at Long Cove where if you drive to the safe spot, the green is invisible, but if you hug the marsh, you get a good glimpse.

Tom Doak,

Ralph Plummer did a great job of building greens that did not have a lot of internal contouring but were full of very subtle breaks.  When running at good speeds, say 9'- 11', they required great nerve and excellent touch.  Even after playing them repeatedly, they made you think and doubt what you were seeing.      

[Patrick_Mucci]

There is another thread lamenting the decline in the use of deceptive features in GCA.  I wonder about the relevence of deception once a player gains some familiarity with a course.  For example, how long does it take to figure out that a bunker that appears at first look to front a green is actually well short of the green, and adjust accordingly?  Once a player makes this adjustment, the bunker becomes superfluous except regarding mishit shots.

Phil,

Perhaps the best way to answer your question is by pointing out examples.

As exhibit A I give you the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd holes at NGLA.

Blindness, whether complete or partial, will perpetually deceive the golfer.

Forget the adage that it's only blind once.

It's blind all of the time.

A PERFECT example is # 3 at NGLA.

I don't care how many times you play the hole, you have little in the way of past experience to help you align your approach shot.

The DZ is huge, the green is huge and it's doubtful that you'll be in the same location hitting your approach to the same hole location, and, once on the highly contoured green, putting is a new experience almost every time.

So, Blindness stands the test of time, both partial and complete, although, in terms of degrees, complete blindness provides the sturdier test.

I also believe that highly contoured greens stand the test of time, especially when combined with complete or partial blindness.

[TEPaul]

Really good and deceptive diagonals stand up to frequent play, particularly the really good diagonals of green sides and fairway sides guarded by bunkers, banks, rough, water etc!

Pete Dye based a career in architecture around it.

[Karl Bernetich]

A combination of 3 things (helps if it's on the right.  most play right and slice the ball)

1)  a "don't hit there" hazard.
2)  tee box aligned with the "don't hit it there" hazard.
3)  a slight slant of the tee box to send the ball "there."

a 360 yd par 4.  relatively easy driving hole. short iron in.  slight dog leg right.  There's a red staked hazard, drainage / wash out area on the right (i.e. don't hit there).

When you walk up on the tee box, you see the hazard (1), because the tee box aligning you there (2) and I can't tell you how many people stand on the tee box as say out loud, "I whish they would level out this tee box."  Then proceed to tee it up and hit a much bigger slice they thay normally do (3 - ball below their feet tends to go right) and hit their 3rd from where their 1st crossed the hazard line.

10 yrs and a lot of people haven't cought on !

[Karl Bernetich]

There's one more but i'm not sure it count's as a deceptive feature ... build a house.

I don't care how far back and out of the line of play, somebody will break a window.

[ForkaB]

Something that the Brits call "dead ground."  It is a little dip 20-40 yards short of the green that foreshortens ones estimate of the length of the shot.  The Old Course is full of this feature, as are Dornoch and a few others.

[Tom_Doak]

Karl reminded me of one of my favorite techniques, which technically might not qualify as "deceptive" but nevertheless has a strong tendency to induce a bad swing:  the dogleg hole where you can see the flag from the tee.

Time and again I've observed that people miss their tee shots on the inside of the dogleg (especially on doglegs to the right), because the last thing that catches their eye before they swing is the flag on the green, rather than their true target in the fairway.

[Mark_F]

The dogleg hole where you can see the flag from the tee.

Time and again I've observed that people miss their tee shots on the inside of the dogleg (especially on doglegs to the right), because the last thing that catches their eye before they swing is the flag on the green, rather than their true target in the fairway.

So, so true.

Anytime part of the flagstick is obscured, whether it's because the green is above or below you, greenside knobs and bumps, or ridges, is forever deceptive.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Anything which makes a green deceptive to read is good forever, unless the golfer goes out with a level.

That must include instances where the architect used the pretty much the same grass "through the green," as in fescue fairways, fescue surrounds, and fescue greens. Can't even figure which way is $%^@ UP, much less break -- brutal from any distance approach position...



Mark

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()