Multiple tees - a poor design excuse?

[Brian Phillips]

I recently played a Robert Trent Jones Jr. golf course in Norway and was not that impressed but the public like it so maybe I am wrong.  One of my complaints was that the first three Par 3's were all copies of the 'redan' with bunkering short and to the left of the green.

I mentioned my opinions to a journalist friend who is respected by many here in Norway.  I said that the architect had not used his imagination enough on the holes and that 3 redans in a row was boring.  The last of the Par 3 redans is the 10th hole and it is very good but the other two are extremely boring in my opinion.

The 7th is the Par 3 redan that I critisised the most and my friend could not believe that I  could critisise a hole with 5 tees with different angles to the green.  

Now I agree with him that tees can be used to create interesting angles to a green on a Par 3 but hey, don't we usually play from the same tee everytime?  Maybe once in a while a player will go one tee further back but how often do you actually change which tee you play from from the last time you played a course?

Is using multiple tees another way of convincing the golfing public that the hole is interesting or is it just another way to put less effort into the design of the hole.  I mean anyone can place tees here or there (as long as the safety aspects are adhered to) but not everyone can create GOOD Par 3 greens complexes.

Should you need multiple tees to create a good Par 3 if you have a decent Par 3 site?

Brian Phillips

[allysmith]

Brian,

Couldnt agree more. Multi-tees are a bale-out option for letting length protect the course.

In designing a hole, particularily par 5s & 3s, the shape/size of a green will, if designed properly, be adequate protection for a hole.

The opposite occurs when a hole is too long for us joes and the tee position is used to make the hole shorter.
The shortened hole bears none of the characteristics of the design and is quite frankly a bore.
Kingsbarns in Scotland is spot on. Hole design is impeccable and the course is quite frankly the best in Britain. It knocks Loch Lomond into next week.

[angie]

donald ross recommended that tee boxes themselves be 50 yards or more long -- or that there be 3 or 4 tees per hole -- in order that the course superintendent could adjust the markers according to conditions such as wind, overly dry or overly wet conditions: so that the course might play as intended, rather than doling out unfair penalty or advantage on given days.  tee box design and placement, whether one, two, three or four, has to be conscientiously designed into the course so that we aren't left with wierd tees that bear no relationship to the second shot or to the green. this is the problem with many of the "forward" or "ladies" tees on some older courses, where the placement seems to have been poorly planned, if planned at all. mostly, unless you can't hit the ball further than 100 yards, such tees aren't really even a true help to the weaker player!

[A_Clay_Man]

Brian- I guess I keep with my contrairian nature because I do play different tees almost every time i go out, here at Pinon. Maybe it's because I usually meet up with others and depending on thier preference I play the tees that is suited for them. I must say that playing from the different angles and distances changes little, for me, other than the looks. Grant it, the shots are all different, but rarely is the score that much of a difference.

Why is that?

[Art_Schaupeter]

Brian,

Three par 3 holes in a row of a similar design style is boring and a bit redundant.  I think that might be the biggest problem with the course you describe.  I think multiple tees are a necessity nowadays, especially for public or daily fee courses, but they are not an excuse to fall asleep on the design.  I think that typically most golfers play from the same set of tees each time, maybe occassionally moving up or back a set depending upon their golfing companions that day.  

I use multiple sets of tees to try and set up a comparable golfing experience for the many different levels of golfers that play on the typical public course.  A well-designed course is going to have a set of par 3 holes that call for a variety of golf shots.  Three par 3 holes all bunkered front left sounds like a problem, regardless of the number of tees.  Having not seen the golf course, I would agree with your take on the situation, the problem is at the green.  Multiple tees do not make the holes better, they just allow more players of different ability levels the opportunity to experience the hole.

[A.G._Crockett]

Multiple tees can really be approached two different ways, can't they?  One way is simply reducing the length of the course for various categories of golfers who can't carry the ball 200+ yds. to make their round tolerable yet challenging.
     The second way is a slight angle change for the back tees, which played over 250 yds. with a driver makes a vastly more demanding shot several times a round than one would experience from a forward tee.  This is one of the best ways to identify the best golfers in competition, much better than simply seeing who can hit the ball the farthest over and over.
     I agree with an earlier comment that on par threes, multiple tees probably mainly change the visuals rather than the playability.

[Rob_Waldron]

When asked to describe some of his design philosophies an architect once told me that he like to incorporate multiple tees on par threes. He explained that in the case of par 4's and 5's you have a variety of approach shots depending upon where you hit your last shot. In the case of par 3's you generally face the same approach shot every time you play the hole. Subsequently this architect provides the player with multiple lengths and angles on his par 3's.

I think this is a great philosophy! During our 3-day Member / Guest this year we used multiple tee locations in addition to changing the pin placements.  We moved the tees forward on several of the short par 4's at least one day. The idea was to challenge the players to try to drive them.  The par 3's were played from a variety of lengths as well.  We also moved the tees on one par 5 well forward.  The green is guarded by water so we wanted to create a risk/reward situation by tempting players to hit a long second shot to the green.
We received tremendous response from the participants and will definitely repeat the course setup next year.  

Multiple tees gives you the flexibility to adjust the course for weather conditions or just for the fun and a unique challenge.

[John Foley]

Had a freind describe a great tourney he played in. Called Heaven & Hell. Day one was 18 holes, all tee's were as forward as possible and pins we're in the easiest spot. Course played in the 4800 yard range. Next day tee's were all the way back beyond the tips and the pins in the most difficult place. Course played well over 7000 yards. Two day cumulative scoring. They loved it.

[Rick Shefchik]

Angie,

I don't believe it's just the older courses that have badly-placed forward or "ladies" tees. In fact, my observation is that older courses treated the forward tees as part of the golf course more often than modern courses do -- at least when the forward tee is separate from the white and blue tees.

I play a lot of golf with my wife; each time we play a new course -- and in this case I'm referring to a recently-designed course, as well as one we haven't played before -- we are generally dismayed at how perfunctorily and even unfairly the forward tees are played. They are usually off to the side, pointed at the rough or the woods, creating a dogleg where a dogleg is not intended from the back tees, or on such poor teeing ground that you must take an uneven stance to hit your ball.

I'd love to play that "heaven and hell" format mentioned in the previous post. I think a lot of players would have their eyes opened about how poorly the forward tees are conceived on many golf courses.

[Tim Weiman]

Brian:

Thinking about the multiple tees at Pacific Dunes' par 3s I'm not able to reach the conclusion that they represent "poor design".

Can you walk through each hole and explain how they are poorly designed?