how hard is it to design a great straight hole?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I played a course this past week that had only two dogleg par fours.  It played long but in many ways it played boring even though the course had some wonderful green sites.  The tee shots were very boring and only demanded length.There are some highly regarded courses that have few doglegs.  Inverness comes to mind.

It justs seems to me that designing a string of great straight holes is a tough task.

[M. Shea Sweeney]

Tommy-

I'm not a big Reese fan however the 3rd hole at The Bridge on Long Island is pretty good, imo.

It's a straight hole with a large bunker down the left side, with total africa on the right.

The fairway has some nice ground movement.

It is a nice driving hole--when played from the black or championships tees will make for a tough approach shot. (Wind is usually in the face.)

The green is built up with a large bunker on the left side, lots of  room right of the green.

Behind the green is a closely mown 'collection area' catching long balls. Then allowing for a shot along the ground.

Championship Tee- 439
Black Tee- 416


I will see if I can find some pictures and post them.



edit-

did some thinking--Garden City has some great 'straight' holes. Depth perception playing a key role.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

14th Piping Rock

[Mark Bourgeois]

Surely if anyone could do a string successfully, it would have to be Ross, yes? Most of the straight holes I've liked were designed by him.

And how straight is "straight?" Really, really straight, or straight playing corridors? I assume you wouldn't count a hole that was straight save for tees that offset to the fairway, introducing the subtlest of dog legs (call it a human leg).  What about a straight hole with an angled or crooked green?

...and by straight, you just mean in two dimensions, right? Take away elevation changes and I think this is a short thread!

Grove Park Inn has plenty of "hole relaxer" applied to it: 6, 10, 16, and 18 are ramrod straight, and if you called 5, 10, 13, and 15 straight you wouldn't get an argument from me.  That would be 8 straight holes out of 13 non-par 3s: 62 percent.

Here's the layout:
http://groveparkinn.com/Leisure/Golf/GT/

Mark

[Tommy Williamsen]

I don't think it is so difficult ot design one good straight hole but that it is very difficult to design a bunch of them on one course.  Elevation changes do make a difference.  The course that got me thinking about it was Aronimink.  It has hole after hole of straight par fours.  There is however, good elevation change on the course.  So in a sense the hole doglegs up and down.

It seems to me that making green sites interesting certainly helps. And Aronimink has some great greens.  It is the tee shot that I think is difficult to make interesting.  Inverness, especially on the back nine has hole after hole of relatively straight holes of dull tee shots.

[Bob Jenkins]

Subject to elevation changes, I would think it easier to design straight holes compared to doglegs as with a straight hole, you would presumably have more options. You can decide where all bunkers reachable from the tee will go, and the same with greenside bunkers. I would think that a dogleg hole likely result in bunkers on the side away from the dogleg.
No???

[Mark Pearce]

Other than 6 and 8 most of the par 4s and 5s at Muirfield are straight.

[wsmorrison]

To me, straight holes are inherently weaker holes than holes that turn or have offset fairways and/or greens.  The straight hole does not ask the player to control distance and line as offset fairways or doglegs do.  All the player needs to do is hit it straight with the bunkering dictating distance.  A straight hole needs bunkering that makes the golfer think about which club to hit and which risk to take.  Unfortunately, rarely do straight holes hold their design.  The bunkering needs to be moved to provide distance demands that meet the changes of technology.  Offset fairways and doglegs maintain their interest and stand the test of time better.  Most straight holes are center directed--Aronimink and Oakmont with their flanking bunkers down the fairway are like this.  Yes, they have wonderful greens, but there has always been something lacking--though much less so at Oakmont because it is superb in so many ways.  

Simple holes with offset fairways and greens are much more appealing.  A straight hole with centerline hazards or mounds or fairway contours is bound to be more interesting than flanking bunkers and flat fairways.  What about interrupted fairways?  That might be interesting but never had much general appeal.

[JMorgan]

The short par 4.  One of my favorites by design:



Guess the architect and course?  (Don't cheat.)

[wsmorrison]

I don't know, but the interrupted fairway at 251 yards makes an interesting decision to layup or go for it given today's technology.  Does the green have some slope left or right?  Does the approach kick the ball onto the green?

[JMorgan]

The approach kicks the ball back down the slope without enough on the ball.  The green has a slight swale on a 120 degree angle to the approach and falls back slightly.  The most difficult pin position is front right.  

I'll try to find a good ground level photo.

[Rich Goodale]

The two best holes at Dornoch (4 and 14) are dead straight, but play as if they are not.  That is architectural genius.

[Jon Wiggett]

The Alps hole (17th) Prestwick is a pretty good straight hole imo. It is the stratergy that is important. In a dogleg it is not the dogleg that makes the hole interesting but the stratergy that is generated by it.

[tlavin]

Beverly, a Ross re-do, has a number of straightaway par 4's.  Each has a singular design feature that separates it from the rest.  That, in and of itself, shows thoughtful architecture.  For example, the 5th hole is dead straight, 400 yards, but it has a lovely plateau green that makes the hole visually intimidating, beautiful and quite challenging.  The eighth hole has a bevy of fairway bunkers short of the green that provide visual interest and a spot for a missed shot.  The green itself is quite difficult to hit because of its shape.
The 14th is probably the best example of how to handle dull terrain and still come up with a great straightaway short par-4.  The hole is 320 yards straight to a very elevated push-up green with deep greenside bunkers and a sharp drop behind the green.  When Prichard restored the course, he lessened the tunnel-vision effect of too many trees on either side of the fairway and then extended two fairway bunkers on a slight angle horizontally well into the fairway, giving players pause before they hit driver while leaving a modest gap to shoot the middle.  Before Prichard's work, the hole was a yawner and now it is a real attention grabber.  That is a good example of architectural skill, IMHO.