[Mark Bourgeois]

I've got some questions.

In one way or another, Mike Clayton has said all the things below, but only recently did it crystalize in my mind: what separates great short, driveable par 4s from average short, driveable par 4s.

1. Max-out on options; at a minimum:
a) A safe route;
b) A driving route;
c) A third "contingency" route, which may vary with the location of the hole, conditions, etc.

In fact, there can be many more options.  Width may be a condition of the validity of a high number of contingency routes, but a hole of "normal" width should be able to hold at least three routes, yes?

2. No dominant strategy.  A dominant strategy is a game theory term and means that one strategy is always superior to the others and should be chosen every time.  For example, golfers may never choose driver on a short 4: "lay-up" is a dominant strategy. (There's a hole at a course I play that's driveable, but I have never, never, seen anyone even attempt it.  The risk-reward's out of whack.  In contrast, there's another short 4 I've played where it seems all golfers do is hit driver, at least two-thirds or more do.)

A great 4 should lead different golfers to make different decisions, and the same golfer to make different decisions from day to day, depending on his game, hole location, and conditions.  You could measure "no dominant strategy" a few ways.  One test might be each option over time sees roughly the "naive" proportion of total play. So: if three options, then each one gets one-third the play. (I admit that's simplistic, especially when some options come into play only when the flag is in a certain location, or under certain conditions...)

3. Aesthetics (personal preference)
4. Originality (distinguishes very good from truly great)

Here are the questions:

A. I assume every architect knows these things, and apparently golfers love these holes, but why do we see so few great ones?  I think it comes down to one of the following reasons:
1. Architects disagree with the criteria above;
2. Architects don't know how to design for multiple options;
3. Designing a hole with no dominant strategy is really, really difficult.

B. What are great examples of short 4s with no dominant strategy, and what options are presented? (BTW, it sounds like Riviera 10 may no longer qualify, at least for the pros, who now apparently pull driver every time, no matter what. For the rest of us, though, presumably the hole still qualifies.)

C. How certain are designers they can design a hole with no dominant strategy, before it actually goes in the ground; i.e., before you get to see how golfers actually play the hole?  I have to think this is harder than it looks -- MacKenzie would have put one on every one of his courses if he could have (yes?), but he didn't (did he?). You might be able to put three options on paper and in the ground, but that doesn't mean each option will get one-third the total play.

Thanks,
Mark

[Dan Boerger]

Mark - That's a very impressive post, loaded with some excellent questions. It's certainly been discussed here, but the best collection of short par 4's I've ever played is Merion East. If you've played it, I suspect you may have come to a similar conculsion. If not, you'll have a great time studying what was done there. 1, 7, 8, 10 are all drivable for the long hitter. It's absoutely uncanny (and, yes, sometimes frustrating) how there are so many different ways to play these holes, and how critical position off the tee is. I love the 11th hole, but I don't think it has the strategic options of the other ones I mentioned.

[JESII]

Great topic Mark,


Dan,

Merion #1 is about 370 - #7 is about 350 and uphill into the green - #8 is about 340 with a gigantic bunker face protecting a very shallow green.

I would agree that #11 is a good hole, and that #10 is "driveable for the long hitter" but we split up after that.

To tie that back in...they are all great holes, and short, so they might fit this thread unless Mark says he needs driveability as a real charachteristic...



Mark,

A fourth possible answer to question A might be the disparity of distances people hit the ball - how could you design a hole that carries all three options equally for two guys that hit the ball 75 yards different distances?


B - #10 at Merion would be for me if they trimmed the tree on the left side a bit...to any pin near the middle of the green, I would probably hit driver a fair bit of the time...to a pin along the left side I would try to hit a 3 wood up the right corner to have an angle for the pitch...and to a right pin I would choose a shorter club like a 3 or 4 iron to help the angle up to the right side.

C Great point!

[Mark Bourgeois]

Helpful questions!  A clarification: yes, I am interested in holes that are driveable for anyone, provided they choose the appropriate tee.  So, that would mean no dominant strategy for an individual golfer -- if he played the hole 10 times, under a variety of conditions and states of his game, his choices off the tee would indicate a rough indifference among the three or so options he had.

Changed thread title to reflect interest in "driveability."

Mark

[JESII]

I still say a barrier to these (equitable option driveable 4's) is a guy that should play the regular tees due to his handicap might be 75 yards longer than another guy playing the same tees...tee shot choices cannot pan out for both equally...not that they necessarily should, just that they cannot...

[Dan Boerger]

I posted too soon ... I mistook great driveable par 4s with great short par 4s. Still, the holes I mentioned are driver or 3wood, flip wedges for the touring pros (and probably for you JES!).

Question ... would a to pro drive bunkerside if possible on #8 at Merion? Would you JES?

[JESII]

Dan,

Tour pros are so good with their wedges...and there are too many places around that 8th green that eliminate hitting the green with their next that I'd bet you will see less than 5% of the guys in 2013 hit driver off that tee...and, I'll also bet those 5% have a higher scoring average than the others...

I do agree that these holes are worth studying what exactly makes them great short par 4's...because they are...but I don't think you'll see a driver on 1, 7 or 8 much at all from that level player...

What do you think about what I've said to Mark about the difficulty of conceiving these driveable holes based on the differences in individual driving distances by players of the same overall caliber?

[Phil McDade]

Mark:

Interesting set of questions.

One of my favorite short par 4s (I'll let others judge its relative worth/greatness compared to other short par 4s) is the 8th at Lawsonia Links.

It plays 339 from the tips, and 322 from the white tees. What I like initially about the hole is its deceptive appearance. From a tee set back in a wooded enclave, you can see the green and flag off in the distance, slightly to the right of the direct line off the tee. But the fairway moves somewhat left off the tee, so one thinks it plays as a dogleg. But it's really a pretty straight short par 4 with an offset green to the right. Adding to the golfer's dilemma on the tee is the partial blindness of the hole -- a yawning trap (an easy carry) frames the right side of the fairway, and the terrain beyond the trap dips down and leaves one uncertain about the outcome of a tee shot.

The golfer on the tee faces what appears to be three choices -- you can give it a rip at the green on the "line of charm," but unknown to the first-time golfer (partial blindness of the terrain) is that it's mostly rough and often thick native grass all the way from the tee to green to the right of the fairway. The second option, perhaps the safe play, would appear to be a fade with a fairway wood/iron over the bunker, which will leave a short iron into the green. The deceptive third option is to take a driver and aim to the left away from the bunker, because the terrain dips down past the bunker on that side of the fairway and the fairway really opens up the further one drives it left (but not too far left).

Making the hole all the more attractive is the nature of the green -- a classic Langford/Moreau pushed-up green, heavily bunkered on all threes sides save for the left front. The green is one of the smaller ones at Lawsonia.

What I like about the hole is that it gives the golfer a range of options, and they are deceptive ones, given the partial blindness of the hole. The risk-reward element is significant, because a tee shot that ends up in the rough will make it difficult for the player to reach the green, even though the shot is relatively short. There is:

-- a very risky driver-option right (with the prospect of a second shot out of the native grass);
-- a less-risky, smart driver-option left (but you'd have to have played the hole to really know it's there, and even then it feels like a counter-intuitive play from standing on the tee; however, this option does open up the green and makes it play deeper from that angle);
-- a fairway wood/iron option that is either a fade/cut over the bunker (but don't fade it too much, or you'll end up in the rough) or to the left (along the smart-driver option line) if you're not terribly confident on that line with your driver.

The safe fairway-wood play still leaves a tough short-iron shot, because you're likely faced with a carry over a greenside bunker. And, even further, the well-hit safe driver-option shot left (the counter-intuitive play) will likely carry all the way to the lowest point of the hole, making for an uphill pitch and thus adding a bit of uncertainty about how much club to take.

Langford really did like to design holes with options, and to me this is one of his best.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Okay, maybe there is no "perfectly" distributed set of options for every golfer on one of these holes.  But, Jim, what if I say for "two-thirds of all golfers" -- does that make this issue go away?

Some holes to think about:
Royal Melbourne West 10
Barnbougle 4
Ganton 14

I could see a lot of different decisions made from one round to the next, for many (okay, not necessarily all!) golfers. (I think Mike Clayton wrote somewhere -- haven't been able to find where -- RMW 10 offers 6 legitimate options! And I took "legitimate" to mean a golfer wouldn't pick the same option every time and in fact over time would give each of these options plenty of action.)

Mark

[Richard Boult]

for me it's simple... I like drivable par 4's that are only reachable when you swing just a little harder and still manage to hit it accurately enough to avoid danger left and right.  I don't think that just anyone should be able to reach a par 4 from their normal tees and that most should consider a shot that leaves them 100 yards or so out (or whatever their scoring distance is).

A couple examples at Bandon:

Bandon Trails 8th - driving this green required a shot aimed right of the green that landed short, bounced left, and ran up to the green. A shot made right at the pin or that lands the green will probably run off the steep bank on the back or left side or into the left-side bunker. A shot made too far right finds trees and long grass (probably unplayable). Coming up short is pretty harmless.

Pacific Dunes 16th - I hit this green by aiming left of the green and hitting a mild fade. The next round, I went right at it and ended up in the long grassy mounds below the green and double bogied after hitting my next shot into the bunker behind the green. This is a pretty risky drive. Difficult or unplayable lies await if you fade too little and go too long left or if you fade too much and come up short.

Bandon Dunes 16th - my caddy suggested I aim left of the green  to end up behind the green for a nice chance for up and down. Instead I went right at it. My first shot barely missed right and found the beach below. My second attempt caught the fringe at the front right corner of the green where I 2-putted for bogie. A shot missed short or right are rather penal, left is okay.

[JESII]

Mark,

I'm not asking you to improve your question, I think it is a good one...I'm suggesting one possible explanation for the lack of real good driveable par 4's is that it would be difficult to make a hole interesting, challenging, confounding and fun for a 10 handicap that can hit it 275 as well as the 10 that only hits it 200. Both may like the hole, but will rarely overlap in how they play it...I just suggesting this may give pause to architect in their thought process while considering a 275 from the mens tee hole...

[Mark Bourgeois]

Phil, of the options you list, how many times have you chosen each one? Do you always default to one of the options, or even just two?  How "legitimate" is each one?

Mark

[Sean_A]

You lot beat me to it!  I was going to say the first thing which makes a great driveable par 4 is that it is driveable for a great many people.  Too often, this discussion really centers around the best players and their length - usually in the 275 and up range.  

I was also going to add that there must be a viable way for the shortish hitter with a good wedge or bump and run game to get a birdie.  Meaning, craftiness (ie playing within oneself) and length can be rewarded on the same hole.  

In my experience, the holes with the best opportunity to fulfill the above tend to be downhill and require some sort of run in shot.  This may mean that the big boys may be hitting irons, but it matters much less if one has to pick a spot and get the ball kicking in from there.

Here is an example of a cracker.
 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean,

That hole freaks me out every time you post it!  I can't remember if you took us through the options in your earlier post(s) on it, but can you give us a sense of whether you feel it lacks a dominant strategy, or whether you (not other golfers) would / could / have play(ed) it differently from round to round?

Mark

[Mark Bourgeois]

One additional piece of evidence that makes me think designing a hole without a dominant strategy is really, really difficult is the thread a few months back on alternate fairways.  You can have two or even three, but in the vast majority of cases a dominant strategy emerges, often for nearly every golfer, and just one route is taken.

Mark

[Rob_Waldron]

I have always said that the most difficult hole to design is a good short par 4. By good I mean a hole that provides numerous options off the tee. A hole where you walk to the tee with anything from a 5-iron to a driver trying to decide how to attack the hole. A hole where the pin position may completely alter your decision. A hole where after you have holed out you question whether you made the right decision off the tee.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Rob, sounds great.

And the winner is...

[Jason Topp]

I think a great driveable par four is one where, for a long hitter, the choice between driving it and laying up is a 50/50 proposition.  I think #4 at Woodlands is among the best and is one that can be copied anywhere. The hole is 251 meters long.

[Matt_Cohn]

Actual drivability is important.

[Dan Boerger]

JES - With the disparity of driving distance among today's players (not just pros) you bring up a very valid point. How many of us would go at #17 at Oakmont (or is it #16) where we saw such carnage the last round of the Open. Most of us would just keep it in the short stuff at all costs rather than tangle with that rough. So now I'm thinking a truly driveable par 4 should allow a run up area, like #10 at Merion (however perilous). A good example of this is #11 at Fieldstone in Delaware.

[Michael J. Moss]

The delusion that you can actually drive it!

Personal favorites:

Fenway's 1st - Gil Hanse added two cross bunkers; a wild green with OB behind it. I've had success. A member knocked his drive in the hole about 5 years ago (the rare double-eagle). I hear he retired from golf shortly thereafter.

Fenway's 15th - postage stamp size green that is very narrow in front. Tightly bunkered. Wish the trees guarding left side would be replaced by bunkers. Requires right to left shaped tee shot. 310 yards from back tee. I've never hit the green, nor will I ever. Nevertheless, always take out the big dog to give it a go!

Pacific Dunes 6th - played it probably 6 times. Never hit the green, but look forward to my next confrontation! Need to be downwind (30 -40 mph would help!). The gold standard.

Royal County Down 16th - before they took it out of reach.

Sunningdale CC (NY) 11th. 310 gently downhill to slightly raised green. Greatly improved by DeVries (... and Hancock). Adding sod as we speak! Will be regarded as one of the best  

[Jerry Kluger]

Deception can be an excellent feature in a driveable par 4.  The shot could be to a flagstick with the green itself hidden from view and a runup area which the player cannot see. (Dismal River has a hole like this.)  The problem is you cannot see where you've landed and if you've made it so you need to hit a provisional to the safe route in case you don't find your ball.
DR has another short par 4 which is uphill and a top level player can reach and in fact, our caddie told us one of the caddies made the first ace at DR on that hole.  It had an interesting green which had a severe drop off at the rear and any shot that was long made for a very difficult recovery.

World Woods Pine Barrens has a good driveable par 4 which is just the opposite as everything is right there in front of you.  Take the safe route down the left or go for the green or the small landing area just short and right.

Problem is when there is little chance for anyone but the very longest hitters to drive the green.  I believe it is the 8th at Colorado Golf which is a short, uphill par 4 which only a really long hitter could go for.  For the vast majority of golfers it is a mid iron and wedge which is not very interesting.

[Mark Pearce]

Mark,

I think you've identified most of the requirements.  I've been lucky enough to play several great short par 4s this year.  Of which the 18th at Kington and the 14th at Ganton stand out.

A course with a series of par 4s that fit your criteria, though each with a different balance of options is Elie.

2 is 290 ish yards up hill but I've seen it driven.  Perhaps not driveablefor most (except with wind behind) and even when I think I can reach, I hit a long iron/wedge. Plenty of people do pull the timber out of the bag,though.

5 only really qualifies off the yellow tees (at 360 ish off the bag only real flat bellies will get there.  A fantastic undulating fairway with a dell green over a ridge.

6 is 300 ish downhill but has a sea of cross bunkers around 220 out.  Drive over them and the chances are you'll be long.  Lay up and hit a pitch short and roll it down to a green that runs away from the shot.  Some people drive way left onto the 7th fairway to avoid the cross bunkers and, perhaps, make the approach a little easier.

7 is 252, I believe.  Often with a good wind behind.  It can be  a mid-iron in a good wind.  Probably the weakest of these holes.

10 is 300+ playing over a hill which makes it blind.  Carry the hill, though and you'll roll down the hill.  Don't be long, though, unless you want toplay from the North Sea.  Another green running away from the pitch, though, so playing iron/wedge is no gimme 4.

Finally 15 needs a good drive to get there, but is driveable.  Another tee shot towards a hill.  Get it over the top and run down towards the green (which again runs away from you).  Don't get to the top and have a blind approach.  Alternatively play right to leave a clear approach.

That's 6 more or less driveable par 4s on one course, of varying degrees of interest.  

[Doug Siebert]

Phil McDade,

I'm not sure I like Lawsonia's 8th as an example because I'm not sure it really qualifies as driveable.  Keep in mind I've only played it twice and I'm sure you've played it much more than that so I haven't explored all the options or certainly all the varieties of wind.

I fell for the "line of charm" trick you mention the first time I played it and ended up stuck in the deep grass with a tricky 30 yard pitch over the front bunker to a tight pin, not a good way to make birdie.  Or par as it turned out

The next day I tried to play a power fade but probably shouldn't have tried it because I really don't have that shot with any consistency anymore with the big headed drivers -- I have to hit it off the toe for the shot to come off.  It didn't fade at all for me and I pulled it a bit, and I flew it into or over that little tree that's through the fairway to the left near the 9th tee, and couldn't even find the ball in the deep grass.  So I'm not convinced that playing out to the left is all that great since you have to hit it far enough to carry the near side of the fairway but not so far that you go through the fairway.  Of course that's a common problem at Lawsonia if you want to use your driver, the turning points of most doglegs are well short of modern carry distances so longer hitters have to either work the ball a lot or gauge their carry distances well.  Its worse for those of us who miss left because all the doglegs go right!

While I think its theoretically driveable if you hit the power fade its still a pretty small target with Langford's elevated green.  You've got to miss that right front bunker, but not by much or you'll fall off the front left of the green.  I don't remember what's there, if there's another bunker or its just one of those "better bring your flop shot to Lawsonia" recoveries, but I'm gonna guess that for most pin positions its not a high probability birdie and if you try too hard for birdie you'll bring bogey into play.  I'll bet even a pro would have trouble putting the ball on that green more than a few times out of a hundred, and most of the misses would take some work to get up and down.  I think I'm hitting a 1 iron at that tree next time I play there

For driveability at Lawsonia I think I'd prefer that one on the back nine -- I believe I'm thinking of the one with the tree in the middle of the fairway, maybe 15?  I rather foolishly tried to give it a go there in my second round.  Not smart, I know, but I'd already lost a couple balls and my score was shot, so what the hell?  I took too direct of a line over the trees that jut out from the right and never found it, while looking I figured that line probably requires about a 310 yard carry so I'm now confident that's not the right way for me!  Given a bit of helping wind and taking it just to the left of that outcrop of trees I think the terrain would do a pretty good job of getting your ball where you want to go, and the up and down from around that green would be a lot easier than on #8 in the event that one gets near but not on that green.

[Doug Siebert]

I think the really great driveable par 4s ought to offer something for some of those who can't actually drive the green.  You'll never set the tees in the right places for very many to have a realistic chance to give it a go, between too many people playing tees that are too long for them and people not thinking of a 250 yard hole as a "real" par 4.

One of the courses I like to play around here as a hole that's 313 yards from the back tees, that's quite uphill the last 80 or 90 yards.  The green is set at an angle so if you play a straight ball there's about a 2 or 3 yard wide area you have to put it between the front bunkers to put the ball on the green.  A power fade would open it up but there's OB left and lots of trees to the right so I don't like to fool around with that shot.

I've been short, long, left, right, all over the place, but never actually on the green, its just a damn hard shot to get right since you have to be so close to perfect if you aren't working the ball.  But being around that green or even in the front bunker gives me a better chance to make birdie than laying up down at the bottom of the hill so I'm always hitting driver there even though I'm not really too worried about my chances of getting an eagle putt there anytime soon.

From the regular tees its only about 25 yards shorter, so most of the people playing there have no hope to come close to that green.  But the architect made it a risk/reward for them too by using a stream that runs diagonally across the fairway.  Its about 180 yards to carry on the right and 200 to carry on the left from those tees, something like that.  So its doable for many golfers, but not necessarily easy.  You can lay up short of the water but unless you are very accurate with your placement you'll end up with a downhill lie hitting steeply uphill from 140+ yards which isn't an easy shot for anyone, especially those using mid irons or perhaps fairway woods/hybrids.  So its worth risking the carry over the water if you have a good chance at making it.

I'm not going to claim this hole is anywhere near as great as the holes other has discussed or that I could name as holes I think of as great driveable par 4s, but it does have something a lot of the so-called great driveable par 4s lack, and that is some strategy and options off the tee for those golfers who can't drive the ball 300 yards.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()