[Dan Boerger]

I strongly suspect this has been discussed here before, but I'll post anyway ...

I just spent a few days in Florida. Played two Art Hill courses (Quail West and Quail Creek) and one KBM course (Hideout). All were in excellent condition, but this Eastern PA guy has seen all the lateral water hazards he wants for some time. I can't, however, for the life of me, understand the need for a tree (18th at Quail Creek) or a series of trees (9th at Hideout) in the middle of the fairway. Is it meant to be a mostly visual hazard? Is it meant to require me to decide between the severe layup or not? Any insight from those in the business appreciated.

[Jeff Spittel]

My home courses in Texas (Kingwood/Deerwood) unfortunately utilize this element of "design" on a few holes. I am considering buying myself a chainsaw for Christmas this year.

[Ally Mcintosh]

as long as a centreline tree still allows a large amount of playability and visibility, it brings choices to the tee shot... choices = strategy...

that would be my opinion...

i.e. once in a while it's a good thing as long as it looks like it should be there...

[JESII]

Not sure why, but I kind of like the ones I have seen...

[Michael Ryan]

#10 at Spyglass has a pretty formidable tree in the fairway.  I know the first time I travelled west and played it, I didn't like, mostly because my drive left me in an area where I had to shape a shot around (not my forte).  I have come to appreciate it and look forward to the strategy required off the tee...

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think the occaisional tree in fw is okay, provided enough room is left on either side, effectively making 1.5-2 fw to shoot at with a hazard in the middle.

When there is a tree in the middle of the fw, many golfers think the gca should create a little ridge just in front of the tree to kick balls to either side, so that no one ends up right behind it and wastes a shot.  

I have done that sometimes, and other times not on the few trees I have left in the fw.

[Dan Boerger]

Michael - Thanks for your reminder on #10 at Spyglass. I had forgotten about that. It seems a seldom used penalty, particulary from the Golden Age guys. Also, seems from my admittedlly limited experience, an American thing.

Jeff - I like your mounding idea.

[tlavin]

Ala Keith Olberman, I hereby nominate the tree in the fairway about 150 yards in front of the green at the otherwise very well designed Butler National Golf Club as...The Worst Tree in the World!

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I believe the tree on number 10 at Spyglass has gone...at least that is what I was told.
But the point it makes reamins the same.
As Jim has said if placed properly they can ge great strategic partners for the architect ala #17 at Cypress Point, #18 at Pebble...however we can all think of several that were not so strategically placed.

[John Pflum]

Personally, I love trees in the middle of the fairway.  It makes the tees shots a lot more interesting.  

Memorable trees for me:
#4 Lakeside @ Shaker Run in Cincinnati
#9 Pinnacle in Columbus, Ohio
#6 (I think) @ Mendham GC in New Jersey

[Michael Ryan]

Haven't played Spyglass since 2004, if indeed the tree on 10 is no longer, I will be upset...can anyone on the site confirm?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I will second the tree in the fairway at Cypress point on 17.  They really make the hole and require you to think and execute well.

My course  in MD CC at Woodmore has a good tree as well.  #3 is a dogleg right to a green fronted by water on the left.  It is about 390 yards long.  The tree in question is on the inside of the dogleg at about the 150 yard mark. Longer hitters will slide it around the tree.  Really long players will fly the tree.  The rest of us try to keep it left.  If you do end up behind the green a low running shot is possible, provided you keep it to the right of the little pond.  The tree literally makes the hole.  We hosted a Nationwide tournament this past spring and the hole was one of the most difficult holes for the pros to par.

On the other hand #17 has a poorly placed green.  There is a tree that is about forty yards short of the green and almost overhangs it.  It is a short hole so you are generally hitting a short iron into the green.  But when the pin is front right the tree comes in play unless you can hit it skiy high.  The problem isn't the tree.  It is  a spectacularly beautiful oak that begs for a tree house.  The problem is the site of the green whhich nees to be moved twenty yards to the left.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tommy,

Any chance the problems on 17 CP are a poorly placed ocean?

[Jamey Bryan]

IMHO, this is a feature which should be used very, very selectively but which can add much.  I tend to like trees which divide the fairway from the tee.  Especially where the more aggressive (preferred) line to the green is narrower than a more generous "bailout" option.

I don't think trees have any place in the fairway in play for the approach.  PB Dye has a hole in Columbia where the drive is semi-blind, then there's a tree in the middle of the fairway next to a pond fronting the green.  That simply makes a goofy hole.

Jamey

[Sean_A]

I can honestly say that I never looked at a hole and thought "what this baby needs is a tree in the middle of the fairway".  I am not keen on the idea, but its acceptable once in a blue moon so long as there is loads of room to avoid the bugger (this refers to the height also - this is usually the biggest problem).

Ciao

[Matthew Hunt]

I like them, but if they are on an up-hill hole more than one aound it becomes a quirk too far. Fair way should be wide and it should split it.

[AndrewB]

Haven't played Spyglass since 2004, if indeed the tree on 10 is no longer, I will be upset...can anyone on the site confirm?

It's still there.  Rather, the tree that was there died or was removed and was replaced by another one, which probably accounts for the statements about it no longer being there.  At least that's what I was told in mid-August.

The same story is told for the tree on 16 at the bend in the dogleg.  Apparently the older tree was much larger than the one that's there now.

[Bill Brightly]

I think trees in the fairway are ridiculous. I makes me think the architect ran out of ideas, so he said: "this hole is so bland, I'll leave a tree in the middle of the fairway to spice it up."

The only time they are remotely acceptable is when I can fly the trees. But that means they are in play for the high handicapers and most women, which again makes them
a ridiculous hazard.

If you want to require presicion with my tee ball, adding risk reward, use a bunker, not a tree. This allows the shorter hitters to clear it with their second shot, and puts the pressure on the A players' drive.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tommy,

Any chance the problems on 17 CP are a poorly placed ocean?

I never thought about it, but you are right.  I think if the ocean were moved about twenty yards to the right it would be a more interesting tee shot.  Thanks for your thoughts.

By the way one of the most memorable shot I have ever witnessed happened at CP 17.  I was playing with my best friend.  I suspect we have played a thousand rounds together. He had just hit seven dying quail slices into the ocean at 16.  On 17 he hit it directly behind the clump of trees.  He told me that he was going to hit his three iron out over the ocean and hook it back into the green.  Now I had never seen him hit that shot and told him he was crazy.  Greg is the kind of guy who thinks if I can see the green or even know where it is "I am going for it."  Well darned if he didn't pull it off.  It has been 20 years since "the shot" and I still chuckle every time I think of it.  It may be one of my most favorite shots every struck.

[Jason Connor]

My issue is the lack of pruning.

A well pruned, well placed tree can be very strategic, especially on a fun short part 4.

But usually after the course opens the tree grows and grows and becomes more of a wall that requires luck to navigate than a well thought out hazard that requires skill to navigate.

I'd say unless a tree in the fairway is pruned every year, it shouldn't be there.

[SL_Solow]

Terry;  I feel better.  I thought you were going to nominate 18 at Briarwood (the only hole you didn't like)

[Sandman]

IMO....trees should not be the main stay of a design.  What if disease or a storm were to destroy the tree?  what happens to the design of the hole?  does the design have merit without the tree?  Trees do not belong on a golf course if they interfere with a well played shot........IMO

[Tommy Williamsen]

I can honestly say that I never looked at a hole and thought "what this baby needs is a tree in the middle of the fairway".  I am not keen on the idea, but its acceptable once in a blue moon so long as there is loads of room to avoid the bugger (this refers to the height also - this is usually the biggest problem).

Ciao

Sean like you I have not seen a hole that I thought would be better if it had a tree.  Generally I don't like hazards in the air.  On the other hand I will come to a hole and after I played it thought, "What a neat place for a tree."

[Tommy Williamsen]

 I have observed a few courses be constructed.  I have noticed that many trees were left had been removed closer to opening day.  My thought was that the architect waited until the course was close to opening before he made a decision about some trees.  Is this observation correct?

[Joel_Stewart]

I just played Stanford golf course and the 12th had not 1 but 3 trees in the middle. Below is a photo from their web site which only shows the largest and last tree, a really large oak tree.  I'll assume that this how George Thomas wanted the hole.  He probably would be rolling over in his grave if he knew some of these players hit driver past the tree and short iron into this green.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()