Do you like this Bunker in the Sky?

[Bill Brightly]

The hole is about 340 from the Mens tees. It is a very elevated tee. As a 4 handicap, I hit a 3 or 5 wood 220-230 yards right over the tree,(so I don't reach the far bunkers) and leave myself a wedge from 100 to 130.

The picture is taken from the far left tee, but there is a right tee where the tree is directly in front of you. Higher handicaps and most ladies have to play around the tree, they can't get over it.

What do you think about this "bunker in the sky"? Good design?

[JESII]

Bill,

Other than the second bunker on the left, I like it...although I don't suppose we would need to put the ladies or senior tee right behind it...

[Bill Brightly]

Don't be bashful, all you GCAers. This is a pretty classic design question:

Do you like this kind of hazard?
Should the tree be removed?
Would you build a new hole like this today?

I mean, if you don't have an opinion on something like this, WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON THIS WEBSITE?

[Dan Kelly]

I like it JUST FINE!

It's a beautiful tree. It certainly allows recoveries if you hit into it.

I don't understand why the front tee is to the right and the back tee is to the left. That seems backwards to me -- presuming, for some reason, they couldn't be on the same line.

340 yards from an elevated tee makes for a good women's hole, of course, particularly with the green open in front. Why not put all of the tees together?

[Tom Huckaby]

Bill:

You're new here.

Patience.

If something is interesting, people will respond.

And the problem with this is it's an issue that's been covered hundreds of times before... not this hole nor this tree specifically, but the role of trees and how they should or shouldn't function on golf courses.  I'd venture to say anyone who's been participating for any amount of time here is pretty tired of this subject... as well as many other subjects....

But then again, you should know, you've been dredging up old threads by the dozens lately!  

 

I mean all of this quite good-naturedly.  It's a cool picture and I know you mean well.  

Just bear with us.  Most subjects have been rather beaten to death in here.

Now with that out of the way... my answer is this:  the hole would be pretty mundane without the tree.  So I say leave it as is.  But I do sympathize with the golfers playing the forward tees...

TH

[David Stamm]

Bill, I'm fine with it. I don't think having the tee right behind it is a good idea, the angle that the photo is taken from on the 2nd photo is fine with me. How else would a hole of that distance defend itself without going overboard with bunkers everywhere?


The 16th at San Clemente has a hole where the tree is an integral feature to the tee shot.  Without it, the hole is infinitely easier. I don't have a problem with that one either.

[Bill Brightly]

Dan,

There two full sets of tees, one left, one right, OK? Does not change the shot for me very much at all, but tee from left makes a huge difference for "low ball hitters."

[Garland Bayley]

...
I mean, if you don't have an opinion on something like this, WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON THIS WEBSITE?

I'm busy beating up Tom Paul about Joshua Crane! Now leave me alone!










 

[Michael Blake]

Posted by: Bill Brightly

Don't be bashful, all you GCAers. This is a pretty classic design question:

Sorry, Bill.  This thread threw me off a bit.  It's not recycled from 1999. (Tom H beat me to it.   )


Cut it down.  I prefer the green complex serve as the main defense of a very short par 4, not a tree in front of the tee.


What IS the green complex like on this hole?





 

[Lloyd_Cole]

Bill
It's fine. Then hole, frankly, looks more fun for the weaker player, a nice 220 slice driver around the tree to the middle of the fairway would be very rewarding, I think.

[Pat Brockwell]

Kind of makes the hole, doesn't it?  Maybe I'll put a tree just like it in front of our first tee, on the ridgeline.

[Kalen Braley]

Most golfers are rightees...

Most golfers slice or fade....

Count me as one of those who fits in that group.

Now if the tree were on the left side, then yes by all means, chop it down, totally unfair!!    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,

You should also mention the substantive pitch of the fairway from the green back to the base of the tree and lower.

JES II,

What's wrong with the 2nd bunker ?

[Bill Brightly]

Interesting responses!

As Pat suggests, the hole plays uphill after the drive. The green has a decent back-to-front pitch, and you dont want to be long.Other than that "The Tree" it is now a fairly simple hole, but the greenside bunker on the left was never there. Instead, there was a very steep knoll, so high hat it blocked your view of the left side of the green. As a kid I always wanted to fade it right (OK, slice it right) so I could see the pin. And our pro emeritus, Tom Hawthorne, says they used to have an extra long pin when the hole was on the left. (Very cool to hear him describe it in his Scottish accent!) Alas, the knoll was removed along the way and replaced with a bunker...but soon will be restored, and a fairway length collection area will be added behind the green, which drops off quiet steeply.

We are also putting in a new forward tee to the left.

[JESII]

JES II,

What's wrong with the 2nd bunker ?

Pat,


I don't like "pinching" fairway bunkers...I like e them staggered...

[Patrick_Mucci]

JES II,

What's wrong with the 2nd bunker ?

Pat,

I don't like "pinching" fairway bunkers...I like e them staggered...

Do you mean that you don't like the holes at NGLA like # 1,
# 7, # 8, # 14, # 15 # 16 and # 18 ?

# 1, # 4, # 5, # 6, # 8, # 9, # 11, # 14, # 16 and # 18 at GCGC ?

# 2, # 6, # 8, # 9 # 12, # 15 and # 17 at Pine Valley ?  

Don't shorter holes need more in the way of defenses ?[/color]

[Joe Hancock]

Don't shorter holes need more in the way of defenses ?[/color]

Pat,

Why do you feel all shorter holes need more defenses? Is it some sort of "difficulty equity" mentality such that all holes should play equally difficult regardless of length?

Doesn't an architect utilize shorter, easier holes at times for flow and "mind games" reasons, from time to time? Aren't easier holes important in the context of match play?

Joe

[Patrick_Mucci]

Don't shorter holes need more in the way of defenses ?[/color]

Pat,

Why do you feel all shorter holes need more defenses?


It's inherent in the game.  Length is a defense.
Absent length other defenses must be inserted if one is to present an interesting hole to the golfer.
Just look at any par 3.
When was the last time you saw one devoid of bunkers.

If you took 3 football fields and put a tee at one end and a green at the other, how interesting and how challenging would that hole be as a par 4 ?

If you'll look at some of the great short par 4's they all seem to have something in common, defenses that make them interesting.[/color]

Is it some sort of "difficulty equity" mentality such that all holes should play equally difficult regardless of length?

No, it's got more to do with the removal of length as a defense and the insertion of alternate defenses, for without them, the hole would be bland and without much architectural merit.[/color]

Doesn't an architect utilize shorter, easier holes at times for flow and "mind games" reasons, from time to time?

I couldn't tell you the motives behind why architects use shorter holes without site and feature specifics.[/color]

Aren't easier holes important in the context of match play?

All holes are important in the context of match, and medal play.[/color]

I'm going to have an aerial photo of # 14 at Oakmont posted.

Then, you and JES II can tell me how the hole would be much better without any bunkering, without "pinching bunkering" or without bunkering to one side.

[Joe Hancock]

I'm going to have an aerial photo of # 14 at Oakmont posted.

Then, you and JES II can tell me how the hole would be much better without any bunkering, without "pinching bunkering" or without bunkering to one side.

Oh, no you don't! You're not dragging me into this, as I never said anything about said hole, or it's bunker configuration. I'm just questioning you by taking one of your quotes out of context, and attacking it.......

Joe

p.s. I'll give a look at the picture, and make my best judgment based only on the photograph, even though that normally isn't allowed....

[Jeff Spittel]

If you don't like the second bunker, just hit driver and carry it.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Posted for Pat Mucci.

[Walt_Cutshall]

I think it is fine. It's not really in play, from my perspective, unless you let it work on you on a subconcious level (which is a reasonable use of a feature such as this).

[Bill Brightly]

If you don't like the second bunker, just hit driver and carry it.

Jeff,

You need to fly the ball about 275 from the back tees to carry it, but that reminds of story:

When the MetAm was played here, I offered to carry the bag for a buddy of mine who can REALLY play. In the second round, he came to this hole 6 under, so I am thinking he has a chance to set the course record, and we are probably leading the tournament... He only carried a driver and 5 wedges, so I practically begged him to hit 4 or 5 iron over the tree...but no, he wanted to hit driver...so as a caddy, I had to shut up at some point, right?

He carried the bunker alright, hit it about 310, but was dead behind the tree left of the green, hit the tree once, hit it again and  knocked it in the greenside bunker, and walked off with a TRIPLE! Ended up shooting 70 and finishing tenth...

[Mike McGuire]

I would remove the tree to improve the view of the hole.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

On a short hole and assuming there are not 18 of these on the course, I see no problem with it.  

The right tee might be somewhat punitive and could be moved.  Prior to that however, consider that the hole is only 340 yards.  The woman or higher handicap player, hiting from the right probably can't reach the left bunker.  They should soimply lay up left and then take their shot.  

How long is the shot from under the tree?  A forward tee might be placed in the shade of the tree for shorter hitters, children and those wanting aq better look.  

For the men, shut up ad hit the shot.  Nothing wrong with this tree.