Armchair architecture...a dangerous propostition.

[Paul Stephenson]

I've been avidly reading Ian Andrew's series on what one of his golf courses would look like.  Two of the concepts he discussed (alternate routes and bunkers inside the fairway lines) and one hole on my home course started me down this dangerous path.

A disclaimer.  I am in no way going to pursue this idea.  This is armchair architecture, and really just an exercise to see if I grasp the concepts.

The hole in question is a par 4.  Lengths are as follows: Black - 407; Blue - 365; White - 332; Red - 290.

View from the back of the white tee.  I've tried to estimate where the 200, 150, and 100 yard markers are.



Some aerial photos of the hole courtesy of a friends Cessna trip.





The ground slopes pretty severely towards the valley and a drive past the 140 mark will run pretty much to the bottom of the hill near the 100 yard marker.  However, a lot of members end up at the 150 yard marker and are left with kicking a field goal through or trying to go over two trees get to the green.  My mother's strategy is to actually chip it into the fairway bunker and proceed from there.

What if the fairway bunker was brought inside the fairway line?  

A player from the tee could:

1. Lay back.  No longer would they have to worry about navigating the vertical hazards from the 150 yard marker.  However a pushed drive could end up in the gorge.

2. Play a long drive to the wide part of the fairway (right of the fairway bunker).  This is currently the shot that is called for.

3. Try and hit it to the left of the fairway bunker for an optimal second shot.  This would require a long drive with a risk of fesque and trees if you pull or hook your drive in an attempt to hit it too hard.

Here are the "modified pictures."  The "brownish" colour is fescue that is growing in.  I just used the same colour.  Brown = fescue.  The pictures were actually taken during the fall of constuction.  I see that some bunkers on other holes are not even built yet.





Have I got the concept?

Thoughts, feedback, discussion and suggestions welcome.

[John Moore II]

Wow, a 400 yard double dogleg. That Hole might make my list of the dumbest golf holes I have ever seen. In fact, it does. I guess though it depends you how far you hit the ball, from the back tees, its dumb, from the up tees, less so, since you can almost aim for the green. But as far as a remodel, I would think you could mover the bunker over to the far edge of the brown fescure area, near that large stand of trees and route the fairway over there, that would at least make it a gentle dogleg. I think that your idea would work with just taking out the trees, not adding in any fairway. But overall, this hole just does not seem like a great addition to the course.
BTW-If the club has the funds to change it, I would try to change the hole, just because its silly. I can't think that this was designed by a world class architect.

[Tony Ristola]

Why not just cut the trees through the fairway.

[Scott Witter]

I am with Tony on this one.  As soon as I saw the overhead view the first thing that came to my mind was to remove the trees along the left side.  The double dogleg is odd for this situation and uncalled for.  This immediately opens up all sorts of room for options.

On a string the hole probably does measure around 400 from the back, but playability and overall strategy could be greatly enhanced for all players with more width-options-choices.

Since you have recently read Ian's site then you would (you have started to) see the value with this approach.

Paul. it appears you will also have more frustrations...the trees, both deciduous and conifers seem to direct play in many more areas on the course

[Garland Bayley]

First, this is not a double dogleg! This is a dogleg left with a penal hazard off the tee on the right. The existing hole is risk/reward in that the player is rewarded for driving a close as possible the the fairway bunker. Removing the trees on the inside of the dogleg and adding a little fairway to the left of the bunker is fine with me, because it seems the optimal path to the green is  from or right over the fairway bunker. You still have to challenge the bunker, whether on the left or the right.

[Scott Witter]

Garland:

Okay, you are probably right about the non double dogleg.  I can't say that I follow your logic about the best approach being from the right?  I like challenging the gorge but it appears the greenside bunkers protect an approach from that angle.  I do agree that shading the right side of the bunker is best for the current setup.  Regards to going over the bunker, a possibility I guess, but how far out it is...from Paul's 'math' it seems to be at around 285-290 from the black tee.  I'm not sure how many will fly it from there?

Looking closer, what does the FW bunker do on the left side?  It falls at the end of a row of trees  I guess from the tees it may establish a frame for the LZ, but that honesly does nothing for me.  Risking the gorge IMO needs to have more potential reward and while it looks like there is a slot between the bunkers for an approach, the aerial view may likely be slanting our real view.  Again from the aerial, removal of trees and a center line bunker of sorts would seem to offer more options.  All this of course from looking at pictures and this is often a dangerous proposition.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland:

... I can't say that I follow your logic about the best approach being from the right?  ...

Where did you get that?

[Paul Stephenson]

Thanks for the responses.  It's good to know that I'm not too far out in left field.

The photos really do not do the contours justice (nor could they).  A shot from the 150 yard marker is roughly the same height as the green.  A shot from the 100 yard marker is at least 20 feet below green height.  Left of the FW bunker is also on top of the hill.

Garland:
You are right to with regards to the non-double dogleg.  The intended line is over the corner of the gorge from the black tee.  Although for shorter hitters it can turn into one if your drive does not catch the slope...like my mom.

Scott:
The FW bunker for me is something to aim at and try to fade a drive off of, or land short of and get a hard right kick.  Longer hitters will just aim right of it.  I'll get into it if my drive doesn't cut or if I hit it too far.  For my mom it's something to chip into  

You're right about carrying the bunker.  I don't think there is anyone from our club who could do it.  But there are many who would try and skirt by it if there was a bit of fairway to the left.  The ideal approach to the green would be just to the left of the FW bunker, and I think the FW bunker would trap a lot more drives.  This would leave one with a bunker shot of about 80 yards...and we all know how easy long bunker shots can be.

Tony and Scott:
Cutting the trees down was my first reaction as well.  However, I now think that they force me to hit my tee shot farther to the right bringing the gorge into play more.  I'm OK with them staying, although it took me awhile.  I'm just not sure the shorter hitters/higher handicap players are happy with them there.

The easy fix if one was proposed, it will not be by me, would be to cut them down.  I imagine this will happen one day and it really would be for the better.

I was just seeing if this could be a case for a bunker inside a fairway line.  To try and put theory into practice.  I'm a teacher so I guess "learning by doing" is inherent.

[Garland Bayley]

... I'm just not sure the shorter hitters/higher handicap players are happy with them there. ...

BINGO! Why penalize those people when they are already having enough trouble.

[Scott Witter]

Garland:

"it seems the optimal path to the green is  from or right"

This was where, but now that I read it closer, I missed a word or two...oops, in a Hagred voice, sorry bout that

[Scott Witter]

Paul:

"The photos really do not do the contours justice (nor could they).  A shot from the 150 yard marker is roughly the same height as the green.  A shot from the 100 yard marker is at least 20 feet below green height.  Left of the FW bunker is also on top of the hill."

This is what I thought and thanks for the info.   IMO, it still makes all the more sense to open up the left side...centralize the bunker(s) and let the long hitters attempt to stay left.  Based on what you describe, I would much rather be higher, 100-120 yds out with an open approach and a better look at the green from the left as opposed 100 yds out, 20' below the PS and off to the right while looking at 2 bunkers to carry.

"The ideal approach to the green would be just to the left of the FW bunker, and I think the FW bunker would trap a lot more drives.  This would leave one with a bunker shot of about 80 yards"

Sounds like a plan to me.

"However, I now think that they force me to hit my tee shot farther to the right bringing the gorge into play more."

I would rather not force the golfer into a situation they may not be able to negotiate, but I have no problem with giving them options so when THEY choose they must accept the consequences.  If they want to go right because it appears to be open, okay, now they have a blind to semi-blind approach with the potential for bunkers to carry.  If they choose left, a tougher tee shot likely, then they have an open approach to the green with more options to play their approach & more chances of getting close. All this, however, could be null & void depending on what the green contours are doing?