[George Pazin]

I was reading Golf World a couple weeks ago, and there was a touching article about Greg Rita, the well known tour caddie, and his battle against cancer.

On the very same pages (the second page of the Rita article, to be exact), there was a little blurb about Mark Calcavecchia's new house - it mentioned a famous Calc quip where he said he's spent more than he's won on Tour (some $22 million, if memory serves).

Taken alone, Calc's quip would probably seem funny, but on the same page as Mr. Rita's courageous struggle, it seemed jarring and almost offensive.

So, being the architecture geek that I am, I naturally started thinking about juxtaposition and it's place in architecture.

It seems that the juxtaposition of strategies often works well - hard hole followed by birdie hole, short by long, etc. - but perhaps not as well in other instances - a "strategic" hole versus a penal hole.

Somewhat in contrast, the juxtaposition of styles is much more jarring - most notably when an architect performs an unsympathetic restoration, but also perhaps on courses that lack a certain cohesiveness.

I know, it's spring and I'll be able to start playing again soon, but I thought it might be a subject worth exploring:

When does it work? When does it fail? And why, in both instances?

[JohnV]

George,

Good topic.

To me juxtaposition and variation of the challange is very important.  A course where every hole is long and hard is no where near as good as one that provides lots of variety.

Many times playing a very hard hole will make the next one look a lot easier than it is and makes us relax.  Then the next thing we know, we are making bogey or worse.  Look at 17 and 18 at TOC.  17 is so hard it makes 18 look easy, but with the Valley of Sin staring you in the face you suddenly realize you've been trapped.

Similarly a comparitively easy hole before a monster will cause you to gamble a little extra to try to get one in the bank.  16 and 17 at Sawgrass might be good examples.  You know what is coming so you really want that birdie at the 16 so you've got it in the bank.

15 and 16 at Cypress are another pair of holes the contrast each other so dramatically that whole is greater than the sum of the parts (not that the sum is bad).

The reason I think that Oakmont is better than some other US Open holes is the juxtaposition of long and short par 4s.   Take 14 and 15 or 17 and 18 as prime examples.

As you said, an unsympathetic restoration can provide many examples of bad juxtapoistioning.

[Sean_A]

While not quite the same thing, but related, I have always liked the idea of a par 5 on a course playing shorter than the longest par 4.  It really helps to place yardage and par into perspective so far as the game is concerned.  I know others find it illogical, but in a very real sense it makes perfect sense to me.

Ciao

[JESII]

Sean,

#'s 14 and 15 at Huntingdon Valley has this potential...when the ground is firm and the widn is up (and from the prevailing direction) the 475 yard 14th (from the tips) can require a longer second shot club than the 575 yard 15th...pretty interesting when it happens.


George,

Good question.

[Steve_Lovett]

I like "experience" of going through stretches of holes that can beat you up, experience a breather, and get back into it...

A new course, Amelia National, north of Jacksonville has this kind of stretch on the back nine.

Holes 11-14 beat you up, 15-17 offer opportunities to make up ground, then 18 beats you up again. 

11 is a 600+ par 5, long, strategic in the layup, brutal green.
12 is a beautiful 230+ par 3
13 is a 430ish par 4 around a pond
14 is a 470 par 4 always into the wind with a really wild (fun) green
15 is a 500 par 5 with the wind w/water and a huge bunker which dares to tempt
16 is a drivable par 4 at 330 max
17 is a 135 par 3 with the largest green on the course that throws off the sense of scale/perspective
Then 18 is a 460+ par 4 playing to the clubhouse with a lake left of the wildly contoured green

I've come to enjoy this stretch of holes, and the juxtoposition of tough/easier holes.

[Lou_Duran]

George,

Wow!  How you got to the last part from the first three paragraphs is really strange, but an interesting topic nonetheless.

I like variety in my golf and prefer, actually delight, when a really hard hole is preceeded or followed by one that gives you a chance to even things out.  I haven't played the TPC-Sawgrass but the 16 and 17 combination comes to mind.

A different perspective is offered by a hero of this website.  I commented to the folks at Cuscowilla that I thought the very long par 4 9th hole would have been better as a par 5 (there is plenty of room to extend the tee and certainly around the green complex to extend or reposition the green)  to provide, if you will, a juxtaposition to #8, a long, difficult par 3 and #18, a similarly difficult par 4 finish to the back-side.

They apparently thought that my observation had enough substance to contact Bill Coore, and the response that was forwarded to me was something to the effect that the architect didn't like to dilute the merits of the long approach on #8 by following it so closely with one that would likely be very short if #9 was a par 5.  He also believed that #9 played sufficiently different (left to right) and in a different direction than #18 (right to left) though the yardages were similar (470+, as I recall).   I've thought about this from time to time and I can understand the rationale.    

[TEPaul]

George:

The thing that interests me most in this thread is the mention or implication of the idea of "par skewing"! I think that is the very thing the best and most imaginative golf architects today (or of any time) really excel at. It shows me they have both imagination and guts!

[George Pazin]

George,

Wow!  How you got to the last part from the first three paragraphs is really strange, but an interesting topic nonetheless.

If I had one piece of advice to others. it would be: don't think like me!

Sully -

I'll be out your way shortly, I expect a personal tour of 14 & 15 on 4/14 this year - mark it down. Consider it a birthday present.


-----

thanks for the other responses. JohnV's posts hits home for me, and not just because he's a good friend. I love the concept of birdie hole/bogey hole. And I love Sean's concept of shorter par 5 than par 4  - that's just beautiful.

[Mark_F]

How about juxtapostion of expectation?

It could be something like an extraordinarily difficult green on a hole already perhaps long and/or difficult, or as simple as a seemingly innocuous green/green complex on a shorter and apparently easier hole.

It could be an architect finding a wild variety of greensites, so that no two are ever the same, and you are constantly surprised. 

Or maybe it is something that has been talked about in various threads over the years, such as how Shinnecock Hills has a reputation as a demanding and ruthless course, but may not be?

[Sean_A]

How about juxtapostion of expectation?

It could be something like an extraordinarily difficult green on a hole already perhaps long and/or difficult, or as simple as a seemingly innocuous green/green complex on a shorter and apparently easier hole.

It could be an architect finding a wild variety of greensites, so that no two are ever the same, and you are constantly surprised. 

Or maybe it is something that has been talked about in various threads over the years, such as how Shinnecock Hills has a reputation as a demanding and ruthless course, but may not be?

Mark

Sea Headrig fits the bill of a tough hole to reach in two because of its length and the placement of the left/centreline bunker only to be greeted with a diabolical green which faces in seemingly the wrong direction - its brilliant.  I don't think the previous hole, a par 5, is any more difficult even though its something like 50 yards longer.  Its a good muck job of expectations and a reason why so many links are so compelling.

Ciao

[James Bennett]

Alwoodley # 3 and #4.  #3 is a moderate par 5 but played with the prevailing wind.  #4 is a long par 4 played back into that wind.  The alternate wind is from the other direction.  Combined thay are a par of 9.  Individually, their character (and par) switches depending on the prevailing wind.

Tom Doak used Augusta #11, #12 and #13 to explain the three main hole types. 
# 11 as an example of strategic - play right and have a better shot at the green, play safer to the left from the tee and have a limited opportunity to hit the green.
#12 as a penal hole - Rae's Creek must be carried.
#13 as the heroic carry.  Actually, #13 can have all the characteristics depending on the route you take.  The tee shot (and second) can be strategic in getting close to the water for a better line of play.  Rae's Creek must be carried with the shot to the green (penal) and an aggresive tee-shot gets the heroic carry reward.

James B

[George Pazin]

How about juxtapostion of expectation?

It could be something like an extraordinarily difficult green on a hole already perhaps long and/or difficult, or as simple as a seemingly innocuous green/green complex on a shorter and apparently easier hole.

Love this idea.

[Kirk Gill]

Mr. Pazin - reading your initial post, my thought is that the juxtaposition of those two items in the magazine creates irony, and thus the next thought is - is there any place for irony on a golf course (other than, of course, in the quips of your playing partners)?

Is there such thing as an ironic golf hole?

And then to your main point, I think that juxtaposition always gets the mind working. It can be used to create deception in the mind, as some have suggested, and can also be used just to provide variety. For example at Castle Pines, the holes down on the lowest part of the property,  4-6 I believe, seem huge and wide-open after the first part of the course where the fairways are surrounded by trees....which then begets the opposite effect when the "open" holes are done and you again wind in between the pines.

[Mark_F]

Love this idea.

Love this thread. Pity there aren't more replies. 

Juxtaposition of expectation - keeping a golfer off balance - is a real key to me.  It takes away from mechanical execution - probably just as well with me - and involves more thought and consideration.

[Peter Pallotta]

George

I hope you don't mind me trotting out my usual musical analogy, specifically my jazz analogy. I do it because, for my tastes and temperament, there's no music like jazz for its variability in pacing and rhythm, and in its ability to offer surprises at every turn -- a series of individual voices and tones and messages but all tied together via the same chord sequence. A slow sad blues can suddenly become hopeful and triumphant on the first few notes of a Louis Armstrong solo, the very sound of his trumpet saying "yes" to life.  But the balancing act -- offering just the right amount of what's expected so as to keep listeners engaged when the unexpected comes -- is really the trick of the great jazz players. Which is to say, I think something analogous goes on with good golf architecture...

Peter

[George Pazin]

Peter, unfortunately for me, the only thing I understand less than jazz is women.

Can anyone think of an instance where juxtaposition didn't work well, yet it wasn't the result of alterations to the course?

I've never been a fan of the "front nine parkland, back nine links" (or vice versa) that was in vogue for awhile; sometimes two halves doesn't make a whole. Or maybe better, two 5's doesn't make a 10!

[Britt Rife]

How about juxtapostion of expectation?

It could be something like an extraordinarily difficult green on a hole already perhaps long and/or difficult, or as simple as a seemingly innocuous green/green complex on a shorter and apparently easier hole.

Love this idea.

And knowing how much you love Oakmont, George, pretend you've never played there before and after finishing that beast of an opening hole, you are faced with this lovely short par 4 2nd.  And then, like me, you end up in the back bunker of said hole, with the hole cut in the middle-back.  And then, your caddie laughs at you.  "Aren't short holes after long tough ones supposed to be easy?"

[George Pazin]

Just one of the 1,001 things I love about Oakmont.

[CJ Carder]

Not sure if this meets the exact definition of a juxtaposition, but Donald Ross' routing style would seem to fit in a way.  He preferred to start you out with 1 or 2 "warm-up" holes before really getting into the meat of the course. 

Take Pinehurst #2... first hole is relatively sublime, second hole is tough... then you reach the 3rd - a seemingly easy hole and respite after the 2nd, but it'll beat you up if you're not careful.  Then the 4th with a chance to recapture a lost shot or prepare for the brutal 5th.  I think the course continues in a similar manner - part of what I think is the charm of #2 that a lot of people don't notice until they've played it several times.

[Kalen Braley]

I've always felt PD 14-16, (when playing downwind), kind of fit in this category somewhere.

A short par 3, 5, and 4 respectively where you really feel like you can get some strokes back.  Which you can if you play smart, precise, accurate shots....otherwise some big damage will be liberally doled out to you.

[Sean_A]

I was thinking of another juxtaposition.  Pennard has back to back short par 5s that couldn't have much different playing characteristics with virtually the same yardage.  16 is wide open with most of defense at the crazy green and 17 is quite restrictive with most of its defense en route to the green.  For one that doesn't know the course they may think that a pair of 4s could be in the cards for a fine finish.  In reality, two 5s work well though the player can walk away thinking how can he not get a birdie on at least the one which is downwind. 

Ciao

[Phil Benedict]

I've never been a fan of the "front nine parkland, back nine links" (or vice versa) that was in vogue for awhile; sometimes two halves doesn't make a whole. Or maybe better, two 5's doesn't make a 10!

I prefer a unified style and look style as well.  Evidently Friar's Head works well despite being on two disparate property types. 

[George Pazin]

Phil, it's interesting that you bring up Friar's Head.

From what I've read (haven't had the pleasure myself), a course like Friar's Head, or even Cypress Point, are excellent examples of how juxtaposition can work well within a routing, as opposed to the type of course I was referring to, with separate and distinct front and back 9s.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()