[Chip Gaskins]

this looks like a good use of a tree to me, however, how do the architects feel.  it looks to be 220ish out so you have to choose right or left.  is this proper?  is this crazy?

looks like a decent central hazard.

i cut this from Sean Leary's pictures from the Tree thread

[Kyle Harris]

It's a decent central hazard so long as it stays alive. For this reason, I tend to believe clusters of trees are better.

[Kalen Braley]

I don't see why it can't work without the tree.  The hole appears to be a bite off as much as you can chew hole to the left of that tree anyways, so tree, no tree, don't think it matters to much as the fairway is angled from the tee.

[Kyle Harris]

Kalen,

I think the tree works in the sense that a golfer is probably more likely to aim well right of the tree, or well left - therefore making the decision to bite off as much as one can chew even more demanding.

The tree makes a certain portion of that decision a bit more complicated than a simple question of carry.

[cary lichtenstein]

No

[K. Krahenbuhl]

I think the tree works in the sense that a golfer is probably more likely to aim well right of the tree, or well left - therefore making the decision to bite off as much as one can chew even more demanding.

Agreed...of course if I played the hole I'd likely aim right at it knowing that my ball would then likely be safe.

[Kyle Harris]

I think the tree works in the sense that a golfer is probably more likely to aim well right of the tree, or well left - therefore making the decision to bite off as much as one can chew even more demanding.

Agreed...of course if I played the hole I'd likely aim right at it knowing that my ball would then likely be safe.

You're just asking for the dreaded straight ball, then.

[Kalen Braley]

Kyle,

Fair enough, I can go along with that...it does seem to add more indecision/doubt on the tee.  But I still maintain that if going for a more agressive line, if the yardage is only 220, it will have no effect on that decision.  However the safe play off the tee will get a tad bit easier. 

[K. Krahenbuhl]

I think the tree works in the sense that a golfer is probably more likely to aim well right of the tree, or well left - therefore making the decision to bite off as much as one can chew even more demanding.

Agreed...of course if I played the hole I'd likely aim right at it knowing that my ball would then likely be safe.

You're just asking for the dreaded straight ball, then.

Very true....

In reality the tree would help me decide which way I wanted to shape the ball off the tee.  If it wasn't there I would likely try to hit a draw that would shape with the fairway and roll out once on the ground.  By placing the tree there I would be more likely to want to hit a fade around it.  All depending on the yardage that it sits from the tee of course.

[Andy Troeger]

I've actually played the hole, and its farther out than it looks. The longer hitter can go left of it, but you better hit it a LONG way. Its more of a temptation than a real strategic option from my one play. Sean L. or others who have more experience with it may be better able to chime in.

I hit a drive to the right of it and didn't strike it real solid and kind of ended up behind it. Its not the most strategic tree, but it makes you think, which I think is always a good thing. There's plenty of room to the right to avoid it. Its a huge fairway.

[paul cowley]

....no, its missing a much higher purpose by becoming firewood.

[Anthony Gray]

    Most of us do not hit the ball where we are aimed. It adds flavor.

[Chip Gaskins]

Anthony-

You are correct.  I would aim directly at the tree and swing hard.

Chip

[Andy Troeger]

I looked at my yardage card. It is 300 yards to that tree from the tips, and 285 from the 2nd set of tees (6600 yards total). Maybe some of you are super long, but I think most of you should be aiming much farther right 

[Jordan Wall]

Chip,

From the back tees, the tree is probably 300 yards out, and from the tees up it is about 260.  Either way, the play is to the right to take the slope.  The farther right you are in the fairway, the better the angle anyways.

I dont have an opinion one or the other, but I certainly dont think its a bad use of a tree.  I guess my only problem with it would be that the shorter hitters might have to play a second shot from 225 or 235 and have to work the ball to get around the tree...

Cheers,
Jordan

[igrowgrass]

If you hit it far enough, always aim left, the native left of the tree is usually hard and advances the ball forward.  My intended target line is just right of the bunker right of the green.  Usually have less than 140 into the hole.  This tree is a key attribute to this hole and its integrity.  If the tree is in-line with your approach, the distance to the hole is long enough that you can play a shot under the tree or shape one in either direction around it.  A right hole location will accept a low trajectory approach.

[Bill_McBride]

Where is this?

[igrowgrass]

The Members Club at Aldarra #8 Fall City, WA

[Bill Brightly]

The tree distracts from the beautiful mountain view beyond the landing area. Look at that picture and envision the hole without the tree (and without the ridiculous Christmas tree next to it.)

From the discription, all tee shots should be played right of the tree, so it seems to serve no purpose other than a directional sign: "Hit it right of this tree." Chainsaw time.

[Matt_Cohn]

It's a decent central hazard so long as it stays alive. For this reason, I tend to believe clusters of trees are better.

They seem to have already planted a small tree directly behind the big one.

[Matthew Mollica]

It's a decent central hazard so long as it stays alive. For this reason, I tend to believe clusters of trees are better.

That's a good point Kyle. One course I play occasionally featured a beautiful lone Sea Birch right in the middle of the fairway at 185 yards.  Much of the attraction to the drive was missing the tree, not so much the effect it had on approach play.  The tree was struck by lightning and now the hole is quite bland.

MM

[Sean_A]

If the tree is 285 from the 6600 yard tees I don't think its placement justifies breaking up the sight line to the mountains.  I also don't like the little tree or the one in the far distance.  My vote is to build a deck with them.

Ciao

[Kyle Harris]

I'm not sure about the critical nature of the view as that is based on the angle of the picture. You get the view as you walk down the hole.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I thought it OK until I heard the distance off the tee... Now I think it a bad hazard...

3 reasons:

1. It takes the heroic element out of the equation... the only sensible play is to the right.
2. As Jordan correctly states, it penalises the shorter hitter by providing a direct line hazard for his second whilst not doing the same for the longer hitter.
3. It detracts from the beautiful mountain view.

[Jeff_Brauer]

This discussion kills me and here's why.  The "groupthink" here, to the degree that it exists would say follow the land and provide no formulas.  And yet, when we speak of an individual hole, its clear that we all have some pre-existing ideas about what's good and bad - i.e. formula.  But wait, can a minimalist be a earth minimalist, but not a tree minimalist?  Well, that,too sounds like something other than a strict "follow the land" philosophy.

I think its a fine use of the tree, since it was there, since using every feature a site has to offer is good architecture.  If God wasn't so kind as to place it at exactly the "right" distance, he might be working behind the scenes for some equipment improvements to make it be in the right place........To God, ten years isn't much time.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()