[Peter Pallotta]

Mike - cool pictures, thanks.

On your "S" picture, Paul will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you can also play with shifting the various tees around, i.e. from back to front moving them progressvely to the right (in your picture) so that from the back tees the hole is 'exponetially' harder for the good player (and exponetially easier from the forward tees). That is, from the back tees (as currently indicated in your picture), the hole would not only be longer but would also call for a pronounced draw....with the hole getting progressively shorter and the 'angle' off the tee progressively less pronounced as one moves up.

I'm not sure that's necessary though; even hacks like me sometimes like to play the holes "in the same way" as the better players, i.e. shorter, yes, but stlll asking for the same shots...while hopefully leaving me a little margin for error (but still 'penalized') if I can't pull it off  

Peter  

[Mike McGuire]

Peter-

This quote could be Paul C or you?

"Now also imagine the tees arranged along this spine"

I was thinking the spine was the center of the fairway, nearest the tee, which is why I put the tees in a line. I'm not sure I understand what the spine is in the "s" (or any) example.

[Kyle Harris]

The case against turn points and centerlines can be made with an even more basic point.

One common complaint against a course setup is the direction in which the tees point. What makes doing this difficult is the question I typically ask, "For whom am I pointing them?"

The problem with allowing turn points to dictate too much of a hole design is that it constrains the architect into placing tees for an ideal group of subsets of golfers. How many architects place the back tees 267 yards from the turn point due to this and then stagger the angle and distance from there on in until the forward tees are something like 150 yards away.

The idea that centerlines/turnpoints exist, and that the tees need to point somewhere are major constraints to growth in architecture. Just build what's there and let the golfer figure out how to play it.

[Mike McGuire]

Paul C -

This hole was pulled from the "What's the Max Angle for a Dogleg?" thread.

It looks like a "C' hole..maybe an "upside down J". I numbered some 'spines'? 1-4.  The green spine (if i have that term right) is interesting as it the axis heads off t into oblivion.

Could you please comment this hole per your concept?  Is this a DD or a DDD or DDDD ?

[paul cowley]

TEP -

Is this the 10th At The Creek Club you refered to as a good example of a "DD"

Mike....interesting hole....but its really a single D, as the drive sets up on a diagonal but the second shot strategy is straight forward. Now if the green was cocked to the right....it becomes a DD because of the right front bunkering.

[paul cowley]

Peter-

This quote could be Paul C or you?

"Now also imagine the tees arranged along this spine"

I was thinking the spine was the center of the fairway, nearest the tee, which is why I put the tees in a line. I'm not sure I understand what the spine is in the "s" (or any) example.

Mike , for my purposes the "spine" starts at the back tee and curves through the hole ending at the green.

[Mike McGuire]

Sorry for all the images

For illustration only would this make the hole a  DD ?

[paul cowley]

The case against turn points and centerlines can be made with an even more basic point.

One common complaint against a course setup is the direction in which the tees point. What makes doing this difficult is the question I typically ask, "For whom am I pointing them?"

The problem with allowing turn points to dictate too much of a hole design is that it constrains the architect into placing tees for an ideal group of subsets of golfers. How many architects place the back tees 267 yards from the turn point due to this and then stagger the angle and distance from there on in until the forward tees are something like 150 yards away.

The idea that centerlines/turnpoints exist, and that the tees need to point somewhere are major constraints to growth in architecture. Just build what's there and let the golfer figure out how to play it.

Kyle....TomD and Company have of late been utilizing teeing areas that don't depend on markers....in fact they don't have them.
You just tee up anywheres on the agreed upon tee.

Its really a novel new concept.

[Mike McGuire]

So the spine is a "centerline" but since your case is against centerlines so..........





EDIT: I am starting to get. If the centerline is curved its OK.   Duh

[paul cowley]

Paul C -

This hole was pulled from the "What's the Max Angle for a Dogleg?" thread.

It looks like a "C' hole..maybe an "upside down J". I numbered some 'spines'? 1-4.  The green spine (if i have that term right) is interesting as it the axis heads off t into oblivion.

Could you please comment this hole per your concept?  Is this a DD or a DDD or DDDD ?

Mike...you are right about it either being a long C or J....it reminds me of a clasic RTJones par five that curves around a lake at the Dunes course in Myrtle Beach.

Remember, all we are trying to illustrate are various curving centerlines that don't rely on ideal fixed points to play to....we want to design something that leaves that option to the individual and his ability to choose his best course of play

Sorry about my delayed responses, as I left at 4 this morning to get to the Mexico job late this night.

Hasta manana.  

[paul cowley]

Sorry for all the images

For illustration only would this make the hole a  DD ?

I wouldn't go that far right with the green....instead just tilt it or expand it to the right where the back right bunker is, and leave the right front bunkering...... while preserving the green opening that would favor a shot coming from the left side of the fairway.

....and don't tell TomP I suggested this.

[paul cowley]

bump

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()