[Alfonso Erhardt]

I am trying to imagine a description of certain greens from an old text and wanted to get as precise idea of a hog back as possible. Until now, I have always visualized that "hog's back green" means that there is some type of ridge within.

I imagine that the hog's back definition encompasses a wide range of alternatives, but:

Does any type of mound within the green also make it a hog's back?
Does the orientation of the ridge make any difference (in considering it a hog's back)?
Does the length/width of the ridge make any difference (as above)?
What is the difference with a spine bisecting the green? (if there is any)
Any other considerations?

Regards,

Alfonso

[Jeff_Brauer]

In general, I have always considered that to be a negative connotation, and pictured the green as sort of the inverse soup bowl type, generally highest in the middle and lowered around the edges, as opposed to a green like Pebble Beach 17 that has a distinct, but limited ridge somewhere through the middle.  And, I think the ridge had to run perp. to the line of play so the green rejects any landing center or past off the back, whereas a ridge along the line (like PB 17) would be fine.

The negative connotation comes from the inability to hold a shot that hits the middle of the green.  I was always taught that this was bad design, usually built be superintendents to assure good drainage in all directions, but I do see some gca's resurrecting it in spots.

[Sean_A]

I am trying to imagine a description of certain greens from an old text and wanted to get as precise idea of a hog back as possible. Until now, I have always visualized that "hog's back green" means that there is some type of ridge within.

I imagine that the hog's back definition encompasses a wide range of alternatives, but:

Does any type of mound within the green also make it a hog's back?
Does the orientation of the ridge make any difference (in considering it a hog's back)?
Does the length/width of the ridge make any difference (as above)?
What is the difference with a spine bisecting the green? (if there is any)
Any other considerations?

Regards,

Alfonso

Alfonso

I always imagined a hogs back as a green with the spine of the hog running in line with the fairway.  It is quite an unusual design.  Below is the 5th at Grosse Ile.  Its hard to tell, but that ridge is about 3 foot high which effectively creates two greens.  The severity of the putt over the spine is bad enough that it is far easier to chip up to the green from the correct side then to putt from the incorrect side of the spine.  The 6th is also a hogs back. 



Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

In general, I have always considered that to be a negative connotation, and pictured the green as sort of the inverse soup bowl type, generally highest in the middle and lowered around the edges, as opposed to a green like Pebble Beach 17 that has a distinct, but limited ridge somewhere through the middle.  And, I think the ridge had to run perp. to the line of play so the green rejects any landing center or past off the back, whereas a ridge along the line (like PB 17) would be fine.

The negative connotation comes from the inability to hold a shot that hits the middle of the green.  I was always taught that this was bad design, usually built be superintendents to assure good drainage in all directions, but I do see some gca's resurrecting it in spots.

Jeff,

Doesn't a "hog's back" divide the green into tactical segments ?

The "hog's back's" that I've seen serve an architectural purpose and weren't there primarily as an aid to drainage.

If you insert a "hog's back" into an otherwise bland green it transforms that target from a pancake like putting surface that tolerates mis-hits and marginal shots into a putting surface that places greater demand on distance and directional control on the approach.

It also transforms the putting surface from a bland recipient of recoveries into one demanding finesse and touch.

[Alfonso Erhardt]

Sean,

Why do you only consider the hog's back when the spine is in line with fairway and not across (or diagonal)??

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Why do you only consider the hog's back when the spine is in line with fairway and not across (or diagonal)??

Alfonso

I think the concept works better (though diagonal is close enough) with the spine in line with the fairway because then the spine can't be used as a backboard.  For instance, with a spine across the line of the fairway if the hole is up front there is a natural backboard.  That isn't a bad thing, just a different concept.

Ciao

[Jaeger Kovich]

Well if this is the case Quaker Ridge has a hogs back green on double dogleg par 5... Any remember #14 green?

[Kalen Braley]

The best way to look at a hogs backs in my opinion is to go look at a football field somewhere.

The center of the field is higher than the sidelines and the ridge runs down the length of the field to aid in drainage.  The old field at Texas Stadium used to be so pronounced, supposedly QBs had to take mental note when throwing to the sidelines because it was so far "downhill" from the middle of the field.

[Bill_McBride]

That benign looking 13th green at Cypress Point is a "hogs back" green according to Sean's definition - which I agree with - as there is a diabolically subtle ridge running right down the left center of that green that will take an apparently straight putt perhaps five feet right of what you think the line is. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()