Galloway National: A Fazio Course I ACTUALLY LIKE

[Kyle Harris]

For what purpose?

To add interest to trying to cut the corner.

[JESII]

You'll have to explain that one to me...

[Kyle Harris]

You'll have to explain that one to me...

Well, no matter what, the hole is shorter by playing inside the dogleg with no other option being as enticing. Furthermore, the position inside the dogleg is limited. Almost every golfer will ultimately want to be inside the dogleg. The line of charm matches the line of instinct.

The bunker is there to place a shot demand on that play. As such, the bunker is not posing the strategic question (how will you play the hole?) but it is posing a tactical question (can you place the shot here?).

[Michael Blake]

You'll have to explain that one to me...

Well, no matter what, the hole is shorter by playing inside the dogleg with no other option being as enticing. Furthermore, the position inside the dogleg is limited. Almost every golfer will ultimately want to be inside the dogleg. The line of charm matches the line of instinct.

The bunker is there to place a shot demand on that play. As such, the bunker is not posing the strategic question (how will you play the hole?) but it is posing a tactical question (can you place the shot here?).

Kyle,

From the tees I played, that bunker most certainly posed the strategic question 'How will you play the hole?'
The option to clear it was most enticing.

[Kyle Harris]

You'll have to explain that one to me...

Well, no matter what, the hole is shorter by playing inside the dogleg with no other option being as enticing. Furthermore, the position inside the dogleg is limited. Almost every golfer will ultimately want to be inside the dogleg. The line of charm matches the line of instinct.

The bunker is there to place a shot demand on that play. As such, the bunker is not posing the strategic question (how will you play the hole?) but it is posing a tactical question (can you place the shot here?).

Kyle,

From the tees I played, that bunker most certainly posed the strategic question 'How will you play the hole?'
The option to clear it was most enticing.

Did you attempt it? Which tee?

[Michael Blake]

Yes.  Both times I've played. Safe both times.
Don't remember if it was the very front of the Blue tee or the tee in front of it.

Can discuss later...off to K of P mall with family.

[Kyle Harris]

Yes.  Both times I've played. Safe both times.
Don't remember if it was the very front of the Blue tee or the tee in front of it.

I guess I'd like to know what you mean by "enticing?" With all respect, it's possible you're just making a poor choice and getting away with it in your two instances - like hitting the lottery twice in row. For example, one could conceivably attempt to play the hole directly through the forest - it would just be ridiculously stupid to do so. A 300 yard carry can be enticing to many players - though few could possibly do it.

Based on the aerials I've seen posted and the description players have said about being right, I think the hazard would pose a more strategic question if the option to play completely left of it existed - that is - to the area in the yardage guide around the 80 yard plate.

Temptation is a necessary factor in a strategic hazard, but not a sufficient one. Temptation is a characteristic of a well-placed hazard, in general.

However, I could see how the bunker becomes a more strategic hazard as the player moves forward on the tees since the geometry of the hole would allow an aggressive line to achieve the area I outlined above at the 80 yard plate. Going back to the original analysis of why to play toward the bunker, the difference between 130 and 160 yards for a better player is trivial under most conditions. Also notable is that every distance between 130 and 160 is also within the fairway/area available to land the ball and not taken away by the placement of the bunker.  So really, a player on his game can pick and choose a line based on how they're feeling that day with little difference in the effect on the second shot. IF the bunker were placed such that the question posed was 130 OR 160 then, you've got a hazard a little bit closer to strategy.

[JESII]

30 yards makes little difference to which players?

I guess that's where we fell off the tracks...

[JESII]

To elaborate on that, I would prefer 130 from a mediocre angle over 160 from a perfect angle every time...assuming both are from the same grass height.

[JESII]

To elaborate a little further...I try to play the hole to the perfect angle every time. I consider the best place to play into a green from, including somewhere shorter than my driver length and plan on that spot...but if given a choice of results, 30 yards is a very large advantage...

[Kyle Harris]

To elaborate on that, I would prefer 130 from a mediocre angle over 160 from a perfect angle every time...assuming both are from the same grass height.

Wedge in one hand... 8iron in the other?

Is that club difference really worth being as near the bunker as possible?

[Doug Braunsdorf]

For what it's worth, Jim, I was working the green complex and 5 tee during last year's Open qualifier and none of the players' tee balls appeared to try to fly the bunker and land in the narrrow part of the fairway.  

What is the carry from the back tees to the narrow portion of the fairway?  What are the chances, if the bunker was carried from that tee, that the tee ball would run into rough, and have that tree to deal with as well as an awkward angle to the green?  Where is the reward there?  

I doubt even the best players in the world can make a driver stop like a sand wedge.  If I remember correctly, the narrow area of the fairway is slightly canted to the right.  It's been a year since I've been there.  I may be mistaken here.  

I would say, Jim,  you're a player comparable to that level of skill, playing in an Open qualifier, and I'm not trying to kiss your ass.

In the qualifier, I did notice a great many having mid irons in, some laid back and hit hybrids into the green.  

Having that tall evergreen tree on the right, I don't know how much sense that makes, although it does force a tee shot too far right to lay up somewhere in front of the green, as the axis of the green points into the bunker.  

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

[Kyle Harris]

To elaborate a little further...I try to play the hole to the perfect angle every time. I consider the best place to play into a green from, including somewhere shorter than my driver length and plan on that spot...but if given a choice of results, 30 yards is a very large advantage...

Yes, I get what you're saying.

My point is more the fact that 130 and 160 are the lower and upper limits and that every point in between is available to the golfer as fairway. The bunker is taking NOTHING away from you within that range. So yes, you can get 130 by nuzzling up to the bunker, but you can also get 131 etc. And the choice in distances is made by the geometry of the hole - NOT the placement of the bunker. The bunker is simply a limiting factor. I said in an earlier post the only thing that mattered was the edge of the fairway and that remains true except possibly from the more forward tees.

I think I made the statement that if the bunker posed the question of 130 OR 160, it would be more strategic.

[Kyle Harris]

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

I never said this Doug. I don't think the hole should be changed.

I just don't think people should go tossing around the word strategy without some scrutiny.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

I never said this Doug. I don't think the hole should be changed.

I just don't think people should go tossing around the word strategy without some scrutiny.

Little buddy,

  My bad; I made a misstatement.  You didn't say that.  I am sorry. 

[Kyle Harris]

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

I never said this Doug. I don't think the hole should be changed.

I just don't think people should go tossing around the word strategy without some scrutiny.

Little buddy,

  My bad; I made a misstatement.  You didn't say that.  I am sorry. 

No worries, Redanboy, Jr.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

I never said this Doug. I don't think the hole should be changed.

I just don't think people should go tossing around the word strategy without some scrutiny.

Little buddy,

  My bad; I made a misstatement.  You didn't say that.  I am sorry. 

No worries, Redanboy, Jr.

Hey, I'm bigger than he is...

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Doug,
  You proabably saw me play the hole last year.  I hit 3wood and then 6 iron.  Barring a great break i. The waste bunker and then a great shot or a funky lucky bounce, I probably had one of the best approach shots that day--20ft pin high.  My 6 iron crom about 185 was hit high and holding the right left wind and still released 30 feet.  I enjoed the firmness and quality of the greens and should have advanced.  Though the course suites my game for tournament play, it is a weak layout strategically.  Everything is dictated for shots to hit

[JESII]

Kyle,

The 130-160 Either / Or scenraio you described is the antithesis of everything I've ever known or learned about strategic architecture.  Once you decide where to go there's no marginal option. There's no "good miss". There's no ability for the lesser golfer to catch the better golfer when the difference between the two is the ability to reach the 130 area...

[Matt_Ward]

What's really amazing - assuming we can now move on to another dimension about GN -- is that it is rated THAT high by GW among its modern courses -- #27 -- but is rated far lower by GD. Frankly, GD does rate TF courses usualyl well.

Have to wonder about the disconnect there.

Maybe they have more strategic guys on GD ?

[Mark McKeever]

I am with Kyle on having the bunker in the middle of fairway.  This is a concept found on BethpageRed 13, as well as some other holes.  

I never said this Doug. I don't think the hole should be changed.

I just don't think people should go tossing around the word strategy without some scrutiny.

Little buddy,

  My bad; I made a misstatement.  You didn't say that.  I am sorry. 

No worries, Redanboy, Jr.

Hey, I'm bigger than he is...

lol


Mark

[Doug Braunsdorf]

Doug,
  You proabably saw me play the hole last year.  I hit 3wood and then 6 iron.  Barring a great break i. The waste bunker and then a great shot or a funky lucky bounce, I probably had one of the best approach shots that day--20ft pin high.  My 6 iron crom about 185 was hit high and holding the right left wind and still released 30 feet.  I enjoed the firmness and quality of the greens and should have advanced.  Though the course suites my game for tournament play, it is a weak layout strategically.  Everything is dictated for shots to hit

Robert, I did.  I was the GAP checkpoint at 4 green and 5 tee.  I recognized your name from this website, but I wasn't going to say anything then.  I seem to remember you were minding your own business--some players talk to me, some don't.  Fine.  Wasn't the time or place, you were there to play to qualify for the Open.  I don't remember your shots specifically, but I do remember a good many players laying back towards the corner. 

Some, landing in the right rough, were double-penalized; that tree, and then the rough.  And the awkward angle to the green.  I seem to remember a number of players missing the green short right. 

The thing is, I get what Kyle is saying. 

In my view, what is the point of trying to drive over the bunker if you can't?  What is the reward for taking on the bunker?
1. Fairway is very narrow there, and may kick balls into the right rough. 
2. Laying back close to the bunker-ok, I get this for a "better" angle, but Robert, let me ask you, is it even a great angle from there?  The green points at the wide area of the waste bunker. 

Is that strategic?  Doesn't seem like it to me.  Seems dictatorial; hit the ball here, now hit the ball here.  Why does the green point 45 degrees left of the center line of the fairway?  To me, it seems like, "ok, hit the ball close to here on the tee shot, now hit a high, 20-yard fade and land the ball soft or else.  The hole just seems fairly devoid of options.  Strategy, to me, implies there would be several options.  Maybe if there was fairway left of the bunker, there may be some strategy there, to gain advantage by playing left, having a look right up the axis of the green.  There might be options here, but none of them seem very good.  I also recall the green is elevated and tilted back to front, so it may be hard to run a shot up there.  If the bunker doesn't serve a strategic purpose, is it just there as window dressing?

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

The 130-160 Either / Or scenraio you described is the antithesis of everything I've ever known or learned about strategic architecture.  Once you decide where to go there's no marginal option. There's no "good miss". There's no ability for the lesser golfer to catch the better golfer when the difference between the two is the ability to reach the 130 area...

I think you're making a few assumptions here that are being taken out of context.

First off, I don't think it's okay to assume perfect execution. It's possible either choice ends up in the bunker with a poorly executed shot.

Second off, the 130/160 scenario I am describing is to be kept only in the context of this hole. The numbers 130/160 are meant to imply boundaries on diverging fairway lines of attack - so you get 129-161 etc. etc. The value of a good miss just depends on the width of the corridor. In the case of this hole, the bunker would be more strategic to me if it were small and closer to the turn point with the option of playing well-right of it, the option of playing between it and the tree line left or the present option of playing just short of it.

To touch on the point of the lesser golfer sneaking up. For this hole, everything I've heard anecdotally indicates that a strong player can accomplish the green with 3wood and a mid-iron. However, the lesser player has to use driver to get to the corner no matter what - AND has to take on the hazard to even put the same club in his hands as the greater player whose skill allows him to avoid the hazard outright. Is the hazard really strategic if only the lesser player MUST take it on all the time? How is this any different conceptually than the case of a forced carry where the lesser player is shaking over a 200 yard carry while the greater player makes it with ease?

With my idea for making the bunker strategic, the safe play for the better player is taken out of the equation by the bunker, forcing them to make a decision too. The repositioned bunker increases the shot demand for both players AND forces a decision from both players.

[Matt_Ward]

One of the things about GN is that the overall AC area is not seen by many as a golf getaway area of major note. Few people -- outside the 100-mile circle of AC wake up and say they need to go there for the total vacation or lifestyle component.

Clearly, the folks who belong at GN are fully aware of what they have and they may not be remotely interested in having the masses clamoring to play there since it is private.

I'm glad to see people on GW have elevated the course to where it is now. I'd say they it in roughly the right position -- the company ahead of the course is quite competitive.

Curiously, I think when GD did open it marked a break from the past when TF layouts had little in terms of consequential shot values and the like -- I see GN as a real examination that goes far beyond the postcard focus that often times with early TF layouts was the main item of note.

[archie_struthers]

Have had the pleasure of lots of golf at Galloway. always enjoy the challenge . The greens can be really hair raising at times.

I've thought about the fourth given all the queries / opinions and and would postulate the hole could be great ...not just good ! If you replaced the ultra large  waste bunker with a gnarly , nasty one on the elbow, lots of possibliities would be created.

.  It  would really reward attacking the corner for the bombers. If you succeeded you might get wedge in hand as the cant of the fairway would give you a left /forward kick. In firm and fast days it it just might lock you up behind the aforementioned tree on the right of the green so it isn't a mindless tee shot.

Like the debate , and Galloway . This suggested change would make for more birdies ( and doubles ) for the highly skilled player. At the same time the impact to the 10 and above handicapper would be minimal.