Maximum forced carry from a back tee

[Kirk Gill]

Jeff, what about on par 3's?

On one of your courses, now called Black Bear (formerly Canterberry) in Parker Colorado, the third and eighth both cross an arroyo area, and from the middle tees one is 160 yards and another 206. with slopes in front of both greens, you have to basically make that carry on both shots or you're looking at a lost ball. From the back tees those holes are at 190 and 230. And the shorter hole is with the prevailing wind. Now, this was certainly a difficult, hilly property, but these are some pretty long forced carries. I'm just sayin.

[Matt_Ward]

Guys,

for all the fussing and moaning -- 95%+ of all players should not even sniff a LOOK at where the back tees are and what is required from that location.

The issue is about having the very skilled be the ONLY ones even REMOTELY thinking about playing there.

To repeat what Kirk said, "I'm just sayin."

[Jason Topp]

Guys,

for all the fussing and moaning -- 95%+ of all players should not even sniff a LOOK at where the back tees are and what is required from that location.

The issue is about having the very skilled be the ONLY ones even REMOTELY thinking about playing there.

To repeat what Kirk said, "I'm just sayin."

I understand the perspective.  I recall Jack Nicklaus being quoted that he had no concern imposing significant forced carries on those that play the back tees.

My point is that many people play from tees too far back for their ability - whether due to ego, the preferences of others in the group or the setup of the course for an event.  Ideally a course should accomodate such individuals by providing at least the opportunity to put the ball in play.    Failure to do so is a significant detraction from the course's quality.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kirk,

Those valleys were wildlife corridors that had to remain protected and yes, our strategy was to try to keep the forced carries to par three holes where you should have an iron or 3metal in your hand.

I don't like them, but when required, you do what you have to do.

[PCCraig]

Personally, I find forced carries to be pretty useless with my "max" carry being 100 yards or so. Even so, there is a big difference between a bunker/waste area and water in between the tee and the fairway...mostly that you can play out of sand

[Matt_Ward]

Jason:

Take exception to your comment ... "Ideally a course should accomodate such individuals by providing at least the opportunity to put the ball in play.    Failure to do so is a significant detraction from the course's quality."

Many courses DO PROVIDE a location where the mid-to-high handicap types can play and do so without onerous carries and the like. If such people DECIDE they want to handle MORE course -- the issue is THEM -- not the course itself.

[Kirk Gill]

Those valleys were wildlife corridors that had to remain protected and yes, our strategy was to try to keep the forced carries to par three holes where you should have an iron or 3metal in your hand.

I don't like them, but when required, you do what you have to do.

Understood. Just messing with you a bit. Even if those weren't protected wildlife corridors, it'd be insane to try and fill them with dirt or anything of the like. bottom line, if you don't want the huge carry, there are other, more forward tees to play. If you want to build a course there (and my many plays on it say that I'm glad you did), then that's just something that has to be done.

[Tom Yost]

Guys,

for all the fussing and moaning -- 95%+ of all players should not even sniff a LOOK at where the back tees are and what is required from that location.

The issue is about having the very skilled be the ONLY ones even REMOTELY thinking about playing there.

Should the maximum carry be a function of the overall course length and difficulty?  Or should the back tees be considered only for the expert player no matter the course, even, for example, the 6300 yard course at Leisure World?

[Jason Topp]

Jason:

Take exception to your comment ... "Ideally a course should accomodate such individuals by providing at least the opportunity to put the ball in play.    Failure to do so is a significant detraction from the course's quality."

Many courses DO PROVIDE a location where the mid-to-high handicap types can play and do so without onerous carries and the like. If such people DECIDE they want to handle MORE course -- the issue is THEM -- not the course itself.

Matt - when I go to Hazeltine, the guys I play with normally play the course at over 7000 yards and play for more money than I normally play for.  That means a lot of hybrids and long irons for me but, despite that disadvantage, I can play the same tees as them and compete because the course does not require me to carry 225 yards of junk to put it in play.  No one will accuse Hazeltine of being a pushover golf course.

If I were going there on my own, I would play it from shorter tees but as a guest, I am going to play where they want me to play.  I want to be invited back.

If Hazeltine were designed with forced carries off of each tee the course would be no more interesting for my playing companions - they can easily make the carry.  For me, I would need to negotiate for shorter tees which is not exactly the way to endear yourself as a guest.  I also would not be able to enter a tournament there unless I knew precisely how they would set up the course.

Which course is better - the real one or the hypothetical one with a bunch of forced carries off the tee?  I think the answer is an easy one.

[Mike Hamilton]

Well then perhaps Tobacco Road was a bad example regarding maintenance costs and effort.

I suppose when we start talking about your tee shots landing in multiple of these sandy areas, I'd just consider them to be hazards, not forced carries.  To me a forced carry should be pretty easy to execute, which is why I limit the length from the back tees to 200.

Point taken about the wrong tees, but doesn't sound like the course gave you too many options?

Joel,

I'm not certain it was a bad example.  I've played TR twice.  The waste areas aren't considered hazards since local rules even allow you to lift and improve your lie and ground your club.  In addition, despite David's assertion above, the waste areas like that pictured did not appear to me to be regularly maintained.  Most were hard pack and certainly not raked regularly.

Mike

[Matt_Ward]

Jason:

You completely failed to answer what I wrote before.

Here's again what YOU said ...

"Ideally a course should accomodate such individuals by providing at least the opportunity to put the ball in play.    Failure to do so is a significant detraction from the course's quality."

The issue is that you CHOOSE to play where you wish. If a course has forced carries of say 250 or so yards -- from the back tees ONLY -- then those folks who play THOSE tees have made THEIR own choice to do so. There is no failure on part of the golf course in the situation I have mentioned -- the failure is on the player who attempts to play such tee boxes because they don't have the game to do so.

I would think that those hosting you would be sporting enough to suggest the forward markers to accomodate your deficiency of carry potential. Nothing wrong in such adjustments.

One other thing -- no course has forced carries of appreciable yards on EACH hole -- here is what you said again -- "If Hazeltine were designed with forced carries off of each tee the course ..." -- the extreme back tees are meant for those with the full capacity of shot to play there -- and that includes both overall distance and carry potential as needed.

[Jason Topp]

Matt:

I didn't fail to understand your points.  I just disagree. 

I will try one more time:

1. Forced carries do nothing to improve the quality of a golf hole. You either can make it or cannot - it is a simple matter of math.  If you can make it the carry is not very interesting.  If you can't make it, it isn't interesting either. 

2.  In my view, playing from the "wrong" set of tees is an important lens through which to judge the quality of a course.   That lens goes in both directions.  An ideal course is fun from a set of tees up from the "proper" tees (the long hitter has interesting decisions and is not laying up off the tee all of the time) and is fun from a set of tees back from the "proper" tees.

3.  This ideal is important because, for a variety of reasons, people play from the wrong tees all of the time and often for good reasons listed in my prior posts, as well as those of others.

4.   I recognize environmental issues or other constraints make a long forced carry necessary to create the best quality golf hole but in my view those circumstances are rare and should be avoided absent compelling justification.

Do you really think long forced carries add to the quality of a course design.

[Bill_McBride]

There are a lot of very good players who can play 0-5 handicap golf who can't carry >210 yards off the tee.  When they are playing in the club championship from the tips, they should be able to get the ball in play.   If they can't, there's a design problem.

[Adrian_Stiff]

I would say 180 yards if its over 'lost ball stuff'. 180 into a strong wind plays say 210 and that is a very long carry for 95%. You need other tees probably so the set up can be changed if conditions are horrible. Plenty of instances in Open championships where players cant make the fairway and are in light rough.

[Matt_Ward]

Jason:

Physical strength is part of golf -- those who bemoan it or knock it -- likely don't have it so therefore the issue is about fairness FOR THEM -- when really it's nothing more than self interest.

If someone is legitimately going to be playing the extreme back tees -- then the capacity to carry a tee ball in the air 250 yards is not a tough deal -- FOR SUCH TALENTED PLAYERS.

I never advocated or even hinted that most holes should have this dimension but when faced with such holes -- I mentioned the 12th at BB which has a forced carry to reach the ideal spot -- you can opt for a much safer situation but you give up considerable yardage and turn the hole into a par-5.

You too quickly excuse those morons who believe they can handle the back tees and then proceed to chop their way around -- all in the hopeless pursuit of ego to show they are "man enough" to tackle such assignment.

Jason, the "proper" tees you mentioned are not the back tees for those who can't hit the ball out of their shadows. The better player can adjust to shorter lengths -- the reverse is not always true by any means. I would think a smart guy like yourself can understand that. Forgive me if I am wrong on that premise.

There are no "good reasons" why people play wrong tees -- it's often self-hyped egos who believe they have the game to play there and don't want to appear as wimps in front of those who are bonafide low handicap types who can move the ball off the tee.

The forced carry has a place at the table in golf design in my mind. So long as people play the appropriate tee box (and provided the correct tee boxes are set-up for that day's play) -- I see no reason that carries of say 250 yards are included. If people don't have the strength to handle that requirement try weights or simply move up to the next boxes and play from there.

Bill:

The guys you tout who can't carry 210 yards off the tee don't have the full game -- they can't drive the ball a sufficient distance. Hey buckeroo -- that's part and parcel of the game no less than a deft putting touch. There's no design problem -- that's the predictable and tired refrain of those who can't hit the ball out of their shadows -- place them on the back tees of say a Bethpage Black and it's likely that "0-5 handicap" balloons quite quickly to 10 or more.

[Tom_Doak]

A friend of mine who is a member of Pine Valley pointed out to me years ago that the maximum carry to a fairway there [before the recent lengthening] was ... 170 yards!  People always described the carries as intimidating, and yet most decent players could hit a 4-iron safely on every hole!

There really isn't a good answer to the question of a "max" distance.  I like the idea of giving a good player an intimidating carry now and again, but you can't do it unless you are confident that the club's management will move the tee markers up in adverse conditions.  You never want to provide a forced carry longer than someone can make with a good shot.

[Bill_McBride]

Matt Ward:  "Bill:

The guys you tout who can't carry 210 yards off the tee don't have the full game -- they can't drive the ball a sufficient distance. Hey buckeroo -- that's part and parcel of the game no less than a deft putting touch. There's no design problem -- that's the predictable and tired refrain of those who can't hit the ball out of their shadows -- place them on the back tees of say a Bethpage Black and it's likely that "0-5 handicap" balloons quite quickly to 10 or more. "

Hey Buckaroo - The name of the game is who shoots the lowest score, whether it's hole by hole (match play) or round by round (medal play).  There are many very competitive short knockers.   A design where it's impossible for them to carry a hazard is bad design.  As specified by Dr Mackenzie, there should be a way around, at the cost of a stroke if necessary.   If you say the ability to carry 250 yards is a minimum requirement to play in tghe club championship, I cry "bullshit!"   Total score or most holes won determines the winner.

Buckaroo Bill

[George Pazin]

Every time someone brings up prodigious carry distances, I am reminded of the Corey Pavins of the world. Or even the Paul Runyans. Paul would likely kick 99% of the golfers of the worlds butts at any distance, even at age 80. It's a shame this aspect of the game seems to have been lost.

I'm also reminded of the time I played with an older Irish gent who carried his 3 wood and driver less than my 4 iron - yet he chipped and putted me to death. This guy could beat most people from any tee - provided the forced carries weren't ridiculous. For those who claim, if you don't have the game, I say bullshit. If you don't have the game to beat everyone who only carries the ball 180, you don't have the right to make that statement.

I'm not a fan of any forced carry distances, with forced being the operative word, or lacking that, a diagonal carry. And I say that having no problem making long carries myself.

[DMoriarty]

The guys you tout who can't carry 210 yards off the tee don't have the full game -- they can't drive the ball a sufficient distance. Hey buckeroo -- that's part and parcel of the game no less than a deft putting touch. There's no design problem -- that's the predictable and tired refrain of those who can't hit the ball out of their shadows -- place them on the back tees of say a Bethpage Black and it's likely that "0-5 handicap" balloons quite quickly to 10 or more.

This statement pretty much epitomizes the blow-hard big hitter approach to golf course design.

If there are legitimate 0-5 handicaps who play Bethpage and their handicap balloons to 10 or more because of the forced arries, then that is a problem with the set-up, not with them.  Driving distance is not the end all be all of golf.   Longer drivers benefit (as they should) because their ball goes farther.  There is no need to put a minimum requirement on carry distance.  If someone can only carry their drives 225 yards but they still can whoop a big hitting blow-hard like Matt, then we ought to tip our cap to them, not artificially manipulate our courses to eliminate them from viability!

_______________

I'm with David Elvins.  Zero is the ideal forced carry, but I am willing to compromise within reason.   

[Adrian_Stiff]

Matt - You really cant have 250 as a proper tee, if its into a wind that plays so much more. 250 is a massive distance to fly through the air, you are talking very elite fields, probably PGA tour and Nationwide that can deal with that sort of carry. If you have 250 carry tees they need to be specials.

[Doug Siebert]

Personally I wouldn't take issue with a 250 yard forced carry on a course that's got some serious tips (either really long or a slope that's in the stratosphere) where you only have yourself to blame if you tee it up back there but don't have the game.  I could make the 250 yard carry without too much difficulty, though it'll get pretty dicey if its into a strong wind - I better hit it square!

But just because I can do it, and just because Matt can do it, isn't a good enough reason to make everyone do it.  There's just no reason to REQUIRE a carry like that with no bailout.  Hell, why not have a hole with an island green that's 230 yards (if you can drive 250 you can surely hit a fairway wood/hybrid 230) with no drop area if you miss.  I have a feeling Matt would be fine with that.  Actually my home course just added a new 235 yard tee for our double island green hole, but at least you get a 90 yard shot from the drop area if you miss the first time, and I have to believe they'll be smart enough to never put the tee there on a day with a cold north wind blowing into your face

I'm not sure of the exact number, but 200 yards sounds reasonable as it would allow for weather conditions if the guys setting the tee markers aren't too cognizant of the day's weather.

[paul cowley]

Have a 240 yd carry on a 300 yd par 3 at Diamante...down wind a 4 iron for many....but not over water.

We try to have no forced water carries.

[Sean_A]

This is one of the issues which leads me to believe that several tee boxes based on length isn't clever most of the time.  Like Jason, I don't much see the point in building back tees which merely serve to add length and especially carry length except in rare circumstances.  If we are truly worried about massive driving lengths the only way an archie can combat that is by reducing the opportunities and need for massive driving.  If he chooses to get into an arms race of length all he does is add to the problem and in all likelyhood reduce his opportunities to create more compelling architecture which isn't based mainly in length.

What is the direct line carry length at Turnberry's 9th?  275ish?  Most of the best drivers in the world refuse to take that on.  Why?  Because they aren't forced to and are not sufficiently confident of pulling it off.  Given that these guys are tons longer and crucially straighter when they bomb than the average so called good player, this would suggest that more like 215 is a more reasonable forced carry distance if that tee is to be kept in play for practically all the weather conditions in these local yocal tournies.    

Ciao

[Matt_Cohn]

Just curious if there are any new examples or thoughts on this. Are there any crazy ones coming up at Erin Hills? Or on other new courses in the past few years?


Also, would your maximum number be in a PGA Tour-level event (given flat terrain and no wind)?

[Jason Topp]

Just curious if there are any new examples or thoughts on this. Are there any crazy ones coming up at Erin Hills? Or on other new courses in the past few years?


Also, would your maximum number be in a PGA Tour-level event (given flat terrain and no wind)?

A Matt Ward oldie. 

I do not recall any crazy ones at Erin Hills although we were nowhere near the back tees.  The course is pretty exposed to the wind so I suspect the carries are relatively reasonable.

The PGA tour question is an interesting one.  There used to be a lot of players with 105 mph swing speeds but now they are pretty rare.  I would still think they would want to allow those guys to reach the fairway.  I am not sure how much carry that is but about 250 seems like an appropriate maximum at that level. 

We installed a bunch of new back tees at my course that stretch it to around 7600 yards and I play them about once per year.  I will never forget playing a 500 yard par four, hitting a decent but not great tee ball and seeing it die in the native  short of the fairway.  Depression set in.  The next time I aimed for the forward tee.