Individual Trees that must be carried

[NAF]

I thought about this topic today while thinking about the 10th hole at the Addington where the preferred line is over a tree standing 100 feet above the fairway..I know Doak is a fan...Other places I have seen the single tree effect are the famous 5th at Crystal Downs and the 14th at Hackensack NJ (Banks)..

While I can see the strategy in this in its simplicity I must admit sometimes I don't think it fair because I hit a low ball most of the time.  Still, at CD Mackenzie gave you some options to go around the tree but at the Addington, Abercromby did not provide such alternate paths.

Do most people here think single trees which you must play over to get a preferred line are fair?

[Ran Morrissett]

Yes, having to hit over a tree to gain an advantage can be an interesting ploy. Like anything else, if it is over done 5-6 times on a course, I imagine it would lose its appeal quickly but selectively done, it can add variety to the risk/reward aspect of a course.

According to my brother, Dave Axland and Dan Proctor effectively used trees to shape certain strategies at Delaware Springs (see its course profile).

[TEPaul]

Sure, a tree(s) can work really well. Trees generally don't seem too popular around here but more should be known about how Tillinghast and particularly William Flynn thought about and wrote about creating strategies through the use of trees!

Sometimes Golfclubatlas and the discussion of trees reminds me of the New York Times in the 1950s-1980s and the mention of Arab subjects. They didn't like it so they hardly ever mentioned it!

[jim_lewis]

NAF:

I am glad you initiated this thread as I have been considering something very simimlar. I would simply expand the topic slightly to include trees in the middle of a fairway or fronting a green that have to be played around OR over. I might not confine it to a single, but include a small clump of trees. In any case, I don't like them! I could live without any trees period, but I don't mind a speciman tree on the corner of a dogleg. Just keep them out of the middle of the fairway. At least keep them far enough away from the green that I have a chance to work the ball around them. (Any tree I can hit over would be more accurately called a shrub and I don't draw or fade wedges too well.)

Unfortunately, I am seeing more of these offending trees on courses of fairly recent vintage, or maybe I am just more sensitive to them these days. Some examples of trees that I would cut down tomorrow if given a chance include:

1. Tall pine that blocks the left half of the green on the par three 17th at Wade Hampton (Fazio).

2. Small clump of pines in the middle of the landing area on ther very difficult par five #5 at the CC of Castle Pines (Nicklaus). When I was a member there, I was the only member who wanted to remove the trees.)

3. Large oak that blocks the left side of the green at the par five #18 at the Barton Creek-Canyons course (Fazio).

4. Large pine (?) that is about 80-100 yards out on the short par four #15 at Kinloch (Lester George).

5. Large oak about 130 yds out on the par four #14 at Daniel Island (Fazio).

The problem is that once the course is opened the trees tend to remain forever. Members develop a love/hate relationship with the tree and refuse to remove it. The time to get rid of the tree is during construction.  If it is a speciman tree that is protected by local regulations, route around it. Keep it out of the direct line of play.

 Anyway, that's how I see it.

[Bill_Coggins]

I like to see a preferred line that is over/around a sizable tree.  However, only once in a round.  You could have one where you can go over, and another to go around (over is NOT the line), but that really is the limit. (not counting generic trees at a dogleg)

Actually one of my favorite "tree hazards" is on the 4th at TPC Sugarloaf.  It has a very tall tree right in the landing zone.  The branches are too high to interfere.  The trunk is quite narrow.  You really have to be unfortunate to have the tree in your way for your second shot.  But it is enough to get one thinking.

[Tony Ristola]

The 15th at Harbour Town.  At least that's what Pete Dye had originally conceived.  Has the tree been topped?

[Doug Wright]

I'm not a big fan of trees as hazards because they can change--what if for example they fall down! The strategy is lost. Having said that, I saw a very good example of tree use at a new course here in Denver near DIA called Green Valley Ranch (Perry Dye). A medium length par 5 with a very wide fairway. Perry left a big ol' cottonwood right in the middle of the fairway, and another about 75 yards from the green. You can play around the first and over or around the second, but they really make you think.  Now if one or both of them dies or gets blown over, that will be one boring hole!

[Jeff_Stettner]

Good point Doug. A great example of this happening is number 17 (I think) at Crumpin Fox. Two large trees left in the middle of the fairway force golfers to shape their shots on the second shot of this long par 5. Or do they? A few years ago one of the trees was struck by lightning, thinning the hazard significantly. The challenge is just not the same, now.  

[Peter_Herreid]

I think that the tree in the middle of #12 at Stanford GC may be the ultimate in terms of mandating strategy, particularly since it's such a long par-4 to begin with.  Controversial tree (I think there used to be more than the one oak with height and breadth), but if you don't get far enough left with the drive, the next must be sliced around it;vice versa if you take the right-hand route, but then the hazard down the entire right side comes more into play.  Finally, a sufficiently lofted club to clear the tree often comes up very short.  Fortunately, my typically topped or skulled long iron often scuttles along the ground under the branches...

[SPDB]

I know of one tree on a course in Augusta, Georgia that caught the ire of a certain member.

Also, what about the Cypress trees on the 17th at CP? They may be my favorite aspect of the course.

[Chris Hervochon]

Love 15 at Harbour Town!! Last summer I played there and as fortunte enough to hit the green in two.  However, after I had hit my second shot,I realized there was a tall clump of trees between me and the green which could not be seen from where I was.  I hit it over them anyways, however I was fortunate and realized the best thing to do is blast it over, or hit a hard hook around the corner if you are to hit that green in two.  It’s funny you would mention #15, because #16 has that lone pine tree in the center of the fairway.  Also a marvelous hole.

      17 at Crumpin’ Fox is a pain.  However, an incredibly hole with a lot of strategy and execution involved.  What do you think about #16, because it is almost impossible to have a shot at that green in two from the fairway, and it is almost impossible to go around that tree.  What do you think???

[jim_lewis]

SPBD:

The Eisenhower tree on #17 at Augusta is not in the middle of the fairway but it blocks at least the left half of the fairway. Except for the few who can hit it over the tree, and that number is quite small since they moved the tournament tee back, most everyone has to draw it around the tree or hit a remarkably straight tee shot down the right side.

In my opinion that hole will never be a good hole because of that tree. It may die someday but, unfortunately, they have planted a cluster of smaller pines just beyond the Eisenhower tree apparently to grow up to serve the same purpose if/when they lose the Eisenhower tree.

[Scott_Burroughs]

I was going to mention Eisenhower and Cypress #17 earlier, but perhaps thought too obvious.  How about at Pebble #18?  Trees in the fairway on the tee shot and blocking the right side of the green in front.  One is dying and then they're going to replace it with another.  This argument could be similar to the big boulder in the middle of the fairway at Sherwood.

There's a few holes at Tobacco Road with trees in play though not necessary to carry.  #13 on second shot depending on where drive is and where you want second shot to land and #15 on tee shot (more so from tips and entire right half of landing area) and on approach with tee shot in right side of fairway and pin on right side of green.

Isn't the tee shot on #15 at Pebble partially over/around trees?

I thought I remember there being mention of preferred line over trees at a hole at Running Deer.

[jglenn]

So here's a tree anecdote:

Taking us back to the late eighties and my late teens.  I had been playing golf (which is to say hitting a golf ball) for about a year, but had never played on a golf course proper.  Yet somehow, due to the above "hitting a golf ball" hobby, I managed to make it onto my high school golf team, and we set off to play our first tournament of the year, on a golf course somewhere Northeast of Toronto.

I don't think I ever mentioned to my coach that it was my first ever round (even after shooting 106...  :-/ ).  Needless to say, I had absolutely no clue about strategy or course management.  I mean, really, really no clue.  None.

So anyway, we get to the 17th, a 120 yard-ish hole, with a large evergreen smack in front of a punch-bowl green.  Of course, as I was on my way to shooting in the three-digits, I hit last.  The other three competitor hit towering wedges up and over the thing.  I mean, for me at least, they were really powerful, majestic shots, albeit none actually landed on the green proper.

Me?  I saw an opening between Mother Earth and some dense lower limbs that must have been all of, oh, ten feet.  So, being clueless about the concept of "percentage shot", I choke down on a four iron (my grandmother's four iron) and hit Tiger's infamous "stinger" before it was actualy called the "stinger".  The thing never got more than nine feet off the ground  , under the limbs , bump and run down the hill , to within 15 feet   for my only par of the day   .

The three others were shaking their heads not at the...uhm, skill of the shot, nor at the luck of the result, but at the undeniable sheer stupidity of attempting such an option in the first place.

So anyway, what's the point of this amusing tale, other than it being a weak excuse to try and boost my woeful "post count"?

Two things, maybe...

1)  Trees are an integral and valued part of golf course architecture.  As with bunkers, "no tree is unfair, no matter where it is placed.  It is the players task to avoid it."

2)  The weirdest quircks on a golf course are often the most fun to play.

[RJ_Daley]

Jeremy, I regard trees in play on a golf course in about the same light as rock ledges and walls built within green surrounds.  I prefer rock ledges and walls to be a nice boundry fence for the entire property, and trees to look very nice well out into the roughs or to enhance distant vistas.  

[Chris Kane]

Similar to Doug Wright, I am not a fan of trees placed in the line of play.  Generally, I'm of the opinion that they should be used only to catch the wayward shot, not interfere with the intended line.  Trees limit the number of options a player has when confronted with a hole: hazards such as bunkers or water allow players of different abilities to enjoy the challenge too.

However, in a few circumstances, they might be OK, such as the tree confusing the drive on the 18th at Pebble Beach.  It gives the champions something to think about, such as at a US Open championship, while the average 10-marker will not even think about the tree.  Perhaps this kind of hazard is overly penal however - if you get stuck behind the tree, you have no chance of pulling off a miracle shot like what could be possible out of a bunker.  

The Eisenhower tree is a perfect example of something there for the wrong reasons.

What do people think of the windmill in the right side of the fairway on 10 at The National Moonah course?  Would you consider this a tree for the sake of strategy, or is it just a little piece of 'charm' for the course?

[Shane Gurnett]

I think there were a couple at the Grand recently which hosted the Australian Open, although they were more in bunches than single trees.

Cant really see a problem with it provided its the exception, rather than the rule.

Chris Kane, as for the windmill on the Moonah (National) course, I think it looks awful. Maybe Norman did it to "Australianise" the hole, but I dont think it works. I think it detracts from the hole and Norman was trying to achive in this particular location. Very gimmicky. I reckon the'll pull it out in the next couple of years.

[Chris Kane]

Shane G,

From what I understand, the windmill was in place long before the course was: it has historical value (or something similar), is 40 years old and to remove it would have been considered bad form.  They were going to take it away but Norman stopped them.

With respect, I disagree with you, I think it looks OK.  If it were not original to the site, it would be gimmicky and pretentious.  I think it adds charm.

[TEPaul]

ANGC's Eisenhower tree!

Maybe it is in the wrong place but never underestimate ANGC's ability to do what they think is the right thing and never underestimate the power of a true golf club dictator.

I'm sure you all know it's called the Eisenhower tree because Ike just hated the damn thing and apparently couldn't do much to stop from hitting it whenever he played the hole. He suggested that the club remove it time and again to no avail as Cliff Roberts wasn't buying even a US President's plea.

Apparently being the politican Ike was he decided to bring this up formally and decided to broach the subject directly at a formal committee meeting where he felt a US President could certainly carry the issue. So he broached the issue of the removal of the tree formally and Roberts immediately cut him off and shut him up with; "Mr President, YOU are out of order!" And the Eisenhower tree remains!

[jglenn]

Richard Daley,

I guess you would really, really hate playing at North Berwick...

[Chris Kane]

Cliff Roberts didn't sit down for anyone!

[jim_lewis]

Eisenhower was right.

[TEPaul]

Ike was right but he got outflanked by Roberts! And Ike had the tools but he didn't use them--CIA, FBI, he could have even sicked the IRS on Roberts! Ultimately Eisenhower blew it!

These real club dictators are very interesting cats! I was just reading about John Arthur Brown of Pine Valley and actually Roberts was a member of Pine Valley but Brown and Roberts didn't get along too well. Roberts was always trying to get some tips from Eb Steiniger, the PVGC super, and it pissed off Brown so he sent Roberts a note that said "Dear Cliff, when you come to Pine Valley, just enjoy the golf".

According to "Big Ed" Bryant (PVGC's steward and Brown's righthand man), Brown basically believed that once anyone crossed the railroad tracks and entered Pine Valley that they should be treated no differently than anyone else.

This was born out in spades when the Chairman of something like US Steel took it upon himself to plan a new pro shop for Pine Valley without consulting with Brown. He staked out what he thought the proper dimensions of the new pro shop should be directly behind the 18th green. Not long after, Mr. Brown, playing up the final hole and arriving at the green sought out "Big Ed" to ask him what the hell the stakes were behind #18! So "Big Ed" told him that the Chairman of US Steel was planning the dimensions of a new pro shop. Mr. Brown, incensed, immediately sought out the US Steel Chairman in the clubhouse and told him; "We don't need a new pro shop at Pine Valley, matter of fact we don't need you either!" And that was that!

[ChipOat]

Can't stand trees that come into play from the fairway!!  "Bunkers in the sky" - no thanks.  The 18th at Pebble, Cypress and Deepdale all have them - yuck.  The 16th at Merion used to have them on the right side of the quarry that blocked out 1/3 of the green from the right side of the fairway.  There used to be one off the tee at the 8th at NGLA, too.  Winged Foot has taken out a bunch of the offending things.  I haven't played Southern Hills in years but they used to have 1 on every hole (so it seemed) that had grown so big as to encroach on shots from the sides of fairways.

[TEPaul]

Chip Oat:

I'm delighted to see you on this website! You have to be the man I ran into last summer on LI at one of the courses in the eastern end and asked me to play somewhere else during a bye day!

I can't forget what you said about the implements (clubs) used in the "Golden Age" days from the rugged bunkering of that era!! You said it would probably be like having to use a 9 iron to extricate yourself from a bunker!! Made so much sense and it's something so many people forget and consequently fail to see regarding the intensity of strategy back then compared to today!! In other words, to explain the differences between the eras in that context is to really put into perspective how much of the strategic function of bunkering has been lost into the the modern era!! Our conversation was in the context of a recent high profile bunker restoration program!

On this particular subject of an individual tree in fairways I'm not sure I totally agree with you--mostly though. It is tricky business design-wise to use a tree in a fairway that must be carried or worked around but ever so occasionally I think a tree can be used to good effect this way. But I think that use should be quite rare and it also needs another design requirement that is even rarer with the occasional use of a fairway tree--and that's WIDTH!!

Width is totally necessary to give a golfer the proper latitude to use a variety of options and shots and mostly a tree in a fairway does the opposite and narrows down options and creates a one dimensional shot situation due to lack of fairway width--usually not a good design offering--although there certainly are some very knowledgeable people who would argue the opposite, like Linc Roden!!

Linc's argument is definitely reinforced by his extensive research on William Flynn and Flynn's not so occasional use of trees or a tree to create high demand and often one dimensional shot demand at Huntingdon Valley!

On the other hand, and maybe off this particular specific topic, but I hear a lot of players and members today say that it's poor design if your ball is in the fairway and you are blocked by trees even on a DOGLEG!! That to me is total nonsense and evidences the complete lack of understanding of what a dogleg hole is strategically!!

Tillinghast probably explained the dogleg best in his book "The Course Beautiful" in which it was his belief that trees were the ideal design feature to create the "dogleg hole"! He even made and interesting distinction that the same hole without the trees was a "cape" hole or at least a "delayed cape".

Anyway, Tillinghast's point was that a golfer who found himself in the fairway with his shot blocked by trees to the green or the next ideal landing area had simply failed to negotiate the dogleg by hitting his ball far enough to get past the trees or alternatively far enough wide of them to open up the angle although leaving himself at a greater distance for his next shot!!

We had an enormous argument on that very subject with trees at a dogleg on one of our restoration holes and it's astounding how little the members understood about this basic hole type design and its basic strategy!!