[Jim Eder]

Is it wrong to design a course where longer (Par 3s, 4s and maybe 5s) holes play into the prevailing wind making them play longer (and more dispersion of the mis-hit shot because of spin and the wind exacerbating that spin) and shorter holes downwind which makes the wedge or short iron approach a bit more difficult due to the lack of spin, the wind knocking it down a bit, etc?  I guess I am thinking about the better players and not all players sadly but I always thought this was an interesting way to make a course play more difficult than a glance at the card might suggest.  I also understand my focus on difficulty is wrong in many/most eyes.  I am interested in hearing if the architects on the site have thought about doing this throughout the course and if there are any extreme examples of this out there. A lot of courses seem to have longer holes downwind making them play effectively shorter and a bit easier.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jim

Is wind not regarded as a hazard and so treaded accordingly. I never considered it to be an aid or to assist a long shot no matter how well struck it may have been. But then I am in the minority when I consider that Golf is by its own definition ‘penal’, well certainly if it is to try and generate a testing challenge in the hope of promoting fun and skill.

Hazard, yes, wind pulls the ball not lets it ride IMHO. Winds up, so the skill starts to surface in larger quantities, be it to push ones game or just trying to keep it on an even keel to weather out the storm.

Melvyn

PS The Wind is also an old golfer's friend

[Jim Eder]

Wind is a wonderful hazard in my opinion and one that really requires a well struck, solid shot.  A slight mis-hit becomes a larger miss. Hit harder into the wind and produce more spin and see a result which may negatively surprise. There is something special in my eyes playing in a stiff wind and being challenged. Especially the left to right wind.

[Jim Eder]

I was pointed in the direction of a well written and well researched piece in the "In My Opinion" section about Ralph Plummer by Lou Duran and Jeff Brauer by a fellow GCAer. Plummer believed "a course should be laid out with cross winds so golfers would be encouraged to control the ball as oppoed to only fighting the wind". He believed wind to be the "biggest obstacle for the expert player".

I totally agree on cross winds but just wonder about the down and against winds and the use of that to make certain holes just that much more difficult.  One of my most difficult shots is a 20+mph downwind sand wedge to a shallow green with big faced bunkers short.  It has to be struck oh so well. And the tendency (of even good players) to swing a bit harder into the wind creating more spin can mkae things a bit more challenging.

As a side note, I found Ralph Plummer very interesting and thought he really "got it" when he was deisgning courses.  It doesn't seem like he got as much credit as he deserved sadly.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

I will say that I actively look to put long 4's into the wind and short 4's downwind, as you describe.  Well, at least some of them.  My reasoning is that doing the opposite can really tend to make them all play the same effective length.  Some gca's (RTJII wrote this in his book) believe the long par 4's into the wind are just too hard. 

When I have a long 4 in the wind, I figure it just makes it play longer, sort of like the old days where a long iron might come out.  And, following Pete Dye, I tend to bunker the shortest route twice on those holes to make them play additionally long.

I agree on Plummer.  When I moved to DFW in 1984, I really wanted to meet him, and I hadn't even seen much of his work.  Sadly, he died just about as I got there, and I never got the chance.  Recently, his daughter saw the piece here and contacted me and Lou to say how much she appreciated our words there.  He was inducted into the Texas golf hall of fame last August, and I wish I could have attended.

He had it going on regarding designing for Texas wind, though.  All the stuff tour pros taught me about how the wind affected their shots was embodied in his designs 30 years earlier!

[Jim Eder]

Jeff,

Thank you. It is getting harder and harder to get a long iron for a second shot into a par 4 as you point out. This seems like a way to do it without going to ridiculous lengths. Very interesting on the use of bunkers. Thanks.

Thank you (and to Lou) for writing that piece about Plummer. He seems like he really knew what he was doing. I am glad to have learned more about him.  I would have never known.  I am interested in learning more but your piece seems to have really touched all sources. Fascinating man and many of the courses he touched are wonderful.

[Jason Topp]

Jeff:

I just read your piece on Plummer and am not sure I understand this concept


"I worked in conjunction with PGA Tour pro Jim Colbert, who taught me how good players think courses should be laid out for the wind, such as canting all targets with the prevailing wind to help set up shots."

Does that mean that the downwind direction is downhill?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jason,

Its the angle of the target, not the vertical slope.  Colbert (and others) prefer a green angling left in a right to left wind, right in a left to right wind, since the wind helps the ball pattern go naturally to the angle of the green and increases the chances of hitting the target over cutting the ball against the wind.  Colbert also likes the slope of the green to go downhill with the wind (in a L to R wind, slope sideways downhill to the right)  I do that mostly for visibility anyway.  As he once told me, "There are smarter guys than me, but if my lie slopes right, the green angles right, the wind blows right, and the ball rolls out right, I think I'm going to hit a fade, partner!"

That said, Fuzzy Zoeller has always said he "rides the wind" on tee shots (i.e. draw on a right to left wind) and "cancels" the approach shots to hit them straight.    And, some architects also favor having the downwind side of the green higher to help stop a shot coming in with the wind, the direct opposite of Colbert.  So, its not a universal concept, but its pretty prevalent thinking among pros.

They also feel that approach shots into the wind greens can be shallow, because the wind adds spin, and downwind shots require deeper greens because the ball loses spin and rolls out further.  Into the wind, its just a matter of adding enough club to get the green, but stopping it is no real problem.  I actually do vary the back to front slope of my greens a bit depending on the wind, although I don't universally make the downwind greens steeper and the headwind greens flatter.  I mix them up a bit so the player needs to know which greens help him a bit and which greens will roll out a bit more.  And, there is a practical benefit in making the short iron greens flatter - it makes it harder to hit and hold, and the ball marks aren't as severe.

BTW, for those of you who think this is modern tour pro gobbly gook, Geo Thomas wrote similar things, advocating long greens downwind for the same reason, and suggesting that the tail wind also reduces side spin, making a long narrow green a perfect choice for those situations.

Like Plummer, and even before, Thomas had it going on!  (and, his thoughts on forming greens to the inherent physics of the shot and wind is also one of the quotes that had me opining on the concepts of fairness in the Golden Age on another thread)

[Jason Topp]

Thanks Jeff.  I am really interested in these types of viewpoints and preferences.

[Jim Eder]

Jeff,

I also thank you for the insight. Wonderful. 

[Carl Rogers]

Do any of you have a rule of thumb about defining a "prevailing wind"?  How many days out of the year?  and how strong?

I have lived in 2 places in the US, West Tennesse & Eastern Virginia.  They have what might be called a "prevailing wind" at different times of the year, but they do not, from a perceptual perspective, seem all that "prevailing".

[Jeff_Brauer]

Carl,

There are weather charts that show how many days of each, and it does vary.

I started in Chicago where it was always SW in the summer, and NW in the spring and fall, expect for about 10% of days in the spring where it came off the lake.  In Texas, its all south in the summer and generally north in the winter, however when its warm in the winter to play, it still usually blows from the south. 

Its a lot more predictable here than in some places. where you can trust the prevailing wind about as much as a riverboat gambler.

[Ken Moum]

Jim,

I will say that I actively look to put long 4's into the wind and short 4's downwind, as you describe.  Well, at least some of them.  My reasoning is that doing the opposite can really tend to make them all play the same effective length.  Some gca's (RTJII wrote this in his book) believe the long par 4's into the wind are just too hard. 

Well, that explains why I feel the way I do about 18 at Eagle Bend and the 10th at both Colbert and Sand Creek.

 

I've been playing Shawnee CC in Topeka for 13 years, and have always figured Donald Ross had it right in that most of the really brutal  holes are downwind for the prevailing SE winds in the summer. 

Despite the fact that two of the longest par fours play into that SE wind, in a NW wind the golf course is no fun at all. 

Length and narrowness into the wind aren't high on my list of things to do.

K

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff,

Thank you. It is getting harder and harder to get a long iron for a second shot into a par 4 as you point out. This seems like a way to do it without going to ridiculous lengths. Very interesting on the use of bunkers. Thanks.

Jim:

It's the dead opposite of the way Mr. Flynn designed Shinnecock, but Mr. Dye started taking this approach thirty years ago, when the 470-yard par fours started being short iron approach shots for the big boys.  Pete didn't believe in "medium" par-4's, he wanted them either short or long.

When he built all those tees at Kiawah for the Ryder Cup, it was 7700 yards from all the way back, but he didn't intend for it to ever be played from all the way back ... he wanted them to move back on the holes that were into the wind, and forward on the holes that were downwind!  Of course, the PGA officials at that time thought he was crazy.  As an architect, you can provide flexibility of set-up but you can't make them put the tees where you think they should go.  [Although, in one famous incident at Crooked Stick, Mr. Dye took the sod off an alternate tee the day before the tournament so they wouldn't wimp out and use it.  And they went even further forward, instead of using the back tee he intended them to use!]

In my own work, I'm more inclined to Jeff's idea that you should just mix things up ... have both short and long par-4's that play into the wind, and short and long par-4's that play downwind.  Part of my reasoning is that there are few places where the "prevailing" wind is really the only wind, and if you design the whole course with one wind in mind it will all be ass-backwards when the wind blows from another direction.  The other reason is that I don't have to worry on my courses about guys hitting wedges into 470-yard holes ... they never pick me to build courses for those guys. 

[John Shimp]

Shinnecock definetely is a massively different course with prevailing off the ocean vs off the sound.  Stepping up to the tee on holes 2, 3, 11, 12, 14 into the wind is something else.  Of course hole 7 down wind is no treat either.   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim,

I think it is wrong IF the tactical balance of the course is lost when the wind blows from other directions.

I think that's the genius of Seminole.

While play of the individual holes changes dramatically when the wind blows in different directions, the overall tactical balance remains fairly constant.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Patrick

Are you referring to inland or links courses or both?

Melvyn

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick

Are you referring to inland or links courses or both?

Melvyn

Melvyn, if there are prevailing winds that sweep the course,  what difference does it make ?  ?  ?

Sand Hills ?
Seminole ?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Patrick

A wind in not something to be considered lightly, it has serious consequences upon the way a course plays.

To make a comment like your “Melvyn, if there are prevailing winds that sweep the course, what difference does it make ? ? ?” seems to explain why we have not been able the match the great courses from both the First & Second Golden Age. In fact, of all people on this site it surprises me most that you make that comment.

But, then come to think of it, what do I know? Perhaps my love of the links leaves me misunderstanding the effect of the wind on the game of golf. Yet my experience confirms that the wind is not just about the prevailing winds. It is, I believe the unspoken guardian of the course and so should be respected as its wrath can unleash some very challenging not to mention unexpected encounters that will test even the best of golfers.

 "what difference does it make ? ? ?” – In my experience it does make a difference

Melvyn

[Patrick_Mucci]

Melvyn,

If there's a significant prevailing wind/s, what difference does it make if the course is inland or links ?

You evidently misunderstood my response

[Tom ORourke]

It has been a long time since I played Old Marsh down in Palm Beach Gardens, FL. When I played it there were no homes on the course and the clubhouse was not finished. But I remember much of it very well. A friend of mine was involved in the course from a financial standpoint and visited it often during construction and played there quite a bit as it was opening, which is when I played it. He mentioned that Pete Dye was keen on making sure there were a number of par 4s that played exactly the opposite direction so you would play the one of the long 4s downwind and one into the wind. If you see the course on google earth what strikes you is that the holes run either north-south or east-west. There are almost no 45 degree angled holes. It looks to me that he wanted to get half of the holes playing one way and half the other. I think the wind was a major factor in the design. Based on a wind from the east, where the ocean is, I would say 1/4 of the holes play a right to left wind, 1/4 a left to right, 1/4 into, and 1/4 downwind. I don't think that is an accident but an attempt to create balance of long and short holes. Whereas he did Kiawah all one way ot the other Old Marsh tries to get all 4 angles covered. You will always get a long par 4 into the wind and you will always get a long par 4 downwind. And I really liked the course. Even the one with the mound for the blind shot.

[Jim Eder]

Tom, Patrick, and Tom,

Thank you. Balance seems like the path for the best results.

I like the flexibilty that is built in by Mr. Dye to change set-ups. I really like the idea that he has on moving tees back into the wind and up with the wind.  Maybe this is an idea to expand on to achieve balance as well. I would imagine a challenge is getting the green to fit this optionality (to the extreme I am thinking of).

Thanks guys, much appreciated.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

The alpine valleys of Switzerland can have significant winds that funnel up and down the valleys. Quite often  in Summer the wind direction will change near midday, reversing the direction of the wind 180 degrees.

In my more recent designs of golf courses in the swiss Alpine Valleys I’ve checked my routing with a modified score card that adds or subtracts about 8% of the hole length allowing for the wind direction.

So I eventually have 4 score cards
Nr. 1 Still conditions,
Nr. 2 Down Valley Wind,
Nr. 3 Up Valley wind

and as Excel makes life so easy

Nr. 4 Down Valley Wind for the first 9 and Up Valley Wind for the second 9.

The idea of the exercise is to check that there is no severe weighting of downwind to upwind holes, and that there is a healthy balance.

Usually the routings are determined by other factors, but the “Wind” check allows Tee positions to be tweaked if the wind effects them excessively, or the “modified wind lengths” get too close to each other.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()