Please give an example where you use strategy off the tee.

[John Shimp]

1 at ngla.  Layup in the middle for 60 or 80 yd pitch or driver to the green.  I made 6 doing the latter from a greenside bunker w back left pin. Rest played short and were -1 all in.

[Rich Goodale]

2nd at Dornoch (180 yards)

The strategic choices and likely results are (very roughly):

1.  Hit the full club for the pin position and weather conditions of the day (5-6 iron in still conditions, pin in the middle)
2.  Hit 1-2 clubs short of the "full" club (7-8 iron in still conditions, pin in the middle)
3.  Hit 3-4 clubs short of the "full" club (9-PW in still conditions, pin in the middle)

IF you execute well, #1 above will give you an average result of ~3, #2 will give you an average result of ~3.3 and #3 will give you an average result of ~3.8

IF you execute poorly, #1 will give you an average result of ~5, #2 will give you an average result of ~4.5 and #3 will give you an average result of ~4.

Of course, these choices are all complicated by factors such as:

  --pin position
  --match or stroke play
  --climatic conditions
  --how well you are playing
  --how you did on the 1st hole
  --etc.

Rich

PS--those who think that strategy is "to get the best possible result" do not understand "strategy."  Strategy is about getting the "optimal" result, based on an ingtegration of the likelihood of success/failure and the risk preferences of the "strategist."  In simple terms, if you cannot handle failure, choose option #3 above.  If you can deal with (often) catastrophic failure, choose #1 above, etc., etc.

rfg

[BCrosby]

I like your walk-through, Rich.

Though the details will vary, the same sort of analysis applies to virtually all good holes.

Couldn't agree more about meaning of 'strategic'.

Bob

[Rich Goodale]

Thanks, Bob.  I was afraid that it might seem like I had been channeling Joshua Crane......

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Bob.  I was afraid that it might seem like I had been channeling Joshua Crane......

That's okay, Rich. There's a little bit of Crane in all of us.  The wise are the ones who recognize this fact, and so can transcend it...

Peter

[JLahrman]

PS--those who think that strategy is "to get the best possible result" do not understand "strategy."  Strategy is about getting the "optimal" result, based on an ingtegration of the likelihood of success/failure and the risk preferences of the "strategist."  In simple terms, if you cannot handle failure, choose option #3 above.  If you can deal with (often) catastrophic failure, choose #1 above, etc., etc.

I would hope this is not true, given that my company does strategic consulting work.

But that is a good point, the risk tolerance of the player is also a factor.

[Chris DeNigris]

To me, strategy or strategic options are less important when you are more unlikely to control the outcome. It's nice to think you have theoretical strategic options standing on the teebox with driver but if you can't really control where the ball goes most of the time then what's the real value?  Give me some decent width and I'll begin strategizing when I get to my ball. Strategy becomes more important the closer you get to the hole.

If I can make solid contact and get decent distance off the tee I'm usually happy wherever I am in the fairway.

Not sure if that's where John was going with this but I think it applies to most of us.

With most split fairways I usually aim for the trouble in the middle.

[Rich Goodale]

PS--those who think that strategy is "to get the best possible result" do not understand "strategy."  Strategy is about getting the "optimal" result, based on an ingtegration of the likelihood of success/failure and the risk preferences of the "strategist."  In simple terms, if you cannot handle failure, choose option #3 above.  If you can deal with (often) catastrophic failure, choose #1 above, etc., etc.

I would hope this is not true, given that my company does strategic consulting work.

But that is a good point, the risk tolerance of the player is also a factor.

"Hope" is far less important in strategic thinking than understanding, J.  Trust me.

[JLahrman]

"Hope" is far less important in strategic thinking than understanding, J.  Trust me.

Maybe I should schedule a meeting with my boss to confirm!

[BCrosby]

Thanks, Bob.  I was afraid that it might seem like I had been channeling Joshua Crane......

That's okay, Rich. There's a little bit of Crane in all of us.  The wise are the ones who recognize this fact, and so can transcend it...

Peter

Rich/Peter -

Yes, each of us must deal as best we can with the Joshua Crane in us. It can be a trial.

Oddly enough, I ran across an old law school classmate at a wedding reception last night, and .... (cue Twilight Zone music) ... the conversation turned to old Josh. My classmate's grandfather was one of the founders of the OSS at the outset of WWII. As for the Crane connection, the story is in development ...

Bob   

[Bill_McBride]

In today's game I don't think anyone on this board who has a handicap between 0 and 18 is good enough to use strategy off the tee. Yeah, it's great trying to hit the right side or left side of the fairway but who here is good enough to execute?  I sure am not.  Yeah, I guess there's some strategy in figuring out whether to hit it short and straight or long and maybe not so straight but I have a hard time believing that almost every person, if given the option of having  their ball placed in the middle of the fairway 270 yards yards from the tee, wouldn't think of that as being pretty damn close to perfect.

Whether you can actually hit the shots or not, i think enjoyment of golf is greatly enhanced by trying to understand the strategy and trying to hit the appropriate shot. 

[Jay Flemma]

13 at Augusta is a great example as well.

[Patrick_Mucci]

# 5 at Newport  demands that the golfer give ample thought to strategy and his line of play.

Ditto # 1 at NGLA

[Tom_Doak]

In today's game I don't think anyone on this board who has a handicap between 0 and 18 is good enough to use strategy off the tee. Yeah, it's great trying to hit the right side or left side of the fairway but who here is good enough to execute?  I sure am not.  Yeah, I guess there's some strategy in figuring out whether to hit it short and straight or long and maybe not so straight but I have a hard time believing that almost every person, if given the option of having  their ball placed in the middle of the fairway 270 yards yards from the tee, wouldn't think of that as being pretty damn close to perfect.

This seems like a ridiculous argument to me, for several reasons:

(a)  If we're not good enough to use strategy, we're also not good enough to place our tee shots in the middle of the fairway 270 yards out;

(b)  You postulate that 270 off the tee and in the middle is always an easy place to get to, but a great golf hole would make it not so easy, by turning the fairway through that landing area or by placing bunkers close to that middle line; which leads to

(c)  The need for placement is golf-hole-dependent.  The majority of golf holes aren't difficult enough to make the middle of the fairway a tough place from which to approach.  So, while the middle of the fairway is usually good enough, it's certainly not a sign that the design of the course is terrific.

[Charlie_Bell]

The 175 yard par-3 8th hole at my home course, a Raynor/Banks 9-holer, is often the deciding hole in my 9-hole match play match.  Rarely will I need to make a 2 -- I've probably made a 2 only ten times in 300 lifetime rounds -- so the challenge depends on whether I need to make a 3 or completely take a 5 out of play.

The variables:
1) my position in the match in match play
2) my position in the match in stroke play, because that's our tie breaker if we're tied after 9
3) which one of us has the honor
4) position of the tee (varies from 170 to 185)
5) pin placement
6) wind

These things determine whether I want to:
1)  aim for the flag
2) bounce the ball onto the green from a left-side embankment
3) play short of front-to-right strip bunker and lob the second shot

And with either #1 or #2, the choice of ball flight makes a difference.  A three-putt is easy if you're on the wrong side of the green because of the massive contouring.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I agree with TD - there is strategy for all of us, just different and with larger margin for error than the pros.  We might play to hit the left edge of the green or just miss, while the pros are playing to hit the back left quarter of the green.

As far as tee shots, I remember the old Lee Trevino take - aim for a 240 or 260 tee shot, whatever, rather than just hitting it as far as you can.  Same principle - find a flat area at any distance and hit it.  He liked the flat areas even more than the angle.  Of course, he knew he was hitting a fade anyway.

Another old pro story.  When I was working with Larry Nelson, we got a bit going whenever we were designing a course and making a design presentation.  I would describe a dogleg left and Larry would say "I hit a draw on this hole"  Of course, the next one would be a right hander and then he would say again, "I hit a draw on this hole".  Then a straight hole "I hit a draw on this hole".  A long hole he would say "I hit a LONG draw on this hole" or s hort hole it would be "I hit a layup with a draw on this hole"

I talked to Colbert years ago, and he estimated only 10% of tour pros hit a mix of shot patterns based on the design/conditions, with Faldo (then on the tour) being the best example.  Obviously, Wadkins fit that mold at least in his prime.  But, he said when he wasn't really "on his game" he reverted to a draw.  Most figured hitting their best shot pattern (Nelson draw or JN fade) served them best no matter what the ground features.  They never think they are going to hit a bad shot anyway!

[JMEvensky]

I agree with TD - there is strategy for all of us, just different and with larger margin for error than the pros.  We might play to hit the left edge of the green or just miss, while the pros are playing to hit the back left quarter of the green.

As far as tee shots, I remember the old Lee Trevino take - aim for a 240 or 260 tee shot, whatever, rather than just hitting it as far as you can.  Same principle - find a flat area at any distance and hit it.  He liked the flat areas even more than the angle.  Of course, he knew he was hitting a fade anyway.

Another old pro story.  When I was working with Larry Nelson, we got a bit going whenever we were designing a course and making a design presentation.  I would describe a dogleg left and Larry would say "I hit a draw on this hole"  Of course, the next one would be a right hander and then he would say again, "I hit a draw on this hole".  Then a straight hole "I hit a draw on this hole".  A long hole he would say "I hit a LONG draw on this hole" or s hort hole it would be "I hit a layup with a draw on this hole"

I talked to Colbert years ago, and he estimated only 10% of tour pros hit a mix of shot patterns based on the design/conditions, with Faldo (then on the tour) being the best example.  Obviously, Wadkins fit that mold at least in his prime.  But, he said when he wasn't really "on his game" he reverted to a draw.  Most figured hitting their best shot pattern (Nelson draw or JN fade) served them best no matter what the ground features.  They never think they are going to hit a bad shot anyway!

I swear I've read this somewhere.

[RJ_Daley]

Of all the posts already on this thread, I like Rich's and Charlie Bell's best. 

There are so many factors and conditions of play that precede the event of hitting a ball off the tee, that any hole could be anything from mindless hit it and find it, to serious thought or strategy. 

Width to my mind is one of the most important factors when employing strategy, when the situation calls for strategy, which would be when you are competing, mostly in matchplay, but also stroke play 'competition'.  Or, if you went out on the course alone, with the mentality of competing or "playing the course".   When you are going to 'employ strategic thinking' you then consider wind, firmness in the LZ, slope in the LZ, etc, along with near and far carries to avoid hazards, or favorable angles. 

When you are going out to just bomb and gouge it, just wail away, and find it to hopefully hit it again, then strategy isn't important.  When you do that, maybe your goal and strategy is just to have fun with friends, enjoy a walk with intermittent acts of violence towards a ball employing a stick to beat it to death, etc.  And, that is fine, if that is what you are out for.

But, when you play a course you think is great, good, challenging, or when for whatever reason, your round means something to you, if you have the resources, and you have the choice of employing a course knowledgeable caddie; aren't you expecting a partnership to employ a version of strategy.  Doesn't a good caddie who knows golf and the course, suggest options and what to try to do on many tees (if you ask him/her)?

Of course, like JR Potts mentions, you aren't 'that good' to pull off what your mind strategises to attempt.  But, when you do see something from the tee, if the situation of what your opponent has done or is trending to do dictates how you should respond or challenge if playing first, then you are using strategy, and you are competing.  I fall into the hit it an hope category 90% of the time.  And, I fall into the mindless hit it and find it most of the time, because I'm usually playing just to wail away and have fun, hope to hit anywhere on a FW, and anywhere on a green, then deal with what I have left. 

But, when playing a match, a friendly Nassau or a skins with pals, and trying to win something, how can you not strategise and try to hit some sort of shot pattern, to match the architecture out there that awaits your play of that hole? 

When you add what I believe are the most crucial elements to the equation, firmness and wind, to a width factor, and strategically designed or routed hazards with slopes at FWs and around greens, how can you not have strategy?  If you have lush soft and flat FWs, with no hazard to avoid, you might as well go to the driving range.

[Matthew Petersen]

In today's game I don't think anyone on this board who has a handicap between 0 and 18 is good enough to use strategy off the tee. Yeah, it's great trying to hit the right side or left side of the fairway but who here is good enough to execute?  I sure am not.  Yeah, I guess there's some strategy in figuring out whether to hit it short and straight or long and maybe not so straight but I have a hard time believing that almost every person, if given the option of having  their ball placed in the middle of the fairway 270 yards yards from the tee, wouldn't think of that as being pretty damn close to perfect.

That's no reason not to try.

Your comment seems to assume a narrow fairway and a relatively straight hole. But what about a hole I played yesterday? #3 at Grayhawk Raptor is a long par 4 dogleg right/ There is a large bunker complex down the right side. The green is angled from front left to back right, again with a large bunker on the right corner. From the tee, you have probably 100+ yards of options, left to right, depending on whether you want to keep it down the left, try to skirt the bunkers, or try to blow it over them. It's not a 100yd wide fairway, but the hole is effectively very wide. So even if you could guarantee a 270 yard straight shot, the question on such a hole is ... where do you aim it? Over the bunkers, hoping you can carry and shorten the approach? (But depending on the pin possibly leaving a much more difficult angle), or out to the left to leave a better angle but longer shot. It's the most basic of strategic holes from green back to the tee, but it certainly works.

[Patrick_Mucci]

RJ,

That's what's so neat about the first holes at NGLA and GCGC, nothing in the way of  preceding play can be taken into consideration, plus, first tee "jitters" become a major factor in a competition, adding to the tension.

NGLA's first hole is more demanding and more difficult, but they both require decisions on distance and direction off the tee, and since you have hours, if not days to think about it, it heightens the tension when you arrive on the first tee.

[Chip Gaskins]

In today's game I don't think anyone on this board who has a handicap between 0 and 18 is good enough to use strategy off the tee. Yeah, it's great trying to hit the right side or left side of the fairway but who here is good enough to execute?  I sure am not.  Yeah, I guess there's some strategy in figuring out whether to hit it short and straight or long and maybe not so straight but I have a hard time believing that almost every person, if given the option of having  their ball placed in the middle of the fairway 270 yards yards from the tee, wouldn't think of that as being pretty damn close to perfect.

This seems like a ridiculous argument to me, for several reasons:

(a)  If we're not good enough to use strategy, we're also not good enough to place our tee shots in the middle of the fairway 270 yards out;

(b)  You postulate that 270 off the tee and in the middle is always an easy place to get to, but a great golf hole would make it not so easy, by turning the fairway through that landing area or by placing bunkers close to that middle line; which leads to

(c)  The need for placement is golf-hole-dependent.  The majority of golf holes aren't difficult enough to make the middle of the fairway a tough place from which to approach.  So, while the middle of the fairway is usually good enough, it's certainly not a sign that the design of the course is terrific.

Ryan-

Maybe you and I are the only two on the board that think like this, but I totally agree.  When modern technology has allowed players of all calibers to hit their driver straighter than their 4 iron, then where does that leave all these "strategic options".

[Scott Szabo]

Hole number 14 at Ballyneal offers plenty of room for strategy.  Play short and left of the centerline bunker for a right hand pin, or go over and right with a back right pin.  Played the hole both ways at this year's Yucca, and can't imagine doing it much differently.  Same can be said for #7 as well.  Just to name a few off the top of my head.  Different pins can require different strategies off the tee, and those are often my favorites to play. 

[Kalen Braley]

Even I use strategy on the course.

On that short par 4, which I probably can't reach anyways...why hit the driver and risk being crooked just to gain 20-25 yards?  Pull out the 3 wood to give myself a bit longer of an approach but gain a lot more accuracy off the tee.

[Andy Hughes]

(waiting for Wade to talk about #2 at Ballyhack...)

(or #5)
(or#6)
(or#8)
etc.

[Rick Shefchik]

In today's game I don't think anyone on this board who has a handicap between 0 and 18 is good enough to use strategy off the tee. Yeah, it's great trying to hit the right side or left side of the fairway but who here is good enough to execute?  I sure am not.  Yeah, I guess there's some strategy in figuring out whether to hit it short and straight or long and maybe not so straight but I have a hard time believing that almost every person, if given the option of having  their ball placed in the middle of the fairway 270 yards yards from the tee, wouldn't think of that as being pretty damn close to perfect.

This seems like a ridiculous argument to me, for several reasons:

(a)  If we're not good enough to use strategy, we're also not good enough to place our tee shots in the middle of the fairway 270 yards out;

(b)  You postulate that 270 off the tee and in the middle is always an easy place to get to, but a great golf hole would make it not so easy, by turning the fairway through that landing area or by placing bunkers close to that middle line; which leads to

(c)  The need for placement is golf-hole-dependent.  The majority of golf holes aren't difficult enough to make the middle of the fairway a tough place from which to approach.  So, while the middle of the fairway is usually good enough, it's certainly not a sign that the design of the course is terrific.

Ryan-

Maybe you and I are the only two on the board that think like this, but I totally agree.  When modern technology has allowed players of all calibers to hit their driver straighter than their 4 iron, then where does that leave all these "strategic options".

Chip,

I tend to agree. I rarely keep the driver in the bag because of accuracy issues; it's much more often about distance. But that's still strategy.