[Patrick_Mucci]

No, it's not good architecture to misalign tees.

It is not good architecture to build rectilinear tees which can be said to "align" the golfer at anything.

Tom,
I'm not sure I understand your comment.

PV, WFW, Seminole, GCGC and many other courses  have rectangular tees, tees aligned toward the fairway or mid-point of the fairway.

Are you saying that these tees should be altered and aligned elsewhere ?

[paul cowley]

The tee markers represent the end points of an invisible line that you must stay behind to avoid a penalty when executing your first shot.

The tee is a is a designated area where the tee markers are placed.

Everyone aims to an area of the fairway that best suits their game.

No designer or the 'tee marker placer of the day' can accommodate these various angles of play beyond placing the tees so they play generally towards the center of the fairway...which is easier if the hole is straight but becomes more difficult as the diagonal line of play of a hole increases.

Its really up to the player and not the tee designer or the 'tee marker placer of the day' to align their tee shots...and they should not assume that the marker placements represent an ideal perpendicular line that one uses while aiming their shot.


This recurring complaint by some is one of the reasons why I find  the tee marker-less teeing ground so refreshing..Ballyneal is a great example. Just line the ball up on your own and hit away.

[Alex Miller]

No, it's not good architecture to misalign tees.

It is not good architecture to build rectilinear tees which can be said to "align" the golfer at anything.

Tom,
I'm not sure I understand your comment.

PV, WFW, Seminole, GCGC and many other courses  have rectangular tees, tees aligned toward the fairway or mid-point of the fairway.

Are you saying that these tees should be altered and aligned elsewhere ?

Oh no... I agree with Mucci and not Tom Doak!

Placement of a tee which is inherently part of routing a golf hole seems important to me, but I do not see how the shape of the tee can be considered bad architecture, at least as long as it is consistent with the design of the rest of the course.

[Will Lozier]

Simply put, it is solely a player's responsibility to aim his shot!  Unless, of course, you are a member of any professional tour where it seems it is now the caddie's responsibility - yes, mostly LPGA members but I've seen many PGA members now shirk this responsibility!   

Cheers

[paul cowley]

I will add another observation along the lines of this discussion.... any designer who designs and builds hard cornered tees that only can be mowed as such is generally an egotist saying play it my way...because I know best.

[Ross Tuddenham]

No, it's not good architecture to misalign tees.

It is not good architecture to build rectilinear tees which can be said to "align" the golfer at anything.

Tom,
I'm not sure I understand your comment.

PV, WFW, Seminole, GCGC and many other courses  have rectangular tees, tees aligned toward the fairway or mid-point of the fairway.

Are you saying that these tees should be altered and aligned elsewhere ?

I think the point may be that we dont need something constructed as a teeing ground but maybe just a circle of tightly mown grass on flattish land to start the hole.  I have no idea however, whether in reality you would be able to find such an area close enough to the previous hole very often.

Bad architecture or not if you want to make me hit a hook have the tee box aiming left of the ideal line so that I have to aim right and across the line of the tee markers and something kicks in to produce a snap hook.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ross,

Architecture seems to go through cycles or trends.

Rectangular to free form to rectangular to non-definable ( Applebrook, Friars Head, Sebonack)

Due to my "eye" and difficulty aligning myself, I heavily favor rectangular tees.
While I appreciate the other types of tees, rectangular tees enable me to align myself for a more accurate tee shot.

[Will Lozier]

Due to my "eye" and difficulty aligning myself, I heavily favor rectangular tees.
While I appreciate the other types of tees, rectangular tees enable me to align myself for a more accurate tee shot.

You are now relying on the architect or greenskeeper or, whomever is responsible for the shape of the teeing ground, to aim FOR you.  I understand it is just a preference but...I don't see how aiming your clubface and feet should be affected by the perimeter of the said teeing ground.  Furthermore, doesn't the alignment of the actual tee markers have more to do with one's perception of aim?

Cheers

[Mike McGuire]

It's not good architecture especially when the tee points to the right.
I notice way more amateurs mis-align to the right than the left. A tee like the one below adds to the problem.
You end up feeling uncomfortable and you dont know why.

This is a poor hole made worse by the shape of the tee.


13 by macadoo9, on Flickr

[Niall C]

Mike

Never mind the tee alignment, its a hell of a shot to get your tee shot by the trees/bushes in front of the tee, is it not ?

Patrick

I agree with you about the difficulty of lining up with rectangular tees particularly as the shape of them usually dictates the mowing patterns which accentuates the problem. I used to have a terrible problem playing at Silloth during the winter when their would be mats on every tee. The greenkeeper would line the mat up with the left edge aiming towards the line he wanted but somehow it felt like the front right edge faced off to the right. I came to the conclusion that the greenkeeper lined them up that way to suit his own game (low handicapper who hits a draw).

I suspect though that misalignment in most instances isn't necessarily deliberate  but more just happenstance through changes in the game/course.

Niall

[Mark McKeever]

Pat,

Interesting you mention that PV has rectangular tees, but if you think about it they acutually have a good mix of ovals, and squared edges.  Some boxes are definitely more squared off than others.  I'm trying to think of many other courses that do this.  It seems like most courses either commit to hard rectangles or something more circular.


Mark

[Kyle Harris]

I hate to see my former boss and colleague get a bit misrepresented by the likes of Mucci so here goes my attempt to bolster his statement with some clarity.

As little as two years ago, one could count me as one of the loudest proponents of the square tee box, aligned with whatever or not. They're simple and clean looking, especially at grade. Somewhat easier to maintain, depending on how much one cares about the immediate surroundings as well.

However, spending a summer around the painstaking finish shaping of some of the tees Tom is describing on his own design, I see the merits of the more free form tee.

I believe that Tom is simply speaking of mowing lines as it pertains to the edges of the tee. If the design of the tee is such that the edge created by the different height of cut is obfuscated, broken up, or hidden altogether and that the flat part of a tee forms a horizon within the same height of cut, one has essentially eliminated the "alignment" for that teeing area since a continuous edge no longer exists as the golfer stands and examines the hole.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Due to my "eye" and difficulty aligning myself, I heavily favor rectangular tees.
While I appreciate the other types of tees, rectangular tees enable me to align myself for a more accurate tee shot.

You are now relying on the architect or greenskeeper or, whomever is responsible for the shape of the teeing ground, to aim FOR you.  I understand it is just a preference but...I don't see how aiming your clubface and feet should be affected by the perimeter of the said teeing ground.  Furthermore, doesn't the alignment of the actual tee markers have more to do with one's perception of aim?

Will,

I try to use whatever is at my disposal to align myself, the footpad, mown boundary or mowing patterns.

Do I not rely on the architect when he crafts his ribbon of fairway in front of the tee, for alignment purposes ?

The tee "markers" have next to zero impact on my alignment, I ignore them, save for teeing up behind them.
I'm referencing the basic footpad and closely mown area

Cheers

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

Interesting you mention that PV has rectangular tees, but if you think about it they acutually have a good mix of ovals, and squared edges.  Some boxes are definitely more squared off than others.  I'm trying to think of many other courses that do this.  It seems like most courses either commit to hard rectangles or something more circular.

Mark,

Most are rectangular, with some having rounded corners.

On what holes did you observe oval tees ?


Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

I hate to see my former boss and colleague get a bit misrepresented by the likes of Mucci so here goes my attempt to bolster his statement with some clarity.

Kyle,

Tom Doak didn't get misrepresented in the least.
He was clear with his post.
In case you misread it, here it is again.

[/color]
No, it's not good architecture to misalign tees.

It is not good architecture to build rectilinear tees which can be said to "align" the golfer at anything.

[/i][/u]

Now, I don't know about you, but it seems like your old boss is:
1 contradicting himself
2 stating that tees shouldn't be built rectilinear, such that they align the golfer at the intended target.

Last, I knew, Tom was capable of answering for himself and didn't need a surrugate or interpreter.
So why don't we let him address the question regarding the statement he made.[/b][/size]

As little as two years ago, one could count me as one of the loudest proponents of the square tee box, aligned with whatever or not. They're simple and clean looking, especially at grade. Somewhat easier to maintain, depending on how much one cares about the immediate surroundings as well.

However, spending a summer around the painstaking finish shaping of some of the tees Tom is describing on his own design, I see the merits of the more free form tee.

I believe that Tom is simply speaking of mowing lines as it pertains to the edges of the tee. If the design of the tee is such that the edge created by the different height of cut is obfuscated, broken up, or hidden altogether and that the flat part of a tee forms a horizon within the same height of cut, one has essentially eliminated the "alignment" for that teeing area since a continuous edge no longer exists as the golfer stands and examines the hole.

Doesn't that drive up maintainance costs.

If one looks at the 7th tee at Sebonack, a tee within a sea of fairway not specifically relevant to the play of any hole, but, mowed as fairway, it would seem that only courses with unlimited budgets could afford that luxury.

[paul cowley]

Patrick....I've been largely posting along with this thread because I'm curious about the responses...especially from a player of your caliber.

When I play, and regardless of the shape of the tee...I first decide which side of the tee most benefits my game...largely guided by the old axiom "tee closest to the side of the hazard that you most wish to avoid"... and I then place my tee making sure it is behind the markers.

After this I stand behind my ball and pick a spot in my teeing foreground that is in alignment with my intended target.

I then address the ball using this spot to square my line and shot to...compose myself...and swing!

After the first of the last 3 steps it doesn't matter to me what the shape or size of the tee is...these things don't exist as far as my scope of focus that it takes to execute the shot.

I could care less about who designed the tee...even if it was me...as far as execution.

Teeing ground aesthetics is another thread.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick....I've been largely posting along with this thread because I'm curious about the responses...especially from a player of your caliber.

When I play, and regardless of the shape of the tee...I first decide which side of the tee most benefits my game...largely guided by the old axiom "tee closest to the side of the hazard that you most wish to avoid"... and I then place my tee making sure it is behind the markers.

My dad, who played in many USGA Amateurs and a number of USGA Opens, taught me that when I was a teenager.
Tee it up on the same side as the trouble and hit away from it.  So yes, I do the same, and I also consider the effect of wind

After this I stand behind my ball and pick a spot in my teeing foreground that is in alignment with my intended target.

I then address the ball using this spot to square my line and shot to...compose myself...and swing!

After the first of the last 3 steps it doesn't matter to me what the shape or size of the tee is...these things don't exist as far as my scope of focus that it takes to execute the shot.

I could care less about who designed the tee...even if it was me...as far as execution.

Paul, if alignment wasn't a major problem for golfers, there wouldn't be a putter in the world with lines on it.   

Teeing ground aesthetics is another thread.

[Mark Chaplin]

The front tee on 18 at PV aims at the 9th green!

Back tee on 10 is a round pad.

All the tees on the 1st are ovals!

[Mark McKeever]

Pat,
A lot of the mowed boxes are a modified mix of a circle and a square.  But more circular ones are on 1, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 17.

Mar

[Tom_Doak]

No, it's not good architecture to misalign tees.

It is not good architecture to build rectilinear tees which can be said to "align" the golfer at anything.

Tom,
I'm not sure I understand your comment.

PV, WFW, Seminole, GCGC and many other courses  have rectangular tees, tees aligned toward the fairway or mid-point of the fairway.

Are you saying that these tees should be altered and aligned elsewhere ?

Patrick:

I believe that rectangular tees are a blight on the landscape.  In addition, I do not think the "mid point of the fairway" should often be the aiming point, so lining up a tee on that spot would be, by your own definition, bad architecture.  I believe it is better architecture for the shape of the tees to give no visual clues on where to aim, so the player can decide his own line without feeling that he is "misaligned," which is what I meant by my original post.  It's not contradictory if you read it correctly.

Many rectangular tees were built in the dark ages of Victorian architecture, but the idea that they were part of "classic" design is an absolute lie ... most of the Golden Age architects did NOT build tees with square corners, except for Seth Raynor of course.  The reason so many rectangular tees have been "restored" in recent years is that so many courses are going to tees built out of a sand mix and they are trying to limit the amount of materials they have to purchase; and also because specifying a rectangular tee is easier than worrying about the shape of it, and misalignment can be blamed on the contractor!

Were I the advisor to Pine Valley, Winged Foot or Seminole, I would advocate only that they go back and look at old photographs of the courses and see what was actually built there.  I am willing to bet you that most of the tees on those courses did not have square corners, although many of them were probably vaguely rectangular with rounded corners.  I haven't looked at the old aerial of Garden City for a while, but only one of the tees there has square corners ... the one that the superintendent built on his own.

For the record, I don't like round tees much more than square ones ... it is the idea of geometric shapes which I oppose, but especially where the geometric shape suggests an alignment.

[Jud_T]

When did the practice of 2 tee markers first come into play?  I assume originally guys just played from a mutually agreed upon area of ground which wasn't specifically maintained any differently than the surrounding area.  Why couldn't we just have 1 marker instead of two and a rule that you can't tee it any closer to the hole, just as in a penalty drop?  Then the alignment problem would be squarely on the player.  Why do we even need separately maintained tee boxes?  Hell you've got pegs longer than some male porn stars readily available...Wouldn't that allow for a lot more variabilty to set distances for events, wind, variety, different handicaps etc.?

[archie_struthers]

 


I'm gonna reiterate my feeling that Tom Doak is spot on relative to tee alignment.  Deliberate misalignment makes no sense.  Shouldn't the player be able to line up without visual aids. ?


 But of course I'm all for banning caddies standing behind the golfer to confirm aim.   It should be a penalty IMHO

Now that I've gotten older , its becoming harder and harder to aim the putter, particularly on short ones.  But I am still  opposed to striping the ball.   

watching LPGA players have their caddies standing behind them and then walk away just before every shot bothers me .  Double barf!  It probably helps and I'm surprised more PGA pros don"t do it.

I'd ban just about anything that takes the golfers senses out of the shot !


Ps    I know that caddies must not stay behind the player when hitting shot .....Johnny Miller rule.     But I'm against anyone else helping with alignment

[Patrick_Mucci]

The front tee on 18 at PV aims at the 9th green!

Back tee on 10 is a round pad.

All the tees on the 1st are ovals!

Mark,

Are you sure that the footpads aren't rectangular and the mowing patterns on the ovular side ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

My description of the tee was in terms of the footpad and not the mowing pattern.

With the reliance on riding mowers, rectangular tees are almost extinct, despite the fact that the footpad is rectalinear.

Many tees are constructed above grade for drainange purposes and once a tee is constructed above grade, one should examine the physical nature of the footpad, now the mowing pattern that's evolved over the years.

GCGC's are all rectalinear, including the newest tee, the 12th.
Ditto Seminole, Winged Foot, NGLA and other classic courses.
Many, if not most of the rectilinear tees have rounded corners due to the type of mowers used.

I would think that non-defined tees are more a product of the abilty to drain surface water, whereas constructed, defined tees, were typically elevated and crowned and in a rectalinear form for drainage and alignment purposes.

I wonder if the courses you designed, starting with your first, to your most recent, have evolving tee designs.

[Daryl "Turboe" Boe]

Let me preface this by saying it might be because its late or that I have had a couple drinks as I enjoy this dismantling of the Bears on TV, but I read quite a bit of the first page of posts and just skimmed over some of the posts following that.  But I am seriously mystified with how critical this seems to some people.  

Im not trying to be a pain I am genuinely interested.  i wonder if most of the people who are upset by the direction or alingment of tee boxes tend to be people who pick out a blade of grass in front of their ball somewhere or something on the tee box itself for alignment?  

Admittedly I have never been one that has been able to use that blade of grass deal.  My target is a tree or a very specific land form out there in the distance (I certainly pick out as specific of a target as I can) but it is always out there in the distance where I am hitting.  I am just wondering if those who find issue with the direction of tee markers are picking out a target that is somewhere on that tee marker.  Because when I am playing with someone who bitches about a tee box "lining them up crooked" I always think "well I was aiming at that pine tree branch 300 yards away and the tee box direction didn't move that pine tree at all."  

Seriously just wondering if those who are bothered by the alignment of tee boxes tend to be people who use the mowing pattern or some other property of the tee box itself as their alignment tool?  I mean if for instance I am trying to start a ball just inside a fairway bunker on the right on a specific hole I will pick out some target in the distance just inside said bunker and aim at that, I wouldn't think anything about lining up a certain amount right of the centerline of the tee box in order to get to that position out there in the distance.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()