What do you think of this hole?

[Bryan Izatt]

No need to have played it.  You can pass judgements based on the following pictures.  

The hole is a longish par 5, rated the number 1 stroke hole on my home course.  It is certainly a difficult hole where it's easy to run up a big number, but is it a good golf (par 5) hole.  My playing partner/friend calls it a stupid hole, primarily I think because, as a better player, it does not set up to allow him very many opportunities for birdies, and some of the features don't reward good (in his opinion) shots.

Seen from high above on the preceding green, the hole is laid out before you in all its scenic majesty.  From the back tees it is 595 yards.  From the middle, blue tees, where I play from it is 545 yards.




From the blue tees you can see that it is pretty level after the carry over the stream and wetland area.  The bunkers on the right half of the fairway in the LZ are 300 to carry from the back tees and 250 from the blue tees.  So, out of reach to carry for anybody except the really long hitters.  My friend wants to fill in those fairway bunkers because they constrict the driving area and impede trying for the green in two.  The bunker in the bank on the left actually serves as a saving bunker that keep a slightly pulled shot being lost in the gunk.  It is a challenging tee shot that requires some thought as to where to try to put your shot.  The wind (which has no prevailing direction) can also factor in.




From a layup in front of the right hand bunker you are confronted with a reasonably wide fairway that has death on both sides.  The second bunker short right and the third bunker longer left require some consideration on the second shot.




Zoomed in, it becomes evident that the green is elevated making going for it in two a difficult proposition.




From near the second bunker and then closer in a look at the green siting.







The green is wicked.  There is a severe false front on the left side, a pronounced ridge from left to right across the middle of the green, and a swale in the back third of the green that slopes both left and right from the lateral middle of the green - a lot going on.  Reaching the green is only the beginning of the adventure/challenge.  My friend wants to bulldoze the ridge across the centre of the green out of existence.

From the right side of the green looking across the front half.  This pin is the most benign on the green. Back right is possible too, while front left is a nightmare with the ridge behind and false front in front.  Pins along the ridge and back left are equally nightmarish.




From front left - the false front.




Don't miss the green to the left - there is a 20 foot deep grass pit and death beyond.




The back swale looking from right to left.  The camera has flattened the slopes.  Putts away from the camera can easily run off the green to back left pins.




Looking from the back of the green towards the tee decks stacked up the hillside with the preceding green perched up on the plateau above the tees.

[Sean_A]

Bryan

Considering the hole is fairly long with a plateau green, my question would be if one can access the left side of the fairway to a degree which takes the greenside bunkering out of play for the third? 

Predictably, I don't like the saver bunker in the left drive zone.  I am not sure about the bunkers in the pocket near the green either.  At the very least, one of those would go if it were my design.

Ciao

[Tom Kelly]

The bunkers on the right half of the fairway in the LZ are 300 to carry from the back tees and 250 from the blue tees.  So, out of reach to carry for anybody except the really long hitters.  My friend wants to fill in those fairway bunkers because they constrict the driving area and impede trying for the green in two.

How far is it to carry over the left hand bunker? If I wanted to go for the green in two I'd be looking to hit it down that side given the green and bunkering around it. If you want to bail out a touch and still go for the green you have to hit it really big to carry the right bunkers which seems fair enough to me. 250 from the middle tees doesn't seem absurd and 300 from the back is long but for the pros it is do-able and as a 'future-proofing' (though I dis-like the word/need for it) it makes sense. The extra elevation from the back tee must surely help with the carry too? The green may be over-kill but hard to tell without seeing it in person. In general it looks like a half-decent hole from the photos.

The bunkers do look abit frilly.

[Paul Gray]

Bryan

Considering the hole is fairly long with a plateau green, my question would be if one can access the left side of the fairway to a degree which takes the greenside bunkering out of play for the third? 

Predictably, I don't like the saver bunker in the left drive zone.  I am not sure about the bunkers in the pocket near the green either.  At the very least, one of those would go if it were my design.

Ciao

I'm not too concerned about the saver bunker from the tee but would agree with the need to curtail the green front bunkers. Possibly  all I would do to them would be to lose the left side of the bunker nearest to the green and convert to fairway, thus allowing more shot shaping in the form of a faded approach and/or, if the turf permitted, a running fade at the target.

[Donnie Beck]

2 mins with paint and I think it becomes a much friendlier hole.

[Matthew Petersen]

I can agree with some of the comments that the hole seems a bit overbunkered, especially for a long and already difficult uphill par 5. But your friends complaints sound like whining because it's a par 5 that doesn't equal an easy birdie. I see this in good players a lot. They won't question a 515 ball-busting par 4, but they have a god-given right to reach par 5s in two and make easy birdies.

For me, none of his complaints address anything other than that he thinks the hole is too hard for him to make birdie on. Nothing wrong with a par 5 where making a 6 is possible for a good player even without hitting a bad shot.

[Garland Bayley]

Looks like ugly Bates' bunkering to me. So I get it. Restrict the landing areas and punish the bad shot, or hit it here or else design. Clearly not an out of the box thinking designer. So which TPC is this?

[Bryan Izatt]

Sean,

It is possible to place your second shot to get an angle to the green for the third shot where you don't have to carry the green front bunkers, but it turns out to be a bad angle to approach from given the contouring of the green.  The best angle is straight on over the bunkers.  The fronting bunkers are not much of an issue for a third shot of 100 to 150 yards.

The bunker left off the tee has saved me and numerous others from being in the impenetrable gunk so it has to stay.    The pocket bunker left and short of the green could go.


Tom,

It's about a 230 carry from the blue middle tees over the left bunker.  And, yes, if you want to challenge the hole, the left side drive is the way to go.  The risk is the wetland area left.  There is no recovery from there.  It ends up playing a bit like a risk/reward Cape drive.

The bunkers are frilly.  The look is consistent throughout the course and it is very noticeable.  My friend hates it when he gats caught in one of those little indentations.


Paul,

My friend would probably agree with you about the green side bunker.  It would make going for the green more feasible.


Matthew,

Bang on.  There is a sense of entitlement to a birdie if you are long and can hit two good shots.  On two of the par 5's on the course he can reach them easily in two and make birdie or eagle.  He likes those holes (except for the one that defends itself with a very difficult green).


Garland,

Clearly this hole is a penal design.  However, there are some options about how you tack your way down the hole.  I'm surprised that you don't hate the wetland area down the left side that plays to your LH slice.   

Architect was Jason Straka from Hurdzan Fry.  This course is definitely an out of the box design.  If you're ever in the Toronto area, come on out and try it.

[Brent Hutto]

I'm no good at analyzing these things, being a cautious short hitter who has only reached a Par 5's in two shots twice in my life.

But it looks to me like pretty much a forced three-shot hole. Or at least that's the intent. Very difficult plateau green that you need to be hitting a wedge onto (and a very accurate wedge at that).

Once you commit to that third-shot wedge it's a reasonably simple first shot with your 220-230 yard club from the blue tees. Then a very simple second shot with a 200-210 yard club. Hit it crooked on either of those shots and you will not likely par the hole. Period.

So decent, not necessarily perfect, execution of two medium-long shots then you get a tricky wedge or 9-iron to an over the top green complex. Par looks like a good score, birdie requires three excellent shots and bogey, double or even triple are in play with even a single errant swing.

Is that about how it plays for you Brian?

As a high handicapper I have a lot of respect for a "Par 5" that's actually a difficult hole for good players rather than the automatic expectation that "Par 5" equate to "Birdie Hole". For me a lot of Par 5's are harder than most Par 4's, no reason it shouldn't be that way once in a while for decent players!

[Sean_A]

Bryan

Here is my take on a saving bunker. Its okay design if the hole is on a slope which is too severe for normal conditions; meaning its quite windy, or firm or there isn't enough space for a wider fairway.  Its sort of a needs must situation.  In the case of this hole, imo, its lazy, fat, wasteful design.  If that hazard space is really required for the hole to work, then something is dead wrong with the hole.  I am also disheartened to discover that the green doesn't reward the best angle of approach for the guy who risked the left bunkers.  I disagree that the fronting bunkers aren't an issue.  Anytime there is a plateau green the fronting bunkers are an issue - especially if there is the possibility for wind or if firm conditions prevail.  All in all, the hole is attractive because of the spot, but I fear its a bit of a bewildering design and not really my bag.

Ciao

[Jason Thurman]

It's not bad.

I don't see a lot of purpose for the middle bunker complex up the right side. It seems like if it were gone, more players could be duped into laying up on the right side of the fairway and leaving a really difficult third shot.

It also seems like it might be a better hole if it were shorter. That severe green is a nightmare to hit in two. I'd like to bring it into range for more players. The guy who lays up to a wedge yardage should have a fair chance at par, while the guy who blows one at the green and misses left can get screwed in a hurry. That's how I see it.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

Clearly this hole is a penal design.  However, there are some options about how you tack your way down the hole.  I'm surprised that you don't hate the wetland area down the left side that plays to your LH slice.   

Architect was Jason Straka from Hurdzan Fry.  This course is definitely an out of the box design.  If you're ever in the Toronto area, come on out and try it.

It seems to me that out of the box would have the right hand bunker your friend hates be just have a small portion of its left side be bunker and the whole hill above would be cut to fairway height. Then the driving choice is the narrow corridor on the left or hit it right to get the ball to roll around the bunker. The success on the more dangerous left would give closer to the green from a flatter lie, while the safer right would give farther from the green on a side hill lie. Instead you get boring pinch the landing area and penalize miscues.

Now that you say approach from straight on instead of from the left is a better option. I agree with your friend. Lose the fronting bunkers.

THERE ARE TOO MANY BUNKERS ON TODAYS GOLF COURSES! THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS THAT GOLF COURSE RATERS LIKE THEM SO ARCHITECTS ARE REWARDED FOR MAKING EVEN MEANINGLESS BUNKERS.

[Bryan Izatt]

Brent,

Good analysis.  That is how it plays for me.  The trick is to be able to hit three good shots in a row and end up in a place where you can two putt.


Sean,

Point taken on the saving bunker in the left LZ.  It's not necessary to make the hole work.  What you're risking on the left side is not so much the bunkers as it is the wetland area.  So, yes the too left bunkers could disappear and the hole would be not much changed.  The reward for hugging the left side and its attendant risk from the wetland is to shorten the hole if you are trying to go in two.  If you are laying up, going down the left side to get a sub-100 yard pitch from the left side (past the second bunker) is a sucker play.  I have rarely seen it played that way.


Jason,

There are two other par 5's on the course that are more reachable.  This hole was designed to be more of a three-shotter par 5 except with two exceptional shots.


Garland,

Interesting idea with making the right LZ bunker more of a centre-line bunker with fairway to the right on the hillside.  It would definitely make the drive easier.

I like the fronting bunkers.

I agree that there are too many bunkers.  I'll have to count them someday. 

[Jason Topp]

Looks like an interesting tee shot, an interesting 2nd and an interesting approach to an interesting green. 

Tell your friend to show some balls and hit it left of the bunker if he thinks he can reach the green in two.

[Dean Stokes]

I think that if the bunkers were not surrounded by three inch high rough the hole would both look better and play better. The ball is supposed to run into the hazard not stop either above or below!

[Garland Bayley]

...

Garland,

Interesting idea with making the right LZ bunker more of a centre-line bunker with fairway to the right on the hillside.  It would definitely make the drive easier.

I like the fronting bunkers.

I agree that there are too many bunkers.  I'll have to count them someday. 

The left fronting bunker could be kept, and the right side shaped so that a precise second could run onto the green, and a not so precise run either into the bunker that is kept, or over a hillock on the right to make for a more difficult recovery. Right now, it dictates lay up short and wedge over the bunkers. It is that unimaginative, inside the box, TPC style dictatorial hole right now.

[Ronald Montesano]

So much top-shelf golf from Hamilton east...people who have never visited have no idea how great and extensive Toronto golf is, and Canadians won't brag enough.

[Bryan Izatt]

Looks like an interesting tee shot, an interesting 2nd and an interesting approach to an interesting green. 

Tell your friend to show some balls and hit it left of the bunker if he thinks he can reach the green in two.

Nice synopsis.

He has and he always tries and he can.  He just bitches the 99% of the time he gets into trouble with this strategy.

[Bryan Izatt]

...

Garland,

Interesting idea with making the right LZ bunker more of a centre-line bunker with fairway to the right on the hillside.  It would definitely make the drive easier.

I like the fronting bunkers.

I agree that there are too many bunkers.  I'll have to count them someday. 

The left fronting bunker could be kept, and the right side shaped so that a precise second could run onto the green, and a not so precise run either into the bunker that is kept, or over a hillock on the right to make for a more difficult recovery. Right now, it dictates lay up short and wedge over the bunkers. It is that unimaginative, inside the box, TPC style dictatorial hole right now.

The third shot is dictatorial, as you put it - fly it onto the green.  Not every course and hole can provide imaginative outside the box options on every shot.   

[Bryan Izatt]

So much top-shelf golf from Hamilton east...people who have never visited have no idea how great and extensive Toronto golf is, and Canadians won't brag enough.

RoMo,

When are you coming up for a game?  BTW, that should be east and north of Toronto, although Mr Bosela, located south of Hamilton, may object.  Modesty prevents us Canadians from talking up our courses but they are quite nice.

[Ronald Montesano]

I've been to Dalewood, Woodington Lake, Station Creek and Westview this spring as a coach...that translates to no golf for me!

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I will go along with Jason's comments.
Three interesting shots, nothing wrong with any par five beinga three shotter in my book, that is what they are supposed to be.
Perhaps ione too many bunkers for the second shot, but I would be happy playing it.

[Matthew Sander]

I don't see a lot of purpose for the middle bunker complex up the right side. It seems like if it were gone, more players could be duped into laying up on the right side of the fairway and leaving a really difficult third shot.

Jason,

Good point regarding that particular bunker complex. In its current configuration, it looks like the hole directs players over to the left hand side which offers the more open approach, which may have been done by design. Without the bunkers, the predominant hazard would seem to be the junk on the left and more players may favor the right hand side and the hill that can help to contain shots, which would leave a much more difficult third shot over the bunker.

That said, I remember seeing other photos that Bryan has posted of his home course. If I recall correctly, there weren't many places where fewer bunkers seemed to be the approach.

[Garland Bayley]

...

Garland,

Interesting idea with making the right LZ bunker more of a centre-line bunker with fairway to the right on the hillside.  It would definitely make the drive easier.

I like the fronting bunkers.

I agree that there are too many bunkers.  I'll have to count them someday. 

The left fronting bunker could be kept, and the right side shaped so that a precise second could run onto the green, and a not so precise run either into the bunker that is kept, or over a hillock on the right to make for a more difficult recovery. Right now, it dictates lay up short and wedge over the bunkers. It is that unimaginative, inside the box, TPC style dictatorial hole right now.

The third shot is dictatorial, as you put it - fly it onto the green.  Not every course and hole can provide imaginative outside the box options on every shot.   

If it's not a predominant theme on this course, it is reasonable to dictate in this manner once or twice.

[Greg Tallman]

I don't know but Donnie's version looks to be a marked improvement.