[Martin Toal]

Watching the Irish Open at the weekend and remembering playing it quite a bit in my (relative) youth, I was wondering what the GCA collective thought about the blind tee shot. RCD features a number of these, on the 2nd, 9th, famously, 11th, 13th to a certain extent.

The 9th is the most storied of these and is a wonderful hole, partly because of the magnificent backdrop of the clubhouse and Mountains of Mourne, sometimes covered in mist, but mostly because of the playing challenge, the variety and the thrill of coming over the hill to see a ball waiting in the middle of the short stuff.

Would a modern architect have to be very brave to design such holes nowadays?



PS. I know I am gong to get a whole bunch of "but [A. R. Chitect is designing holes like that, foe example the 13th at ,,,,]

[astavrides]

GCA collective thought likes blind shots. I personally am not crazy about them.

[Garland Bayley]

Perhaps like correlates to handicap. We high handicappers don't know where the shot is going, so it doesn't matter if it is blind. Being blind actually takes some of the stress out of it.

[Chris DeToro]

I don't think a modern architect would have to be that brave to design such holes.  I do think they are better served on private golf courses or courses where people get more than one play.  I think blind tee shots on resort and public courses add a level of complexity that lends itself to longer rounds, waiting and frustration for the player

[Frank Kim]

Isn't it only truly blind the first time?

[Chris DeToro]

Agreed that it's only truly blind the first time, but I'm of the evolving theory that it's still blind if you can't see and know where the ball landed and came to a stop

[Thomas Dai]

The old line about a shot only being blind once has some merit but one aspect of blind shots that needs consideration is the state of the downslope on the far side.

If the far side downslope is rough, scrub, gorse etc, as is often the case on links courses, then, if there's no lay-up or alternative route available, those players who are short hitters (or even longer hitters playing into a strong headwind) who may only just carry the hill are not going to find their ball on the fairway, indeed they might not find it at all. Hassle time results what with ball searching, time delays, slow play etc.

There's also, seemingly ever more these days, the safety issue with folks on one side of the hill hitting without knowing that other folks are on the far side of the rise. I'm sure we're all familiar with the "Can we go yet?" discussion on a tee. Also, anyone walk over a rise and forget to ring the bell, if one's provided? Even step ladders to help viewing safety can become an issue - "Hang on a minute, we can't carry on using that ladder coz it needs a handrail to comply with H&S regulations." Maybe there's a business venture in installing ex-submarine periscopes!

They may continue to occur on existing courses but I'm sceptical about their future on new courses.

Atb

[Ken Moum]

I don't think a modern architect would have to be that brave to design such holes.  I do think they are better served on private golf courses or courses where people get more than one play.  I think blind tee shots on resort and public courses add a level of complexity that lends itself to longer rounds, waiting and frustration for the player

That's just one of many things that make no sense on resort and daily fee courses.  I agree with those who say blind tee shots can get old if there's an abundance of them, but one or two aren't anything to complain about IMHO.

As one of those guys who often doesn't know where his tee shots are going, the only kind of blind holes that grind my gears are ones where there's hidden, major trouble on the other side of the hill. An example is #17 at Royal Dornoch the first time I played it in 2006.

It seemed as if almost any tee shot over hill was doomed to end up in the gorse.  But I played it again in 2013 and the gorse removal made a huge difference.

Blind approaches are slightly more troublesome because you ARE trying to hit a specific target.  I don't mind holes like #18 at Golspie (which is right outside my window at the moment). There are only a couple of bunkers short of the green, and the rough around it isn't that terrifying.

K

[David Whitmer]

I don't mind the occasional blind tee shot; I like it better than a blind approach shot. It works best if there is ample room to hit it. Take Old Macdonald #3, for example. On my first round, my caddie said "hit it anywhere right of the tree; the closer to the tree you are the closer to the hole you'll be." I liked that a lot...the shot didn't require a specific spot to hit it, but I knew where the preferred spot was. Same with the 11th at Muirfield...my caddie said to hit it between A and B, but the closer to the left side I go, the better my angle to a right-side hole location I would be. There is a wide range where you can hit the ball and be okay.

[Joe Zucker]

I agree a lot with what David said, preferring blind tee shots to blind approach shots.  Approach shots generally have much more specific targets where aiming 5 yards off of the ideal line can lean to a bad outcome.  For a blind tee shot, rarely if ever is 5 yards off the idea line a bad result.

I've long wondered if players hit more accurate tee shots on blind holes because they cannot see the trouble out there.  It's less likely a player will steer a shot, so he just gets up there and hits it.  Looking at the data from RCD this week might be interesting, but pros are not very representative of most golfers.

[Jon Cavalier]

I really enjoy a well-executed and designed blind tee shot.  Used sparingly and in the right place, I find that a blind shot can add a lot of interest and a heightened level of excitement to a shot.  A few of my favorite blind tee shots, off the top of my head, include:

The 10th at Myopia:





The 6th at Whippoorwill:





The 3rd at Old Macdonald:





The 8th at Old Town Club:





The 15th at Somerset Hills:





The 2nd at National Golf Links:





The 18th at Yale:





The 9th at Fishers Island:





The 5th at Sleepy Hollow, over a ridge, which leads to this view:



And perhaps my favorite of all, the 18th at Eastward Ho:





... to name a few.  These are holes that stand out to me as being both blind and extremely enjoyable to play.  To be honest, I am not sure what common factor, if any, makes me enjoy these holes so much and remember them so fondly.  Perhaps its the delayed gratification of having to wait to see where your shot ended up.  Maybe its the reveal of the hole and the landscape.  Regardless, there's a place and a use for blindness off the tee, to be sure.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Got a call from a senior tour pro today, on his way to Wakonda in Iowa.  He said among other things, he didn't mind the blind shots so much, but the second and third holes there combine blind with a rolling fw that kicks your shot off the fw.  In short, there ought to be some way to play the hole.  And, ideally, some way to mark the ideal line, naturally preferred.

[Sean_A]

Jon

Jeepers that Old Mac hole reminds me a ton of 13 at Hunstanton and I spose 16 at Rye. 

I am nearly at the point in life where I think if a course doesn't have a blind a shot or two than its contrived to avoid it 

Ciao

[Jeff_Mingay]

I think it's as simple as this: You want variety, and playing the occasion blind tee shot is essential to ultimate variety.

Jon's great photos above certainly speak to this. Thanks for posting.

[jeffwarne]

I really enjoy a well-executed and designed blind tee shot.  Used sparingly and in the right place, I find that a blind shot can add a lot of interest and a heightened level of excitement to a shot.  A few of my favorite blind tee shots, off the top of my head, include:

The 10th at Myopia:





The 6th at Whippoorwill:





The 3rd at Old Macdonald:





The 8th at Old Town Club:





The 15th at Somerset Hills:





The 2nd at National Golf Links:





The 18th at Yale:





The 9th at Fishers Island:





The 5th at Sleepy Hollow, over a ridge, which leads to this view:



And perhaps my favorite of all, the 18th at Eastward Ho:





... to name a few.  These are holes that stand out to me as being both blind and extremely enjoyable to play.  To be honest, I am not sure what common factor, if any, makes me enjoy these holes so much and remember them so fondly.  Perhaps its the delayed gratification of having to wait to see where your shot ended up.  Maybe its the reveal of the hole and the landscape.  Regardless, there's a place and a use for blindness off the tee, to be sure.

I am sorry to use the bandwidth, but I do it to emphasize my point.
Those are spectacular pictures of spectacular holes.
To think they could be improved by adding visibility is folly, hubris, and mainly ignorance.

"Learning", knowing, and "feeling" a golf course used to be important in competitive golf, and should be.
I get sick of hearing respected players, revered for their golf prowess and skill, discuss the "weaknesses" of blind shots.
Judgement, memory, and God forbid-preparation, are important skills in this jet in and play the mandatory Wednesday pro-am and that's enough prep era.
I hope the winner at Chambers Bay is someone out there prepping right now at the advice of our new Open Doctor, Mike Davis.

I recently played well in an event at a "quirky" old school course that I loved that was belittled by many in the field.
I myself had failed to qualify at the site 2 years ago in a different event due to unfamilarity with the course leading to poor execution.
This time I had seen it several times and was better prepared and much more familiar with its demands and "random" bounces.
There are many ways to prep for an event-pounding range balls off a flat lie under the watchful eye of Trackman can't become the end all be all of the outdoor game we all love.

I just read Golf World's recap of the Irish Open. In an attempt to be educational and respectful, they only get it half right and talk about the importance of being able to physically SEE the demands of a shot in order to create it, and that RCD lacks in that regard and that it's a negative that not even its spectacular setting can overcome.
Knowing what's over the hill via preparation, and being able to "see" it in one's MIND'S eye is an incredibly important skill, and is evidently a lost art amongst most well known players, and the author-presumably Jaimie Diaz-a frequent guest on my show-will be called out next time )


Golf is not better for such blatantly lost imaginations, and it is a further slip down the slope of homogonization.

[Jim Hoak]

Got a call from a senior tour pro today, on his way to Wakonda in Iowa.  He said among other things, he didn't mind the blind shots so much, but the second and third holes there combine blind with a rolling fw that kicks your shot off the fw.  In short, there ought to be some way to play the hole.  And, ideally, some way to mark the ideal line, naturally preferred.

Jeff, I grew up on Wakonda and the second hole is not blind--it is an uphill par 3 where you see the flagstick if not the hole.  The third really isn't blind either, although the drive goes down into a valley and you can't see where it ends up.  But you see the whole fairway in front of you until the valley.
It may be the distant memories of my youth, but Wakonda is a great old course which held the US Am in the early 60's, but never gets enough recognition.

[Andy Shulman]

I'll follow up on GJ's comment from earlier in the thread.  I don't know the psychology of it, but it seems that blind shots either totally discombobulate golfers - mostly high handicappers - or serve to relax them.  While there may be a target such as a post or stone for this second group to aim at, there's not a wide (or narrow) swath of fairway that's visible, so they have little choice but to let their natural ability take over and hope for the best.

BTW, other than Tobacco Road, can anyone think of a course that begins with a blind (or mostly) blind shot?

[MCirba]

Jon,

Bravo.  Great post!

I love love love blind tee shots.  Golf should be played with a sense of adventure discovery uncertainty and a degree of randomness.

[Niall C]

Perhaps like correlates to handicap. We high handicappers don't know where the shot is going, so it doesn't matter if it is blind. Being blind actually takes some of the stress out of it.

Not so, it does matter. Usually blind shots have some intermediary reference point such as a marker pole which helps to focus and often you are more accurate because of that. In a non blind hole your average hacker probably looks at the green/fairway and vaguely aims towards it without truly being specific about what he is aiming at.

As to whether an architect would be brave enough to design a real blind shot now, even if he wanted to, and his client wanted him to, he would be foolish to do it for all the potential litigation that he could get involved in when someone drives into someone else because they couldn't see him.

Niall

[Jeff_Brauer]

Got a call from a senior tour pro today, on his way to Wakonda in Iowa.  He said among other things, he didn't mind the blind shots so much, but the second and third holes there combine blind with a rolling fw that kicks your shot off the fw.  In short, there ought to be some way to play the hole.  And, ideally, some way to mark the ideal line, naturally preferred.

Jeff, I grew up on Wakonda and the second hole is not blind--it is an uphill par 3 where you see the flagstick if not the hole.  The third really isn't blind either, although the drive goes down into a valley and you can't see where it ends up.  But you see the whole fairway in front of you until the valley.

It may be the distant memories of my youth, but Wakonda is a great old course which held the US Am in the early 60's, but never gets enough recognition.

I wasn't sure about his numbers, since I haven't been there in a decade, but maybe they renumber the hole sequence for the senior tour?

Mike,

Do you love blind tee shots so much you would prefer 18 of them on one round? 4?, 1 for variety sake? Most golfers prefer 0, some will accept 1, but even then would call it a bad hole.  I figure if  half this board likes them, or 750 golfers, the total of the other 25 Million golfers in the US might not even double that!

My take is that the GA guys had all written against it (especially on approaches) but were sometimes faced with it.  Doak and CC have written against them and don't generally do them. I think I read Pete Dye went back and redid his famous short blind par 4 to make it visible.  In short, the best minds in golf are generally against them. It has been an outdated idea for 90 years now.  And things like higher legal standards, more public courses, etc. sure don't do anything but argue against bringing them back.

The only reason to bring it back is nostalgia, or for variety, but a steady diet of it would tee off almost all golfers.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Perhaps like correlates to handicap. We high handicappers don't know where the shot is going, so it doesn't matter if it is blind. Being blind actually takes some of the stress out of it.

Not so, it does matter. Usually blind shots have some intermediary reference point such as a marker pole which helps to focus and often you are more accurate because of that. In a non blind hole your average hacker probably looks at the green/fairway and vaguely aims towards it without truly being specific about what he is aiming at.

As to whether an architect would be brave enough to design a real blind shot now, even if he wanted to, and his client wanted him to, he would be foolish to do it for all the potential litigation that he could get involved in when someone drives into someone else because they couldn't see him.

Niall

I can think of numerous blind shots in the modern game, Niall... Queenwood has a number, Old Mac previously mentioned, plenty more... Here's the 3rd hole tee shot on Carne Kilmore. The fairway on the back side of the dune is 60 yards wide:

[MCirba]

Jeff,

Are you saying I have an Abby Normal brain?

I do understand all the reasons but would argue that most of modern architecture is much too visible and much too predictable.

[Jim Sherma]

Whether or not blind is ok is a function of what's on the other side and the expected spread of scores across a set of shots. A tight fairway with hazards that extract over a full stoke, e.g. blind water hazards or randomly placed lost ball style gorse bushes/long gunch, makes it too capricious in my mind. If the penalty for a reasonable miss is a half stroke due to findable and potentially recoverable rough or a worse angle then the blindness adds to the fun as opposed to adding randomized grief.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

That is basically what my pro friend was saying, after saying that in general, a visible tee shot is conceptually better than a blind one, for several reasons.  But, if you have one, then it logically follows that there is some compensation for the extra trouble - visual markers, wider and flatter fairways, etc. that make sure the shot is not impossible, or in your words, doesn't automatically lead to a large spread in score due to uncertainty of what is expected of you.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Knowing what's over the hill via preparation, and being able to "see" it in one's MIND'S eye is an incredibly important skill, and is evidently a lost art amongst most well known players, and the author-presumably Jamie Diaz-(a frequent guest on my show-who I will call out next time )


Golf is not better for such blatantly lost imaginations, and is a further slip down the slope of homogonization.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()