Did Robert Trent Jones and Dick Wilson redirect golf course architecture when

[Patrick_Mucci]

they introduced their long surf board tees ?
 
If a significant aspect of GCA and play is about angles, didn't the long, narrow surf board tees prevent golfers from choosing the side of the tee that allowed them to ideally position their tee shots based upon their individual ball flight ?
 
Did the introduction of their tee style redirect architecture away from wide tees, tees that let the golfer choose the angle of attack into the drive zone and target green ?
 
Exasperating the angular restriction were courses where, to preserve teeing areas, the ball markers further narrowed the tees.

[Bill_McBride]

You can still aim way right or way left. The alignment of the tee doesn't force you to drive on a line perpendicular to the blocks, does it?   That would be akin to always driving into that bunker because the tee points you at it. 

This is not a defense of those tees, I hate those tees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,
 
It's far more involved than that.
 
Picture if you will, a golfer who hits a pronounced tee shot, consistently.
It doesn't matter if it's a hook or a slice.
 
If that golfer is forced to hit from a narrow tee and the playing corridor he must navigate has trees to the side of the fairway that he must aim toward to compensate for his ball flight, he's inherently going to end up in the opposite rough.
 
That's a consequence a golfer shouldn't be subjected to.
 
The architect attempts to forge a disinterested challenge, one that doesn't favor any one golfer's game, but, when you build narrow tees, especially in conjunction with tight playing corridors you create a bad situation, one that the golfer should NOT have to confront.
 
The golfer should have a reasonable expectation and ability to hit the fairway or green from the tee.
 
Playing with a draw or a fade, hook or a slice shouldn't preclude the golfer from finding his intended target.
 
Wide tees afford the golfer the ability to "favor" one side or the other, depending upon his typical shot pattern.
 
When that's taken away from him he's been unjustly penalized.

[Ronald Montesano]

Yes, they did. Next question.

[Sean_A]

I think Pat is right.  There is always the temptation to frame space with vegetation...often trees.  If the design concept is visually narrow there is a high risk of accentuating that visual cue and perhaps end up with a green wall chute. In any case, no matter the style of tee, if width creating angles off the tee is deemed important clubs must be vigilant in keeping lanes cleared.  From the way courses have become arboretums I can only assume this is easier said than done. 


Most clubs are reactive to trees instead of being proactive. Being reactive runs the huge risk of losing playing lanes for years or decades and then there can be a huge battle with members to spend what can be significant amounts of money to clear what many find more than acceptable.  I wonder if clubs these days budget for tree clearance each year to halt the creep of growth rather than wait for 25 years and hope to find cash in the budget to do a much larger job?


Ciao

[Niall C]

Don't agree. For one thing the tee markers restrict where you can tee up anyway, and secondly what's the point of the architect posing a particular problem for the golfer to overcome if he can simply pick his ball up and circumvent that problem ? I mean to say, would you move your ball twenty yards to the side on a fairway because it would help you avoid a bunker ?


Niall

[Jerry Kluger]

Pat: How often do you play a course where the tee markers are on the outside edges of the teeing ground? I cannot remember a course i played where they were at the outer edges.  They narrow them and move them side to side and front to back. Unfortunately, at most courses the person setting the tee markers just wants to move them around and doesn't pay any attention to hole locations or wind direction, etc.  I can't tell you how many times I have seen a right side hole location on a par 3 which has trees on the right side and they put the tee markers on the right side - happens all the time at my home course. 

[Phil Young]

Pat,

No. In fact I don't think you thought out your question well as it appears your blaming the cause of a problem that you perceive on the tee when it is actually on the trees/vegetation that narrow the hitting corridor.

Remove the trees/vegetation that you view as the actual cause of the tee problem that you perceive and the player can aim as far left or right as they desire to compensate for their "pronounced tee shot... It doesn't matter if it's a hook or a slice" as you put it.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

My first round of golf was at Medinah, pre any restorations a long time ago. I truly recall several narrow chutes of trees off the tees.  So, it happened sometimes with the older courses.

I believe tees have generally always been under thought.  RTJ was evolutionary, not revolutionary with those long tees, realizing that more length on the back tees required many more shorter tees to truly accommodate average length tee shots.

Perhaps it was other architects who set those long tees on angles to vary lines of play, thought to put multiple tees instead of a strip (based on how they played the hole and trying to be different than RTJ( and much later Fazio, with substantial grading, put tees at various angles, hiding each from the tee behind with subtle mounding and ridges.

Somehow, I doubt that is the final step in the evolution of tees, but I think they are improved from where they were in the RTJ era.  I recall visiting RTJ II office on a golf vacation in 1980.  My mentors used rounded and free form tees (those stolen from Larry Packard and Innisbrook) and we discussed tees.  They felt strongly that a tee ought to be a rectangle, and might, maybe, would do one rounded, split or angled tee per course if a specimen tree dictated it. Otherwise, it was a long rectangle.  Not sure how related that is, but it is just one of my designers memories! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think Pat is right.  There is always the temptation to frame space with vegetation...often trees.  If the design concept is visually narrow there is a high risk of accentuating that visual cue and perhaps end up with a green wall chute. In any case, no matter the style of tee, if width creating angles off the tee is deemed important clubs must be vigilant in keeping lanes cleared.  From the way courses have become arboretums I can only assume this is easier said than done. 


Most clubs are reactive to trees instead of being proactive. Being reactive runs the huge risk of losing playing lanes for years or decades and then there can be a huge battle with members to spend what can be significant amounts of money to clear what many find more than acceptable.  I wonder if clubs these days budget for tree clearance each year to halt the creep of growth rather than wait for 25 years and hope to find cash in the budget to do a much larger job?


Ciao

Sean,

I clicked away from this site to read emails, one of which has various projects coming up for bid (usually contractor stuff, but for what I pay a year sometimes I get a lead)  First lead listed was "Desert Willow GC (CA) fiscal year tree pruning contract"

So, we have one course that seems to budget for annual tree maintenance.  I think ANGC does, too in a different way as their trees are all of the same age and need help in many cases.  I am sure there are others.

[William_G]

they introduced their long surf board tees ?
 
If a significant aspect of GCA and play is about angles, didn't the long, narrow surf board tees prevent golfers from choosing the side of the tee that allowed them to ideally position their tee shots based upon their individual ball flight ?
 

Golf is all about angles and appreciating GCA varies from one golfer to another.

Nature, eg, the wind , can also prevent golfers from achieving their ideal line.  Different golf shots may be required by different types of GCA. 

Different styles of GCA create an opportunity for different experiences for the golfer, and that is a good thing, just to be alive and play.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,
 
It's far more involved than that.
 
Picture if you will, a golfer who hits a pronounced tee shot, consistently.
It doesn't matter if it's a hook or a slice.
 
If that golfer is forced to hit from a narrow tee and the playing corridor he must navigate has trees to the side of the fairway that he must aim toward to compensate for his ball flight, he's inherently going to end up in the opposite rough.
 
That's a consequence a golfer shouldn't be subjected to.
 
The architect attempts to forge a disinterested challenge, one that doesn't favor any one golfer's game, but, when you build narrow tees, especially in conjunction with tight playing corridors you create a bad situation, one that the golfer should NOT have to confront.
 
The golfer should have a reasonable expectation and ability to hit the fairway or green from the tee.
 
Playing with a draw or a fade, hook or a slice shouldn't preclude the golfer from finding his intended target.
 
Wide tees afford the golfer the ability to "favor" one side or the other, depending upon his typical shot pattern.
 
When that's taken away from him he's been unjustly penalized.

It used to be a helpful skill to be able to work the ball both ways.  When you could you were thought of as a "complete golfer."    Is that skill no longer relevant?

[Matthew Sander]

I have to say that I'm not quite tracking with what Mr. Mucci is suggesting. As other posters have mentioned, regardless of how wide or narrow the constructed teeing ground is, the player is only permitted to tee the ball up between the day's markers. Even on a wide tee box, those markers are the player's boundaries, not the actual teeing grounds. Am I missing something?

Now, I will agree that it seems that runway tees seem to often go hand in hand with narrower corridors, therefore the narrowness of the teeing grounds seems more confined. Wider teeing gounds tend to be a part of a more width based approach.

[Steve Lang]

   TIME OUT!


FAIRNESS IN GOLF???  SINCE WHEN???


WHAT ABOUT THE ART OF HITTING THE BALL STRAIGHT??? ISN'T THAT SOMETHING TO BE REWARDED AS WELL?


certainly a slight fade or baby draw can be accommodated on any hole where straight is needed.

[B.Ross]

i can think of courses w/out surfboard/runway tees that make you move the ball a certain way off the box, and there is nothing wrong w/ that. the 18th at winged foot from the back and blue tees comes to mind. a draw cannot be hit b/c of a tree on the right side.

[Paul Gray]

No. If there's an issue with vegetation, it's, er, an issue with vegetation.


I've personally never quite understood what all the fuss is about with these tees. To me, it's just trivial aesthetics. I'm far more interested in what follows than the little bit of ground where I put a tee peg in the earth.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Don't agree. For one thing the tee markers restrict where you can tee up anyway, and secondly what's the point of the architect posing a particular problem for the golfer to overcome if he can simply pick his ball up and circumvent that problem ? I mean to say, would you move your ball twenty yards to the side on a fairway because it would help you avoid a bunker ?


Niall,

Then I take it that you'd advocate for returning to the rule which forced the golfer to tee up within one or two club lengths of the previous hole/cup ?

The architect must forge a tactical challenge that favors no one golfer.
Since golfers have vastly different flight patterns why would want to penalize a golfer with a pronounced ball flight by forcing him to tee off within the confines of a narrow tee that presents architectural features that conflict with his ball flight ?

You get to choose where you wish to tee up your ball, you don't get to choose it's location once it's put into play.  Thus, your analogy is...... Moronic


Niall

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat: How often do you play a course where the tee markers are on the outside edges of the teeing ground? I cannot remember a course i played where they were at the outer edges.  They narrow them and move them side to side and front to back. Unfortunately, at most courses the person setting the tee markers just wants to move them around and doesn't pay any attention to hole locations or wind direction, etc.  I can't tell you how many times I have seen a right side hole location on a par 3 which has trees on the right side and they put the tee markers on the right side - happens all the time at my home course.


[size=78%]Jerry,[/size][/color]


This is a by-product of the lack of understanding of how the game is played and usually a maintenance issue created because the tee is too narrow.


As an example, let's suppose a tee is 30 yards wide on a par 3, and the hole is cut far right with a right side fronting bunker.   For me, I want to get far left, aim center or left center and cut the ball into the hole.   Why should I be forced to tee up far right and have to carry the fronting bunker in order to get close to the hole ?


Why should a mediocre or poor golfer be forced to confront features that are beyond his ability ?


Shouldn't he be offered viable alternatives, vis a vis tee width ?


And, it's a worse situation on a par 4 or 5 when you have trees or other obstacles flanking close to the playing corridor off the tee

[Patrick_Mucci]

No. If there's an issue with vegetation, it's, er, an issue with vegetation.


I've personally never quite understood what all the fuss is about with these tees. To me, it's just trivial aesthetics. I'm far more interested in what follows than the little bit of ground where I put a tee peg in the earth.

Paul,

That's why you stink ! 😜

You have to start thinking BEFORE you tee it up.

So, if there's out-Of-bounds all down the right or left side of the hole, you're not interested in where you tee it up ?

That's why you stink ! 😜

Start thinking about how you want to play the hole, where you want your drive to finish and WHERE you should tee it up.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

No. In fact I don't think you thought out your question well as it appears your blaming the cause of a problem that you perceive on the tee when it is actually on the trees/vegetation that narrow the hitting corridor.

Phil,


Are OUT-Of Bounds and lateral water hazards a function of trees/vegetation ?


I don't think that you thought this issue through 😜

Remove the trees/vegetation that you view as the actual cause of the tee problem that you perceive and the player can aim as far left or right as they desire to compensate for their "pronounced tee shot... It doesn't matter if it's a hook or a slice" as you put it.


Tell that to the golfer who just hit it OB

[Paul Gray]

No. If there's an issue with vegetation, it's, er, an issue with vegetation.


I've personally never quite understood what all the fuss is about with these tees. To me, it's just trivial aesthetics. I'm far more interested in what follows than the little bit of ground where I put a tee peg in the earth.

Paul,

That's why you stink ! 😜

You have to start thinking BEFORE you tee it up.

So, if there's out-Of-bounds all down the right or left side of the hole, you're not interested in where you tee it up ?

That's why you stink ! 😜

Start thinking about how you want to play the hole, where you want your drive to finish and WHERE you should tee it up.

If you're advocating a forty yard wide tee, complete with the markers forty yards apart, the likes of which I've never seen, then sure I'm thinking about where to tee it up. Equally however, I don't need forty yard wide teeing grounds to decide to tee the ball up on the right if there's OB down that same side, ergo the tee shape remains an irrelevance.

[Matthew Sander]

Don't agree. For one thing the tee markers restrict where you can tee up anyway, and secondly what's the point of the architect posing a particular problem for the golfer to overcome if he can simply pick his ball up and circumvent that problem ? I mean to say, would you move your ball twenty yards to the side on a fairway because it would help you avoid a bunker ?


Niall,

Then I take it that you'd advocate for returning to the rule which forced the golfer to tee up within one or two club lengths of the previous hole/cup ?

The architect must forge a tactical challenge that favors no one golfer.
Since golfers have vastly different flight patterns why would want to penalize a golfer with a pronounced ball flight by forcing him to tee off within the confines of a narrow tee that presents architectural features that conflict with his ball flight ?

You get to choose where you wish to tee up your ball, you don't get to choose it's location once it's put into play.  Thus, your analogy is...... Moronic


Niall

Pat,


You have to tee your ball between the given markers for the day. The tee could be 200 yards wide and it wouldn't matter. I'm not arguing that tee design is immaterial, but on a given day the width of the teeing ground is irrelevant.


Regarding your 30 yard wide tee example...have you ever seen markers set 30 yards apart??

[Jeff Bergeron]

The Dark Ages.

[Bill_McBride]

No. If there's an issue with vegetation, it's, er, an issue with vegetation.


I've personally never quite understood what all the fuss is about with these tees. To me, it's just trivial aesthetics. I'm far more interested in what follows than the little bit of ground where I put a tee peg in the earth.

Paul,

That's why you stink ! 😜

You have to start thinking BEFORE you tee it up.

So, if there's out-Of-bounds all down the right or left side of the hole, you're not interested in where you tee it up ?

That's why you stink ! 😜

Start thinking about how you want to play the hole, where you want your drive to finish and WHERE you should tee it up.

If you're advocating a forty yard wide tee, complete with the markers forty yards apart, the likes of which I've never seen, then sure I'm thinking about where to tee it up. Equally however, I don't need forty yard wide teeing grounds to decide to tee the ball up on the right if there's OB down that same side, ergo the tee shape remains an irrelevance.

How does Mr. Mucci know you stink?

[Patrick_Mucci]

[quote author=Paul Gray link=topic=61501.msg1460496#msg1460496

If you're advocating a forty yard wide tee, complete with the markers forty yards apart, the likes of which I've never seen, then sure I'm thinking about where to tee it up.
 
Paul,
 
Would you cite where I ever advocated for tee markers placed 40 yards apart ?
 
That's your exagerated example
 
Equally however, I don't need forty yard wide teeing grounds to decide to tee the ball up on the right if there's OB down that same side, ergo the tee shape remains an irrelevance.

To the contrary, tee width is a critical aspect of the game.
It allows golfers with different abilities and different flight patterns to strategize accordingly.
 
Funny how you advocate for wide fairways but not wide tees