[Nate Oxman]

Is a par 4 or 5 that requires a forced layup of let's say 200 yards short of a hazard (hazard is too long to carry for 90% of amateurs) or to a dogleg that's way too risky to attempt to blow it over and then a second shot of longer than 200 yards automatically deemed a poorly designed golf hole?

[Tom_Doak]

Pretty much yes.


It's an interesting concept, in theory, but I don't know of very many places where it's proven to be popular.


The only hole I've built that's close to that is the 6th at Stonewall (Old).  The best play is to play to the right of the creek off the tee, and take a longer shot into the green, with the slope of the fairway helping to bring the ball back onto the green.  However, I got away with it because I gave the option of blowing your drive over the creek to the left.  That play leaves a poor angle to a green that runs away toward a creek, maybe off a sidehill lie, and maybe behind a tree if you really pull the tee shot ... but it appeases the guys who say it's unfair to make them lay up.


I'm not a big fan of forced lay-up shots because they are boring ... but more because they turn the hole you described into a dull three-shot affair for the higher-handicap golfer.  A much better design would be to have the fairway taper down to very narrow in the landing zone, giving the player the option of trying to thread the needle with their tee shot, or laying back.  The 10th at St. Enodoc is a great example of that.  [You can also hit it up the hill to the right, and try to hit the green from a steep sidehill lie in the rough.  Good luck with that shot!]

[Jon Cavalier]

Here's the 6th at Stonewall that Tom is referring to:



He's being modest - that's a really fine golf hole.

The 2nd hole at Tattersall/Broad Run used to play 7-iron/4-iron over a gorge, but unlike the 6th at Stonewall, the tee shot was much shorter and there were no options.

[Wade Whitehead]

Nate:

15 at Ballyhack doesn't require a longer second shot, but it offers it as a choice.  In fact, from certain teeboxes, it can be a mid iron then a three wood (if the player elects to go for the green).

Over the years, I've determined that this route produces an occasional eagle but makes for fewer birdies than a more "traditional" approach to playing the hole.

Essentially, Lester built a world class par five, then added the short porch as an additional choice.  The criticism I've heard of the hole almost always comes from someone who has failed to notice everything it offers.

It's pretty fascinating that an architect can give the player the choice to hit a longer club into the green than from the tee and that so many players take him up on it.  Having no choice, I agree, might not make for a great hole, but that isn't the case here.

WW

[Thomas Dai]

If you're not a long enough hitter or there's a strong wind against there are holes on the recently GD rated No 1 course in the world where this can apply. One example being the photogenic 9th where if you can't fly your tee-shot over the hill and land it on the short fairway grass but land it on the shaggy downslope instead you may not find the ball. The lay-up area at the top of the hill is pretty tight too and it's an awful long way from there to the green.
Atb

[Doug Siebert]

Wouldn't it depend on the length of the hole, at least to some extent? For a longer hole, definitely. For a shorter hole, I'm not sure.

One of the courses in town has a short par 4, 320 from the regular tees, plays as a dogleg right that's uphill the last 80 yards with a large fairway bunker on the right about 240 yards out. There's a creek that snakes across the fairway, allowing a carry of only 200 to cross it on the right (but leaving a totally blind shot and a terrible angle to the green due to slopes and greenside bunkers) but is longer on the left (210-225 depending on how far left you go) where you have a perfect angle and can see the top portion of the flag. Laying up near the creek isn't easy because the ground slopes downhill the last 20-30 yards short of the creek and the area where you can get closest is on the right where you have that poor angle. So the best place to lay up is to the left around the 150 marker, meaning some players will end up hitting the same club twice, or nearly so.

Is it a bad hole? Now that I think about it, I actually think it is one of the better all-around holes in the area, when considering all levels of golfer. It has a lot of strategy going on for players who can't make the carry or decide against it, there's some obvious risk/reward for players who can make the carry but not every time, and it is very interesting for longer hitters since you have to decide where to place your drive and avoid that bunker on the right when there's no wind, and can give it a go when there's a helping wind (it is about 295 to the front of the green from the back tees as the crow flies, but you're hitting from that 'bad angle' on the right so while I've been short/long/left/right I've only ever driven the fringe, never the putting surface) Since the hole is so short I don't think the way the hole forces those who can't make the carry to lay back so far is really all that bad. If it was 20-30 yards longer I would think it was a bad hole, because shorter hitters laying up at the "150" (that would then be 170-180, uphill) would be practically playing it as a par 5.

[Don Jordan]

I am just working off memory but wasn't this done through course set up at Valhalla for the PGA in 2014? I don't know if it would work for club play but as a device to actually force pro's to have to use a long iron on a Par 4 for their approach shot it made things interesting.

There was an option on the Road Hole but the way it was set up on the last day for the Open a similar effect was found for a large chunk of the field and made things interesting done the stretch.

[Jason Thurman]

I am just working off memory but wasn't this done through course set up at Valhalla for the PGA in 2014? I don't know if it would work for club play but as a device to actually force pro's to have to use a long iron on a Par 4 for their approach shot it made things interesting.

I also thought of 6 at Valhalla, but it doesn't meet the criteria. It doesn't really force a layup for most players, but it does place a premium on accuracy off the tee over distance.

The hole doglegs hard to the right with a creek dividing the driving zone from the final 170 yards or so of the hole. The tee shot allows a solid hit of up to about 260 yards or so (I've only played it from the 6500-ish set of tees, so that's my reference point). The real key, though, is to hit it as far to the right side as you dare - too far and you're wet, but if you play too conservatively like Tiger your approach gets really, really long. I've hit 3 wood off the tee both times I played it and I had a 5 iron in the first time I played it and a 6 iron the most recent time, so it's not a crazy long second shot IF you can position the ball in the right spot.

[astavrides]

The 2nd hole at Tattersall/Broad Run used to play 7-iron/4-iron over a gorge, but unlike the 6th at Stonewall, the tee shot was much shorter and there were no options.

Did they change the hole or does it still play like that?

[James Bennett]

I recall this matter being discussed 10 years ago, with the hole design being referred to as 'cart before the horse' holes.
The prime example that I recall is Huntingdon Valley C2 - a long par 4 dogleg left with an uphill second.  The second shot typically requires a longer shot than the tee shot.  The hole emphasises positioning of the tee shot on the left side to a particular length - anything left to the right is probably getting to the distance that most can't make it.

Personally, I like the hole, and it works similarly to those dogleg left holes with a water hazard on the inside (a Florida hole), ie rewarding play close to the hazard, but the Huntingdon Valley hole doesn't have as severe a penalty for missing the shot a little left on the tee shot, or a little short on the second.

James B

[Sean_A]

I am not really a fan of the idea and can't really think of a good example of the type.  To me, it just seems as though the big hitter is rewarded because big hitters often layup by choice anyway...because they can still reach greens. 


Ciao

[Jon Cavalier]

The 2nd hole at Tattersall/Broad Run used to play 7-iron/4-iron over a gorge, but unlike the 6th at Stonewall, the tee shot was much shorter and there were no options.

Did they change the hole or does it still play like that?

It hadn't been changed last time I was there, and a buddy who plays there often reports that as of this past October, it's the same as it ever was.

[Joe Bausch]

The 2nd hole at Tattersall/Broad Run used to play 7-iron/4-iron over a gorge, but unlike the 6th at Stonewall, the tee shot was much shorter and there were no options.

You must hit a really long 7-iron, Jon!


That hole from the back tee is takes about a 230 yard tee shot to stay comfortably short of the bunch, followed by a 185 yard 2nd.


But, I will agree that I don't think it is a fine hole.

[Nate Oxman]

Those par 4s that provide no choice are what I was thinking about.

Tom, I loved playing the sixth at Stonewall - Old. Were you toying with any other ideas when planning that hole?

Jon, that 7 iron/4 iron par 4, one that presents no other option, is really the type I was thinking about. I played one somewhere in the Phllly area this year but can't recall where. There's a par 5 on the back nine of Penn Oaks GC in Chester County, Pa. that isn't exactly what I was thinking because the dogleg isn't sharp, but it is a narrow hole off the tee that really doesn't provide any legitimate option other than hitting it around 200-215 yards (or playing from a more forward tee) if you can't work the ball one way or the other at will. You're then left with about 300-330.

Wade, I looked at the 15th at Ballyhack on BlueGolf and it looks like it would be a blast to play.

[Jon Cavalier]

Nate - it's an exceedingly crappy hole.

Joe - I don't remember the tee shot being quite as long as 230 or the approach being quite as short as 185. I don't doubt your distances, but I think you must be taking the measurement from the very, very edge of the fairway before it plunges down into the gunch.

[Ken Moum]

I really, really don't like that kind of hole.

My wife, a solid 15-handicap senior, thinks they're evil. Even worse, however, are par-four holes that require a wedge layup second shot, while leaving a looong third.

Back on topic, there's a hole at Colbert Hills that pretty much requires me to hit a 7 iron off the tee, leaving a 220-yard-plus second shot.

It's no fun to walk up on that tee with a 7 iron.

K

[Joe Bausch]

Joe - I don't remember the tee shot being quite as long as 230 or the approach being quite as short as 185. I don't doubt your distances, but I think you must be taking the measurement from the very, very edge of the fairway before it plunges down into the gunch.

Click it out for yourself on Google Earth. 

[Josh Tarble]

I don't automatically hate the concept.  I think there is something to be said for forcing the player to hit a long iron into a green.

Jason mentioned Valhalla #6, which I like well-enough.  He describes the playing characteristics exactly.  And I do think it's interesting because the strategy involved off the tee.  The player will still be hitting a long iron, but aggression and proximity to the river affects the length.

Wolf Run #14 is also a hole that prescribes to this concept.  And it's one I don't love - although it perfectly fits the ideology behind Wolf Run.  But the green is extremely unforgiving and there also isn't much to lay up for a third shot.

[Sven Nilsen]

Here are Donald Ross' thoughts on these types of holes:


"As an illustration, take a hole at North Berwick, where the majority of good golfers play an iron shot first, then a full shot with wood, and then the approach to the green.  An American golfer might say that that was all wrong, as the course should call for a full shot first, but upon examination there is no reason why such a theory should prevail, for the British one surely has the real spirit of golf in it when it says that the way to reach a hole is by using the clubs and by taking the route which will get the player to the green in his own way, which should be better for him than anybody else's way.  So that the golf holes on the best links in Scotland and England have several different ways of playing them and because they do not present just one and the only way to everybody, the interest in the game increases with the diversity of its problems."

[Ken Moum]

Sven, there's a wide gap between people chosing to hit a short club then a long one and forcing virtually every to lay up to a spot 200+ yards from the green.

Here are Donald Ross' thoughts on these types of holes:


"As an illustration, take a hole at North Berwick, where the majority of good golfers play an iron shot first, then a full shot with wood, and then the approach to the green.  An American golfer might say that that was all wrong, as the course should call for a full shot first, but upon examination there is no reason why such a theory should prevail, for the British one surely has the real spirit of golf in it when it says that the way to reach a hole is by using the clubs and by taking the route which will get the player to the green in his own way, which should be better for him than anybody else's way.  So that the golf holes on the best links in Scotland and England have several different ways of playing them and because they do not present just one and the only way to everybody, the interest in the game increases with the diversity of its problems."

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven, there's a wide gap between people chosing to hit a short club then a long one and forcing virtually every to lay up to a spot 200+ yards from the green.

Ken:


I agree, and I think you can interpret Ross' comments at the end of the quote to mean that as long as the player has an option (ala what Tom said above about Stonewall), there isn't anything wrong with hitting the shorter club first.  The converse, of course, is that a limitation of options is a limitation of diversity of problems and a less interesting hole. 


Forgive my extrapolation.


Sven

[Martin Lehmann]

There are quite a few of these holes that can be found on Dutch golf courses. Especially on the ones that were built in the 90s on properties that were too small. To overcome this, architects in those days weren't shy to design treelined 90 degree doglegs to get as much length out of a site. On some of these holes, the second shot into the green is considerably longer than the forced lay-up. Terrible! 

[JESII]

James Bennett,


You have a hell of a memory. I can only remember your holed (or nearly?) bunker shot on the third that day.


I challenge anyone to drop a ball in the vicinity of the 200 yard marker on that 2nd hole of the C-nine at Huntingdon Valley and see anything other than one of the greatest approach shots in all of golf.


Some think it's unfortunate that the tee is only 190 yards away and that the golfer really has no option to get much closer to the green from the tee...I'm blind to those flaws!!!

[Jon Cavalier]

Joe - I don't remember the tee shot being quite as long as 230 or the approach being quite as short as 185. I don't doubt your distances, but I think you must be taking the measurement from the very, very edge of the fairway before it plunges down into the gunch.

Click it out for yourself on Google Earth.

While I appreciate the invitation, I'm hoping to go quite a while before seeing that hole again, whether on the ground or from above.

[James Bennett]

Jim Sullivan

the holed bunker shot on the redan-ish third (a-3) was about the only memorable shot I played that day.
My mind is full of relevant material - some comes to mind readily, others more difficult to extract.

Don't ask me what happened last week though.  Unless it happened on a golf course I was visiting for the first time.

James B

ps  the A-nine - that is the 'NASCAR' routing isn't it, the routing just keeps going left in a long loop, with the embankment higher on the right and lower on the left.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()