I miss doglegs

[Tommy Williamsen]

     I love a dogleg but it seems there are fewer of them on newly designed courses. Surely they are not as pronounced as they once were. There is something fun about being able to cut the dogleg over the trees or hug the inside. Musgrove Mill has a 90 degree dogleg. The tee shot needs to travel about 220-240 yards from the back tee to avoid a nuisance tree. Hit is much farther and you run through the fairway. On 16 at Four Streams if you cut the corner and turn it a bit you can get close to the green. While there are exceptions, it seems that on many newer courses most holes are relatively straight or the dogleg subtler. Are they becoming an anachronism?
 

[Brad Tufts]

I feel like we still have many doglegs on the ground, as the fairway turns around hazards...but as courses remove trees and new courses are built that are wide open, we have fewer doglegs locked in by trees.

Definitely a good trend!  I feel like doglegs through trees are sort of passé at this point.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I miss them, too.  Sometimes my tee shot ends up left of the fairway, other times to the right!


I do believe they are less severe these days, in general.  My mentors had a saying - There are only two instances where I don't like a sharp dogleg - where there are trees on the inside corner, and where there aren't."  The ease of cutting a corner (for big hitters) and the problems of too many average players NOT making it to the corner set up a situation where its just not practical, and not exciting to enough golfers to make it a oft used design feature.

[Duncan Cheslett]

The problem with doglegs on many older courses is that they have ceased to be doglegs for the big hitters.  If nothing else this presents a health and safety issue with flat bellies bombing 300 yard drives over trees with no idea if anyone is in their line of fire.


It is no surprise that they are not built so often these days.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm not convinced that doglegs provide much of a safety concern. Doglegs provide another dimension of thought on the tee. How far do I need to hit the tee shot? Where is the best place to hit my second shot? How much dare I cut off?

[jeffwarne]

I feel like we still have many doglegs on the ground, as the fairway turns around hazards...but as courses remove trees and new courses are built that are wide open, we have fewer doglegs locked in by trees.

Definitely a good trend!  I feel like doglegs through trees are sort of passé at this point.

minor thumbs down.
Vaiety is the spice of life
nothing should ever be :"passe'"
As Tommy says, they are a lot of fun-but like anything a steady diest is not geat.
Sometimes maintaining height for a given distance, or  massive curve are part of the fun.
The "no tree dogleg" is fine, but it's a lot better in the UK where ground firmness demands a cunning shot-rather than something on soft ground that curve matters not at all as long as the ball carries the hazard on any trajectory.


Duncan nails it-modern tech has added danger on older courses and it's another way we make our great game worse

[Thomas Dai]

My preference is for long curves and arcs rather than strict doglegs as this permits more shot variety and play flexibility, but, if it's to be dogleg, then one with a modest angle is more preferable to a tighter one.
Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have designed a few nearly right angle doglegs with pond on the inside corner, maybe a bit like Oakland Hills 16.  When lateral water is present, and the fairway is wide, it makes for a nice risk and reward on a sharp dogleg - Hit it close to the pond and you are closer.   The 14th at Tangleridge in Texas can put you up to 40 yards further from the green by playing safe.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tommy - you're an old school golfer who has managed to stay young at heart. That's a great/ideal combination, but it is a rare one*.  Architects in the modern era know how rare it is, and so tend to design for your complete opposite, ie aging, grumbly has-beens using the very latest equipment and keen on playing only the very best of today's open, treeless golf courses in a doomed and ill-fated attempt to recapture their glory days (which in truth weren't all that glory-filled to begin with). No one can -- and very few even want to try to - hit those fading/curving tee shots around a dogleg that were so prevalent and cool during the persimmon era, and so architects have abandoned them. It's too bad; but there may be a 12 year old out there, playing golf at his/her parents' 1950 parkland course who finds the doglegs great fun, and one day will grow up to design a whole bunch of new ones.
Peter
*I think Jeff Warne might be another of your kind. Me too, in a way, except for the fact that I'm not very good at all.

[Steve Lang]

   Tommy,


today at my 10th hole at The Oaks, a short almost 90 deg dogleg right two shotter, I got by the trap and "that" tree guarding the inside dogleg of the by a club length but still had another's high up branches to negotiate.... as i was chipping on in 3, and getting ready to 2 putt I thought, I'll get it right next time!   So viva le' dogleg, it makes you think, consider the alternatives, and importantly it makes you execute or pay the price... what more can you ask of a golf hole or gca building em, eh??

[Ira Fishman]

Tree, bunker, or pond--great.  More than one of those obstacles on a hole--no thanks--especially if it is a fairly long par 4.  Number 17 at Pine Needles my least favorite hole on one of my favorite courses--the big bunker on the turn is just too much.  On other hand, number 14 is one of my favorite holes.

[Peter Pallotta]

I was watching a while ago the Nelson-Littler match from Pine Valley. The first hole: 425 yard sharp dogleg framed by trees and to a perched green. Littler hit a fine drive, 250 yards to the centre of the fairway, and had a 4 iron left that hit the green and rolled down off the back into the rough, Nelson double crossed himself and pulled his tee shot left, into the rough, from which he had to pitch out and then hit an 8 iron that came up short. If all that is good enough for the No 1 course in the country and a 10 in many people's eyes and good enough for Mr Nelson and Mr Littler, it's good enough for me.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Peter,


Is that the real point?  One pithy example of top ranked golfers on the top ranked course to prove your opinion?


Or in the real world, on the 10,000th rated course, being played by golfers rated 10,000,000th and below of 25,000,000 US golfers, do they still make sense?

[Peter Pallotta]

Jeff - I understand your point, and the PV post was something of an aside for me -- my first post on this thread expresses my views better, ie that the average golfer has never been more coddled than he is today, both in terms of the equipment he uses and the courses he plays; and yet, as spoiled as he is he still complains (more about courses I think than equipment). You and your fellow architects hear those complaints, from golfers and clients, so it is understandable that you should try to deal with them practically and realistically. But I think it is better to admit to the coddling instead of denigrating a kind of golf hole that even a hack like me on my first ever rounds of golf on completely below average courses found intriguing and challenging and on some rare times exhilirating.
Peter

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pete,


Well, LOL....


I think you overstate the case, but maybe not by much.


That is to say, I don't think my mentors came to that conclusion back pre-1977 when I joined their firm.  Maybe golfers have always complained (don't ask what they think of the course, ask what they shot for the same answer is another old saying of theirs) but certainly this was before the modern tech explosion.


I think we hear it more from management or indirectly from golfers disgruntled with speed of play.  We start looking for obstacles to fast play, for both groups, and sharp doglegs are one design feature we can remove when its a design issue, which it probably wouldn't be for PV.  So, I am only "denigrating" it on a course specific basis.


That said, as someone posted, a sharp dogleg at any distance only plays well for those few golfers who it it nearly that exact same distance, and using features that all or most can enjoy about equally seems to make sense, too, complaints or not. I would guess you are in a small percentage who would argue that there should be a few included in every course for your golfing pleasure. 


As you suggest, I am usually forced to design for the tastes of the masses.


Short version - There is such a thing as "the wrong kind of challenge." In the pantheon of desirable design features, sharp doglegs, in general and with exceptions, really ain't that great.  Add in safety issues and space wasting qualities, and there is a lot to recommend against their usage in the normal design project.


But, cheers!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jeff, I agree that very sharp doglegs don't seem to work well much of the time. The the 90 degree dogleg fifth at Musgrove Mill does. When I have brought guys there they always mention it as a hole that shouldn't work but does. One of our long time members had his ashes spread on the hole. Actually they were shot out of a cannon.
Hug the dogleg and you only have 120 yards to the green. Leave it out to right and you have 170 yards. It not only asks the player to hit it a certain length but be accurate as well.

[Tom_Doak]

The loss of doglegs is due to the widened gap between long hitters and short from technology, and the inadequacy of multiple teeing grounds to make up for it.  [If you place the tees so that everyone, in theory, can play to the corner of the dogleg, that still leaves them an approach shot that's a wedge for a low-handicapper and a 4-wood for the ladies.]


Also, safety issues arise because the long guys who are hitting over the trees are probably also hitting over golfers on other holes, and that's a problem.  A dogleg requires more acreage if you can't put anything inside the bend, and on development courses at least, the developer wants to sell those acres instead of wasting them on a doglegged hole.

[Peter Pallotta]

JB - yes, as is my wont, I am probably overstating the case a bit. But I would really hate to see doglegs go the way of the dodo. There is such a sharp dogleg-right on my home course, a modest 1970 public. The entire right side is a huge mound/rise covered in thick forest. Off the tee you need to hit it 200 yards, and then you turn right and have about 145 left to a perched/skyline green. For me it's a 2 iron off the tee, and then an 8 iron, and it's the only 2 iron I get to hit all day. It's fun, and so is trying to get the distance just right because if I mishit it I'm blocked by trees and can't get to the green, and so sometimes the hole provides a good birdie chance and sometimes I'm struggling to save bogey. And yet, even as just a very average golfer, I find none of it 'beyond me'. I am glad there is at least one such hole, and I think some in golf (like Crump) used to agree with me 

[Tommy Williamsen]

Peter, I wish it would be a two iron and eight iron for me. It used to be. Now it's a 16 degree hybrid and a six iron for those distances. Oh well, I gonna be 70. The 60's are a bitch.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tom, Jeff, do you design more doglegs on private clubs?

[Peter Pallotta]

Peter, I wish it would be a two iron and eight iron for me. It used to be. Now it's a 16 degree hybrid and a six iron for those distances. Oh well, I gonna be 70. The 60's are a bitch.

Tommy - from your posts here over the years it seems that for most of your life you were a very good golfer indeed; and that you *still* are a very good golfer, even if you hit it less far than you used to. But that's why it seems to me that you're young at heart, ie in general you don't spend your time -- as most of us do who were once good at something --bemoaning what *used to be*, but instead focus on and don't shrink away from *what is*...even when what is is a tough old fashioned dogleg!

[John McCarthy]

Has anyone here played the 12th at Ridgemoor CC?  It is by far the most frustrating hole on that course for me.  It is a dogleg right, about 110 degrees.  Reverse camber a little, a small uphill tee shot of around a three wood to a downhill green with a left to right cast to the green. 


The problem with the hole?  Two massive cottonwoods in the middle of the dogleg.  The design of the hole, sans cottonwoods is tempt the dogleg.  Play safe (only real option today) are playing from a flat plateau around 180 out (with a real ground game option with a big ditch in front inviting a short shot feeding into the green, if they did not decide to drown that course every night).  If you cut the cottonwoods you have to precisely spot your drive or else hit from rough to a green sloping away to a deep bunker.  It does not help they flattened the greens in the most recent renovation seeking Oakmont speeds since "the course is short". 


Bah.  A great drinking man's club anyway.

[Sean_A]

In theory near 90 degree leggers are okay, in practice they are rarely done well and usually end up favouring the long ball hitter to a great degree.  I much prefer more subtly turning holes because of the choices off the tee.


Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

In theory near 90 degree leggers are okay, in practice they are rarely done well and usually end up favouring the long ball hitter to a great degree.  I much prefer more subtly turning holes because of the choices off the tee.
Ciao

Yank - can you explain your thinking on this? My experience, as per the above post, is that the longer hitter's length advantage is mitigated on the sharp dogleg in a way and to a degree unmatched on any other hole. On every Par 5 he bombs it past me and has a chance to reach the green in two; on every Par 4 he bombs it past me and has a much shorter approach shot; and on every Par 3 he is using 2 or 3 irons 'less' than I am.  Only on the sharp dogleg are we both hitting it a maximum of 200 yards - and though he might use a 4 or 5 iron while I'm using a 2 iron, I can live with that, just as I can live with me using an 8 iron and him using a PW for the approach. It is as close, distance wise, as I get to the longer player all round.
Peter

[Steve Lang]

   Peter,


As a dogleg masochist you might enjoy a match at Tamarac in Lima, OH... not all that far from Ontario...      Certainly not a modern marvel of gca, but played by ordinary people, and some that could matriculate around pretty well. Definitely a Top 25000 course.


Used to play there before work and in an after work league, over 25 years ago...  Dead flat... with some push up greens.. The big hitters hated it, as they had to club down on a handful of holes as you can see, to handle the angles.   Negative, it could take 3 hours for 9 holes and not just because of the beer, folks did wait to go over the trees, but most accepted it wasn't worth it other than for bragging rights...