The 6th hole at LACC North seems like a fish hook hole to me. I haven't played it. What do people think of the hole?
In its current form, it can be played like a fishhook--the safest layup leaves a second shot that would be played at a 70-90 degree angle to the tee shot. But from that layup and angle, the second shot is to a very narrow green with bunkers in front and in back.
The alternative, and the reason I don't think it's a fishhook, is to fly the corner and leave a second that plays straight up the length of the green. I think it's about 230 yards from the regular tee to the start of the fairway on that line, and even shorter tee shots on that line might bounce down the hill into the fairway. When I played there, I hit driver directly at the green and had about a 15-yard, uphill pitch that didn't have to navigate any bunkers. I suspect that's how I would play it every time--and I think typical fishhooks don't permit that as an option.
Thanks Carl. It makes me wonder if only average to below-average players will lay-up left and everyone who is a decent player will go for the green. If the decision to go at the green is an easy one, is it because there isn't enough risk with going right at the green?
Eric: Given my game--good with driver and long irons, poor from inside 90--the reward for going at the green (a pretty straightforward pitch rather than a hard 80 yard shot) is worth the risk (leaving it in the trees or on the hill). For others, I would think the calculus would be different. If I were a short hitter, I'd probably take my chances with the 80-yard second.
Also, I don't have an overhead of the hole, but there are other ways to play it, including by playing longer down the "layup" line (going past the 90 degree angle) and pitching back to the green. For
me that option seemed to make less sense, as it still requires a more difficult pitch, but for folks who couldn't make the carry on the direct line it would be worth the risk.