5 at Cal Club

[Matt_Cohn]

I can't tell if I'm missing something, or maybe some people I've discussed this hole with and I just disagree. And I think enough people on here have played #5 at Cal Club to have a good discussion about it. (BTW, I love Cal Club and think it is absolutely at home in the Top 50 in the world, as Golf Magazine just ranked it!)

The 5th hole is 346/325 and plays somewhat uphill. The overview:


This is a good view from near the tee:


The fairway is 28 yards wide between the bunkers, widening to 45+ yards past the left bunker.

I always hit driver here because it gets me to the widest part of the fairway without going so far that I have an awkward distance in (and if I do end up with 60 yards in...there are worse problems to have). Anything less off the tee and I'd be playing to a narrower fairway with more sand in play, leaving a longer shot in from a worse angle. Meanwhile, the shorter hitters have to contend with both sets of bunkers and only 28 yards of width.

GCA has trained me that short par-4's should have options, and also that longer hitters should have more to contend with. This hole doesn't seem to have either characteristic (although the green and its surrounds are really fun!).

So...would the hole be "better" with a different fairway bunker arrangement (like, backwards of what it is now, making a longer tee shot down the right side of the fairway a risky play)? Or am I missing something, either about the hole or how it fits in with the rest of the course?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Matt, why does only the long hitter have to contend with more stuff? Wouldn't that make a boring course for the short hitter, who should be challenged from time to time as well?

Not every hole has to be "super strategic" IMO. Some holes are okay with just saying "hey, here's the shot, let's see if you can pull it off." I see this hole (I haven't played it) as a mixture of the two. There's strategy because you can choose to lay up, but if you can carry it 250… the play is almost always to go for the driver and then it's more of a straightforward "can you beat the challenge" type of hole.

And to be clear, this hole is not without risk/reward. You still have to carry the ball 250+ uphill and to a fairway that doesn't get wider until about 265. 45 yards is not wide enough that even a good player will expect more than about 60-70% of his tee shots to land in that area.

[corey miller]

I have not played Cal Club but I would offer that I am much more a fan of random-ish bunkering that fits into the landscape regardless of what that may do with strategy on individual holes.  This philosophy (thank you George Bahto) worked out very well (numerous natural landforms in strategic places) in the restoration I was involved in.  That said, these forms are a little "easier to find" when free reign is given to the architect in the field.


For #5 and the above, I feel the two left bunkers look a lot better and more natural than the right without regard to strategy.  If the right side hazards moved farther from the tee looked better (more natural) than what is there I would opt for that strategy.

[Eric LeFante]

Matt,


I agree with your premise that the long hitter has too much of an advantage on this hole. I think the fairway should be narrowed past the bunkers to 30 yards. A good tee shot with driver will be rewarded by having a short shot into the green but will be penalized by having a less than full shot out of the rough, making it difficult to hold the green. Currently there isn't much risk to hitting driver for the long hitter.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I agree with your premise that the long hitter has too much of an advantage on this hole. I think the fairway should be narrowed past the bunkers to 30 yards. A good tee shot with driver will be rewarded by having a short shot into the green but will be penalized by having a less than full shot out of the rough, making it difficult to hold the green. Currently there isn't much risk to hitting driver for the long hitter.

Why do we always have to punish the longer hitter? Why is the idea that they'll have a shorter shot in the ONLY reward they should have? What's wrong with a hole that simply rewards the guy who can hit it 250+? If you can't, it's not like the hole is unplayable.

I've played a hole where there's a small creek at 250 or so, and anyone who can carry it gets very close to the green with a downslope (~30 yards), while others who have to lay back are left with 130 to 140 yards. Sometimes I think it's okay for a hole to say "Can you hit this shot?" and extra reward you if you can. Hitting the ball far and still somewhat straight (it's not like 45 yards wide is the first/18th at TOC) is a skill, too.

[John Kirk]

I agree with Erik (as usual) and I enjoyed this hole when I played it.  And I am amazed by people who can hit the ball so far.

[Carl Nichols]

Matt,
What's a typical distance for your second shot if you hit driver?  My concern (in 6 rounds total, all from the 325 tees I believe) was that even if I hit the fairway, driver would leave me with a short pitch to a severely uphill and small green.  I thus thought the hole presented me with three choices off the tee:  (1) hit driver but potentially leave a short/difficult pitch (and of course the possibility of missing the fairway); (2) take on the bunkers at my preferred yardage for a fuller second shot (say 100 yards); or (3) lay up short of the bunkers but obviously leaving a longer shot.  But perhaps I was overthinking how difficult the second shot might be from past the bunkers. 

[Matt_Cohn]

hit driver but potentially leave a short/difficult pitch

I would generally hit my driver 260-270 up that hill, leaving 70-90 yards depending on the hole location—totally comfortable. I can understand that a longer hitter might have 50 yards in and some would consider that difficult (though only if the hole is in the front). So maybe that's a subtle hidden thing I'm not seeing?

[Eric LeFante]

I agree with your premise that the long hitter has too much of an advantage on this hole. I think the fairway should be narrowed past the bunkers to 30 yards. A good tee shot with driver will be rewarded by having a short shot into the green but will be penalized by having a less than full shot out of the rough, making it difficult to hold the green. Currently there isn't much risk to hitting driver for the long hitter.

Why do we always have to punish the longer hitter? Why is the idea that they'll have a shorter shot in the ONLY reward they should have? What's wrong with a hole that simply rewards the guy who can hit it 250+? If you can't, it's not like the hole is unplayable.

I've played a hole where there's a small creek at 250 or so, and anyone who can carry it gets very close to the green with a downslope (~30 yards), while others who have to lay back are left with 130 to 140 yards. Sometimes I think it's okay for a hole to say "Can you hit this shot?" and extra reward you if you can. Hitting the ball far and still somewhat straight (it's not like 45 yards wide is the first/18th at TOC) is a skill, too.

How is making the fairway the same width for the long hitter as the short hitter punishing the long hitter?

[Ben Stephens]

How about moving the front green side bunker further down the fairway and leave a shaved bank in front of the green for balls that are short of the green and then roll back? This would make it more challenging for the longer hitter as well as scare the short hitter for their second shot. This is subtle change to the character of the hole however it makes it slightly more strategic

[John Handley]

Being a Cal Club member for 13 years, I have played #5 many times.  So here is my take...


Overall, it is not the most challenging hole on the golf course.  In my mind, that is ok because you have just dealt with #2 and #3 which are very difficult par 4's.  #6 is one of the hardest par 3's on the course.  So if I can get a relatively easy par, then that helps.


The best strategy on what to hit off the tee is really determined by the pin placement.  I am a longer hitter so mostly I take drive because that typically will take the fairway bunkers out of play.  Danger with driver is if you push it right, you are in trouble but if you hit it in the fairway, you are typically 60 (ish) yards away.  It is well known that is not an easy shot for any player.  Here is where the pin placement makes all the difference.  If it is back left, it's pretty simple as there is a back stop by using the slope (more margin for error).  If the pin is in the middle of the green you have a chance to stop the ball somewhat close for a birdie opportunity (not much margin for error).  IF the pin is front right, forget it.  There is very little chance to stop the ball and get it anywhere close to the hole.


So in terms of being a strategic short par 4, I think you need to examine the way to play #5 a little more in depth.  If the pin is front right, I may hit a 2 iron (which brings the fairway bunkers into play) but if I can hit it straight and avoid them, I have a full shot in with either a PW or GW.


Many good players walk off #5 with bogey.  And they're not happy!  The green and bunkering are it's defense.  So all in all, I like the hole and it does require some thinking instead of just going bombs away.

[Ben Stephens]

Being a Cal Club member for 13 years, I have played #5 many times.  So here is my take...


Overall, it is not the most challenging hole on the golf course.  In my mind, that is ok because you have just dealt with #2 and #3 which are very difficult par 4's.  #6 is one of the hardest par 3's on the course.  So if I can get a relatively easy par, then that helps.


The best strategy on what to hit off the tee is really determined by the pin placement.  I am a longer hitter so mostly I take drive because that typically will take the fairway bunkers out of play.  Danger with driver is if you push it right, you are in trouble but if you hit it in the fairway, you are typically 60 (ish) yards away.  It is well known that is not an easy shot for any player.  Here is where the pin placement makes all the difference.  If it is back left, it's pretty simple as there is a back stop by using the slope (more margin for error).  If the pin is in the middle of the green you have a chance to stop the ball somewhat close for a birdie opportunity (not much margin for error).  IF the pin is front right, forget it.  There is very little chance to stop the ball and get it anywhere close to the hole.


So in terms of being a strategic short par 4, I think you need to examine the way to play #5 a little more in depth.  If the pin is front right, I may hit a 2 iron (which brings the fairway bunkers into play) but if I can hit it straight and avoid them, I have a full shot in with either a PW or GW.


Many good players walk off #5 with bogey.  And they're not happy!  The green and bunkering are it's defense.  So all in all, I like the hole and it does require some thinking instead of just going bombs away.

Hi John,


Thank you for the insight on how the hole plays. I have never been to Cal Club. Regarding your comment on 60 yards shots how many feet is the green above the fairway/ball lie from 60 yards also how firm are the greens?


Cheers
Ben

[John Handley]

Ben-


The greens are very firm.  The green sits about 5 feet or so above the fairway when you are right in front of the green but from 60 yards out it may be 6 or 7 feet.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

How is making the fairway the same width for the long hitter as the short hitter punishing the long hitter?

I took the person I quoted as saying they should "narrow" the fairway past the bunkers as relative to between the bunkers, not relative to how it is now. My mistake. As it is, I like that there's an "extra" bonus of a bit more width if you can pull off the shot.

A friend of mine who has played Cal Club a number of times and understands some statistics and how that impacts GamePlanning doesn't care where the flag is - he hits driver every time. A 60-yard shot is still more likely to get closer to the hole than a shot from 120, even with relatively firm greens. He said that given how firm the greens are, it's not like you're spinning back a full wedge anyway.

I haven't played the course, and my information above is based only on a friend's account (though he's played there a fair amount), combined with the statistics I've got. As such, I'm not prepared to die on the hill I'm about to make, but I feel strongly enough about it to state it and leave it here. No more, necessarily. It is this: I think sometimes some "old school" types (no offense intended by that) see "strategy" where there really isn't any simply because that's how things used to be or how they've always played it. Like I said in the prior paragraph, even if the pin is front right, the odds on play is probably still to hit driver. Just like the odds on play at Dormie Club's 14th is to get up there just short of the greenside bunker if you can, leaving a little pitch to the green. The single biggest determinant of how close your ball finishes to the hole is how far away it was before you hit it: except in extreme cases, you'll hit it closer from closer.

[Kalen Braley]

Erik,


You asked early should long hitters have extra rewards too and I would ask in return isn't being long off the tee already its own reward?  The reams of data you have presented and research in general point to distance off the tee and being long in general as the number 1 advantage to have over your competition.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

You asked early should long hitters have extra rewards too and I would ask in return isn't being long off the tee already its own reward?

Hence the word "extra" before "rewards," Kalen. 

And not always, but occasionally, I feel like they deserve an "extra" reward besides just having a shorter shot in. I think that's within the context of what I said earlier, too. I could make the case that the distance they hit the ball isn't a reward at all, too - it's just the result of their shot. So, I could even ditch the "extra" and say "reward" - in this case, a wider target.

[Pete_Pittock]

I have not had the pleasure.  Do I read your digits correctly that it is only about 150 to carry the left bunkers, since it is 365 yards long and being by the bunkers leaves a 215 shot?

[Joel_Stewart]

It's not one of the more eventful holes at Cal Club.


I spoke with Kyle Phillips about it and said it was an original hole so he didn't want to alter it.


Personally I thought that there's a much better green site about 30 yards to the right.


I also believe that Cal Club doesn't have a driveable par 4 and this could have been the hole but it's slightly too long and that nasty bunker in the front makes it impossible. 


Nobody has mentioned this is a fairly severe green, maybe the most severe on the course. If you're above the hole you can forget it!

[David_Tepper]

Pete P. -

Be sure to scroll the picture all the way to the right, to see where the 5th green is located. The green on the left side of the pic is the 4th green. The 5th tee is below the 4th green. The numbers shown (215/235/265) are the distance from that tee box moving to the right.

DT

[Carl Nichols]

How is making the fairway the same width for the long hitter as the short hitter punishing the long hitter?

I took the person I quoted as saying they should "narrow" the fairway past the bunkers as relative to between the bunkers, not relative to how it is now. My mistake. As it is, I like that there's an "extra" bonus of a bit more width if you can pull off the shot.

A friend of mine who has played Cal Club a number of times and understands some statistics and how that impacts GamePlanning doesn't care where the flag is - he hits driver every time. A 60-yard shot is still more likely to get closer to the hole than a shot from 120, even with relatively firm greens. He said that given how firm the greens are, it's not like you're spinning back a full wedge anyway.

I haven't played the course, and my information above is based only on a friend's account (though he's played there a fair amount), combined with the statistics I've got. As such, I'm not prepared to die on the hill I'm about to make, but I feel strongly enough about it to state it and leave it here. No more, necessarily. It is this: I think sometimes some "old school" types (no offense intended by that) see "strategy" where there really isn't any simply because that's how things used to be or how they've always played it. Like I said in the prior paragraph, even if the pin is front right, the odds on play is probably still to hit driver. Just like the odds on play at Dormie Club's 14th is to get up there just short of the greenside bunker if you can, leaving a little pitch to the green. The single biggest determinant of how close your ball finishes to the hole is how far away it was before you hit it: except in extreme cases, you'll hit it closer from closer.

Those are all fair points.  For me personally, given my terrible pitching/chipping game, I would guess that my average expected score from hitting driver and a 50-yard pitch to this green would be higher than my expected score from laying up and having a full swing....but mostly because my wedge game is so relatively weak.  I'm sure for others it's a much different calculus.   

[John Handley]

@Pete Pittock

I would say it's around 250 to carry the left bunker from the Back tee, not the Venturi tee which is another 20 ish yards back.

[Tal Oz]

I've only played Cal Club once and paid the price for leaving my approach in the front bunker. I wouldn't change anything around the green. However the more I think about the drive, the more I'd want to see that last fairway bunker on the right pushed closer to the green and closer to the fairway. Starting roughly 275y from the Venturi tees and 65y from a front right pin. Something to give the longer hitters something to think about or have them rev back to a 3w.

[Lov Goel]

So...would the hole be "better" with a different fairway bunker arrangement (like, backwards of what it is now, making a longer tee shot down the right side of the fairway a risky play)? Or am I missing something, either about the hole or how it fits in with the rest of the course?

Hi Matt ,
I've thought about this debate quite a few times since we started it a few weeks ago, and have finally arrived at what I think is the best answer to your initial question - I think the (as designed) hole fits into the rest of the course extremely well for even the long hitter given the holes that play around it.  To build on John's comment above, most folks view 5 as a "breather," but end up walking off with a bogey.  I think it's one of the better mental challenges at Cal to stay focused on hitting two very high quality shots on this hole as you've just gone through the gauntlet of 2-3, and had a par 5 that's likely unreachable for even the longest hitters (our mutual friend excluded), and are about to run into 6.

The other argument for this fitting into the character of the course is the parity with the back nine.  There are two "recovery holes on this course - 5 and 11 - that provide a bit of a breather before the challenge of the "difficult" par 3 of the side.  I will agree that this is the weaker of the two arguments, but again, you've just gone through 9 and 10, and are about to run into 12-14 (the hardest stretch on the course).  The same mental challenge of staying focused on the "breather" hole is real for the members.

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

To add to the conversation, it's an opportunity to test the player's wedge game. Especially in match-play where, like all short holes, missing the aggressive approach leaves a very tough recovery to one of the more challenging greens.

[Alex Miller]

I believe 5 at Cal Club is actually a very good hole strategically, but the bunker pattern does not fit with what we're used to seeing for short par 4's due to the uphill nature of the hole. Allow me to explain...


The approach to the green is significantly uphill, and unlikely to be into the wind. While there is a backstop on the left side that is useful for back left hole locations, everywhere else on the green requires a controlled, high trajectory, and fairly high spin shot to hit, hold, and give the golfer a good chance at birdie.


My last time playing the course, I decided that hitting driver would be advantageous as I could take the right side bunkers out of play completely. I hit a good drive down the middle, which was not a guarantee. Not quite the preferred right side but I was in good shape and had 68 yards left to the hole.


Playing to a front left hole location I found myself staring at far more front bunker than visible flagstick. I don't mind less than full wedges or even opening the face up, but this was not exactly the position I wanted to be in. My full lob is comfortably 85-90 yards, and other full wedge distances would have put me right between the bunkers off the tee. Turns out they are protecting prime real estate. I ended up safely on the back of the green and two putted for par. I didn't feel like I missed my birdie opportunity on the hole but did play the hole in a riskier fashion than necessary. If given the option again I'd probably lay up short of the left fairway trap to leave 120-125.


To conclude - the fairway bunkering does not mesh with the greensite in a way to scream "HEY, PLAY THE HOLE THIS WAY FOR A BIRDIE" but does offer distinct risks/rewards in how the player chooses his route. If I played there often I'd imagine my strategy would change depending on what clubs were working in my bag and where the pin was located that day. That to me, is at the least a solid golf hole.