Par 5 7th hole at Valhalla

[Tim Martin]

For those that have played the hole who likes it? The double fairway has most of the players favoring the left side which is reportedly a forty yard advantage over the right. How much forward are the member tees?

[David Cronan]

Hey Tim,


In all the times I played Valhalla (about 100), I never once played the left fairway on #7, even when I was scratch. The risk/reward for me just didn't make it a prudent play as the 2nd is all carry over water, with the drop being from that left fairway, leaving a very long carry over the water for a 4th shot.


If memory serves, the member tees are between 480-530. The course has a shitton of tees.

[Nigel Islam]

On the card the hole is 600 as it becomes a boomerang hole from that tee. The hole is really only 550 yards from the back using the left fairway.  The black tees are 505 (green tees 490 yards,) and there is no benefit to use the left fairway. The tees move to the right as you move forward.


The left fairway is pretty wide, but it is a tough layup from there. But for a pro golfer or high level am it is a no brainer to go left. There are a lot of tee shots on the course that are easier for pros. Everything is angled there and it is all about controlling distance off the tee to hit the fairway.


Valhalla is pretty good course. It is not Royal County Down, but we do not have a plethora of options in Kentuckiana.

[Matt Kardash]

Seems like if you are an elite golfer it is a no-brainer to go left. If you are anyone else you go right. I don't think that makes it a compelling split fairway hole.

[Kalen Braley]

That seems to be the case.

They had a graphic up yesterday that said on average players who go left score a full half stroke better than those who go right.

[Tom_Doak]

Seems like if you are an elite golfer it is a no-brainer to go left. If you are anyone else you go right. I don't think that makes it a compelling split fairway hole.

This is the case for most alternate-fairway holes, which is why I was never a fan of them.


However, I have been working on a hole in Texas that I think is the opposite.  It gives the short hitter a shortcut to the hole and a better angle of approach for their skills, but it's a layup for the long hitter to take the shortcut.  I am very curious to see how "better" golfers decide to attack the hole.

[Rob Marshall]

The course looks great but would it be a major championship course if the PGA hadn’t owed it?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

It gives the short hitter a shortcut to the hole and a better angle of approach for their skills

Curious what you mean by that.

[cary lichtenstein]

Wonderful tournament

[Matt MacIver]

I like the split fairways and them in general…we bemoan lack of strategy/choices/options and then when they’re provided say they’re really not options. 


What about weather-dependent distance changes, F&F vs soft, moving the tees around routinely, etc? 


I also think #18’s split fairway is ok (good); maybe the horseshoe green with distinct left and right pinable areas makes it so. 

[Matt_Cohn]

It gives the short hitter a shortcut to the hole and a better angle of approach for their skills

Curious what you mean by that.

I can only assume this means an open front of the green, whereas if the longer hitter wants to hit driver they’ll have to play to a worse angle, though that might not bother them as much on a shorter pitch shot.

[Tom_Doak]

It gives the short hitter a shortcut to the hole and a better angle of approach for their skills

Curious what you mean by that.

They will be coming into the green lengthwise and from a position level with the green.  You can't really bounce it on, because there's a big dip between the upper fairway and the green, but you've still got a lot more room to stop the ball.


If they go left off the tee, instead, they'll have a somewhat longer approach because they can't the corner as easily as the big hitter, but more importantly, the green is shallow from that angle, and lots of shots that are short of the green will come back down the hill in front.  That probably won't bother the long hitter as much, so I'm thinking they'll be more likely to play to the left instead of laying back on the direct line.  But if the wind is left to right, then that downwind approach from the left will be hard to get close.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

It gives the short hitter a shortcut to the hole and a better angle of approach for their skills

Curious what you mean by that.

They will be coming into the green lengthwise and from a position level with the green.  You can't really bounce it on, because there's a big dip between the upper fairway and the green, but you've still got a lot more room to stop the ball.

If they go left off the tee, instead, they'll have a somewhat longer approach because they can't the corner as easily as the big hitter, but more importantly, the green is shallow from that angle, and lots of shots that are short of the green will come back down the hill in front.  That probably won't bother the long hitter as much, so I'm thinking they'll be more likely to play to the left instead of laying back on the direct line.  But if the wind is left to right, then that downwind approach from the left will be hard to get close.

Thank you for the answer.

I suppose I thought you were saying that the shorter hitter has different skills or something.

Now, there are a lot of dumb golfers out there, but if the "right" route is the better route for the short hitter (in general), then the "right" route is the better route for the long hitter, too: he might just hit a driving iron instead of a driver. The longer the hitter, generally speaking, the better the player. The more skilled the player. Not because of their length per se, and there are exceptions, but length correlates strongly to skill, as does accuracy.

Now again, there are a lot of dumb golfers, so maybe the longer hitter doesn't like the option that takes driver out of their hands, but the "right" route is still likely the better option for them if it's the better option for a shorter hitter.

[Michael Felton]

I would think if:


- you have a split fairway where the fairway on the right ends at say 150 yards from the green
- then you have rough between that fairway and the green
- the fairway on the left curves around and ends at 70 yards from the green
- the green is angled such that playing from the right fairway means you're playing up the length of the green
- the shot from the left fairway would be across the green, so shallow


Then the longer hitter should choose the left side because they get so much closer to the hole, while the short hitter plays to the right fairway because they can't get it closer than 150 anyway and the shape of the green means an easier shot from the right fairway. I'd think that if the right fairway is the right play for the long hitter, then that would mean that the better angle is worth giving up 50-70 yards. At the very least that would be acknowledging that angles do matter.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I would think if:

I suppose that something like that could be the case (though I don't know about giving up 50-80 yards - that'd be quite the difference between the "short hitter" and the "long hitter"). I — and a few others I asked — took the original post about this as the short hitter having different (better?) skills in some areas.

[Michael Felton]

I would think if:

I suppose that something like that could be the case (though I don't know about giving up 50-80 yards - that'd be quite the difference between the "short hitter" and the "long hitter"). I — and a few others I asked — took the original post about this as the short hitter having different (better?) skills in some areas.

50 yards is about the difference between driver and 2 iron (for me at any rate). Granted there are not many people who are 50 yards shorter than me and are decent golfers, although I'm sure there are some. But either way - call it 30-50 yards then. Same point applies I think.


I am curious to see the hole in question. I wonder how close it is to what is in my head.


One other thing I would note is if we are talking about long vs short PGA Tour players, then the shorter ones better be pretty darn good at something or they wouldn't be out on tour in the first place. So it's conceivable that Tom is talking about players who are shorter but more highly skilled in something. Wedge play most likely. Gary Wolstenholme would be a good example of that. Lucky to hit a driver 240, but he could hit 5 wood from 190 closer than most people could hit a wedge. I watched him play at my club back in England once and it was quite something. His putting was also ridiculous.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

50 yards is about the difference between driver and 2 iron

Like I said, I and others I asked all took it to mean that Tom was saying the shorter hitter is more skilled at something. Your explanation for a possible other reason was fine.

One other thing I would note is if we are talking about long vs short PGA Tour players, then the shorter ones…

I don't think we are talking about Tour players.

[Michael Felton]

50 yards is about the difference between driver and 2 iron

Like I said, I and others I asked all took it to mean that Tom was saying the shorter hitter is more skilled at something. Your explanation for a possible other reason was fine.

One other thing I would note is if we are talking about long vs short PGA Tour players, then the shorter ones…

I don't think we are talking about Tour players.

Reading it back I think perhaps what he means is the shorter hitters will hit it lower and with less spin, so the open front gives them a chance to hold the green (i.e. a playable option for their skillset). I see how you could read it as meaning some skill that the longer player doesn't have, but I don't think that's the only read.

[Tom_Doak]

I didn’t say the short hitter has better skills, but they certainly have a different balance of skills, and my goal was to build a hole they’d try to play differently.


Michael Felton’s description of the hole is largely correct: the upper fairway ends at 100-110 yards (250 from back tee, 200-220 from normal tee).  Between there and the green there is about 40 yards of rough and small trees, a bunker that would leave you an awful 50-yard uphill bunker shot, and a fairly steep slope back up to the green.  A handful of Tour pros might have enough to go for the green.


The upper fairway is fairly narrow and there are a couple of small trees that could block out an approach if you stray. My guess is that many of the longer hitters are more comfortable hitting driver over the corner to a wide fairway, than 5-iron to a narrow one that leaves them further from the green.  Conversely, anyone who struggles with length would prefer the upper route, unless they also struggle with a 200-yard straight shot.


When the course is finished and we have a good as-built, I will post it on my Instagram for discussion.

[Tom_Doak]

The 4th at Liso would be another good case study comparison to the hole at Valhalla.  The historical island fairway for that hole did not make much sense for today’s elite players (it ended at about 270 yards leaving 200 to go), but trying to decide the best length for a new back tee depends on the player you want to attract.  The carry to the island fairway was originally +/- 200 yards, so if you add more than 30, you start sending more and more players to the left.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I didn’t say the short hitter has better skills, but they certainly have a different balance of skills, and my goal was to build a hole they’d try to play differently.

Okay. I'm glad I asked, as I and a few (like two or three) others read it as if you might be saying that the short hitter was maybe more accurate or were better with wedges or… some other such thing.

I get what you mean now and agree that the longer hitter is likely to want to enjoy the width.