Wesley Bryan Golf Course Concept

[Ben Hollerbach]

PGA Tour player Wesley Bryan posted this golf course concept recently on twitter:

"6 par 5’s
6 par 4’s (2 driveable)
6 par 3’s (2 of them under 100 yds)

No bunkers, only waste areas

No primary rough, only intermediate cut 

10 yard wide fairways

Small undulating greens"

He followed it up with a bit more:

"Every hole would have 30+ yards of intermediate cut before waste areas/trees to make it visually look the same from trouble to trouble,” adding that “Average golfers would prefer to hit from a slightly fluffier lie. Tour players prefer a tight fairway. This way the best players would only get rewarded for perfect drives. Average players will hit better shots from intermediate cut.”

In other words, 40+ yard wide fairways cut to ~.75 inches, with a 10 yard strip down the middle cut to less than .5 inches? Almost makes me think of bowling lane oiling patterns.

I would not be proposed to all sand being waste area, would allow rakes to be a bit more optional.

[Ryan Book]

His heart is in the right place. What I would find really curious is to have professional-caliber golfers draw lines on diagrams of classic courses to demonstrate where the "best tee shots" should land. Seems common sense enough to me that I should need to play as near as possible to a fairway hazard to have the best angle in and, therefore, this is where the 10-yard strip should guide me. Does the professional bomber see it the same way? Or does his perfect drive get him so near to the green that he can air away from the same fairway hazard off the tee, and therefore his 10-yard strip would head directly to that point?

[Ben Hollerbach]

His heart is in the right place. What I would find really curious is to have professional-caliber golfers draw lines on diagrams of classic courses to demonstrate where the "best tee shots" should land. Seems common sense enough to me that I should need to play as near as possible to a fairway hazard to have the best angle in and, therefore, this is where the 10-yard strip should guide me. Does the professional bomber see it the same way? Or does his perfect drive get him so near to the green that he can air away from the same fairway hazard off the tee, and therefore his 10-yard strip would head directly to that point?

I'm intrigued by the idea that this idea fairway strip does not have to go down the middle of the fairway and does not have to follow the normal line of the hole. But at the same time, I'm not sure if there is truly enough of an advantage on the approach shot for a player to be chasing the 10 yard strip. I think the height of the intermediate would dictate the detriment to the better players ability to generate and manage spin.

[Michael Felton]

His heart is in the right place. What I would find really curious is to have professional-caliber golfers draw lines on diagrams of classic courses to demonstrate where the "best tee shots" should land. Seems common sense enough to me that I should need to play as near as possible to a fairway hazard to have the best angle in and, therefore, this is where the 10-yard strip should guide me. Does the professional bomber see it the same way? Or does his perfect drive get him so near to the green that he can air away from the same fairway hazard off the tee, and therefore his 10-yard strip would head directly to that point?

I'm intrigued by the idea that this idea fairway strip does not have to go down the middle of the fairway and does not have to follow the normal line of the hole. But at the same time, I'm not sure if there is truly enough of an advantage on the approach shot for a player to be chasing the 10 yard strip. I think the height of the intermediate would dictate the detriment to the better players ability to generate and manage spin.

I do quite like the idea, but 10 yards wide is nasty if it's not in a straight line from the tee. Hitting it straight enough to get in the 10 yard wide strip is one thing, but having good enough distance control with your driver to hit it in there when it's running across you is tough and I think trends too much towards sheer luck of the bounce.

[Sam Morrow]

I think he's overthinking things but he had me intrigued until the 10 yard wide fairway thing. 


Instead of reinventing the wheel just go out and design the best course you can, there are plenty of fine architects doing that right now.

[Thomas Dai]

On first reading this would appear to have general merit.
As to the 10 yrd strip, there’s a pretty good chance that a shot landing on the 10 yr strip will bounce off to one side or the other and end up in what he terms the intermediate.
Atb

[Kyle Harris]

I think it says more about what Tour Pros don't like playing (three-shot Par 5s and long Par 3s) than it does about how to accomodate amateur and recreational golfers.

BTW, what the heck is a waste area? How do I find that marked on the golf course? Is the word "bunker" really all that scary?

[Michael Felton]

Didn't Seve once say that he wished fairways were one yard wide? That way everyone would be playing from the rough and not just him.

[Sam Morrow]

Didn't Seve once say that he wished fairways were one yard wide? That way everyone would be playing from the rough and not just him.

Yes but Seve had charisma, this guy is more famous for social media.

[Tom_Doak]

I don't understand the "shorter fairway" concept as we have been told for years that the players don't care about the fairway per se and just bomb it as far as possible off the tee.


Why would they chase a fairway that's ten yards wide if it's near trouble?  They wouldn't.  But, maybe they would be rewarded for hitting a straight drive on a hole with no hazards to make them play safely to one side.


Also, "six par 5s" means six birdie holes for elite players.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Has anyone played Solina in Columbia, SC? I wonder what he did there.

[Michael Felton]

Has anyone played Solina in Columbia, SC? I wonder what he did there.

Not played it, but seen it on videos quite a bit. It looks like a normal golf course - he certainly didn't do this there.

[jeffwarne]

He"s onto something and it's different.
I like the outside the box thinking.



Alternatively,fairways could return to a reasonable height-say 1/2 inch and 99%would enjoy it more and the other 1% could separate themselves by exercising judgement and skill with the odd potential flier lie.

[Tom_Doak]

He"s onto something and it's different.
I like the outside the box thinking.

Alternatively,fairways could return to a reasonable height-say 1/2 inch and 99%would enjoy it more and the other 1% could separate themselves by exercising judgement and skill with the odd potential flier lie.

How about 5/8 of an inch while you’re at it, so the good players aren’t quite so good?


When the USGA banned Ping’s square grooves, I had the thought that we could have kept the clubs and let the fairways be shaggier, which would have saved everyone a lot of $ in the long term.  But that’s the opposite of how the golf business works.  It’s all about making things more expensive so people can make more $ off the golfers.

[Ben Malach]

Honestly who gives a shit without land to back it up.




build something and then sell the idea. I personally think that the Bryant bros are great at promoting the game but they lack the depth that’s required to understand it

[Ryan Van Culin]

I like most of what he proposes, and I think it shows that he IS thinking about average players and not just pros.


I think having more par 5's is great for average players because it give them permission to lay up. Put most golfers on a 480-yard hole, and if it is a par 4, they will believe they have to go for it in 2, because of the par number. If it's a par 5, and they don't have a great lie, or whatever else the case, they will be more inclined to lay up and leave a wedge approach.


Also, having six par 3s gives more opportunity of hitting approaches off a level lie, in fairway-length grass. So, while he is having you hit off intermediate rough on most holes, you now have 6 holes where you are guaranteed a perfect lie, on fairway turf. I'd love to see 2 medium, 2 short, and 2 long holes. I think something we often forget is that in "golden age" architecture, they weren't afraid to hit woods and even drivers on par 3 holes.

[Charlie Goerges]

I like most of what he proposes, and I think it shows that he IS thinking about average players and not just pros.


I think having more par 5's is great for average players because it give them permission to lay up. Put most golfers on a 480-yard hole, and if it is a par 4, they will believe they have to go for it in 2, because of the par number. If it's a par 5, and they don't have a great lie, or whatever else the case, they will be more inclined to lay up and leave a wedge approach.


Also, having six par 3s gives more opportunity of hitting approaches off a level lie, in fairway-length grass. So, while he is having you hit off intermediate rough on most holes, you now have 6 holes where you are guaranteed a perfect lie, on fairway turf. I'd love to see 2 medium, 2 short, and 2 long holes. I think something we often forget is that in "golden age" architecture, they weren't afraid to hit woods and even drivers on par 3 holes.

I like this take. I'd only add a couple of things. The intermediate rough isn't an issue at all (as long as it isn't too lush), my dad would almost always rather hit out of dry 1.5 inch rough (I'm happier there with my long irons and woods too). And the par 5 thing is absolutely true, but only if they could get close with two good shots, because then laying back and hitting a solid short iron 3rd (or excellent longer iron) really feels like something.

[Tags:]

Tags: