[Jordan Wall]

After recent talk about tree removal and how it could benefit some courses, I was surprised to see new trees added on the inside of the dogleg 15th hole at Bay Hill.

I am confused as to why trees are continually added to courses and there is no tree removal when trees interfere with the playability of a course.

If nobody really likes the addition of trees, why are courses continually planting them??  And, if tree removal would benefit courses, why is it not being done anymore??

[PThomas]

my young friend:  a lot of courses ARE takin' 'em out:  Oakmont, Olympic, my home course of Ravisloe, Old Elm in CHicago, etc....

I guess those crews just haven't gotten the call to get to work out in New Jersey yet, if you get  ;)my drift

[Jordan Wall]

my young friend:  a lot of courses ARE takin' 'em out:  Oakmont, Olympic, my home course of Ravisloe, Old Elm in CHicago, etc....

I guess those crews just haven't gotten the call to get to work out in New Jersey yet, if you get  ;)my drift

Or Augusta...

[Brian Noser]

I believe those trees were added to combat the distance issue off the tee. It was to prevent people cutting the corner. Trees are not always as bad as some think. if the didtances were not out of whack the trees would not have been planted, but that is another discussion.

[PThomas]

my young friend:  a lot of courses ARE takin' 'em out:  Oakmont, Olympic, my home course of Ravisloe, Old Elm in CHicago, etc....

I guess those crews just haven't gotten the call to get to work out in New Jersey yet, if you get  ;)my drift

Or Augusta...

well done Jordan!

[Kyle Harris]

Jordan,

The adding of select specimen hardwoods can enhance a course - especially under the direction of someone who knows what he is doing.

In 1949, one of the Ross contractors (I think Frank James) added several specimen oak trees to the PSU White Course that have a great influence on play today. In fact, these trees are the only ones I'd keep on the course as they affect shotmaking and decision making, but allow the golfer the freedom and choice to decide how to play (and if) to play near them.

Coincidentally, there are only 5 of them - in select spots.

[Jordan Wall]

I believe those trees were added to combat the distance issue off the tee. It was to prevent people cutting the corner. Trees are not always as bad as some think. if the didtances were not out of whack the trees would not have been planted, but that is another discussion.

We cant add trees AND have a patented distance ball...

Why are trees being added to combat distance when we are already designing a new ball to do that??

Adding trees just doesnt make sense.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

The wisdom of youth!!

PGA courses are adding trees and the old classics played by members are removing them!  

Has it occurred to anyone out there that no one really has a clue about where the game is going and where we should take it?  

In the meanwhile the industry continues to drift.  Read Klein's column in last weeks GOLFWEEK.   Much of this reminds me of the definition of insanity that most everyone has heard by now....Trying the same thing over again....expecting different results!

They planted trees in the 70's, then we cut them down and now we are planting them again.......YIKES!

[mike_malone]

 When you are considering changes to "combat technology" you should figure in the  cost to change  your solution at a later date.. This is where trees fail miserably. Bay Hill at least is adding to a dogleg. That seems reasonable.

   I guess Augusta and Bay Hill don't have to worry about that. But, I expect most courses would hesitate to remove trees. It just seems too costly. So, don't plant them in the first place. Do something that can be changed easier or even adjusted without a complete redo.

[Sean Leary]

At my course (built in 2000), two young trees were specifically planted in 2 areas (1 each) where way off line shot on the inside of the dogleg was somewhat rewarded (one is a dogleg right, one is a dogleg left).  I don't know if the architect (Fazio) was consulted or not, but when they do grow, those trees will be in play (too small now).  Both trees are not visible from the tree, but are in areas where if you hadn't played there before, you would think that you ball might be lost, but actually put you in a better position that the intended line off the tee. One note is that trees are really not in play on most of the golf course, excpet for a couple of singular trees that were incorprated into the strategy of a couple of holes.

I wonder whether a bunker in the same area would have been a better alternative. I'm not really sure..

[Tim Gavrich]

PGA courses are adding trees and the old classics played by members are removing them!  

Has it occurred to anyone out there that no one really has a clue about where the game is going and where we should take it?  

I think it's simply going in a different direction for different kinds of players.  Surely we can't force ourselves to hold 'member' golf courses to the same type of standard as 'tournament' golf courses.  I do not think either end of what Mr. Cosgrove says is ludicrous at all.  Sure, we all play golf, but Tiger Woods plays a 'kind' of golf different from what we (whose home courses don't hold a high-caliber professional tournament every year) play.  Thus, our home courses should be set up differently.  Many of the great golf courses of which we speak on this site are ill-suited for PGA Tour golf.  I'm sure some would agree; good thing, too.

Different holes for different roles.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()