[Scott Macpherson]

Hi,

I have noticed that some tightly turning holes (say anything greater than about 70 degrees) are looking upon in a disapproving manner by some golfers.

Is the commonality of the best 'strong dog-legging' holes that you can see, and are tempted to hit across the corner? If so, I understand that.

But if you can't see or hit across the corner, does this 'forced lay-up' cause the dislike?

What are the best examples of short par 4 that turn tightly, but you can't hit across the corner? Maybe due to the presence of a big tree. Is the first hole at Pine Valley in this category? What about the 1st at Merion (The angle may not be strong enough)

scott

[Brian Phillips]

Scott,

I only have a problem against tightly turning holes like you mention when the run out is too short for the corner to be cut.  They are pretty good starting holes as not many golfers dare to thrash away on an opening hole so often they will hit the gentle driver or 3 wood.

[Mark Pearce]

Scott,

I'm not sure.  Two good holes that immediately sprung to mind were the (I think) 7th on Berkshire Red and the (again, I think) 8th at Alwoodley (though that's a par 5 and takes a big hit).  Both of these are heavily tree lined on the inside of the corner but you can drive over the corner, if you hit it well and choose the right line.  Both can equally be played by "laying up" straight but there is an advantage to be gained by going for it.  Certainly, at the Berkshire if you lay up straight you must use the right club and right line or be through the fairway.

[Sean_A]

Hi,

I have noticed that some tightly turning holes (say anything greater than about 70 degrees) are looking upon in a disapproving manner by some golfers.

Is the commonality of the best 'strong dog-legging' holes that you can see, and are tempted to hit across the corner? If so, I understand that.

But if you can't see or hit across the corner, does this 'forced lay-up' cause the dislike?

What are the best examples of short par 4 that turn tightly, but you can't hit across the corner? Maybe due to the presence of a big tree. Is the first hole at Pine Valley in this category? What about the 1st at Merion (The angle may not be strong enough)

scott

Scott

How bout this one from Goring & Streatley?  To be honest, I don't mind the turn, i just don't like the visuals of a wall of trees in front and down the side. 


I don't think there is much difference in the turn of the dogleg -believe it or not.  I much prefer the one below because you can carry the hazard or of go left of it.  In other words, one can shape his ball either way - a big plus for a hole like this.


Ciao

[Jason Connor]

My general complaint is lack of options.  On many of these holes you have one choice, for example 5-iron to the middle, wedge in.  It's no fun if the designer doesn't make you think how you want to play the hole as you stand on the tee.

But the key is you can still have a short par 4 with a 90 degree turn and have options.  It's just up to the designer to ensure the hole has these options and that they're evident to the golfer who desires to see them.

[Mike Hendren]

The 4th at Beverly, at least six or seven years ago.

[Jeff_Brauer]

My mentor used to say he hated sharp doglegs in only two instances - 1) where there are a lot of trees, and 2) when there aren't.

I tend to agree that it is either too easy to cut the corner, or there are too many problems in laying up.  The layup is just not a fun shot for most, other than a change of pace, and sharp dogleges usually require that.

I also wonder if sharp doglegs are disliked just because of the line of charm concept. It just seems so unnatural to see a green way to one side of the fw, doesn't it?  Not to mention, I would wager that most sharp doglegs are a result of a gca (and in this case, I use that term loosely) who can't find a way into and out of a tight piece of property.  So they probably are awkward, forced holes to begin with.

[Jason Topp]

We built a new back tee on one of our holes with a sharp dogleg.  Now I need to hit my sunday punch to have an open shot at the green.  Even then I have no chance to approach the green from the preferred angle (which is on the outside of the dogleg) because that would require a 300 yard drive.  I think the tee was built because from the old tee it was possible for a long driver to hit it through the fairway into some Christmas trees.  I think the hole is better from the prior tee because it presented the option of a longer approach from a good angle versus a shorter approach over difficult greenside bunkering.  Now the hole plays best from the middle tees which are at a less severe angle and allow one to cut the corner over a bunker if one wants to hit driver.

On another course a short par five plays at a very sharp dogleg.  One can try to carry some scraggly trees to get within 200 yards of the green or hit a drive straight that uses some slopes to roll around the corner leaving a 220 yard approach.  I really enjoy the tee shot but at the same time the hole seems very awkward and out of place.  The angle could be changed by moving the tee left but it would eliminate the decision off the tee.  I am not sure if that would be an improvement or not.

The best tightly turning holes I have played have been cape holes with the green jutting into water.  If designed with a wide enough fairway, one can bail out off the tee but then face a longer, more difficult approach.   

[Kalen Braley]

A few of the holes I've played like this have the opposite problem of the "dreaded layup"

They were situated such that they had trees on the inside corner of a sharp dog leg, and if you didn't hit a really good drive that went far enough and straight enough you had absolutly no shot to the green... from the fairway.  While playing one course that had 3-4 of these holes, I often found myself with wedge in hand for my approach shot, from the fairway, with absolutly no chance to get it anywhere near the green due to these goofy angles.

[Phil Benedict]

The 17th at Pine Needles from the back tee qualifies.  The optimal tee shot is a hard hook which is worth 2-3 clubs on the approach versus a straight tee shot.  I think it's a good hole because it rewards a certain type of shot without overly penalizing someone who can't execute the shot.  You can still reach the green in regulation after a straight drive; it's just a longer shot.

[BCrosby]

The 17th at New Zealand?

[Ian_L]

Another opening hole, #1 at Enniscrone.  There's a good overhead and approach view on this page:
http://enniscronegolf.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=193

One negative is the OB on both sides, but there is a safe play to the left for those willing to face a longer shot at the green.  I liked the hole on my only play.

[Brian_Ewen]

My Favourite ......

[Andrew Summerell]

Quite a few suburban courses in Sydney have tight dog-legs, often quite extreme. Of course, being in Sydney they are heavily tree lined as well, which means they are often only 200y to the turn-point. There are a couple that require a longer 2nd shot than the tee shot. They are all awful hole.

In most cases, the only way these holes can work is when they allow the golfer to cut the corner.

[Tom_Doak]

I don't mind a sharp dogleg hole that might force a long hitter to lay up instead of cutting the corner.

To me, the opposite problem is much worse ... a player who cannot reach the corner (or who hits a bad drive) should not be forced to play a very short second shot to get to where his drive should have been.  So, for me, a sharp dogleg without trees in the corner is okay, but a dogleg around a line of trees off the tee is not so good.

There are, of course, exceptions to any rule in golf architecture.

[Ben Stephens]

My Favourite ......

Brian - this used to be my 'home' course while I was at University. The tee shot is a blind downhill shot and it is more than 90 degrees dogleg because the ball used to go so far downhill and past the trees (you dont want to be short and blocked by the trees!) therefore the second shot goes back uphill. I would get rid of this hole and the remaining last two holes and redesign the closing holes as the first 14 holes makes it a very good course but the last 4 is a huge let down!!

Cheers
Ben

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()