What do you think: Par 4 with short tee shot and long second shot?

[Garland Bayley]

The way I understand this complaint about a hole is that there is a pond blocking the fairway. Of course it is a bad hole if there is a pond blocking the fairway. It can be straight, dog leg, u turn, or what ever. The PGA hired Tilly to take out hazards like Ulrich shows. It's about time they hired Tom Fazio to go around taking out these stupid ponds.

[Mark Pearce]

At least in respect of the hole at Slaley I mentioned, this has nothing to do with "taking the driver out of my hands".  It has to do with forcing me to hit 6 or 7 iron off the tee, then asking me to hit a 3 wood or utility uphill.  It's a boring, risk free tee shot with no adventurous option (though I think some pros when the European Tour played there drove back down the 12th fairway) and a very tricky 2nd shot.  Just a silly hole.  The 8th on the same course is a dogleg right where the safe tee shot is a mid-iron off the tee and a long iron or utility 2nd but the adventurous (foolhardy) golfer can hit driver over the trees on the inside of the dogleg.

[Jerry Kluger]

The hole that I played gave you no options.  The further you hit it, the further you were from the green on this dogleg left over a lake which was also straight ahead at about 160 to 185 yards.  So you hit the ball 160 yards down the left side and then turned 90 degrees over the lake to an elevated green.  You could hit the ball further if you went down the right side but you were further from the green.  The elevated green allowed you to bail out right but short, left and long all would be in the water.

[David Bartman]

I am pretty sure I would have a hard time enjoying a par 4 hole that required a significantly shorter tee shot then the second to the green. 

The other problem with some other short holes that take the driver out of peoples hands , ( I am not opposed if done well, but one problem that I frequently see is ) that everyone hits the tee shot into the same 20 yard section of the fairway leaving it riddled with divots.  Think #2 at Spyglass as an example. 


There are many short holes like #14 at Muirfield Village that don't force the driver out of ones hands, but certainly nobody playing for a score does it, and yet due to the terrain being downhill rather than a bowl uphill, rarely are players hitting from the same 20 yard area, and thus rarely is one in a divot. 

[JESII]

Hutingdon Valley CC has one on their C-nine and I love it...even though I'm the only one I know who does.

Would these holes be better received if the tee were moved back so the tee shot was slightly longer than the approach?

The one at HVCC has one of the coolest, best long uphill approach shots I've ever seen so I'm willing to hit a 5 iron to get a shot at it...but if the approach shot is mediocre I can imagine it'd be pointless.

So where's the pond at Huntingdon Valley? If I've found the hole you are referring to, it seems there might be a small stream there.

Garland,

I don't think I mentioned a pond. Lester did right after my post but I think he was referring to one of the other posts.

If you found a nearly 90* dogleg left then you've found it and there is a small stream on the inside.

[Garland Bayley]

Hutingdon Valley CC has one on their C-nine and I love it...even though I'm the only one I know who does.

Would these holes be better received if the tee were moved back so the tee shot was slightly longer than the approach?

The one at HVCC has one of the coolest, best long uphill approach shots I've ever seen so I'm willing to hit a 5 iron to get a shot at it...but if the approach shot is mediocre I can imagine it'd be pointless.

So where's the pond at Huntingdon Valley? If I've found the hole you are referring to, it seems there might be a small stream there.

Garland,

I don't think I mentioned a pond. Lester did right after my post but I think he was referring to one of the other posts.

If you found a nearly 90* dogleg left then you've found it and there is a small stream on the inside.

The thread is about a pond blocking the fairway on a dog leg hole, presumably preventing a curving ball, as it would not clear the pond.

I think I would bribe the super at Huntingdon Valley to mow more ground and then hit a big slice with driver. Since all I do is hit big slice with driver.

[Ben Sims]

I've played a few of these holes and the reason most aren't so good is the room to miss issue.  They give you a fairway sized target to hit a 5, 6 or 7 iron and then a green sized target to hit a 4 iron or 3 hybrid.  For these holes to be any good, I think they should include a large green surface.  Or at least a large green complex/area.

[Jim_Coleman]

    I hate these holes.  I just think they're dumb.  And are they really fair to the moderately long player who has to lay up on his tee shot and then can't reach the green?  And don't tell me golf isn't fair.  I think it's bad architecture.

[Sean_A]

I am usually not keen on this sort of hole, but there is one bold exception I can think of which is very good - St Enodoc's 10th.  I think it works because

1. If downwind, its easy to lay-up and still not have a huge club in - say hybrid/hybrid.

2, If into the wind the driver can be used. 

3. There is the merest sliver of fairway to bang one long if one is brave or stupid.

4. Its pretty.




Ciao 

[Anders Rytter]

This hole is kind of in the category and i think it works very well

Most peopel hit Spoon/Long Iron from tee (if playing the tips) and long Iron or Spoon Second shot. But there are to other routes. A driver over the lake or a precise shot right of it (If you don't hit the ball high you might need to hit a little cut to avoid trees on right)

I'm fairly sure the hole is longer now, it was lenghtened (20-25ish meters) 2years ago, this is before that i think.

[Mark Pearce]

Anders,

I don't think that's the sort of hole we're discussing.  As you say, there are driver options (over, round) which the holes in question don't have.

Also, something seems to have gone wrong with the distances on that strokesaver page?

[Anders Rytter]

I guess that the main difference is the option to hit right. The distances are Meters and as i wrote aprox 20-25m has been added. hence the carry is now 245yds ish.

I'll find a picture of the tee-shot later, Right is less appealing in person and hence almost everybody play the hole as described, not a 7 iron but anyway. Because you have the option it works better on me than holes where a short shot is forced. It's not unusual that people face a longer 2nd shot than the first although same lenght is most often the case.

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

Thanks for the pics of St. Enodoc's 10th.  What a great place.

The first time I played it was in December of 1982.  The rough was down, so I just hit my driver up on the side of the hill in very short rough, and tried to reach the green from there!

[Brad Tufts]

I like the forced long second shot, but probably not something like 5i-3i.

I like a hole where Driver can be hit to gain distance advantage, but the prudent play may be 3w or 5w to a larger target area that forces a long iron into the green.  Most holes where we hit layup clubs are sub-350-yarders where a wedge approach will be had either way.  I like a forced layup with narrowness, but probably not with a perpendicular hazard that must be carried or not.

The example I have in my head is #5 at George Wright, the Ross course in Boston.  420 yards over a rise with fall-offs on both sides.  The prudent play is 3w-5i, but driver can be hit to a very narrow area closer to the green.

[David Davis]

If indeed there are no options to play this type of hole then nope I'm not a fan at all. In fact, we have an almost at Noordwijkse. it's even been changed as it use to be a 7 or 8 iron to a sharp dogleg left. Then a 5-6 iron to the green. Since something like 10 years it's a long iron or rescue followed by a semi long iron or rescue depending on the wind. The problem with the hole is that it's tight as hell and unless you want to risk crushing a high draw with the driver which rarely works into the cross wind there is basically only one play, middle of the fairway and long enough to get past the dogleg so you can have a shot at the green.

Most the older players or shorter ones don't have a shot and have to play a chip and run second shot before leaving them with a longish 3rd.

The main problem for me is when there are no option of how to play the hole. In the examples above there seem to options even if the holes are not the greatest from an architectural standpoint. Ulrich's example is a long carry as he says, and unless you are quite long or an excellent player you don't carry the ball 225 yrds in the air. However there is an option to lay up and play for 3 shots so on the other hand not bad. Plus 225 is also from the back tees.

I like the looks of the St. Enodoc hole that's the kind that I wouldn't feel right about myself if I was playing once and I saw that and didn't try to carry the corner. I mean that's just too much fun to bypass plus there is a substantial bail our right.

[Matthew Petersen]

You know, it doesn't fit the description perfectly, but 8 at Pebble Beach is a little bit like this. Not everyone has to lay up necessarily, but you can't just go trying to bang your longest drive out there. And even a perfectly placed drive in the fairway just short of the cliff leaves a long iron to a very small target. Is 8 at PB a bad hole? Hardly, in my mind. But this is the complaint that people typically seem to ahve about it, if they have any complaint.

Even then, it's not as extreme as the sort of hole which really dictates a lay up for all players, to the point where some people are truly hitting less club off the tee than they are into the green. There would be nothing wrong with that if it were the player's own strategy, I guess, but if that's mandated because of a hazard that cannot be carried, that just sounds like a bad hole.

[Kalen Braley]

Matt,

I think #8 at Pebble doesn't really fit in this discussion, because 90% of people who play golf can  indeed hit their driver out to the left and not run out of run.

Its only a small % of good players who are long off the tee that can't do it....

P.S.  It never loses its schocking effect to me when they are doing a flyover of a hole on a PGA Telecast and they say something like: "These bunkers are only 270 to carry off the tee so they aren't in play for the pros this week."  Hell they wouldn't be in play for me either, cause I couldn't even reach em!!

[Martin Toal]

I am sure there are good holes where the tee shot is a 6 iron on a par-4, but I haven't ever played one of them.

The 10th at The Belfry is a good example. Played off the back tees, at 285 yards, with a tee shot requiring a fade over the water, no average player can reach, so ifs forced to hit a 6 iron then a wedge. The hole is OK for the pros, but a terrible bloody hole for the average golfer.

Another example is number 8 at Remedy Oak in Dorset, UK, a poor hole in an otherwise mostly decent track.http://remedyoak.com/course_page

The hole is a par 4 with a water hazard right in front of the green. What the graphic doesn't show is that it is downhill to the water hazer, then steeply uphill to the green, so the green is at roughly the same elevation as the tee. Very few amateurs will make that carry, so instead the result is the rather unedifying spectacle of hitting 6 and 7 irons off a par-4 tee.

I assume that at least some of these holes arise because the architect can't fins another way of getting from one place to another, between two nicely framed holes, say, and the club wants another 4 here to keep par up.

[Garland Bayley]

I like the forced long second shot, but probably not something like 5i-3i.
...

Play it forward dude! What a bunch of wimps we've become if we are going to complain about having a long iron approach. That's the way the game was played until the USGA lost control of equipment, and tee it forward became the order of the day.

[Jerry Kluger]

The point here is a hole where you are forced to hit a short club followed by a longer club with no options.

[Garland Bayley]

The point here is a hole where you are forced to hit a short club followed by a longer club with no options.

How do you create such a hole without a pond, or the cross bunkers in the style that were removed by Tilly at the request of the PGA?

Who cares if it is short club/long club. Ponds blocking all progress are bad. Cross bunkers blocking all progress are bad.

[JESII]

The hole at Huntingdon Valley that you found...those trees inside the corner are too close to go over so you hit a 190 - 215 yard tee shot followed by a 200 - 230 secind shot depending on the tee shot.

[Dave McCollum]

Thinking (very little) about this, I can’t think of a reason why such a hole would be automatically bad.  However, I can only remember playing a couple of holes like this and I thought both were terrible.

Example one:  Badlands, Las Vegas, Desperado nine, I think.  A whole bunch of rather odd holes playing up and down a dry arroyo.  Desert target golf on steroids.  I remember one hole that required a 160 yard tee shot, followed by a 200+ yard approach.  No ponds here, just desert, rock, and brush.  I wondered how a high capper could play it, then wondered how the course made any money.  Another image came to mind as well:  green complex mounding that would give guys on this site nightmares.
 
Example two:  Falcon Crest, Kuna, Idaho (near Boise), 18th hole, I think.  The tee shot played out to a fairway with a lake along the left side.  No matter what club is used off the tee, from a short iron to a driver, the second shot required a 200+ yard, forced carry, approach over water.  The way around the lake to the left of the pond was totally native.  Perhaps the dumbest hole I’ve ever seen.  I played the course right after it opened and it was still basking in all of the glory of its creation and creator, a landscape contractor owner’s first effort.  No doubt the hole has been modified since by giving us geezers a way around the lake to the left (after a quite few Tin Cup rounds).  I don’t remember where the forward tees were.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

This kind of hole should become a template hole. 

The hole with a forced layup that requires a longer second shot than the first.

There are dozens out there – usually because the GCA didn’t have much choice in the matter, but I would never call it bad design.

Another DIFFERENT challenge for the golfer rather than the clichéd long Tee shot, short approach. There should be more of them