I heard this phrase used by Bruce Hepner on the phone in my office yesterday to describe a tree on one of the courses we consult at [not the seventh at Pasatiempo].  It got me thinking that if you had an annual poll on this subject, it might encourage clubs to do something about the offending trees.

I'll hold off my vote for now, but I know what USED to be the worst tree in golf ... the volunteer cherry tree on the right side of the 17th fairway at Crystal Downs, which blocked out the green from the right half of the fairway, and blocked the view as well!

It was finally taken down in about 1990 after SEVERAL years of debates on the club board of directors.  It should have taken about ten seconds!

Bill:

The tree at The Valley Club is long gone.  

The landmark logo  

The tree that overhangs the tee shot from the back tee on #6 at Cobbs Creek (par 3, over the creek).  No need to remove the whole tree, just get rid of that awful overhanging limb.

I also remember some trees that needed to go on the Blue Course at Penn State.  I believe they were on the first and last par 3's (#3, #17?).  The one on #3 was halfway down the hole and blocked the front right portion of the green.  The one on #17 was closer to the tee but also affected the tee shot.

How about the tree(s) on Butler National's 18th?

Take your pick off the 18th Fairway at Cypress.

Shooter nailed it.

As a lefty, the long par three required either a duck-hooked 4-iron or a slicing 3-iron started over the river.  

I opted for the 6 iron over the tree and played it like a short four par.

Is that called "options"?  Whatever, it wasnt much fun.

Sahalee #11 - Don't ask me how I narrowed it down to this one hole.

It's been a while, but I'd be curious about the first long par 4 on the back(#12?) at Stanford.  There are a couple of conspicuous trees which a few of the strategy folks used to hug.

If Brad Klein did articles on the worst trees in golf, for credibility's sake he should probably also mention some of the trees in golf that really are strategic. Otherwise, the article would probably come off as some architectural philosophy that no tree belongs on any golf course or at the very least that no tree can serve a strategic purpose, both of which are obviously patently ridiculous.

The most strategic tree I've ever seen is the large tree (two actually) to the left of the green on HVGC's #11. That tree absolutely centers the entire tee to green strategy of the hole. The two bunkers that squeeze in the center of the fairway creates risk for those gambling on the hole to get far enough down the fairway to take that tree basically out of play for the approach to the left side of the green. If the pin is left it's pretty important to try to get your approach to the left side of the green otherwise you're left with a dangerous and complex putt from the right side of the green. Some choose to hit an iron off the tee which takes dealing with the fairway bunkers out of play but then you're left with a longer shot over a creek close in front of the green and it's very difficult from that angle to get a ball to the left of the green without running the risk of hitting the tree on the left and dropping into the creek.

I have no idea how that green gets enough light, and I'd recommend removing as many trees as possible from all around that green but that big tree on the left really does need to stay or that entire really interesting strategy from tee to green it creates would be completely gutted.

There're plenty of bad tree placements in golf but that one on HVGC's #11 is really excellent---it adds tremendously to the demand and strategy of that hole which is a pretty short par 4..

Blackwolf Run River course- the tree(s) blocking the approach to the par 3 13th.

Shooter:

That might be the worst hole I've ever played and on one of the better courses too.  As I recall it was a long iron from the back tees so going up and over was very difficult.  Those trees look mature and I know the River Course is not that old so I have to conclude that Dye used the trees in his original design?  Can anyone confirm?  Besides, I can't imagine letting trees so radically intrude on a hole design.  

Does anyone have any thoughts about this hole?  

ding ding ding... We have a clear winner. Thanx John

Re BWR; The trees are a motiff on that newest nine. Perhaps why it ain't as great as the orig.

Did anybody go up and play the orig config, this year?

Hmmmmm.... I'd put the trees on #12 Stanford over on the other thread ("Best").  Absent that tree, the hole is OK, but basically just two mindless bashes.  Try to stay right on the tee shot, bash away on the 2nd.  Ho hum.  No ass-tightening, blah.

WITH the trees, you really have to make a choice... it is better to come in from the right, but man that's a narrow opening...but it also makes the hole shorter than going left.. too far left means blocked by tree... dead center means you're gonna need to shape the 2nd... With the trees, it is the most memorable hole on that course - the one everyone talks about.  Without them, it would likely be the most forgettable.

So just why are these bad trees?

Adam - good call re #5 Bayonet.  Good lord was that something.  That hole is still a stone-cold bitch, even with no trees.  With the tree in the center, it was impossible.  I'm all for a challenge and memorability - especially at that bitchly course - but that was one tree that needed to get taken down.  I still weep for a lot of the others though, as we've discussed many times.  

TH

I was so happy to see that I wasn't that crazy in hating that 13th at Black Wolf Run-  I just can't figure out why that tree is there as I think it makes the hole terrible.  On a more nostalgic note, I played Bel Air for the first time in 38 years and was sad to see the tree on the 4th hole had been lost. I always thought that was one of the most strategic trees in golf, making that hole truly great.