Michael Wharton-Palmer's great photos of Cypress Point brought up a question I've pondered for a long time:

#17 at CPC provides a unique situation where the shorter tee shot is actually the more daring, aggressive play... that is, a tee shot on that hole kept close to the ocean and short of the trees (about 190-200 off the back tee) leaves a clear approach in a short-cut over the ocean to the green... but it is a very difficult shot to pull off, as too long means blocked by the trees, and too short or to right means in the hazard and reload.  A far easier tee shot is to just bash a wood out to the left and then take one's chances going over or left of the trees on the approach.

So my question is, are there other instances where the strategic choice of the shorter shot is actually the more daring, risky, aggressive play?

This seems quite unique to me and is one of the reasons I call #17 CPC one of the world's great par fours.

But I'd love to hear other examples... are there any?

TH

Although by definition the tee shot may be more daring, leaving an aggressive 2nd shot, is the reward for this strategy that much greater then the standard approach?

In the example of the #17 at CPC, I would say no.

Although by definition the tee shot may be more daring, leaving an aggressive 2nd shot, is the reward for this strategy that much greater then the standard approach?

In the example of the #17 at CPC, I would say no.

I say in the case of #17 CPC the reward is quite substantial.  The only other way to get a clear shot to the green is to bash it 290+, and not many have that kind of power.  Now if the question is is it worth the risk, well... that depends on how confident one is with a 190-200 shot, and how much he needs to make 4 or less on the hole.  In most cases it will not be worth the risk.  But if you are playing well and need to make a birdie, I'd say this is the best way to do it.

In any case let's give the benefit of the doubt here and say for once in my life I have something correctly assessed.    Are there other instances where the shorter play is the riskier and more aggressive?

TH

How about that double-fairway par-5 at Valhalla? I don't remember for sure, but it seems to me it might have been a fairway wood to the left, riskier, more rewarding island fairway.

So my question is, are there other instances where the strategic choice of the shorter shot is actually the more daring, risky, aggressive play?
TH

Tom, Just to challenge your premise for a moment. I'm not convinced playing shorter, and right, on 17 is the daringest, riskiest, or most aggressive play for that hole.
Yes, it is a little more risky than blasting it left, but isn't going for the green more aggresive, risky and daring?

I only know the scenario from my one and only, in a serious competition. All my partners chose this shorter right side with the clear shot to the green, while I was in the middle of the fairway left. From my perspective, The trees weren't really an issue, with an 8 iron(downwind) in my hand. In my mind they seemed a bit nuts, but mostly because it looked like rough grass, (albeit dormant in Jan) with a side sloping lie away from the right hander towards the ocean.

Even with the pin cut front left center, near the precipous, my just short of the green, on the collar, 8 iron, ended up being the closest ball to the hole.

Could this avenue of approach be a sucker play?

Tom, There is something to your logic. The boys had all golfed there before. They knew what to do and they did it. It just so happens that my fellow "B" player made the double Hail Irwin par, finding the rocks on both his drive and approach, only to have them spit back out onto terrafirma. Most of the peninsula residents, that are good players, usually do choose the agressive line. And not just on that hole.

I believe the Dunes Club in Myrtle beach with the sharp dogleg par 5 # 12, or 13(?) might qualify for your original posit.

Tom
I'm surprised there have not been more examples. When you first mentioned this feature on 17 at CP on Michael's thread, it struck me as unique--I know I tried to come up with it and came up empty. But I thought all the experts here would come up with other places this occurs. Perhaps it is pretty rare.
Andy

Andy - I'm thinking it's pretty darn unique also... but man there must be other examples.  But if not, have we maybe hit on a "new" thing for architects to try?

TH

What about my Valhalla hole? Does anyone know?

Tom, That hole at Green Springs comes to mind too,
but,

TePaul wrote a little something in his post #26 on this thread http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=16000;start=25 that may be relavent.

Myopia- all over the place!

#4 at Myopia is a dogleg left to a cantilevered green- the corner of the dogleg is marsh- not too long but if you draw the ball its a drop from just below the tee box- double bogey for sure. If however, you block your tee shot, you will take out a foursome on the green that abuts the far edge of the fairway. At the special olympics outing there in the fall, one of our group did just that, took a drop off the green and holed out for an eagle!(net 1) A fabulously quirky and strategic hole-
where the safe play is to hit three wood straight off the tee and then 3 iron or so to the green- good luck!

I think the "unsafe"route that you can take at St Andrews would just about fit into this category.
The shorter right side of the fairways, certainly leave you with the more ideal second shot, whlist the hit it anywhere as long as you like left side leaves the harder second shot.
This is working on the principle the shortest length between two points etc....

Tom ,
You are 100 % correct, I knew what you wanted, I just stretched it a little!!!
But in response..no I do not think you would club back and go right at TOC.