There is another thread lamenting the decline in the use of deceptive features in GCA.  I wonder about the relevence of deception once a player gains some familiarity with a course.  For example, how long does it take to figure out that a bunker that appears at first look to front a green is actually well short of the green, and adjust accordingly?  Once a player makes this adjustment, the bunker becomes superfluous except regarding mishit shots.

Phil, When one plays by eye, ignoring the modern ritual of researching exact yardages, well designed and placed humps and hollows, between you and the target create a never ending form of deception. Examples like a hell bunker or A.W's Tarantula, can still be subliminally distracting causing those mis hits.

Well designed deceptions can wreak havoc for a lifetime of play.

The rational side is always debating with what your eyes are telling you.

To prahrase the punchline from an old joke, who are you going to believe? You're lyin' eyes or the yardage book?

Phil,

I still find the fore bunker a mind entering foe. I know that there is 20 yards between the bunker and the green, but I also know I do not want to miss my shot and end up with that long sand shot.

The other shot is the temptation to skirt a hazard, to bite off a little more than I can chew. You know the safe play is out to the middle of the fairway - to the wide spot, BUT the temptation is there to turn the drive over a hair, to carry that one bunker and set up a wedge instead of a 6 iron.


Hole #7 at Ghost Creek Pumpkin Ridge illustrates both of those concepts.

The tee shot is uphill and open straight away. You can see the bunkers lining the ridge and are tempted to go farther left and shorten your approach.

Once on the fairway, a conservative tee shot can leave you a mid iron in. Now you confront fore bunkers and a green that slopes slightly away from you. In the summer, when the course is firm, the play is just short of the green in the ample chipping area allowing for the run up.

I never tire of playing this hole.

Jon,

It occurred to me after I posted this topic that one deceptive feature that is difficult to adjust to is a tee that is out of alignment with the target, whether intentional or not.  My guess it that this is so because proper alignment is one of the harder fundamentals in golf, and very few of us get it right.  I think that the vast majority of right-handed golfers are aligned right of the target.  

It is one of the reasons why a solid pre-shot routine should always include picking a pin point target and the golfer should align himself up to it. Most of us will take any obvious line laid out such as the edge of the teeing ground if we don't conciously choose a target.

I think using such things to make the course harder is not in the spirit of the game.

I don't consider offset tees deceptive. Do others?

I like offset tees. I wish they were used more often. But I wouldn't think they ever fool anyone.

Bob

They always fool women!

Features like hollows or bunkers which make approach shots appear closer than they really are.

Gradual slopes which make the effective length of the approach longer, particularly effective when there is a lack of background like with a skyline or fortress green.

Bunkers or other hazards that appear to be too far out to reach but are not (Brauer's Tangle Ridge #15 on the left), or reachable when they're not (creek crossing #8 fairway at the same course).

The third hole on the new Pensacola CC, 360 yards, has a cross bunker at 280 yards that effectively hides the green so all you can see is the top half of the flagstick.

The course has been open since November 9th, so by now I know the green and how it's shaped and receives shots, but the fact that I can't SEE the green still keeps that uncertainty in your mind.  That makes it hard to fully commit to the shot and in turn makes it hard to get close.  So far my only birdie there was when I holed a 50' putt over the ridge dividing front from back, from the back half to a front pin.

That cross bunker and the ridge it's built into won't ever go away, so I think it will continue to be a problem for keeps.



This picture was taken before the course opened (no pin) and from farther back up the fairway so you can see the green.  From inside 150 yards you can't.

"This picture was taken before the course opened (no pin) and from farther back up the fairway so you can see the green.  From inside 150 yards you can't."

Bill,

I probably would like the hole more if it had a challenging spot in the fairway from which you could see the green.  There is a hole at Long Cove where if you drive to the safe spot, the green is invisible, but if you hug the marsh, you get a good glimpse.

Tom Doak,

Ralph Plummer did a great job of building greens that did not have a lot of internal contouring but were full of very subtle breaks.  When running at good speeds, say 9'- 11', they required great nerve and excellent touch.  Even after playing them repeatedly, they made you think and doubt what you were seeing.      

Really good and deceptive diagonals stand up to frequent play, particularly the really good diagonals of green sides and fairway sides guarded by bunkers, banks, rough, water etc!

Pete Dye based a career in architecture around it.

There's one more but i'm not sure it count's as a deceptive feature ... build a house.

I don't care how far back and out of the line of play, somebody will break a window.

Karl reminded me of one of my favorite techniques, which technically might not qualify as "deceptive" but nevertheless has a strong tendency to induce a bad swing:  the dogleg hole where you can see the flag from the tee.

Time and again I've observed that people miss their tee shots on the inside of the dogleg (especially on doglegs to the right), because the last thing that catches their eye before they swing is the flag on the green, rather than their true target in the fairway.

Anything which makes a green deceptive to read is good forever, unless the golfer goes out with a level.

That must include instances where the architect used the pretty much the same grass "through the green," as in fescue fairways, fescue surrounds, and fescue greens. Can't even figure which way is $%^@ UP, much less break -- brutal from any distance approach position...



Mark