I spent part of today thinking of ways to design against the professionals without length. Statistics pretty much prove that the successful players now rely solely on distance not accuracy to win. In looking at alternative ideas I found myself thinking back to the Canadian Open at Royal Montreal. The players struggled off the tee that week and it got me thinking about why.

Royal Montreal (Blue) featured a lot of doglegs that made their turn inside the typical driving distance. The players could either play safely for position, or if they wanted to hit driver they were forced to work the ball around the corner. The more aggressive they played and the more they tried to use length as a weapon, the harder the course was to play. It got me wondering if some of the landing areas should be intentionally short, so that a player simply runs out of room, or needs to turn over the ball to find the fairway. This would be almost like using length against them.

A fascinating thing took place in the recent renovation at Royal Montreal, all those holes were lengthened with new tees and the landing areas were now at the turn. The player no longer has to shape the ball and length is at a premium. I wish they left the tee shots the way they were, particularly since the players still loved to gamble despite the advantages of playing conservative. The Presidents Cup is the next tournament to be held there and it would have been a perfect match play situation.

I agree with the premise.  It has seemed to me that Tiger struggles on courses like these.

When watching pros play the 18th at Tucson National, I was amazed at how accurately they gaged their carry distance off the tee.  Thus, it may require trees to really force the decision you suggest.

Ian,

Would you try and "tempt" them to work it around the corner by making the shot look easier than it really is?  What could you put on that inner corner other than trees that would acomplish this?

I like the idea since not only does it use length against them, but technology too.  The one thing I keep reading is that the new driver/ball combinations make it harder to shape the ball than in the past due to reduced spin.

Wouldn't reverse camber doglegs really make the tour pros pay attention? Either they work the ball around the turn to get it to stay in play or they lay up to the the turn. Anything hit across the corner would hit the fairway and keep on going ending up with blind shots, or in hazards, bunkers, etc.

Come on boys, this kind of thread is what GOLFCLUBATLAS.com once was and was when it was at it's best, and what it can be again.

Forget about all this OT bullshit about Tiger and Phil or what a cheater really is.

This thread is the real deal. Get involved. Think architecture!

I would, but I have a super early call and I have to go to bed.

TOMORROW!  

The problem with doglegs, especially tree lined one, is that they don’t necessarily cater for every player, under any conditions. There is such a wide range of distances hit off the tee these days, from the pro who can ‘crank’ it out 300y to the older guy or lady who may only hit it 200y. And yes, we can have multiple tees, but not enough to suit every occurrence.

The other thing is, I like doglegs with a little bit of openness on the inside, possibly protected with bunkers. That way the short hitter or a slightly miss hit drive still offers opportunity for the golfer to have a go at the green (par 4), even if it is an extremely difficult shot, it is in most golfers nature to go for it. Too many heavily tree lined doglegs would take some of that gambling spirit away.

Ian -

A very good idea. Another example of why lengthening holes ought to be done with a little fore-thought.

At a purely theoretical level, your idea is hard to distinguish for simply tightening the landing area for drives beyond a certain distance.

But in practice, turning doglegs earlier makes for a better looking hole and gives the long hitter a much more exciting choice. Primarily because he is often hitting to a hidden LZ. Which is always cool.

I am having trouble coming up with historic holes that consciously employ the early turn idea. There must be some, no?

Bob

Bob,

Doesn't Colonial have many holes like this? Short straight hitters and medium length hitters who can work the ball still seem to have a chance to win there.

If I remember Southern Hills from the last open correctly, I believe there is at least one reverse camber dogleg there.

Bob,

Maybe turning the dogleg early is distinguishable from simply tightening the landing area. For those with the enviable ability to bomb it out there, simply tightening the landing area rewards a relatively curve-free shot, precisely the kind of shot that has become easier with new ball and club technology. The early dog leg turn, perhaps in combination with fairway slope such as the reverse camber, opens up the possibility of making the curved bomb (and ideally also the throttled back curved shot) a better play than the straight bomb.

Greg

Greg -

In either case, whether you courve it or not, you (the long bomber) are trying to find a narrowed lz. But I agree that the early dogleg offers opportunites for more variety.

All -

Would shortening the 18th at Muirfield Village make for a good early turn hole? You might want to push the fw farther left, towards the trees on that side. The tree at the corner would at last serve a useful function.

Bob

Ian,

Great topic.  I think turning a dogleg early, either with architecture or maintenance practices, is an excellent equalizer.  Yet I do think that the skill of hitting a ball far should be rewarded some of the time and not entirely negated.  Setting up the right risk/reward equation is key.  

Having a variety of risk/reward dogleg holes is even more interesting from a whole course perspective.  

Designing the holes so that the outside of the dogleg is a better approach is a way to let the hole play longer for the longer hitters while the shorter hitters need to find a way to make up a stroke around the green.

As stated earlier, reverse cants are an added challenge with precise ball striking required.  The shorter hitter might be a better ball striker and he is not out of the hole with this added dimension.

I started a semi-related thread called, "It's hard to create strategy by dictating the width of landing areas" (or something like that).

I don't want to interrupt this thread but I'd encourage people to comment on that thread because it might well add something to this one.