[Mark_Fine]

I know I’m setting myself up here but I don’t say things unless I believe them (and feel I can make a strong case).  I’ve played all over and I can’t name five better “risk/reward” par fives anywhere that are as pretty and dramatic and offer as much fun and significant challenge to the greatest number of golfers.  Lehigh’s #11 – 501 yard par 5 is about as good as it gets for risk/reward par fives and I’m anxious to hear from others who have played it why I’m over stating myself?  

#11 is 500+ yards of pure fun.  Standing on the tee, you won’t find many better looking fairways with numerous options for shot shape.  A draw can catapult over or off the hill picking up valuable extra yardage.  A cut can hold the hill and ensure a fairway lie for your second.  Rub of the green plays heavily as a perfectly struck tee shot can still leave the golfer with a hanging side hill lie in the 210 –240 yard go no go zone.  The end of the fairway is 305 from the tips and the hole usually plays into a slight breeze so only the monster drivers are forced to hit less than driver.  

The second shot is do or die from 80 feet above the Little Lehigh if the golfer elects to go for the green on the other side of the stream in two.  The small 2200 square foot green is protected not only by the stream in front, but also by numerous (and now infamous) grass hollows on all sides.  It is not an automatic up and down just because you cleared the creek with your second shot.  These grass hollows are controversial and most better golfers would love to see them replaced with sand that would allow much easier recoveries.  Personally, I think the greensite might look a little goofy sitting there right by the stream with sand all around it.  It sure wouldn’t look natural!  Softening the edges on the grass hollows might be the best compromise.  

Anyway, laying up on your second, leaves a testing shot of 70 to 110 yards with no guarantee of a par or birdie or that you will even find the putting surface.  The small narrow green is heavily pitched from back to front and angled to the fairway.  Proper placement of your second shot is key to having any chance of getting this one close.  This green is almost always kept firm and anything less than perfection will not be rewarded.  

Hitting this green from the top of the hill is one of the greatest thrills you can experience playing Lehigh and that temptation entices many golfers to go for it!  If you can carry the stream with your tee shot on #4 or #7, you know you can reach it if you hit a good one.  Anybody who can’t reach this green in two after there best tee shot, probably can’t reach any reasonable par five in two.  For them it just becomes a demanding but very beautiful par five.  

Flynn used this part of the property perfectly and I don’t believe anyone could have designed a better golf hole here than this one.  

FYI – Here is how our recent foursome of Matt Ward, Bill Wamsley, Leigh Taylor and myself just played the hole:

Matt Ward (who normally drives the ball 340), over hooked his first drive left into the woods.  We had him hit another ball and he hit that one right, into the trees beyond the bunkers.  Three is a charm and his third drive was a monster shot into the breeze the just reached the rough 310 yards from the tee.  He had a good lie and hit a 200 yard five iron just right into the grass hollow.  He drew a reasonable lie, flopped his next shot on just below the back right pin and missed a six footer for his “birdie” ending up with a *5.  

Leigh Taylor – a scratch player, hooked his drive left into the rough.  He drew a heavy lie and was forced to muscle a short/mid iron over the hill to the landing area.  He ended up over the hill but short of the fairway about 140 yards from the green but sitting with a very clean, but downhill lie.  He hit a flyer and the ball just went long caroming of the side behind the green.  He tried to bump his forth shot on and rolled all the way to the bottom of the green.  Three putts later, he walked off with a 7.

Bill Wamsley – a 10 handicap hit his drive short of the hill and was left with a mid iron lay-up to the landing area short of the stream.  He hooked his iron shot right and was left with a 9I shot from the rough.  He hit it just short of the green and it ended up in the heavy grass, just short of the edge of the green.  He chipped up on and two putted for his 6.

Myself – I hit a decent drive into the breeze but was left with 248 yards to the green.  Never known to play smart, I hit 3W just clearing the stream and ending up in the grass edge of the hazard.  I somehow was able to hit a very good pitch to four feet left (but just above the hole).  From there I kept from embarrassing myself by making the three footer for 5 after my first putt for birdie missed the hole completely.  

Total score for the group (with a combined handicap of about 15)… +3

The beauty of the hole is that we could all go play it again and come in at 3 under or so.  Anything can happen here.  For a “RISK/REWARD” par five, there are few better anywhere!  Tell me what I am missing?

Sorry I can't post a picture or two!  Tommy help!
Mark

[BillV]

Another take

The way I eagle this hole is to hit through the end of the fairway as far as I can and have only 6 or 7 iron into the green, make the putt or hole a shot from off the green.  Since i've used this strategy, mu stroke average on this hole has decreased.

Laying up when the drive is not right is no more than an 8 or 9 iron, usually PW if in hte fairway.  Then I hit wedge from 80-100 and make par or birdie if I hit the green.  If I miss the fairway or green it's 50/50 to get up and down.

If I want to make 6,7 or 8, I miss the hanging lie and struggle.   (Also, See Leigh Taylor)

It is absolutely a cool hole for a good player, Mark's favorite and my candidate for one of Lehigh's weakest 2 or 3 because how it treats the 'handicap man'.

If a weak player misses the fairway, they lay-up to the end of the top fairway with one or two shots and try to hit the bottom fairway.  Then from there if they get over they are usually happy.  If they don't hit it to the fairway at the bottom of the hill, they lay up again. High handicaps and women who are average don't have much fun and consequently don't care for the hole.

My wife is not as much of a man as Mark's eight year old.   He can hit it in 3 or 4 and par it!   (Pre-emptive strike!)

[BillV]

Tip:

Just don't miss the drive left!

[Matt_Ward]

Mark,

Great thread and I completely agree about the hole!

Next time I would opt for the Hawkeye 12.5 and try to nestle the tee shot close to the end of the airstrip fairway. From there I know the second shot would be about 4-5 iron.

Green is the size it should be and I have no issue with the grass bunkers. They are completely appropriate and avoid giving players an easy bunker play.

Super hole by Flynn!

Regards,

[GeoffreyC]

Mark-

Your analysis just pointed out to me why I think 11 is the weakest hole at Lehigh.

There are really only two choices for your second shot on the hole.  You go for the green or you MUST attempt to carry to the small landing area at the bottom of a tall rough infested very steep hill.  If you can't make it cleanly to that area you have little or no chance to hit the tiny green on your third shot. What does the average guy do from the rough? He can pitch out to the fairway with a sand wedge so that he can then lay up to the lower fairway short of the river or he can wack at the ball and leave it on the steep hill with no shot.

To make this point I give you the scratch golfer in your group. "Leigh Taylor – a scratch player, hooked his drive left into the rough. He drew a heavy lie and was forced to muscle a short/mid iron over the hill to the landing area. He ended up over the hill but short of the fairway about 140 yards from the green but sitting with a very clean, but downhill lie."  Greater than 99% of golfers would not 1- get their drives as far as this person did so they would be left with a longer shot to "muscle" down the fairway.  They most likely will be in an IMPOSSIBLE situation on the hill if they can find their ball at all.  What if the downhill lie Leigh had from 14o yards was deeper in the rough?  Would he have had to pitch down to the fairway for his third? Think about the "average" player and what he would have to do.

What were Matt's options for the first two tee shots he hit?

The 11th is a gutsy hole but it really is limited by that hill. It takes away options and creates undo penalties that are not risk/reward.  It's only risk reward if you play the hole perfectly.

[Matt_Ward]

GeoffreyC:

My only options left would have been to lay up towards the top of the hill and advance a third with a mid-iron to the green.

The drive right was playable, but had some tree issues. If I decided to play an "Arnie" shot it would have been 5-iron punch to the bottom of the hill. Proability of success about 3 out of 4.

I personally love the hole. I only wish the fairway extended about another 20-30 yards because then it would be OK to hit the driver without going through. However, the day we played it there was a good wind in your face and if that's the prevailing then a driver play would not be out of the question.

Regards,

P.S. I know it's not connected to this thread, but I think the par-4 10th is also worthy of discussio too! Great hole ...

[GeoffreyC]

OK- here is something else to ponder.

I think that Flynn got caught once too often with a BIG downhill area to fit into his routing at Lehigh.  He first used the "charming" dropshot par 3 7th over the little Lehigh River. That hole is just fine. However, he got caught a second time with a huge hill to contend with I think the 11th is a much poorer use of the land. Perhaps he had to do this to get to the remaining superior parts of his routing (ie- the following hole (the 12th is outstanding and the previous hole, the 10th is better than that) but I still claim its a weakness of the course as a whole.

Mark said "Flynn used this part of the property perfectly and I don’t believe anyone could have designed a better golf hole here than this one." Well, I agree with him perhaps for 1930 but my question (seriously) is if a modern architect (Fazio for example) could improve the 11th by moving some dirt?  Is this situation a good example of the positive aspects of modern techniques?

[TEPaul]

Very interesting analyses and by GeoffreyC too. I agree with some of Geoffrey's thinking but I wouldn't call it a design weakness of the hole. I would say his criticism is something that could be  resolved by some maintenance alterations and in my opinion would make the hole even more interesting than it already is because it would resolve some of those cumbersome choices (or lack of them) on the hill itself.

I realize it would bring up a few other problems and solutions like what exactly to do with the cart path traversing the hill (not as if anything really would have to be done about it) but my advice would be to put the entire hill into fairway (or maybe into a fairway pattern that could have additional strategic implications). Maybe a combination of some fairway pattern and much shorter rough than the hole now has on the hill!

But the point is if the hill was fairway or some of it or a good portion of it was the hole would have many more strategic implications filtering all the way from the tee to the green.

Think about that! A very long hitter would have to think more than he does now about getting the ball near or to the crest of the hill without having the ball filter onto the the downslope somewhere leaving a doable (and shorter) but very dicey second shot to the green from a downhill lie (shades of a couple of Augusta's layup shot problems but even more dramatic here!). Fairway on the hillside or some interesting pattern of it and much shorter rough would also take care of the impossible shots from the rough on the hillside Geoffrey was talking about. Or possibly some combination of fairway and much shorter rough on the hillside to up the temptations and shot choices on the hillside for all levels of player.

I forgot to look but this fairway or shorter grass alteration might also call for taking the fairway on the near side of the river right to the drop-off at the wall. This would increase the intensity for particular layups.

I can hear the criticism to this recommendation right now. One day some really long hitter will hit a drive so long and accurate that his ball will get all the way down to the flat and about 90yds from the green and everybody will scream now the hole is too easy. But don't you think something could be done on that hillside (grass-wise and maybe pattern-wise) that if somebody hit a shot that long and that accurately they should maybe be rewarded  with a real shot at eagle particularly considering that Mark Fine has already said that that short shot isn't that easy anyway?!

I already broached this possibility to BillV last year but not in any detail. I know also the hole may never have been maintained this way but so what if it can make the hole play far more interesting and multi-optional? We're not talking about some radical redesign here, just a maintenance alteration and if it didn't work or wasn't appreciated it could be returned to what it is now in about 3 weeks of letting the grass grow long again.

Think even of the interesting turbo boost possibility with not only Tiger but the second shots of higher handicappers. But if they got less than accurate with them their risks would get even more interesting with getting out of angle with the green and whatnot.

I think the shadowy grass bunkers at the green are fantastic as is and I really like the way the grass is trimmed at what was the sand floors to look almost the same as if sand was there. There's a cutline where the faces meet the bases that is very visible and very interesting.

Mark sort of forgot to mention some of the very cool slope implications on that green too. I had a birdie putt of no more than five feet the other day but the only problem was the pin was way back and left and my ball was a little above and actually to the left of the hole. The greens weren't even that fast and I thought very carefully about how not to 3 putt if I happened to miss that putt and miss it I did--not an easy putt at all and probably broke about half as much of the length of the putt even though the green wasn't that fast.

One other thing Mark--that green is not 2200sf no matter what you think or John Chessard told you. I walked it off and either I don't know how to do math or it is a minimum of 2700sf and probably larger (closer to 3000sf) since I walked the length but only the short waist of the middle in measuring the width and clearly the front and back are wider than the slightly waist-like middle (so it would have to be larger than I calculated above).

But it's a real fun hole as you say and I think it could be even more so with very little effort and no design alteration or design tweaking at all, just some well thought out and interesting maintenance to do with grass cut and height! Not a normal hole, very different looking and playing and the better for it.

You forgot one other thing to mention. If for some reason you don't hit much of a drive you then have some serious BLINDNESS and direction problems to overcome. I realize the hole might be criticized for that and I've heard that about it but that aspect is another asset in my book because the hole doesn't have to be blind it just can be made that way by a player's shitty drive!

[TEPaul]

Very interesting analyses and by GeoffreyC too. I agree with some of Geoffrey's thinking but I wouldn't call it a design weakness of the hole. I would say his criticism is something that could be  resolved by some maintenance alterations and in my opinion would make the hole even more interesting than it already is because it would resolve some of those cumbersome choices (or lack of them) on the hill itself.

I realize it would bring up a few other problems and solutions like what exactly to do with the cart path traversing the hill (not as if anything really would have to be done about it) but my advice would be to put the entire hill into fairway (or maybe into a fairway pattern that could have additional strategic implications). Maybe a combination of some fairway pattern and much shorter rough than the hole now has on the hill!

But the point is if the hill was fairway or some of it or a good portion of it was the hole would have many more strategic implications filtering all the way from the tee to the green.

Think about that! A very long hitter would have to think more than he does now about getting the ball near or to the crest of the hill without having the ball filter onto the the downslope somewhere leaving a doable (and shorter) but very dicey second shot to the green from a downhill lie (shades of a couple of Augusta's layup shot problems but even more dramatic here!). Fairway on the hillside or some interesting pattern of it and much shorter rough would also take care of the impossible shots from the rough on the hillside Geoffrey was talking about. Or possibly some combination of fairway and much shorter rough on the hillside to up the temptations and shot choices on the hillside for all levels of player.

I forgot to look but this fairway or shorter grass alteration might also call for taking the fairway on the near side of the river right to the drop-off at the wall. This would increase the intensity for particular layups.

I can hear the criticism to this recommendation right now. One day some really long hitter will hit a drive so long and accurate that his ball will get all the way down to the flat and about 90yds from the green and everybody will scream now the hole is too easy. But don't you think something could be done on that hillside (grass-wise and maybe pattern-wise) that if somebody hit a shot that long and that accurately they should maybe be rewarded  with a real shot at eagle particularly considering that Mark Fine has already said that that short shot isn't that easy anyway?!

I already broached this possibility to BillV last year but not in any detail. I know also the hole may never have been maintained this way but so what if it can make the hole play far more interesting and multi-optional? We're not talking about some radical redesign here, just a maintenance alteration and if it didn't work or wasn't appreciated it could be returned to what it is now in about 3 weeks of letting the grass grow long again.

Think even of the interesting turbo boost possibility with not only Tiger but the second shots of higher handicappers. But if they got less than accurate with them their risks would get even more interesting with getting out of angle with the green and whatnot.

I think the shadowy grass bunkers at the green are fantastic as is and I really like the way the grass is trimmed at what was the sand floors to look almost the same as if sand was there. There's a cutline where the faces meet the bases that is very visible and very interesting.

Mark sort of forgot to mention some of the very cool slope implications on that green too. I had a birdie putt of no more than five feet the other day but the only problem was the pin was way back and left and my ball was a little above and actually to the left of the hole. The greens weren't even that fast and I thought very carefully about how not to 3 putt if I happened to miss that putt and miss it I did--not an easy putt at all and probably broke about half as much of the length of the putt even though the green wasn't that fast.

One other thing Mark--that green is not 2200sf no matter what you think or John Chessard told you. I walked it off and either I don't know how to do math or it is a minimum of 2700sf and probably larger (closer to 3000sf) since I walked the length but only the short waist of the middle in measuring the width and clearly the front and back are wider than the slightly waist-like middle (so it would have to be larger than I calculated above).

But it's a real fun hole as you say and I think it could be even more so with very little effort and no design alteration or design tweaking at all, just some well thought out and interesting maintenance to do with grass cut and height! Not a normal hole, very different looking and playing and the better for it.

You forgot one other thing to mention. If for some reason you don't hit much of a drive you then have some serious BLINDNESS and direction problems to overcome. I realize the hole might be criticized for that and I've heard that about it but that aspect is another asset in my book because the hole doesn't have to be blind it just can be made that way by a player's shitty drive!

[Matt_Ward]

TEPaul:

Enjoyed your comments.

One thing to consider -- as a long hitter if you cut the grass to fairway height on that slope you will get someone to reach the bottom with a solid well struck tee shot. I think I could do it if I really busted one.

Maybe a small alley-way is possible to keep things in perspective. Do you really want to give long hitters that much of an advantage. Maybe the fairway should be extended 20 yards and leave the hole as is. Thereby you will more than likely get a severe downhill lie if the pace is too strong on the tee ball. Now the ball rests downhill, but you can still play a shot if it's not sitting down too far in the rough.

For all types of players the key is getting the tee shot in play down the right side with a favoring draw (for right handers). I agree with BillV -- anything left is deader than Elvis!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark Fine,

I think the result of the tee shot determines the play of the hole.
And, I think it is a demanding tee shot in light of the terrain.

I'm curious about the maintainance of the hill.  Was it ever fairway ?  It appears that there are several "plateaus" in the hill where balls were intended to end up, for shots into the green.

I think the neat part of the hole, is, with a good tee shot to the top of the hole, you've already played a similar shot at # 7.

[GeoffreyC]

I agree with Matt that cutting all of the rough on the hill is not a good solution.  It solves a few problems but it will never make the hole into a good par 5.  If you cut the rough on the bottom 1/2 of the hill it might be better but both the very long driver and the duff who either misses his 2nd or still can't carry the ball far enough out of the rough are screwed.

By the way, if I recall correctly, driving left on the hole is death mainly because of a very large and tall and wide freekin TREE blocking anything but a wedge/9 iron attempt to reach the bottom fairway.

[TEPaul]

Matt and Geoffrey:

Now you're talking! Maybe as you both and even I mentioned turning the entire hillside into fairway wouldn't be the exact way to go--maybe doing some clever combination of two heights like a very clever fairway corridor that might even have topographical and direction significance (maybe even relating to the green's particular left orientation) might be the way to go.

Matt, as I said in my last post about that,  the whole concept should not go out the window simply because one day you or somebody else might hit a drive so long and so accurately as to get to the bottom of the hill. It makes no sense to me when people kill a design concept just because something like that might occur now and then. What they are failing to realize is that to do something on a hole that might TEMPT a golfer to try such a thing is not only about the ramifications of the REWARD but more importantly the ramifications of the RISKS which are bound to be far more prevalent (if the hillside was set up cleverly and meaningfully!). Think not of just the one thing that could go right but all the things that could go wrong or partially wrong possibly causing to arise all kinds of other neat temptations like playing the ball off a steeper lie with a shorter shot or maybe various other results like playing shorter shots but much more out of angle to the green. All these considerations are what make golf architecture and its strategies and choices fun and interesting to me and make for better golf holes and courses.

The point is this kind of thing would be extremely easy to try and experiment with. If they don't like it they can just let the grass grow back--big deal!

[Mark_Fine]

Interesting comments so far but no one has convinced me that this is not one of the best risk/reward par fives in this country.  No one has mentioned one better!  What are the options on #13 at Augusta for example?  Hit a good drive and go for it and if you don't, then you hit two wedges!  That is typical of most risk/reward par fives.  But Lehigh's offers a lot more than that.  The second shot for example is much more demanding than the layup at #13 at Augusta.  

#11 is a risk/reward par five and standing on the tee (just like at #13 at Augusta) there is pressure to hit a great tee shot to have a go at the green.  If you don't, you know you are going to have to lay up and deal with two relatively difficult golf shots.  

BillV's method for playing the hole is from the white tees not the tips.  Nobody, not even Matt who kills the ball, hits it way down that hill.  Matt's best drive just got through the end of the fairway.  From the white tee, yes you can do it.  How many guys hit it over 300 with accuracy anyway?  

There should be a penalty if you hit it way left.  The tree there is fine.  You can hit more than 9I or wedge (the shot is called a draw).  

Also if you are hitting wedge down to the bottom of the hill for your second shot either you drew a bad lie (tough break) or you just don't have the nerve to go for the green because you should be able to reach from the location of your first shot (if you can hit wedges that far).  

This hole is as good as it gets guys.

[ForkaB]

Wow

I'd hate to hear youse guys arguing about a hole and a course that you didn't like!

Mark

How would you rate #11 at TPC-Sawgrass vs. #11 at Lehigh?

[TEPaul]

Mark:

It's a nice hole and the second shot (if you want to go for it) is one very good risk/reward situation--very dramatic and pretty too and the smallish and quite sloped green with the shadowy grass bunkering adds alot to the look and the playability of the hole too for a second "go for it" shot.

But as Geoffrey has very correctly pointed out, other than the go/no go option the three shot choices are somewhat limited as to what can be done. I'm not talking about a miss-hit or a couple of miss-hits either and either is Geoffrey. He's talking about interesting and varied options if you don't go for it. If you don't go for it in two, you take a club and layup in the flat rather smallish level fairway down by the river and you hit a wedge of some kind onto the green. As he said that's quite straightforward if one chooses not to go for the green in two. The idea of doing something with the hillside cut-wise would probably filter back to the tee and certainly to the second shot options and would definitely create much more to think about which is not quite so clear cut as it is now!

I don't really know what you mean about one of the best risk/reward par 5s in the country either. Maybe you just mean that single decision to go in two or not.

If you want a risk/reward par 5 that has far more and different things (choices etc) going on with the tee shot, second shot, third shot etc, I would point you to #18 NGLA. There is so many more different ways of playing that hole than #11. None of those different ways and varied shot selections or choices may be quite as dramatic as the second shot go option on #11 but still there are many more ways of playing NGLA's #18. Maybe that doesn't make for a better hole to you or even a better hole in only a second shot risk/reward context but I wouldn't count it out in that single context either!

[Mark_Fine]

Rich,
#11 at The TPC is a good risk/reward par five of about 530 yards from the tips.  The alternate fairway doesn't really work that well but it does look nice on a drawing board  .  Nobody plays over there.  Also, isn't there an old oak tree that plays prominately in the strategy of the second shot???  A higher handicapper could spend the whole day trying to finish this hole.  After they've lost a few balls that they sliced into the water, they could spend the rest of their time in that 100 yard six foot deep sand trap!  The hole is very manufactured vs. Lehigh's which is very natural.  Lehigh's hole is far superior.  

Again, what I am saying is as a risk/reward par five, Lehigh's hole appeals to almost all levels of golfers.  It's just that good!
Mark

By the way, I've seen all the pros play many times.  Matt Ward hits the ball farther than 95% of them!  Keep that in mind!    

[BillV]

Mark

Hate to disappoint, but I hit 3-wood from the whites (Now Blues!) and Driver from the Blues (Now Black-confused??? see previous thread) to hit through the end of the fairway and I am not as long as Mattie Warder!  I am not the most consistent with the driver, that's why the hole is only dead left and behind a tree right.

Tommy Paul and I had the discussion he listed above, but I commented little because I know what good drivers are capable of and a full fairway cut on #11 would be suicide.  It is as good as it can get just now, except for better framing, such as bunkers or ornamental trees.

Quote:
"Pretty good hole for the weakest hole at Lehigh!"-the redanman  

Just wait until your boy grows up and starts getting Testosterone along with Titanium and Tungsten/Urethane!!!!!!

The hole

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
I love #18 at The National, but the far majority of golfers could never get home in two shots there even if they moved up to the 450 yard markers!  That is the biggest difference!  For all but the best golfers, #18 is a three shot hole.  It plays far longer than the 502 yards from the tips.  As a risk/reward hole (a potential two shot par five where many have an option to reach the green in two), I don't believe it is a better hole.  

#11 at Lehigh affords a much greater number of golfers the chance to hit a dramatic shot and two putt for eagle while at the same time providing challenge for even the best.  This is not a gimmie birdie for anyone!  That second shot is not as trivial as some might think (ask Leigh Taylor and Bill Wamsley).  Bill was in the center of the fairway for his second and miss the landing area!  It is no fun trying to hit that green with a third shot from the rough.  If you get above the pin you are in danger of three putting every time!
Mark

[Mark_Fine]

Bill,
I hear you and that is fine, but 99% of golfers (the rest of us) hit driver from the tips "all the time"!  It is 305 yards to run out of fairway usually into the breeze!  If you are that long, just hit a 280 yard 2I or something.  How many eagles have you made there?  I'd be surprised if it's more than one in ten tries even though it sounds like you are always hitting mid irons for your second!
Mark

[TEPaul]

By suicide I suppose that BillV means the hole would get absolutely killed scorewise everytime or most of the time. I would really like to take another look at that topography on the hillside in that context but I really doubt that the hole would be subject to suicide. Many golfers have a way of fantacizing about what they can do if they did it once in a while. Give most golfers some really good temptation and they will screw themselves up most of the time. Maybe pros won't or don't but give an amateur tempting chances at greatness that have complex and less than straightforward risks and the hole will get them more than they will get the hole!

[GeoffreyC]

Mark

Sorry but I have to disaggree with you again. Not only is #11 at TPC Sawgrass a better risk reward par five then #11 at Lehigh but #16 at TPC is as well.  At both of those holes you have options about WHERE TO LAY UP or whether to go for the green.  Contrary to your opinion, the left fairway is a viable option on #11 TPC. I played that way myself to a front right pin location.

The trees on the holes at TPC affect decisions about club CHOICES and where to attempt to place your 2nd shot.  I'd like to see you attempt to draw (fade for us mollydookers) the ball around the tree at Lehigh #11 from a nasty lie in the rough going straight for another set of trees that would then block your third over the river to a tiny green.

Face it- #11 is an awkward hole that gets you from the superb tenth hole to the superb 12th. I actually think given the topography it would have worked better as a longish par 4 with the green on the other side of the little lehigh river but then Flynn would have had to find another par 5 somewhere. As a par 4 it would be interesting for severe downhill 2nd shots with the river behind the green and equally terifying if facing a pitch shot third from a downhill lie on the hill.

[Matt_Ward]

Have to agree about the 11th and 16th at TPC being better than #11 at Lehigh simply because you don't have a forced ending to the fairway.

I only wish Lehigh did cut the rough down and extend the fairway down the hill. How would this hurt the play of the hole if it was included?

Mark, into the wind I was about 10 yards into the rough cut. I'd like to try it again without rough being there and if there was no significant wind in my face as there was last Thursday I'd like to see how far I can go. It's a clear gamble and certainly the payoff isn't guaranteed until you hit your second shot!

Still, I like the hole for it presents -- I look forward to my second attempt in the near future.

[Mark_Fine]

GeoffreyC,
It's tougher to hit that left fairway on #11 at The TPC than it is to hit that green and I'm not sure why you would even want to try?  Who wants a 50 yard pitch shot to that green anyway?  Furthermore, you still have to fly the ball all the way onto the green from either side so what is the advantage.  You either go over the 100 yard bunker from the right or the pot bunker short of the green from the left!  Check the number of divots over there the next time you play it.  You'll be lucky if you can find any!  I've played the course a half dozen times and have always felt that area is fairway just for the sake of it.  What else was he going to put there?

#16 at The TPC is the far better risk/reward hole of the two (at least as far as the number of golfers that have a chance to go for the green in two shots).  But even there, half the pros layup and their tees are only 8 yards longer (497 vs. 491) then the regular tees.  The shot is not nearly as tempting with all the trouble everywhere.  I still think Lehigh's is easily in a class with this one.  

Saying Lehigh's 11th is a filler hole is a good example of why the best golf holes need to be studied to be understood.  I can understand someone saying this if they've only played it a few times as you can miss a lot.  Tom Paul brought up some things I failed to mention (my initial post was long enough) and each time he played it,I bet he would come up with some others.  

Furthermore, if you base your opinions on your own game you can really get yourself in trouble.  For example, I wonder what Matt Ward would think of #10 at Lehigh if he based it on his own game?  His drive was just right of that bunker we all love, 70 yards short of the green!!  He hit his tee shot 350 yards!  I joked to him, "I told you that bunker was perfectly placed by Flynn".

Getting back to #11, if I hit a drive left and had a poor lie and felt I couldn't draw the ball around the corner, so be it, I'm penalized and I deserve it as I hit a poor tee shot.  I hope you don't think that is unfair?  There is a huge opening from treeline to treeline and the hole is visually very open.  

Pete Dye is one of the best at designing risk/reward par fives as he knows how to tempt golfers into trying to do more than they are capable of.  He is a master at this and is always playing with your mind on every golf shot.  Some of his courses were the first I considered in looking for other great risk/reward par fives.  But how many others can anyone think of that have the interest and drama of #11 at Lehigh.  Think about the top courses in the country and tell me some better r/r par fives that challenge most everyone?

Finally, I would be willing to bet if you asked 100 golfers after playing Lehigh which hole they would like to go play again, the majority would pick that hole!  When Lehigh has had outside tournaments there, #11 is always brought up as one most golfers would like to get another crack at playing.  I wonder why that is??  I was out there for a college match this summer and the kids were all raving about how much fun that second shot was into that green.  They all wanted to hit extra balls to see how far back they could go and still reach the green.  

Mark

 

[Mark_Fine]

Matt,
The fairway is 305 yards long!  If you moved the tee back 40 yards (if you could) that would defeat the purpose of the hole.  The far majority of all golfers would have to layup from back there and all the advantage would go to the monster long hitter.  Flynn wanted to tempt most any decent player to have a go.  Back then, I'm sure the fairways were like concrete so most decent golfers could get there drive into the go range!  Driver/5I, what more do you want?  By the time we got to #11 we didn't have much of a breeze.  Heck, I knocked it over the stream from 248 yards out!  

If #11 and #16 at The TPC are only better because the fairway doesn't run out, you are only thinking about the hole in regards to how the extremely long players would play the hole, the rest of us mortals.  I disagree with that logic.    

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()