[DMoriarty]

Some of you have grown quite tired of the constant strategy threads.--  In almost every such thread, one or two posters volunteer that we overemphasize the importance of strategy to great architecture, and posit that there are many great non-strategic holes out there.  So, for a change of pace, I thought we might all learn something from identifying and discussing these great non-strategic holes.  

I'd love to start the ball rolling, but I must confess my ignorance.  I am not as well traveled as some of you and therefore am not familiar with many of these great non-strategic holes.   Really, I am embarrassed to admit that it is even worse than that--  I am not familiar with any such holes.   While I am sure there must be many, I cant even think of a single par 3 which I would consider both great and non-strategic.  

Can you guys help me out here?  What are some of the great non-strategic holes?  And, if you dont mind, could you describe them and tell me what it is that makes them great?  

[THuckaby2]

David:

#17 at TPC Sawgrass.  Not much strategy there, and sure some hate it, but most would call it a great hole, just for the drama involved in pulling off the shot.

Disagree?

TH

[Mike Hendren]

Huckster,

You are correct for us mere mortals.  I think the green contouring at TPC's 17th IS strategic for the professionals, however.  Too much club when the pin's down front for safety reasons will leave a tricky downhiller.  Ditto when the pin is on the right side and one choses to play for the middle of the green, thereby missing the right-hand boost down toward the pin.  

Not much strategy at Beverly's 3rd or Sand Hills' fabulous 17th off the top of my head.

Mike

[Brian_Gracely]

#9 at Royal County Down.  Bomb it at the white/black post off the tee, and fly your approach into the green.  The fairway is very wide, and devoid of fairway bunkers, so placement off the tee is minimal for strategy.  And there are cross bunkers about 30 yards short of the green, so the margin for error on a run-up shot is small.  

[JSlonis]

What do we define as strategy?  

I don't think there are non-strategic holes, for that matter I don't think there are non-strategic shots.

Even a do or die hole like the 17th at TPC Sawgrass has strategy.  Yes the basic premise is to just hit the green, but aren't there different ways or strategies to go about doing that?

I think we're back to the basic argument that Pat Mucci first made and I completely agree with- Basic strategy exists on every hole and every golf shot , but it is ultimately the skill level of the player that creates the different strategies.

The strategy for a tour pro, or an accomplished amateur is going to be far different from a 20 handicap on a hole like the 17th at TPC.

[THuckaby2]

OK guys, gotcha re 17 TPC Sawgrass - that was just off the top of my head.  Of course, the difficulty here is that on ANY golf shot there is some form of "strategy" if one wants to define the term broadly enough.  

But if that's the case, then there's no need to respond to this thread, as every golf hole on the planet will have "strategy" involved.

TH

[Thomas_Brown]

Wow! No strategy on #9 at RCD ? - What about the cross bunker 40 yards short of the green on the right?  I was in the rough and it certainly had my attention.

Doesn't the green receive the shot better from the left side of the fwy. than the right?

[Brian_Gracely]

Wow! No strategy on #9 at RCD ? - What about the cross bunker 40 yards short of the green on the right?  I was in the rough and it certainly had my attention.

Doesn't the green receive the shot better from the left side of the fwy. than the right?

If we're going to get into a discussion about strategy after you've missed a previous shot and are now contending with stuff like bunkers, etc...then Tom's right that we ought to stop this conversation right now.  You could make the same argument about every single hole if we miss a previous shot.

Now, somebody else could make an argument about RCD #9 like this....I can only hit it 210 off the tee, and hence the cross-bunkers come into play on my approach because I'm now 230+ into the green and that's a tough shot for me because it's long.  Well, one strategy there is to play from the forward tees so you're not playing it at 450-490.

I'd agree that the cross-bunkers are the most strategic element on that hole.....which by the way I'd like to buried at the top of that hill, so I'm not bashing the hole  

[Dan Grossman]

I would view this as "What are the Great Holes where the architect dictates the line of play?"

A couple of thoughts:
#3 Pasatiempo (hit the green or make bogey)
#11 Pasatiempo (the way it is today, can't go over the wash to the left)
#8 & #9 at Pebble
#7 at Pac Dunes
#12 at ANGC

I'm sure there are also some great RTJ holes, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Go visit a golf course in the coastal dunes of Florence, Oregon called Sandpines-Golf On the Oregon Dunes for a better definition of non-strategy.

You will find that holes 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, & 18 are about as non-strategical as a golf course can get--that is unless its on some farmer's field with sand greens and cows to hit at.

The name of that course again, "Sandpines--Golf on the Oregon Dunes"

[Mike Benham]

Go visit a golf course in the coastal dunes of Florence, Oregon called Sandpines-Golf On the Oregon Dunes for a better definition of non-strategy.

You will find that holes 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, & 18 are about as non-strategical as a golf course can get--that is unless its on some farmer's field with sand greens and cows to hit at.

The name of that course again, "Sandpines--Golf on the Oregon Dunes"

[Dan Grossman]

Do we really want to do this again??

 

[DMoriarty]

Brian, does RCD #9 receive a shot better from the left part of the fairway than the right?

If conditions are firm, does one have the option of hitting over the bunkers but short of the green and trying to run it in?  
___________
Dan,

That question works for me, with perhaps a fudge on what you mean by "line of play" which will probably become apparent in a second.

Good suggestions, as well.  Especially Pasa 3 and the two oceanside 4s at Pebble.   I probably wouldnt classify Pasa 3 as a great hole, but see why one might.  

ANGC #12?  I always thought that the hole was famous for swirling winds which left the golfer at a loss as to what to do with regard to trajectory, club, even direction.

PD 7? Perhaps I misremember, but isnt the approach better to at least some of the pins if one challenges the left side, including the left side bunker.

Pasa 11 & 3?  When I have played the hole I tried to decide 1) how far to hit my drive, and 2) how close I should try to get to the wash to the left.   On my second shots, I recall trying to figure out out whether to aim at the front/left of the green or to go over more of the wash to hit into the center of the green.  What am I missing?   With regard to Pasa 3, hitting the green definitely helps. But I always aim a little left though, kind of for the left front or even a little short.  Probably takes birdie out of play, but if I get the ball there it might take double bogey out of play also.  
PB 8 & 9.  I can see why you would say this.  A few questions though:  On PB8, wouldnt it make a difference how close one layed up to the edge?  Also, couldnt one change the angle and risks substantially by the precise line they took off the tee?  With regard to PB 9:  Cant one choose to lay up a little off the tee to get a flat lie at the cost of a longer shot, and/or to try to hug the right to get a better angle at the small opening in front?  
   

[DMoriarty]

Tommy, my friend.  I think you misread the topic.  I am looking for great non-strategic holes.  

Unless you think there is a great non-strategic hole at Sandpines, please dont hijack my thread and turn it into another long boring thread on Sandpines.

Thank you oh mighty one.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Your absolutely right David.

But you know what they say, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!

[Dan Grossman]

David -

I think you could argue that on every hole, there is a preferred line of play.  However, I view the holes I suggested as holes that (1) the line of play is fairly obvious from the tee and (2) there is really only one way to successfully play the hole.  The your score on the hole is dependent upon execution, as opposed to strategy.

Maybe I am wrong, but every time I have played PD #7, it has been dead into the wind.  So, the appropriate play has been to bash driver as far as you can and then hope like hell your 2-iron approach holds.  Execution of two difficult shots allows for par.  I tend to cut my 3-wood and long irons, so fairway position doesn't matter for me.


Having not played #12 at ANGC, I might not be able to comment.  But, while the wind is difficult, I have never seen any of the pros try a knock-down or anything.  Everyone seems to just hit 9-iron or  wedge and hope like hell they get the distance right?  Not a lot of strategy there, I don't think.

As far as Pasa #11 and PB #8, I really don't view the lay-up shot as strategic.  Isn't the goal just to hit it as far as you can without going in the wash or canyon?  You need to know three things in order to do this (1) What is the line?  (2)  How far is it to the hazard on that line?  (3) How far do I hit my clubs?  I view those as execution questions, rather than general strategies on the hole?

As far as #9 at PB, I hit driver, 3-iron into that hole.  I can't imagine trying to lay up....

Regarding aiming spots on Pasa #3 and approach on #11, aren't those factoring in your bail-out areas?  Which gets back to execution.

These holes are different from, say #7 at Rustic, because the golfer has to choose a tactic on the hole (do I carry the wash or layup) and then execute.  These holes just require successful execution of a pre-determined shot.

[DMoriarty]

Dan, I am not so sure that every hole has a "preferred line of play."  Preferred connotes that one is favored over at least one other, and on some courses there is only one line.  Regardless, I am not sure that all the holes listed fit your description.    

PD#7.  I have only played 7 into the wind as well, but I think much of the year the wind is blowing the opposite direction, so the decisions might be much different.  I'll let those who know the course better than me explain the subtleties of the strategy coming into this hole, if they care to.  Suffice it to say that I dont ever recall feeling optionless at Pacific.   Perhaps I will readdress the question in a few weeks after seeing the hole again . . .

Also, I may be wrong but I think 7 might have been the hole where one of those in my group was quite disappointed that he had hit a terrific recovery shot at the green, only to see it bounce into the bunker.  But from where I was standing (up by the green), it was no surprise because the tough angle and the green slope seemed almost like a foregone conclusion.  

ANGC 12:  Here is where I disagree most.  It seems the pros consider and reconsider their options on this hole and it seems they always have.  They may not hit what you and I call a knockdown, but I'll bet they carefully choose a preferred trajectory and line.  

It may just be wild fantasy, but sometimes standing on the 8th tee at RC I imagine that the shot might be somewhat similar to ANGC 12, because of the changing winds. For example recently my parter and I watched both our opponents hit over and left after deciding to club up because a strong wind had been blowing straight down canyon before that point.   Before they had hit my partner and I noticed that the wind had shifted slightly, and was blowing cross canyon and slightly helping.  My partner hit relatively less club and moved the ball into the wind, hitting it safely onto the center of the green. (I tried to do the same and probably toe shanked it onto the seventh green.)  All three had hit it solidly, but only one had correctly read the situation and chosen accordingly.

As for the others holes you mentioned, I dont have too much to add to what I previously said, except to admit that perhaps I am stretching the concept of strategy to include choosing an aggessive line or favoring a safe, bail out line. But isnt this exactly what strategy often entails?  Same goes for playing to the wide side on a diagonal hazard such as PB 8 (or RC 5 or 7);  Isnt it a strategic question of aggressive play (challenging the edge) for advantage vs. safety (far back away) and a longer harder shot?  

By the way, do you consider Pasa 3 to be a great par 3?  World class great?  If so, what do you think makes it so?

For now though, let's ignore my efforts to find strategy everywhere and put the following courses on the list of holes which might possibly be great non-strategic holes.  

ANGC 12
PB 8
PB 9
PD 7

Plus, if you and others think they are deserving as great holes, we can add Pasa 3 and 11.

[Mike_Cirba]

The 7th at Pacific Dunes might well be an "optionless" hole and perhaps it is for the scratch player.  However, I have a tough time believing that when I consider that the last time I played there, into a fierce wind, I putted my third shot from 65 yards out.  

[Brian_Gracely]

Brian, does RCD #9 receive a shot better from the left part of the fairway than the right?

If conditions are firm, does one have the option of hitting over the bunkers but short of the green and trying to run it in?  

David,

The problem with the left side of the fairway is that the tee-shot is completely blind and the dunes on the left-side push into the fairway.  So you not only have to be long to carry those dunes, but you had better know the line really well.  Missing into the gorse is dead.  The approach from the right-side is not a bad angle at all.  It's a longer shot, but the green actually sits on a front-right to back-left angle.

And there is about 15-20yds between the bunkers and the front of the green.  But the approach is going to be long (190-230yds) and someone had better be very accurate with a run-up long-iron approach to be able to leave it short and not go in those deep bunkers.  If I recall correctly, over the back is not that penal and might be a better miss than in those fron bunkers.  

#9 is a great hole and it benefits from breath-taking scenary, but at 480yds and a blind tee-shot, I don't think it's oozing with strategy that isn't really just the need to hit long and accurate shots.  

[John_Cullum]

I'll toss in the 1st at The Old Course. First of all, it is a great hole because it is The Old Course, and it's the first hole, where you will undertake one of the most thrilling days of your golfing life. You cannot stand on that tee and not be enveloped in the drama that every great player who has ever lived (except maybe Hogan) has been there. And there She is before you. The fairway 150 yards wide, the only hazard being the five foot wide Swilkin Bern at the front of the green. No way to go except over it. No strategy, just GO.

[Dan Grossman]

It may just be wild fantasy, but sometimes standing on the 8th tee at RC I imagine that the shot might be somewhat similar to ANGC 12, because of the changing winds. For example recently my parter and I watched both our opponents hit over and left after deciding to club up because a strong wind had been blowing straight down canyon before that point.   Before they had hit my partner and I noticed that the wind had shifted slightly, and was blowing cross canyon and slightly helping.  My partner hit relatively less club and moved the ball into the wind, hitting it safely onto the center of the green. (I tried to do the same and probably toe shanked it onto the seventh green.)  All three had hit it solidly, but only one had correctly read the situation and chosen accordingly.

DaveM - I actually don't think this is strategy (or at least not one which is dictated by the architect).  I think this is execution.  Imagine a 150 par 3 over water.  The green is a perfect circle, completely flat with a radius of 20yds.  It is also completely surrounded by water.  I would say that this theoretical hole has no strategic merits and is a penal design.  Now, that being said, there are many ways to try to effectively play this hole.  You can hit a knockdown into the wind, cut it against the wind, ride the wind, but, in the end, you are just trying to fly it the right distance to the green.  To a certain extent, this is how I view #12 at ANGC and #8 at RC.  

Now, contrast this with #4 at Rustic, where the player can choose to fly it back to the hole or try to catch the downslope in front of the green to roll it back to the hole.  In this example, the player has to decide on, what I will call a HOLE STRATEGY, and then a SHOT EXECUTION STRATEGY.  The hole strategy is dictated by the architect (do I carry the wash, do I run it up or fly it in) while the SHOT EXECUTION STRATEGY is dependent upon wind, ground conditions, the player's game, etc.  At #4 on Rustic, the player has to decide which option he wants to take and then figure out how to do it.  Specifically, at #4 on Rustic if the player decides to roll it up, he then has to decide how to do that.  Bladed wedge, putter, 5-iron, etc.  On Non-Strategic Hole, there is no HOLE STRATEGY, Just SHOT EXECUTION STRATEGY.  The holes which I have attempted to name only have shot execution strategy.

I don't think #3 at Pasatiempo is a great hole.  However, I do believe that #11 is a great hole.  

I think a player's attitude on the tee is telling of whether a hole is strategic or not.  When I think about these holes, I have had more of a resigned "Here Goes" attitude on the tee.  I knew exactly what I had to do, and it is difficult.  Versus strategic holes where I will typically ask my playing partners how they are going to attack the hole.

Can anyone name other non-strategic holes, or does no one agree with me?  I just came up with my list in about 5 minutes.  I am sure there are more, I just haven't had time to think about it.

[Jeff Goldman]

Excellent topic!  I think there are 2 elements that can make a hole great - strategic choices and shots that are fun to hit.  However, I don't think you need both, and fun shots may be more important than strategy.  As an example, let me suggest the 3rd hole at Olympia Fields North.  You hit a tee shot to a fairway that you cannot see, maybe 30 feet below the tee.  It is thrilling to pound it and watch it disappear below you (there is fairway extending from the tee about 150 yards or so, which blocks the view of the target fairway).  However, there really isn't much strategy to the shot.  You try to keep it a little left to get the best angle to the green, but there is no "risk reward" strategy involved.  Similarly, the second shot is uphill to a steeply sloping green that falls off bigtime on the front, left and right, and you don't want to be long.  Choosing how to play is more course management than strategy, but again, calling it merely a fun shot understates the case - I've gone out and hit shots to that green 10 at a time just to see.

Jeff Goldman

[DMoriarty]

Dan,

I think it depends upon the winds and the hole.  From what I have heard, the winds at Augusta 12 are more than just a consistent breeze, they are constantly changing and quite unpredictable.  They consistently offer an added element of uncertainty to the hole which the golfer is forced to consider.  

I asked the super at Rustic whether the architects chose 8's location because of its location relative to the changing winds, and he said that that was definitely one of the considerations.    If an architect sticks a short par 3 requiring an aerial shot on a location which constantly changing interesting winds, shouldnt we consider that the choice was probably made in order to create choices for the golfer on an otherwise simple hole?  

[Dan Grossman]

If an architect sticks a short par 3 requiring an aerial shot on a location which constantly changing interesting winds, shouldnt we consider that the choice was probably made in order to create choices for the golfer on an otherwise simple hole?  

I guess I don't know how to answer this.  I think you have to look at the routing too.  It seems like to assume that any short par 3 is probably strategic because of wind seems a bit too simplistic.  

I think we will have to agree to disagree.  While I truly enjoy playing holes like #8 at RC and #7 at PB, I don't think there is a lot of HOLE STRATEGY.  I would consider those holes to be non-strategic.

[John_Cullum]

I don't think there are non-strategic holes, for that matter I don't think there are non-strategic shots.

Even a do or die hole like the 17th at TPC Sawgrass has strategy.  Yes the basic premise is to just hit the green, but aren't there different ways or strategies to go about doing that?

I think we're back to the basic argument that Pat Mucci first made and I completely agree with- Basic strategy exists on every hole and every golf shot , but it is ultimately the skill level of the player that creates the different strategies.

The strategy for a tour pro, or an accomplished amateur is going to be far different from a 20 handicap on a hole like the 17th at TPC.

I will respectfully disagree. I don't see much difference in strategy between levels of play at TPC 17. Whoever plays the 17th is looking to fly his ball through the air and land it on the green, now maybe the elite players of the PGA tour can try to make some bit of strategy out of that, but not enough  to make it a strtegic hole. I believe Dye designed the hole to be devoid of strategy. It is designed to test the elite players ability to execute a fairly routine 145 yard shot, late in the tournament with all the marbles on the line.
 A great hole with even less strategy, if possible, is the 8th at Royal Troon.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()