News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
What Constitutes an advantage?
« on: November 30, 2002, 04:25:29 PM »
In the revived anti-strategy thread, I can add a few things.

First, I have played some Fazio courses with options and strategy.  After reading about his courses here, I guess I should be surprised!

Second, I have discussed the inside of fw, inside of green hazard layout with Pete, and he is trying to force the long par 4 holes to be longer, since the legal limit for par 4s is no longer sufficient to require long iron play for the top players.

I had this discussion with him five years ago, so I wonder how new the idea is.  Also, I believe Doak mentions guarding the short cut route twice in Anatomy of a Golf Course, and as a disciple of Dye, assume it must have been discussed with Pete sometime prior to writing the book, but, I may be wrong.

None of that is the point of the question, though.  What constitutes the best advantage for the good player?  I  wonder if the open front green as the primary advantage is now as dated as the 200 yard dogleg, at least for good players you presumably design for?

When the ground game was king and ground hard, the open front was essential.  In the aerial era, good players not only don't bump it in, they don't worry about ground balls!  They also have better distance control than lateral control with their irons, meaning left and right hazards and angles of play are more important.  

The pros I know tell me this:

1.  They look at the green contours, to work their shots close to the pin, not surrounding hazards, in plannning their approach.

2. If between clubs, an open front may allow them to club down, allowing an uphill putt.  Without one, they simply take the extra club and play more spin back to the hole.

3.  They like to hit away from trouble (ie, teeing up right next to O.B., aiming at the far edge, and curving the ball back towards O.B., rather than aim out over the O.B. and curve it away, to max out side to side miss area.  

Thus, in the Bulle Rock example,  the right side may be  preferred, because:

1.They can aim at the far left edge of the green, and have the greatest angle room to miss the bunker.  The green angle sets up the fade.

2. Unless the pin is cut right behind the bunker, it doesn't come into play.  Distance control should also help avoid the back bunker.

3.  As the green angles right, I presume the back left is high, and if the front swale happens to aim at the right fairway, the contour may give more assistance to stopping the shot.

4.  And lets not forget, it is still shorter, which should imply more accuracy, no?

Leaving the green open from the long side/angle provides two more or less good options, rather than hand the hole to the long hitter, while shutting out the medium hitter.  The long carry hitter has the shorter shot, which he can more easily execute the carry bunker by the green, and the shorter hitter has a longer shot, but an open front to help ease the burden.

Isn't it better to be more "democratic" and favor a wider range of players, with the inside/inside hazard combo preferred (at least in many cases) over a inside carry/outside green hazard?

And again, what really contitutes an advantage to the best players in todays game?




« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Cirba

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2002, 04:31:24 PM »
Jeff;

Good thoughts, there.  

I'm having trouble keeping up with 3 threads on this discussion, but you might be interested to know that the pic of Bulle Rock's 9th hole I posted is a 478 yard par four from the tips, with the water carry on the right somewhere around 330 yards and requiring a fade around trees on the right that block off the back tee.  

Probably not the smart play.   ::)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2002, 05:00:30 PM »
Jeff Brauer:

Very fine logic there in your last post. Generally inside/inside bunkering used to be considered not the thing to do (of course any rule can be broken to good effect sometimes) but the thinking against inside/inside bunkering probably was somewhat of an old saw from some time ago and well before the pinpoint precision of the approach aerial shots of these good players today.

I've played Bulle Rock although I don't remember the details of #9 posted above. But if Mike Cirba is correct that the carry to that right side fairway option from the tips is about 350 or 290 from the middle, what exactly is Pete Dye thinking about?

Simply put, that is not an option (certainly from the tips) that will be used by anyone. Maybe Pete's thinking of the 2090 Open or something with that arrangement! These guys are good but not that good and in a competitive situation they sure aren't crazy either! Even the world's greatest mindless raw talent, John Daly, wouldn't fall for that option and if he wouldn't no one would!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2002, 05:51:24 PM »
Jeff,

I had a similar conversation with Pete Dye at Crooked Stick the year it hosted the USGA Mid-Amateur, so his ideas date back beyond 5 years to at least 1989.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2002, 06:03:48 PM »
Mike,

Okay, so I didn't read all the thread carefully either! ???

Maybe Pete Dye was using the Jesus theory of design regarding carrying the water.....the one that says you need to know where the rocks are!

My question remains, even for flirting with the water on the right, or any similar hole.  Of the typical strategic advantages, which would typically be the most enticing to a good player?

Shorter Distance?
Frontal Opening?
Frontal Nudity?
Level or Assistive Lie(ie slopes right when you want to play a fade)?
Better Vision?
Green Slope facing you to help stop shot versus against you or neutral?
Better View of the Cart Girl?

Some combination of the above to make flirting with water even remotely a possibility?

Jeff

PS - For the astute among you, I threw two red herring options in to throw you off.  See if you can pick them out!

Got to go watch hockey again, so you have three hours or so until I check back in!


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

TEPaul

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #5 on: November 30, 2002, 08:01:55 PM »
Jeeesus Jeff--I've been on here for two and one half years and I never thought anyone on here would ever get around to mentioning the underlying key to all ideally designed holes!

But you finally did--congratulations!

Nothing else in golf architecture is as important as the proper application of 'frontal nudity'!

Way to go---yuduman!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

jsbach

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2002, 08:11:50 PM »
Sir,
I regret to inform you that you must have been intoxicated.
The hole to which you refer to carries 476 yds. NOT 478 yds.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2002, 09:07:36 PM »
TEPaul,

Okay, you got the important point.  But you didn't identify the two "red herring" options like I asked!

On another thread, you said you were going for a million posts by Christmas.  And that was before you knew we were going to discuss nudity on a regular basis!

For some reason, I want to go to the office on Monday, and do a replica of Thomas' "Mae West" green!  Somehow, I doubt that the "Pamela Anderson" green will have a lasting nickname.

jeff
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #8 on: November 30, 2002, 10:03:35 PM »
Jeff,
All those factors would weigh in to the determination of RvsR but all things being equal I would think a back to front tilt would lure the most often, especially under firm conditions.    
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Andy Hodson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2002, 08:42:20 AM »
Jeff

I think the one advantage that would entice me to take the more difficult route would be a better angle into the green, specifically one that allows a wider margin for error left and/or right. For example, using the Bulle Rock hole(if that carry were feasible), if I had a second shot that came in more on the perpendicular to the green's axis that would entice me to take the harder route off the tee. I think for the better player distance control is not as big a factor as directional control. I like to know I could miss it a little left or right and still be on the green. That gives me more comfort, moreso than if I had an "open" look at the green, or room in front or behind the hole. Carrying a hazard, bunker or water, wouldn't be enough to not take the chance.

I hope that makes sense. If it doesn't, disregard. And know that, at all times, full frontal nudity gives me great comfort.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Eric Pevoto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2002, 08:55:04 AM »
Andy,

I think I got ya, and I agree.  

Give the "outside" line the open entrance to the green, but have it open to one side of the axis of the green.  

The "inside" line would find the hazards and the forced carry to reach the green, but would come in straight to the green's axis.  The better player doesn't have a concern with keeping the ball in the air and is willing to risk trouble for the better angle.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
There's no home cooking these days.  It's all microwave.Bill Kittleman

Golf doesn't work for those that don't know what golf can be...Mike Nuzzo

Mike_Cirba

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2002, 11:55:02 AM »
I think this is a great thread, and one that we should really all be thinking about because it may cause more than a few of us to reevaluate our thoughts on what constitutes "advantageous" positioning.  

Frankly, I'm surprised when I hear really good players like Andy and Eric tell us that they'd rather have some degree of width to play to on an approach, even if it means a forced carry, or shallow area on which to land and stop the ball.  

Andy and Eric...would your opinions hold true on a course with very firm greens??  On many courses I've seen, the shallow approach angle is also further complicated by the fact that there may be a downsloped landing area (often just behind a bunker) which tends to propel the ball forward (and potentially over into more trouble).

Also, how does the whole idea of "visibility" affect your decisionmaking?  Oftimes, the "open" side provides a very good viewpoint in traditional classic architecture, while the shallow side often requires a shot at least partially blinded by bunkering, mounding, etc.  Does this factor into your thought process?

Has the whole idea of what constitutes advantageous strategy changed on approach shots for top players due to equipment, soft conditioning, and higher-spinning balls??

Conversely, if the pros and top amateurs are sooooo good with "distance control" that they'd rather have a wider landing area for an approach than a deep one, then why do most of the errors I see on approaches in tournaments usually come from coming up short, or catching a flyer long, than anything too far way left or right??

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »

Eric Pevoto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2002, 12:29:31 PM »
Mike,

My reading skills are lacking. I read Andy's post, said I agreed, then proceeded to say the exact opposite. :-[  

The short answer:  it depends!

Rather than width as you and Andy said, I'm actually saying I'd rather have a margin for distance control rather than accuracy.  But that depends on the length of the shot.  

Generally, the shorter the shot, the more it becomes all about distance control.  I may be willing to risk trouble to gain a shorter shot with more margin short/long.  I may not if that means an approach that is too shallow for comfort. Firmer greens make this even more true.  

  


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
There's no home cooking these days.  It's all microwave.Bill Kittleman

Golf doesn't work for those that don't know what golf can be...Mike Nuzzo

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2002, 01:16:05 PM »
The green(shown elsewhere on their site) doesn't seem to present any sort of back to front slope but looks as though it will readily accept a longer shot. The higher front tier looks like it will funnel longer approach shots toward the lower back and a slight hump in the back left looks like it might turn a slightly hot ball back towards the surface. If that is true then going over the water with a huge carry has the shorter shot as its main reward, no? The depth and breadth challenge of this green seem to offer an equal challenge for the club in hand. The fairway looks to offer good lies from all places.

(disclaimer: The above sentiments are derived from photo examination only and are not meant to supplant first hand experience. ;D )  

Hole overhead
http://www.bullerock.com/South%20Course/BigPictures/Hole9_Overhead.htm

Green
http://www.bullerock.com/South%20Course/hole9.htm


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Andy Hodson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #14 on: December 01, 2002, 01:28:34 PM »
Mike
Good points made. My response would be that (1) firm greens would make a difference, though I believe it would be minimal. Firm greens still hold a shot, just usually after a hop or bounce.Unless they were the kind of greens that wouldn't hold a javelin. And given any downslopes off the back of bunkers, if there was enough "width" I feel that could be overcome by working the ball into the flag, thus not challenging the slope directly. (2) Visibility, or lack thereof, is lessened so long as I have accurate yardage available, especially the second or so time playing the hole.  (3) I agree regarding the equipment issue. If we break down this discussion on strategic advantage , we are talking length(off the tee) and spinnability(on the second shot). That's exactly the beauty of the new golf balls ... the do both without sacrifice. And(4) I think has more to do with selective memory. Touring pros distance control is uncanny. They miss em left or right, too. But I think the real issue is the penalty paid for missing (and by what margin) left and right vs. long and short. 10 yards short or long of a middle pin leaves a 30 foot putt. 10 yards left or right more times will not leave a putt.  For example check with Neal Lancaster if he would have rather been short or long by the amount he was left on the 18th at the Canadian(?) this year.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #15 on: December 01, 2002, 01:31:14 PM »
Having read the last number of posts and who perfers which angle--length of green/width of green, bunkers fronting or open, I believe the green surfaces should be firmed up about 50% from whatever any of you have in mind and then you should take another look at how you feel some of these holes are designed and also how you might play those holes.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Andy Hodson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #16 on: December 01, 2002, 01:53:37 PM »
Tom
We could, in our imagination, firm up the greens, tilt them away from us at 8*, put humps or mounds protecting the pins, or whatever. I still would rather play an approach on a perpindicular to the green's axis. It gives me more options. I realize if the pin is particularly tucked, or the greens very firm I may not get it close, but I would have more of an option of a "safe" approach to make par.

To give another example, water hazards guarding one side of a fairway (parallel to the line of play) is more difficult than a water hazard that merely has to be carried (perpendicular line).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #17 on: December 01, 2002, 02:14:38 PM »
Andy;

I'm not talking about redesigning the hole--simply firming up the green surfaces about 50% (that is if they were really receptive).

I believe for a thinking player (a player really paying attention to strategies) the firming up of green surfaces makes a player far more aware of the pros and cons and the ramifications of various strategies.

Also, it's always amazed me to hear most players talking about the strategies or the option of constantly trying to shoot at pins. I hear you're a good player so I'm sure you know what I mean.

I really don't think a golfer of the caliber of even Nicklaus or Woods at his best even tries to shoot at pins anywhere near as often as most golf fans think they do.

And I'm also convinced that for about 98% of the golfers in the world, if the pin was removed from every green they played they would hit far more greens and also score lower day in and day out.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #18 on: December 01, 2002, 03:01:59 PM »
Mike C,

I'm surprised that you are surprised that really good players would ignore a fronting bunker.  I'm a 5 (and thus far from "really good") but I feel the same way.  I was and still am surprised at the level of discussion this "anti strategy" thing has received.  Being able to roll in my approach isn't even on my radar until I'm 210+, or perhaps 180+ if I'm hitting from rough or with a strong breeze, unless I'm hitting to extremely firm greens.  As has been discussed many times in GCA I'm sure, few bunkers (in the US) provide a real hazard.  The way most US courses are designed, with thick rough and the now very popular mounding around the greens, makes playing from the bunker easier or at worst no more difficult for the up and down, with little worry about a double.

I find myself considering what I'll face on the sides of a green (especially the left, given that's where I usually miss) far more than what's in front.  On older designs from when front bunkers mattered I'll sometimes find myself playing on the opposite side of the fairway from where the architect intended, playing over the front bunker instead of taking the clean route, because I feel it offers me a better angle to play away problems on one side of the green.  Its a nice side benefit that it often makes the tee shot easier as well!

Front bunkers only penalize the short hitters and shotmakers.  They do little for good players, and less than that for really good players when they are playing from the fairway or non-penal rough.  Think about how rarely you see someone in the front bunker at 18 at the Masters, even with a front pin position, unless he's playing from the fairway bunkers.  Compare that with how many are in the bunker on the right or down the nasty little slope to the left.


TEPaul,

Definitely agree.  The firmer the greens, the less valid everything I said above is.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #19 on: December 01, 2002, 03:22:44 PM »
On the Golf Channel this afternoon, Rick Smith gave an architectural tour of one of his courses. He stood on the tee and said "The bunkers on the left mean I want you to hit to to the right side of the fairway. You will also note that the bunker on the left side of the green means I want you to approach it from the right."

I'm thinking this guy has pretty much got anti-strategy down to a science.  

The Rick Smith central design principle:

The green opens up from the bail-out side. (Did he steal the idea from Fazio or did he come up with it all by himself?)

Then I click on GCA, that bastion of the strategic school, and read that inside/inside bunkering ok. Pete Dye himself said it was ok. Otherwise the pros will cut the angles and shorten the hole.

I guess I've got two thoughts.

First, no one should be designing permanent features on a course with the Tour player in mind unless that course is intended to serve as a regular Tour venue. And that's not many courses.

The disparity between their games and those of even good amateurs is so extreme that classic design principles probably on longer apply to the pros.

Those principles do apply, however to the 99.9% of the other people that play golf. Let the pros shoot 62 on these courses. Trust me, no one else will.

Second, strategic design is so much at the heart of what makes a great golf course, that it should be abandonned reluctantly and only rarely.

Simply for variety, you might want to abandon strategic bunkering in favor of something more penal or funky or whatever.

Maybe somtimes you lure people into thinking the hardest line from the tee will yield advantages at the green and then cross them up. (I'm thinkng of the rightside fw bunker on no. 10 at Riviera that might make you think a drive to that side, since it is a harder carry, will give you a payoff on the next shot.)

But these kinds of holes ought to be the exceptions, not the rule.  

What bothers me about the Pete Dye/Rick Smith inside/inside thing is that I think it contains a hidden agenda. (Or maybe it's not so hidden.) Seems to me they are both pandering to the weaker player at the expense of solid design concepts.

I have no expectations about Rick Smith. Dye disappoints me, however.    

Bob  

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Andy Hodson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2002, 03:29:16 PM »
Tom
Agree 100%. Which is why firm greens are so important! Courses with well designed greens suffer when the greens are soft. It takes the inherent strategy out of the equation, and distorts the true character of the golf course. Here at Whispering Pines, I am constantly harking about this. Our greens need to be firm and fast to really see what they are about. Soft greens are an equalizer and mute the need for perceptive thought (is that redundant?) and play.

I don't think that goes against what I have said earlier. I still prefer the perpendicular angled approach...and frontal nudity, firm or soft. And any approach to it is fine by me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich Goodale (Guest)

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2002, 04:02:51 PM »
I think Andy has raised a very important point in this perpendicularity thing.  I agree with him (and Doug) that frontal hazards (i.e. anti-nudity) are irrelevant to anybody who can reasonably spin the ball.  I also think that the firmness of the greens doesn't really matter either any more, particularly for those at the higher levels of he gaem.  As I've said before probably far too many times on this site I've seen great players hit balls that stop nera "tucked" pins on greens harder than most of you can imagine, even 20 years ago.  It does separate the men from the boys (and make life hell for those who can't spin the ball), but it is not a complete deterrent.

I think, as ususal, Dye is onto something here, and has been on it for quite some time.  Maybe the old saws based on old players and old equipment realy don't work any more, except for that great majority of players who still play as if they are using guttas and hickory........

Perpendicularity makes me think of the 5th at Dornoch.  Thought (rightly) to be a great hole at least in part because of the belief that in order to get an shot "down the green", which is sharply angles from left to right, you need to hug the gorse laden hill on the right.  Well, in fact, that shot is not as easy as the shot from middle of the 12th fairway, which requires a tees shot bombed or sliced over the right hand bunkers of the 5th fiarway.  I've been there more than a few times before through inexplicable failures in my balls and equipment, and every time I have been there I have been amazed at how much easier it is hitting wedge into a green laid out horizontally before you, back to front, than a sand wedge to a sliver of a green canted sharply from left to right.

Maybe as Jeff implies, our concept of "advantage" is warped by our dreams of how golf uswed to be......
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ian

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #22 on: December 01, 2002, 04:03:56 PM »
For myself, a match play golfer, I perfer holes with angles and lots of risk an reward.

For the pros it doesn't seem to matter. After watching them at Angus Glen (7400) just hit 3 woods and 2 irons to take the risk out of the hole, I've come to realize that they rarely approach a risk/reward hole the same way as we do. Most of the aggressive (and risky) options were bypassed except on reachable par 5's (all 5's really). They would rather hit a club or two longer from a good position, than risk a very difficult recovery. The game for the pros is much more carefully calculated than I ever had thought.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Eric Pevoto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #23 on: December 02, 2002, 06:56:35 AM »
Could someone please explain to me how an inside/inside bunker scheme is not strategic?  Without considerations for terrain/visibility, wouldn't the inside line be the line of instinct?   In the strategic school, shouldn't hazards be placed along the line of instinct?

I agree that fronting bunkers are not an issue to even the marginally good player.  In my opinion though, the desired angle into the green is entirely dependent upon the length of the shot.  The shorter the shot, the less important left/right margin becomes and the more I look at short/long margin.  It seems pretty common sensical, but I think Pelz has statistics to support this idea.  The tour pros tend to miss shots inside 100 yards short/long rather than right/left.  And the firmer the green, the more important short/long margin becomes.

I think Tom P nailed it with regard to target.  I believe the elite player will most often aim at the safest part of the green and if possible, bend the ball toward the flag.  I'm not talking about great curvature, but using the lie and wind to an advantage.  It's just good odds.



« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
There's no home cooking these days.  It's all microwave.Bill Kittleman

Golf doesn't work for those that don't know what golf can be...Mike Nuzzo

Mike_Cirba

Re: What Constitutes an advantage?
« Reply #24 on: December 02, 2002, 07:54:43 AM »
Eric;

Good question!

I believe the lines between "strategic" and "heroic" get very blurred in our discussions, and I'm as guilty as anyone of mixing/confusing the two.

Robert Trent Jones Jr. defines them, as follows;

"The terms “strategic,” “penal,” and “heroic” frequently are applied to shots, features, holes, and even entire courses. Because these shorthand references appear in various places in this book, it is important for you to understand how I will be using them. It is equally important to understand that these categories are not totally clear-cut in every case, and experts may disagree regarding which term best describes a specific hole, or feature."

"For me, a “strategic” hole is one that has at least one reasonable route for reaching the green in regulation with very little risk of incurring a severe penalty because of a misplayed shot. In addition, if there are several alternative routes, the route having the greatest distance generally has the least risk of incurring a severe penalty for a misplayed shot."

"A hole is “penal” if the only way to reach the green in regulation involves successfully executing at least one shot that will incur a severe penalty if misplayed. Often the severe penalty involves a ball lost in an escape-proof hazard like water, a ravine, or out-of-bounds."

"A “heroic” hole has at least two distinctly different alternatives for reaching the green in regulation. One lacks a severe penalty for a misplayed shot. With the second, however, a misplay incurs a severe penalty, but, if successfully negotiated, it will reward the player with a far superior position and/or distance advantage. Thus, the player faces a truly heroic decision. This shot itself also can be called heroic."

I think many of us in here sort of classify any hole that has clear "risk/reward" features as "strategic", when a more accurate definition might be "heroic".

For instance, using Jones's definition, your inside/inside bunkering scheme is likely "strategic" (i.e alternate safe route), but would probably not offer much in the way of "risk/reward" unless there was some considerable distance advantage to challenging the bunkers.  By definition, it doesn't sound as though it would usually offer superior "positioning" or a better angle.  

Again, these definitions do tend to be somewhat relative, and any one hole can encompass elements of all schools, but what I probably should have said in my original post titled, "Tom Fazio and "anti-strategy", was that the holes did not offer much in the way of "risk/reward".  It was counter-intuitive in that on the majority of the holes, the safe play from the tee (away from hazards) offered the preferred position for the next shot, with little in the way of distance advantage for challenging the hazards, either.  

Hope that helps!

  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »