What Kind of Hole Should Have a Severe Green?

[TaylorA]

I think severe greens are most interesting in the following order:

1. Short Par 3
2. Short Par 4
3. Short Par 5
4. Long Par 5
5. Any medium length hole
6. Long Par 4
7. Long Par 3

Now, that doesn't mean breaking the mold makes it a bad decision, that's just what I find to be the most interesting use of a "severe" green. Personally, it's 1,2 and then the rest. I really love a crazy green on a short par 3 because it makes the hole incredibly fun. If I've got an 8-iron or less, working the ball off a slope to get closer to the hole is a great challenge. Like wise, if I miss, I really have my work cut out. Now it becomes an interesting and testing recovery shot or putt, which one is deserving on such a hole for a miss.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I think you have to create sub-categories of severe green styles.

You mentioned the 17th green at TOC, a green that I don't view as severe in terms of the putting surface.

# 1, # 3 and # 6 at NGLA would fit into one category with
# 7 at NGLA or # 17 at TOC in another category.

I can't see # 1 at NGLA at the end of a long to very long par 4

I can see # 7 at NGLA or # 17 at TOC at the end of almost any hole.  The configuration of that green, internally and externally, works universally, from 360 degrees, from almost any yardage.

The configuration of # 1 at NGLA only works, in a practical sense, in a limited environment, a limited applicaton.

For the sake of MY discussion, I'd like to limit the context to clubs played by members or the public and not by PGA Tour Pros.

Severity, or the tolerance for severity lies within the membership.  If, after adequate play, the green is deemed to severe, it will not survive intact.  So, there has to be a balance between the challenge as manifested in the artistic talents of the architect and the playing requisites of the membership.  When the two come into conflict, I know who wins and who loses, and sometimes it's the same or both parties.

An example might be as follows.
Had the 18th at Sebonack been a very long par 4 with a green that mirrored # 1 at NGLA, I think the criticism would have been ..... severe.

And, I don't think it would have been a hole of merit.
It would be viewed as a mutant rather than an enjoyable hole.

As a compromise, I believe the greens within green concept works best.

One look at # 3 and # 6 at NGLA proves that a severe green can present the challenge desired while retaining its playability for almost every level of golfer.

One asset of Sebonack that I forgot to add is the feeding nature of the terrain on some severe green sites.
This can be used as an advantage by the golfer if he understands them and if he can execute a reasonable shot that will qualify for use in feeding.

[ed_getka]

Prairie Dunes #8 is another great example of a long hard hole with better than average contoured green. So there is definitely room for that kind of hole in golf. Obviously you don't want to see more than a couple of those a round.

#6 NGLA is a great example, just getting on the green in regulation isn't nearly good enough unless you just happen to be lucky enough to be next to the pin. So I would say short par 3's up to 150 yards would be a great place for a severe green.

Short driveable to almost driveable par 4's are another great place for a severe green.

[Ryan Farrow]

When talking about severe greens #1 at Oakmont has no business being in the same sentence as 18 at Winged foot IMO. I think # 9, when stretched to a par 4, is a good example of what many in the thread are talking about.

I also think Jordan has a good point. More often than not you are going to miss the green on a long par 4 or come up just short. Wouldn’t it make sense to make a hole more interesting to the majority of the players? There is relatively no fun chipping onto a dead flat green.

[paul cowley]

....the first hole that came to my mind was a par four that was long for its day but unfortunately no longer exists....the old Seaside #7 at Sea Island Resort......a wonderfully strategic hole that totally tested your skills to get pin high, and then one would encounter a tiny domed pushup green to boot.

This Colt and Allison gem surely needs to be reborn somewhere.....maybe I need to take up the mantle.

OK, I will.....any seconds?

Aye.

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I do agree that a severe green on a long hole has to work with the contours of the green site.  There are indeed some kinds of severe greens which I would use in certain circumstances but not in others ... for example, a couple of months ago when I said I love a boomerang-style green on a short par 4 but I don't like the same green for a par five.

And, I forgot to mention #3 at NGLA to refute the early post that a blind shot to a severe green is inherently bad -- unless that poster thinks the third at National is no good.

I think I've built severe greens for a hole in every one of Taylor's categories ... and made one that works for each of them, too.


Paul:

I only vaguely remember the green of the old 7th on the Seaside nine, but from what I remember of it, do you think that was really the original green?  It reminded me of some of those Yeamans Hall greens twenty years ago -- shrunken heads of a sort.

[Mike_Cirba]

I was going to use the example of the 15th green at Kingsley Club but Geoffrey beat me to it.  

[Tom_Doak]

Personally, I'm not that big a fan of the 15th green at Kingsley.  I'm okay that you can't miss it to either side, but you can't really play short of it and have an easy chip, either, because of the elevation.  I do love the first 3/4 of the hole, and if it was just a bit less severe to some side of the green, it would be a favorite.

[Mike_Cirba]

Personally, I'm not that big a fan of the 15th green at Kingsley.  I'm okay that you can't miss it to either side, but you can't really play short of it and have an easy chip, either, because of the elevation.  I do love the first 3/4 of the hole, and if it was just a bit less severe to some side of the green, it would be a favorite.

Tom,

I have to disagree that every great, severe green has to have an easy bailout area where getting up and down is a relatively easy chance.  In the case of the 15th at Kingsley, the "best" miss is possibly a bit long, although the downhill slope from there is admittedly dicey.  

I think that one of the things I admired most about that hole is that it dared to break convention and expectations.  I see nothing wrong with a hole that is par four length yet is one where five is consistently a good score.  

[Dan Kelly]

I see nothing wrong with a hole that is par four length yet is one where five is consistently a good score.  

Bingo.

I would add: I see nothing wrong with a hole that is par-3 length where four is consistently a good score, or with a hole that is par-5 length where 6 is consistently a good score.

Provided, of course, that making bogey is both challenging and fun.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Another benefit of severe greens is their notable effect on green committee chairmen intent on Stimping over 9.

I think Stan George at PD uses his Stimpmeter exclusively as a mini-shovel for carving out little drainage gulleys for low areas of tee boxes...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark,

The stimpmeter is the bain of severe, interesting greens.