Does increased hole distance reduce the options of play ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

At 370 yards, I can see a good deal of variety in the approach shot to almost any green.

At 470, I see very little in the way of options for the approach.

Is increased distance creating one dimensional thinking and play ?

[Mark_Fine]

Pat,
Aren't you thinking way tooooooo much about courses from the perspective of your own game?  Good thing you are not a rater  

Furthermore, distance is only one aspect of variety.  You've said nothing about sooo many other things that impact the strategy of a good golf hole.  Better re-phrase your question  
Mark

[Steve_Lovett]

Pat - In your question you seem to imply that at 470 you automatically presume the only play is right at the green with a long club?  In that assumption, a 470 hole requires long drive, long approach.  However - I don't necessarily see it that way - I would submit that, at that distance, more options exist because a wider range of clubs for the second shot come into play - including layup clubs for lesser, or shorter players.

In fact - I would guess that a very small percentage of the golf population could reasonably expect to reach the 470 yard threshold in two strokes.  Given that - brute strength may give way to thoughful play with the acknowledgement that it will take three strokes to reach the green - putting many more options for agressive play or layup clubs in the player's hands on the first and second shots.

Within reason - and without being fixated on traditional "par values" (two strokes on and two putts for a par-4) - many more options may exist on a 470 yard hole than a 370 yard hole.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve,

How can you ignore par ?

It's fixated right on the score card.

Look at the question incrementally, at every 20 yards as you move beyond 370 ?

As the distance increases, the options for the approach reduce.

[Michael Moore]

Pat -

Is the converse true?

As a hole gets shorter than 370 yards, does the variety of approaches increase?

Is a 20-yard long hole the pinnacle of strategic excitement?

Or do returns also diminish as we get shorter than our beloved 370 yards?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat -

Is the converse true?            YES[/color]

As a hole gets shorter than 370 yards, does the variety of approaches increase?   YES[/color]

Is a 20-yard long hole the pinnacle of strategic excitement?


NO[/color]

Or do returns also diminish as we get shorter than our beloved 370 yards?

NO, and 370 was an arbitrary number.

Examine # 1 at NGLA (322) and # 16 at Pine Tree (670)[/color]

[Steve_Lovett]

Pat -

I'm not ignoring par - I'm simply focused on the options a player has to put his ball in the hole in the fewest strokes possible.  Regardless of par, that is still the point of the game.

If a player can't get home in two at 470 yards - doesn't he have a lot of options of how to use his three shots to put him in the best position to score?  If a player is gorilla-long, the raw distance isn't such a concern.  I recall someone, perhaps Ben Hogan, who at the 11th at Augusta National would never play his second shot to the green - rather taking the option of playing safely away from the pond and chipping up with his third.  I don't think he would've considered that option with a shorter club in hand.

And, as far as par is concerned - wasn't the 13th at Augusta a par-five measuring 465-475 yards for many years until the recent lengthening?  I would venture to guess that there are more than a few great half-par holes of this length, whether par-4 or par-5.

I will say - I think holes of this length must be the most difficult to design in terms of presenting options for play.

[Walt_Cutshall]

Pat,

That is a really interesting questions. For my game, the longer the approach shot, the fewer shot options I generally entertain (particularly off the tee).

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I don't think it takes a brain trust, if they think about it for about 30 seconds, to tell it's probably easier to create a two shot hole of 370 yards compared to a two shot hole of 470 yards that has more variety on the approach shot or to hit in two shots for most golfers. At the latter distance most golfers are probably near the outside limit of two of their longest and best shots anyway, so how much variety can a hole like that have---approach shot or otherwise, that is if most golfers can expect to hit it in two shots?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm not ignoring par - I'm simply focused on the options a player has to put his ball in the hole in the fewest strokes possible.  Regardless of par, that is still the point of the game.

OK, I"ll buy that.[/color]

If a player can't get home in two at 470 yards - doesn't he have a lot of options of how to use his three shots to put him in the best position to score?  

"A lot" ?  No, I don't think so.
Practically, he probably has a few and more than likely they'll be reduced to comfort zone shots[/color]

If a player is gorilla-long, the raw distance isn't such a concern.  I recall someone, perhaps Ben Hogan, who at the 11th at Augusta National would never play his second shot to the green - rather taking the option of playing safely away from the pond and chipping up with his third.  I don't think he would've considered that option with a shorter club in hand.


Hogan may be a bad example.
Remember, he fought that cursed, dogged hook for many years and finally relied on a consistent left to right flight.

Most golfers who were capable of altering their ball flight would aim right and draw the ball in, from longer distances.

In addition, fronting inclines feed balls hit short and right, to the green, so playing to the right and drawing the ball is prudent.

Hogan, who was deathly afraid of the draw/hook would naturally avoid that shot at all costs[/color]

And, as far as par is concerned - wasn't the 13th at Augusta a par-five measuring 465-475 yards for many years until the recent lengthening?  

At it's inception the hole was 480 from the Masters tees, 455 from the Members tees.  In 1999 it was 485 from the Masters tees and 455 from the Members tees.  Recently ANGC purchased land from the adjacent Augusta CC and the hole now plays 510 from the Masters tees and 455 from the Members tees.[/color]

I would venture to guess that there are more than a few great half-par holes of this length, whether par-4 or par-5.

Bobby Jones was fond of the half shot holes, ergo # 13, # 15.
You could also make the case for # 2 at 525 from the Masters tees and 490 from the Members tees, downhill in the original version.  # 8 was 500 from the Masters tees and 475 from the Members tees, but, the hole plays uphill on the drive and especially the second shot.[/color]

I will say - I think holes of this length must be the most difficult to design in terms of presenting options for play.

I'd agree.

And, what makes it more difficult today are the environmental constraints on the use of natural waterways.

It's doubtful that # 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16 could be built today.[/color]

[David_Tepper]

It all depends if we are talking about the pros or 12-handicappers. Chances are a pro playing a 470-yard hole will be hitting roughly the same clubs (probably driver/6-iron)  as a 12-handicap playing a 370-yard hole. Playing from the proper tees, they will both have roughly the same options.

On the other hand, Tiger proved at the Hoylake Open that forgoing the driver is a very viable option (for a player of his caliber, at least) on EVERY par-4 or -5, regardless of their yardage.  

[Tommy Williamsen]

Pat, I have always thought that shots from 125 yards in give the player more options.  
High lofted shot.
Low runner.
low spinner.
from 200 yards must of us just bust a long iron.

[rjsimper]

At what point does the converse become false, though?  I agree that beyond a threshold on the top end, distance limits options, but at what point on the bottom end of the spectrum do you no longer continue to gain options?  320 yards? 300?

At 480 yards, yes it's Driver and hope I find the fairway, then hopefully some sort of long iron and hope I get near or on the green.  There are no choices/options...only reactions to what I've done to myself.

[Doug Siebert]

Ryan,

I don't think I'd call it "reduced options" when on a 480 yard hole a less than ideal drive leaves one with limited options.  That's just the consequences of a bad shot.  If you are left with only one or two options when you hit a really good drive, that's lack of options.

But look at it this way.  You have limited options on a 480 yard hole because you need a pretty good drive to have a decent play at the green.  Hitting a 3 iron off the tee may not be an option for you if it leaves you too far away for your second.  So stretch it to 550, or wherever your limit is for being able to get home at all in two shots.  Now you'd have more options, you could hit driver/3W and try to get as close as possible for a short pitch or chip onto the green, you could hit driver and then hit a 7i or whatever to leave yourself a full SW, you could hit a 3W or 3i off the tee to try to insure you stay out of the trees and rough, etc.

I think of most of us mortals look at long holes as reducing our options because it reduces the odds of the way we actually end up playing the hole being the way we originally intended playing it from the tee.  On a par 3, I can be pretty sure I play the hole pretty much as I intended most of the time.  I choose my club and play my shot.  Maybe I miss the green, but other than hopefully rare occasions, I'm still pretty close to the green and usually still have an up and down opportunity.

The longer the hole gets, the greater the chance I do something stupid along the way, getting stymied by a tree, hitting on the wide side of the dogleg and leaving myself too far to have a decent approach at the green, heeling a shot into a bad lie in the rough that forces me to lay up instead of going for the green on my second, etc.  But that's not limiting my options ON THE TEE, it is just limiting what choices I have left after I've made a mess of things with my golfing skill, or lack of same.  On those rare days when I'm mostly doing what I want with my ball, I maintain those options throughout the entire hole and the way I play even a long par 5 can look very much like I mentally mapped it out on the tee.  You know, kind of like how it works for Tiger 99% of the time!

[cary lichtenstein]

At 370 yards, I can see a good deal of variety in the approach shot to almost any green.

At 470, I see very little in the way of options for the approach.

Is increased distance creating one dimensional thinking and play ?

It does for us amateurs

[Matt_Cohn]

Pat,

I think there's a distinction to make.

On short par-4's, options generally come with the teeshot. The shorter length makes it possible to hit different clubs off the tee and concern oneself with various angles of attack.

But do short par-4's provide options on the 2nd shot? If you have a wedge into the green, won't you just aim for the pin? At least 90-something percent of the time.

Long par-4's provide fewer teeshot options. You have to hit driver, and angles aren't as much of a concern. However, they provide more options on the second shot.

Consider #13 at Pine Valley. There are a lot of options on the 2nd shot, as long as that approach is from considerable distance. Length creates more options. If that approach were played from 110 yards, it wouldn't be a big deal.

I would say that short and long holes create options in different ways, but comparable amounts.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

Good question.  First reaction is that USGA slope studies show that accuracy starts to decline faster over 180 yard approaches.  

I suspect that most would want to hit a drive to get within that distance for a more comfortable shot.  If you drive 270, and hit a 3 wood 240, then any hole over 450 (maybe 440 if a slight dogleg and angles of play matter) would almost virtually require a driver in most peoples mindset.  Any hole over 410-420 probably requires at least a 3 wood, etc.

So, yes, I think long holes do tend to restrict at least logical play options.

[JohnV]

The USGA prototypical scratch player hits it 470 in two shots.  The USGA prototypical bogey player hits it 370 in two shots.  So, the 470 yarder for the scratch player is pretty equal to the 370 yarder for the bogey player.  The scratch player has a 120 yard shot to the 370 hole while the bogey player as a 100 yard shot to the 470.

Without considering the abilities of the golfer in question I don't think you can say which distance reduces options more.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug Siebert,

What options do amateur golfers have on a 250 par 3 ?

What options do amateur golfers have on a Biarritz 250 par 3 ?

Can a 4 handicap get to a 470 par 4 with options ?
A 6 handicap ?
An 8 handicap ?

Yet, they'll be playing the same tee.
For them the options are zero.
Hit driver, hit 3-wood, then recover to the green.

Matt Cohn,

On the 322 1st hole at NGLA I can hit every club from driver to putter on the approach shot.  I'd submit that that's 14 good reasons.  And, I can have other options with the play of many of those clubs.  Pitch, chip, bump and run, etc,. etc..

Sean Arble,

Stroke and Match play have the same goal, get the ball into the hole in as few strokes as possible.

Play the man, and you'll lose the match.
Play the golf course and observe the man gets better results.

[Paul Payne]

Pat,

I agree in principle with most of what you say however when you toss the difference between stroke play and match play into the picture I think it does make a difference.

On this 470 yard hole most of us will struggle hitting the green even if we posess the distance just because of the accuracy it requires (especially with wind over distance). In stroke play your temptation is to go after it as the main objective is to attack par.

In match play I could envision situations where you would certainly elect to get on in 3 and putt for par or at worse bogey to protect your postition. In other circumstances you would have the incentive to bust one loose because you need the hole badly. I would consider this a case where a 470 yard hole presents options.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Payne,

What if you're giving your opponent a stroke on that hole ?
It sure changes things, doesn't it.

Sean Arble,

You play the golf course, that's what you score against.
The opponent is merely an observer.
Absent the STYMIE, there's no defense in golf.

In the ultimate, you count up the number of strokes you take on each hole.  In match play, you compare the sum against your opponent.  In medal play you total the sums and compare that against the field.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

If we’re talking about the second shot, I would imagine a long approach offers more options than a shorter on.

A shorter approach usually requires a wedge or 9 iron. The shorter distance and high trajectory means that “going for the flag” or the heart of the green is an easier task than from a distance. The target area is reduced and thus the options
correspondingly reduced.

The options available for a long approach is very much dependant what the green complex has on offer.

If there are some humps and hollows to feed the ball in from the right for instance and avoid a bunker on the left, then the option is a realistic one to consider.
The other option being to try and hit the putting surface directly.

[Patrick_Mucci]

If we’re talking about the second shot, I would imagine a long approach offers more options than a shorter on.

What options exist from 230 yards for most players ?[/color]

A shorter approach usually requires a wedge or 9 iron.

No, that's a very short approach.

A short approach can be distance or club related depending upon the golfer.  For some it could be a 6 or 7 or 8 iron which they hit from 160, or others it could be less yardage but the same clubs NORMALLY.

But, they could punch or play bump and run with a variety of clubs.

That's tough to do from 230.[/color]

The shorter distance and high trajectory means that “going for the flag” or the heart of the green is an easier task than from a distance. The target area is reduced and thus the options correspondingly reduced

That's only for a very short shot, and even then, that depends upon the skill of the golfer.

If you think a 14, 16 or 18 handicap typically fires his wedge at the flag, I would imagine that you don't have much experience playing with these fellows.[/color]

The options available for a long approach is very much dependant what the green complex has on offer.

Don't you find that the longer the approach the more benign the green complex ?[/color]

If there are some humps and hollows to feed the ball in from the right for instance and avoid a bunker on the left, then the option is a realistic one to consider.

That's a convenient qualifier.
How many long approaches have those features ?[/color]

The other option being to try and hit the putting surface directly.

Isn't that the overwhelming tendency of golfers ?[/color]

[Lloyd_Cole]

Upon consideration, with my rather ragged game (weak 5), I'd say that inside 150 yards, excepting a front pin - these days that is just a question of club selection and execution. A front pin may demand a ground ball. But in New England, and frankly, Old England, again - these days, that's about the only time I NEED to consider a ground ball.
With 210 - 240 to the hole I may actually have to consider shaping my shot. With a front bunker from outside 210, my only shot is a cut fairway wood. If wind is a factor I may consider a fairway driver, or a 2 hybrid (as close as I can get to a stinger..). I may decide to attempt to use the terrain, if there is a feeding slope from the right, maybe a smooth draw to roll onto the green. I accept, and agree with Jeff, that outside 180 yds I can't expect a high succes rate, but mine is not so low that I'm deluding myself trying the shots.
I maintain that the game I play is more fun than the one the pros play. I have to play more shots.

[David_Madison]

In certain respects the longer hole offers more options, even after a good drive. With the shorter hole, there's really no option other than to go for the green and most often the pin, maybe shying away to one side or the other depending upon the trouble and the other challenges present. With the longer shot, my options are different - - go for anywhere on the green, try to go pin hunting, or aim to hit a shot that's not likely to end up on the green but that will absolutely avoid a certain piece of trouble. Perhaps with the longer shot the ball flight characteristics of the shot are less varied, but the broad strategic purposes available are much wider.