[Kevin_Reilly]

Almost looks like the old Bayonet !!!

Do a little bit of work to #7 on Bayonet (coincidence) and you might have something!

[Tom Huckaby]

That is a weird coincidence.

The Bayonet hole is longer, and plays downhill whereas
OClub is uphill.  But the overheads for each are
remarkably similar indeed... but what's even more
interesting is each hole has a wacky green belonging
in the upper pantheon of wildly contoured greens.

Muy interesante....

And Steve, yeah you're right, the OClub tree isn't
in the middle, not like the others discussed on here.
But it looks like it was quite the problem....

[Kalen Braley]

The most saddistic tree placement I have seen in person was when I went on a trip to Bangalore, India.  Couldn't find a picture of it though  

We played the Eagleton Resort which is a decent course with an interesting layout.  The par 5 6th has a massive banyan tree that sits right in front of the green, literally right in front.  It was about 30 feet tall and 50 feet wide.  Needless to say after putting a 7 iron into it I took a seven, but hey thats the joy of playing in excotic locales right?

[Mike Hendren]

That sounds like a Southern version of "Go Bears!"  You have to be salivating over 2007 based on what Cal did to Texas A&M, that was pretty brutal.   Too bad the Bears didn't play like that against either Arizona or USC, it would have been a better season.     But the Big Game was okay, victory is all that matters against The Tree!  

Kevin & Bill,

I believe the Volunteers open at Cal next year.  A little football, golf and visit to Ravenswood and the Gun Bun might just be the ticket!

Mike

[Forrest Richardson]

How about cactus? Is this site biased toward TREES?

[Bill_McBride]

That sounds like a Southern version of "Go Bears!"  You have to be salivating over 2007 based on what Cal did to Texas A&M, that was pretty brutal.   Too bad the Bears didn't play like that against either Arizona or USC, it would have been a better season.     But the Big Game was okay, victory is all that matters against The Tree!  

Kevin & Bill,

I believe the Volunteers open at Cal next year.  A little football, golf and visit to Ravenswood and the Gun Bun might just be the ticket!

Bogey, can we assume you will be visiting Berkeley for the 2007 season opener?  I will be in Northern Ireland at the Walker Cup, but I'm sure the Northern California gang will be sure to make all the necessary arrangements for you to thoroughly enjoy your visit.  

[Geoffrey Childs]

Yep, my boo-boo but since said car is sitting in the garage under boxes, Christmas decorations, old golf clubs, I haven't looked at the license plate lately.


And to not stray to far from the original topic, here is a photo of from the 12th tee in 1930.

My Inca Orange 1972 BMW 2002 ($3600 new) (round tail lights before the rectangular ones came in a couple of years later) lasted for 14 years and 5 years in the bay area before I sold it for $1200. I loved that car.

I loved the 12th at Stanford too!

[Forrest Richardson]

Not quite as cool (or small!) as a BMW Isetta 300. We will have ours at the Golf Industry Show this February. Maybe we can have a BMW-fest...

[Kevin_Reilly]

Kevin & Bill,

I believe the Volunteers open at Cal next year.  A little football, golf and visit to Ravenswood and the Gun Bun might just be the ticket!

Put it on the Calendar!!!  
 

[Andrew Hastie]

Trees in the center of the fairway.Valderrama 2nd hole has a tree in the middle of the fairway at about the 260m mark from the professional tee's.Into the wind it is a tough tree to drive around.The green is also small  and up on a hill,typical Valderrama.The tree always seems to be in the way.

[ChipRoyce]

Steve P. wrote:

Tom,
What about the vertical impediments the tree creates?  A bunker IMHO is easier to negotiate.


No question it is, but that's the point.  You can put 50 bunkers on a hole and a good player may not need to think about any of them, but a tree exerts its influence much more because of that vertical element.  That means it is a hazard to be used sparingly and with careful thought, but it doesn't mean one should never use it at all.

Tom;
Very fair point - I'd have to believe some general common sense should apply when using a tree in the line of play.

Here's the examples of the most aggregious failures I've seen:

1) Fairway width - (Mostly applicable to centerline trees). I've seen a bunch of times where the designer didn't leave sufficient room on either side of a centerline hazard (trees) to allow for both: a) reasonable landing area and b) ability for a ball with different draw or fade flights to make it through the space. Most of the time, I've seen this used to affect the tee shot or less frequently a 2nd shot on a par 5. In both cases, you're seeing long iron / wood or iron and in most cases you need to create space for the ball to reasonably travel.  IMHO - these are best left to fairway bunkers / moundings that come into the line of play but could be navigated in a wide variety of manners.

2) One side of a fairway - Most logical use of trees in design and a fair way to push the golfer towards a longer line of play or towards a risk/reward situation. Not sure much applies here, but then again, I'm of the camp that a good tree on a golf course is a removed tree from a golf course

3) Along a Hazard Line - Best I can explain this is an example at the Landfall Club in Wilmington, NC. They have a pretty good hole on the Nicklaus course there. Its essentially a reverse cape hole (green to right of tee box), with a risk/reward carry over a large marsh. The funny thing is they left a scenic (dead) tree right in the line of play of an agressive shot. What's worse is that a big hitter could take that line and use the ample space through the fairway to get a great angle to the green. I can't see why that was left in play as it doesn't serve any purpose to the hole.

4) Par 3 - NEVER, please, NEVER put one in the line of play of a par 3!  This is the case on our 10th hole here at Great Hills. When it was first planted, it was pretty small and not a big deal to get over. Now its size is as such that you have to hit a hard, high shot to the green that usually has some kind of cross wind. Its a shame as a  low punch shot has been taken away from the golfer to a large green that has room for a run-up to a front pin and a large generous green that would reward a running shot to a back pin (upper tier).

Here ends my rant

[ForkaB]

Steve P. wrote:

Tom,
What about the vertical impediments the tree creates?  A bunker IMHO is easier to negotiate.


No question it is, but that's the point.  You can put 50 bunkers on a hole and a good player may not need to think about any of them, but a tree exerts its influence much more because of that vertical element.  That means it is a hazard to be used sparingly and with careful thought, but it doesn't mean one should never use it at all.

Tom;
Very fair point - I'd have to believe some general common sense should apply when using a tree in the line of play.

Here's the examples of the most aggregious failures I've seen:

1) Fairway width - (Mostly applicable to centerline trees). I've seen a bunch of times where the designer didn't leave sufficient room on either side of a centerline hazard (trees) to allow for both: a) reasonable landing area and b) ability for a ball with different draw or fade flights to make it through the space. Most of the time, I've seen this used to affect the tee shot or less frequently a 2nd shot on a par 5. In both cases, you're seeing long iron / wood or iron and in most cases you need to create space for the ball to reasonably travel.  IMHO - these are best left to fairway bunkers / moundings that come into the line of play but could be navigated in a wide variety of manners.

2) One side of a fairway - Most logical use of trees in design and a fair way to push the golfer towards a longer line of play or towards a risk/reward situation. Not sure much applies here, but then again, I'm of the camp that a good tree on a golf course is a removed tree from a golf course

3) Along a Hazard Line - Best I can explain this is an example at the Landfall Club in Wilmington, NC. They have a pretty good hole on the Nicklaus course there. Its essentially a reverse cape hole (green to right of tee box), with a risk/reward carry over a large marsh. The funny thing is they left a scenic (dead) tree right in the line of play of an agressive shot. What's worse is that a big hitter could take that line and use the ample space through the fairway to get a great angle to the green. I can't see why that was left in play as it doesn't serve any purpose to the hole.

4) Par 3 - NEVER, please, NEVER put one in the line of play of a par 3!  This is the case on our 10th hole here at Great Hills. When it was first planted, it was pretty small and not a big deal to get over. Now its size is as such that you have to hit a hard, high shot to the green that usually has some kind of cross wind. Its a shame as a  low punch shot has been taken away from the golfer to a large green that has room for a run-up to a front pin and a large generous green that would reward a running shot to a back pin (upper tier).

Here ends my rant

I agree conceptually, butr here is a description of a really cool golf hole.  Anybody want to guess the venue and the architect?

"A walk up hill and then down brings you to a separate part of the course directly below (the hotel). The 8th should be a straight forward 162 yards par 3 except for the huge tree directly in front of the green! Going long and over doesn't help as the road is just behind the green. Best bet here is to punch an iron, but be aware of conditions. The fairway can be notoriously damp after rain and your ball WILL plug."

Rich

[Kalen Braley]

Steve P. wrote:

Tom,
What about the vertical impediments the tree creates?  A bunker IMHO is easier to negotiate.


No question it is, but that's the point.  You can put 50 bunkers on a hole and a good player may not need to think about any of them, but a tree exerts its influence much more because of that vertical element.  That means it is a hazard to be used sparingly and with careful thought, but it doesn't mean one should never use it at all.

Tom;
Very fair point - I'd have to believe some general common sense should apply when using a tree in the line of play.

Here's the examples of the most aggregious failures I've seen:

1) Fairway width - (Mostly applicable to centerline trees). I've seen a bunch of times where the designer didn't leave sufficient room on either side of a centerline hazard (trees) to allow for both: a) reasonable landing area and b) ability for a ball with different draw or fade flights to make it through the space. Most of the time, I've seen this used to affect the tee shot or less frequently a 2nd shot on a par 5. In both cases, you're seeing long iron / wood or iron and in most cases you need to create space for the ball to reasonably travel.  IMHO - these are best left to fairway bunkers / moundings that come into the line of play but could be navigated in a wide variety of manners.

2) One side of a fairway - Most logical use of trees in design and a fair way to push the golfer towards a longer line of play or towards a risk/reward situation. Not sure much applies here, but then again, I'm of the camp that a good tree on a golf course is a removed tree from a golf course

3) Along a Hazard Line - Best I can explain this is an example at the Landfall Club in Wilmington, NC. They have a pretty good hole on the Nicklaus course there. Its essentially a reverse cape hole (green to right of tee box), with a risk/reward carry over a large marsh. The funny thing is they left a scenic (dead) tree right in the line of play of an agressive shot. What's worse is that a big hitter could take that line and use the ample space through the fairway to get a great angle to the green. I can't see why that was left in play as it doesn't serve any purpose to the hole.

4) Par 3 - NEVER, please, NEVER put one in the line of play of a par 3!  This is the case on our 10th hole here at Great Hills. When it was first planted, it was pretty small and not a big deal to get over. Now its size is as such that you have to hit a hard, high shot to the green that usually has some kind of cross wind. Its a shame as a  low punch shot has been taken away from the golfer to a large green that has room for a run-up to a front pin and a large generous green that would reward a running shot to a back pin (upper tier).

Here ends my rant

I agree conceptually, butr here is a description of a really cool golf hole.  Anybody want to guess the venue and the architect?

"A walk up hill and then down brings you to a separate part of the course directly below (the hotel). The 8th should be a straight forward 162 yards par 3 except for the huge tree directly in front of the green! Going long and over doesn't help as the road is just behind the green. Best bet here is to punch an iron, but be aware of conditions. The fairway can be notoriously damp after rain and your ball WILL plug."

Rich

Hi Rich,

That was a fun one.

Dalmunzie in Scotland by none other than the good Dr. MacKenzie!!

[Scott_Burroughs]

In moderation, I don't mind them.  Trees blocking part of a
green are another twist, such as the par 4 w/water down the left side at Caledonia.

Here's a tree in the fairway (and another sticking out on left
side) on the short par 4 17th at Plantation CC in Boise, ID.  
The hole is just over 300 yards and this made for at least an
interesting hole on an otherwise boring course.  I think the
loop of about 4 holes concluding with this one were not part
of the original design, but added later when a housing
development was added (much like my home course).



About the only other interesting thing about my round here
(other than the state Am qualifiers practicing for the tourney
starting the next day) was watching my host go around on his Segway:

[ForkaB]

Hi Kalen, and thanks.

So now we have 3 Dalmunzie veterans on gca.com--you, me and Slag Bandoon.  Damn fine group oif people, if I say so myself.......

Rich

[Kalen Braley]

Hi Kalen, and thanks.

Damn fine group oif people, if I say so myself.......

Rich

Well I certainly can't disagree with you on that one!!!  

You wouldn't happen to have a picture of that hole would you?

[Bill_McBride]

Kevin & Bill,

I believe the Volunteers open at Cal next year.  A little football, golf and visit to Ravenswood and the Gun Bun might just be the ticket!

Put it on the Calendar!!!  
 

 Interestingly enough, the owner of Gundlach-Bundschu winery in Sonoma - lovely place - is a Cal alumnus, 1969 I think.

[Chris Cupit]

Steve,

I played the Stanford course back in 1990 during a college event.  As horrible as this may sound, as a college player most any architectural feature was lost on me.  I remember thinking the tee shot on #1 (over the road) was neat and #12 I remember most of the guys thinking was kind of stupid.

The tree played absolutely no factor in what anyone did off the tee.  NO ONE was trying to thread it down one side or the other--it was "bombs away" to a wide fairway--if you hit a good drive and had a 7 iron or so you just hit it over the tree.  If you missed your drive and had a five iron or so, you had enough room to curve the second shot if you had to (back when balls curved more).

I haven't seen the hole in 16 years but as a dumb college kid the hole seemed kinda dumb and it certainly didn't pose a strategic dilema for anyone.  With straighter flying balls and balls going even farther maybe the hole plays differently now?

[John Kirk]

Chris,

I'm not going to defend the hole too vigorously, but there's some strategy involved.  You played the hole from the back tees, about 480 yards.  Most people play from the second tee at about 450.  With modern equipment, good drives get only 10-20 yards short of the trees, and you have to hit something under the trees for your second shot.

You must have been able to hit the ball quite high as a college player.  I remember the one time I hit a 7-iron from over the tree onto the green.  I had 190 yards left to the center, and hit it about 180.  We always marveled at how high the college kids hit it.

I believe Tom Watson, who attended Stanford, once said his strategy at #12 was to aim for the trees and swing hard, assuming he would either cut or draw when swinging hard.  If I'm playing poorly, I aim for the left side.  Otherwise, I'll try to cut one off the trees into the right slot, which is a much better angle.

You do end up hitting your second shot under the trees on occasion, which tests your ability to judge low running shots.  It's fun to try and run a 3 iron up and over the little false front onto the green.  Some of the older players even bunt driver, especially when the shot needs to curve a little to the right.

That's one thing I will say in favor of trees in general.  On a parkland layout, a tree can test the players ability to play the occasional low shot, which are tougher and when executed properly, are very satisfying.

[Bill_McBride]

John, I was wondering the same thing last night when reading Chris' post about hitting 7-iron over the tree onto the green.  I was lucky enough to have cut my tee shot and didn't have to go over the tree the only time I played the hole a couple of years ago, but I thought then that if you were behind the tree, you'd have to hit a 7-WOOD to get over it!  I think a shot behind it that allowed you go over it would have to be at least 200 yards from the green.

Watson's strategy is pretty cool.  It's very similar to the strategy employed by David Duval when he hit his drive into the rocks in the middle of the 18th fairway at Sherwood in that match with Tiger Woods.  Aim at the trouble, you're bound to miss either one way or the other.   Not!  

[Chris Cupit]

Bill and John,

I only played the hole four times and it was a while ago so it could be very different now.  I remember hitting 7 iron even though I was about 170-175 out.  I do remmebr hitting a poorer drive in one round down the left side that left me with a 5 iron or so but I had a pretty open shot.

Strategically all I was saying is that no one I knew (including myself) was good enough to try and aim for a specific side of the fairway because of the tree.  We aimed right down the middle and tried to kill it--not exactly strategic thinking.  Today's college players may hit it so far that they would get stymied by the tree--technology bringing strategy back to the game--what a change

[Dan Moore]

I see nothing wrong with the occasional strategic use of a tree in the fairway.  Here is an example of one of my favorites.  Its about 165-175 from the green on this 568yd par 5 and plays an important role in the placement of the second shot.  

[Tim Rooney]

 Rolling Oaks(W.Woods) incoporated a blind (back T) back/9 par(5)   center tree ,wheras,my best day"s tee shot was essentially "DED'. The most and judious placement would be #5/The Golf Club.

[Norbert P]

http://www.barona.com/golf/hole-1.html

  A well placed sky bunker at the 1st at Barona Creek.  (BC website wouldn't let me access properties for picture retrievel)

 Being a par 5 and the Valley Oak(?) being only 70 yards from the green, it gives the golfer two shots to maneuver around or, if a well placed drive, reach the green in two.

[RJ_Daley]

Dan, unless you are Brad Swanson, and then it plays a role in "from" where you hit your second shot to the green.  Like 6 or 7 iron just skirt the right side and draw it in...  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()