The most exciting shots in golf

[Mark_Fine]

are in some way defined by a hazard!  

I’m sure some may think I have a bit of a bias about the importance of hazards to the game of golf, but can anyone think of an interesting or exciting shot that is not defined by one or more of them in some way?  

I should note that I define hazards in a broader sense than those few defined by the USGA.  I include all those "informal" hazards that help make the game so intriguing and exciting.  In the beginning, it was the hazards, whether it be a road or a sand mound or a burn or gorse or a railway track or some obstacle,...that had to be confronted and dealt with that provided the true heart and soul of golf.  The game would not have existed or lasted without them and that is still the case today.  Hazards provide the essence of great golf.  

[Adam Sherer]

How true.  

"informal" hazards, like blind shots and other obstacles that were encountered in the "primitive" ages of the game

References to “cross-country stick-and-ball activities,” such as in the translation of Roman de Brut (1155-1200), of, “driving balls wide over the fields,” surely encountered obstacles and hazards that were far worse, penal ,and strategic than any we see on modern courses.

I think that the most intersting hazard encountered on a golf course is one that is a construct of society upon the land, ie playing over the stone wall at #13 N. Berwick.

That is the closest any of us will come to play the game as it was meant to be played, "through the green." Playing around natural and unnatural obstacles is what provides an intersting mix of hazards. Would the #17 at the OC be as intersting if you didn't play over the hotel and approach a gnarly green complex (that happens to be right next to a road)?

[Tim Gavrich]

What about the 18th at TOC?  I've never had the good fortune of playing the hole, but I'd imagine that shot is thrilling, especially if driving the green is a possibility.

[Adam Sherer]

What about the 18th at TOC?  I've never had the good fortune of playing the hole, but I'd imagine that shot is thrilling, especially if driving the green is a possibility.

With the "hazard" being what?

The Valley of Sin, the pedestrian crossing, the buildings on the slice side, the psychological hazard of walking in the footsteps of hundreds of thousands of great Scotsmen?

"I should note that I define hazards in a broader sense than those few defined by the USGA." (Mark_Fine)

Tim: Maybe you're on the right wavelength, maybe a hole that has relatively no apparent disruptions is a hazardous hole in itself. Maybe a "thrilling" hole does present hazards from the thrill alone.

Maybe you don't need a stone wall to cross, a sand blowout to carry, or a hotel to drive over.

[peter_p]

This is in contradiction to John Kirk's unified theory. Blasphemy

[Doug Siebert]

Tim,

The 18th is a great hole, with all the stuff that Adam talks about and it'd surely be the highlight of most courses if it was transplanted as is.  But compared to the hole before it, it is not going to be as thrilling as you think it is because the Road Hole will redefine the meaning of the word thrill for you.  So long as you play it properly at the green instead of being a pussy and laying up to the right

[Matthew Hunt]

A blind Shot!!!

[wsmorrison]

Do you consider the mounds (left) and promontories (right) flanking the fairway on Royal Dornoch's 14th hole to be hazards?  I do not and thus think the topography on that hole (and the 12th and 16th at Merion West among others) create the interest and strategy.

[Gary Slatter]

Agree 100% certainly for myself.  I love the 18th at St.Andrews but for diferent reasoning. Now, the 18th hole at The Player's Course or TPC is very exciting due to the hazard left, same as Pebble Beach.  Much more exciting that the 17th at TPC or PGA West. They are just terrifying.

I prefer "hazards" without penalty strokes, prefer hitting my ball every stroke.  TheOB on the first at Hoylake is not exciting, it's annoying.

[Mark_Fine]

The 18th at The Old Course is has all kinds of "informal" hazards (some have been pointed out above).  How about the macadem road that runs across the fairway.  We wrote a story about the 18th and that path in our bunkers book in a section titled - The Concept of Fairness (page 158 for those of you who have a copy).  

Matthew,
I would suggest that a blind shot is the result of some form of hazard blocking the way (such as a high dune on a links course).  Think about #5 (The Dell) at Lahinch.  Is that dune a "hazard".  Maybe not in the rules of golf but trust me it is  

Wayne,
Foxy, #14 at Royal Dornach, is one of my favorite holes in all of golf.  Topography/contour is a great "informal" hazard.  As you know, if you go play this hole and you will understand what I am talking about.  

A bunkerless hole with no water features can be loaded with other types of challenge, interest, and peril, e.g. "hazardous conditions impacting your golf score".  The other interesting point about some of these "informal" hazards, is that with many of them, you will never encounter having to take a penalty stroke.  

[Steve Lang]

 

Hard to beat elevated par threes over water with a mountain range in the background thrown in.. like the 4th at Banff Springs .. from the old or new tees

[JESII]

Mark,

Just so I have your definition of "informal hazard" understood, does it include everything that could effect the player or the shot? Sounds like every shot except the 3 footer straight up hill (no grain) fits into this description...in which case I would say yes, "the most exciting shots in golf are...defined by a hazard"...although in tournament play that three footer often creates as much thumping heart as any other shot.

[Adam Clayman]

Peter Pittock,
 It is not blasphemy if you count short grass as a hazard.

[Mark_Fine]

Adam,
Short grass indeed can be a "hazard".  

JES II,
As you know, in modern golf, the only "formal" hazards are bunkers and water hazards.  The balance of an architect's "hazard arsenal" is of the "informal" variety.  Without these components, conditions, and elements, we would have a very limited box of crayons with which to color our courses and make them unique works of art and interesting obstacle courses.  

Furthermore, everyone's definition of these "informal" hazards will vary but we include things like sand hazards that are not "bunkers", barrancas, broken ground, what we call "bumps, contours, undulations and hollows", stone walls, fences, buildings, ruins, trees, out-of-bounds, wind,...anything that can add to the interest and challenge of a golf hole.  

This is not meant to be a trick question.  Just think about your favorite golf shots on courses you have played around the world and my guess is that they in some way are defined by a hazard.  I doubt your favorite or most exciting shot is a three foot putt (though I agree it could be terrifying).  

I bring this subject up in part because I recently sat through Bob Randquist's seminar on "Basic Bunker Maintenance" out in Anaheim.  It was a sold out session and Bob gave a great course.  We both agree that much of modern golf architecture and hazard maintenance is the attempt to "elimnate the hazardous nature" of hazards.  Many courses are conditioning away the element of luck and unpredictableness that hazards should employ to the tune of 25% or more of their total average maintenance budget.  We also tend to toss the hazards to the sides and out of the line of play which takes much of the interest and excitement out of the game.  This is not to imply we should be making our courses harder.  We need to be making them more interesting and less one dimensional.  It is the role of hazards that add so much excitement and pleasure to the game.  Without them it would be a very dull game.  

[wsmorrison]

I agree with Jim, your definition of informal hazards is nearly all-encompassing and therefore loses significance.  Short grass is a hazard?  I don't understand the implications.  It seems like everything but the hole is either a formal or informal hazard.  Taken to such an extreme, the influence on exciting shots is a given.  If you narrowed the definition some, I think the resulting discussion would be very interesting.

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
As I said, everyone has their own definition of "informal" hazards (we go into detail on many of them in our book).  For example, you don't think short grass can be a hazard.  I do, but that doesn't mean one of us is right or wrong.

Again I go back to my question about the most exciting shots in golf.  Can you name any that are not defined by some kind of hazard?  
Mark

Sean,
I agree and I love to incorporate that idea into designs.  It creates so many options and most importantly, it makes golfers think.  That in itself can be hazardous  

[John Kirk]

This is in contradiction to John Kirk's unified theory. Blasphemy

Not really.  The most exciting shots are those which hold your attention for the longest time.  In the case of blind shots, such as a greenside shot from a deep bunker, there's considerable, building anticipation of the result as you scramble uphill to see where the ball finished.  I find it hard to rake the bunker before first determining the result first.

In the case of the 4th at Banff Springs, I have mixed feelings about these types of shots.  A well struck shot is exciting.  Since you know it has a good chance of carrying the unplayable hazard, the anticipation of the result is great and long lasting.  However, a poorly struck shot is instantly recognized, the chance for success is zero, and the result is both known and undesirable.  Thought instantly focuses on the third shot.

Of course, hazards provide a second type of excitement, the apprehension of executing a difficult shot.  Another exciting part of golf.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Mark,

I don't think you're looking for this kind of answer, but "excitement"   can be motivated by lots of things other than hazards.  When I stand on the 1st tee at Pebble Beach, I'm excited and it has nothing to do with the hole's hazards.

I've known hard-bitten capitalists who told me stories about literally crying on the 1st tee at TOC, they were so thrilled to be there.  

The most exciting shot in golf, for we who are still snow-bound in Chicago, will hopefully occur by the 1st of April!

[Lloyd_Cole]

The creeek at the foot of the hill that your ball runs into is the hazard. The length of the grass on the hill is the conditioning. Take 17 at Valderama - is the green speed a hazard? If we were to follow the 'short grass' logic, then it is.
There is a great deal of abbreviation on this site, newbies, me included, are often confused by  PV and TOC etc...  I assume what we are talking about here is not simply short grass, but the comination of contour and conditioning. And, don't get me wrong, I'm generally all for this, but this combination is a challenge, or an elemnet of the challenge presented, not a hazard, and to refer to it as such is, for me anyway, simply confusing.

As to the most exciting shot in golf. For me it's the drive on a Cape hole when I've struck it well, but pushed or pulled it slightly so that I've bitten off more than I intended. Will it carry?

[Jeff Doerr]

Mark,

I find the most exciting shots to be those risky ones I'm willing to take. Water and OB usually negate that risk as I steer away for fear adding to the score.

"A fool and his strokes are soon added!"

A hollow or knob is a great one for me, as is a tough bunker.

Someone already mentioned the Valley of Sin on TOC 18. I think the back left pin on 14 at Pebble is exciting. A front pin on 15 at Bandon with the wind at your back and the huge bunker in front. At Pacific, how about navigating the knob with your 3rd on 15?

In the end, excitment really varies with the skill level of the golfer. In many ways the very low and very high handicap players probably find similar features to be exciting. For the high handicap player all features are in play and navigating any of them is exciting. The low man has the skill to skirt treacherous hazards. Those of us in the low to mid range tend to avoid the big hazards and find our excitement in places that will probably only cost us (or gain us!) a stroke.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark Fine,

I think heroic carries and heroic recoveries tend to magnify the excitement factor.

I can name a zillion holes where those two shots can occur.

Golf, not Hollywood, really coined the phrase:

"A man has to know his limitations."
"And then, try to exceed them"

And nothing brings that to life like a heroic carry or a heroic recovery.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Hazards provide the essence of great golf.  

Mark,
The more I think about this statement, the more trouble I'm having with it.  Perhaps I'm interpreting it too literally.  It ignores the competitive and comradeship aspects of the game.  Why did two shepherds or sailors or whatever decide one day to knock an object around a field?  Because they were looking for a diverting way to pass some time and have some fun.  Not because they were looking for a puzzle to solve--i.e., how to get around some hazards.  Designing the holes with hazards came later, as a way to make the game more challenging.  It might not have taken long, as in "OK, now let's try to hit it over burn and the sand to that spot over there!"

But I think you have to dig deeper to find the "essence" of great golf.

[Adam Clayman]

John Kirk,

In the case of the 4th at Banff Springs, I have mixed feelings about these types of shots.  A well struck shot is exciting.  Since you know it has a good chance of carrying the unplayable hazard, the anticipation of the result is great and long lasting.  However, a poorly struck shot is instantly recognized, the chance for success is zero, and the result is both known and undesirable.  Thought instantly focuses on the third shot.

 Its fortuitous that Seve posted the Banff par 3. When there, Peter hit your first examle. A wonderful exciting well struck shot that almost went in the hole ending a foot away. I then hit what was an equally exciting looking shot but it wasn't well struck and landed short on the apron leading up to the green's surface. I chose the Texas wedge and almsot made the two too. So. not all not-so-well struck shots are easily recognizable. Plus, where else are recoveries made from, but poorly struck shots?

[Mark_Fine]

Eric,
Think about where golf was first played to as you say "pass some time".  The fields of play would have been better described as obstacle courses rather than golf courses.  It was the obstacles (the hazards) that created the interest and excitement.  Hazards didn't come about later on.  They were just formally named later on.  

Most first tees do create excitement as well as pressure for a variety of reasons and your example about the 1st tee at Pebble Beach and TOC are good ones.  I've played and watched many people tee off on both of those tees.  Some golfers are so excited they are beside themselves.  Others are so excited (and nervous) that they have trouble getting the ball in play.  Lots of thoughts enter their mind including some that are not all that positive    

[Tim Gavrich]

What about the 18th at TOC?  I've never had the good fortune of playing the hole, but I'd imagine that shot is thrilling, especially if driving the green is a possibility.

With the "hazard" being what?

The Valley of Sin, the pedestrian crossing, the buildings on the slice side, the psychological hazard of walking in the footsteps of hundreds of thousands of great Scotsmen?

"I should note that I define hazards in a broader sense than those few defined by the USGA." (Mark_Fine)

Tim: Maybe you're on the right wavelength, maybe a hole that has relatively no apparent disruptions is a hazardous hole in itself. Maybe a "thrilling" hole does present hazards from the thrill alone.

Maybe you don't need a stone wall to cross, a sand blowout to carry, or a hotel to drive over.

My mention of 18 at TOC was in response to the statement that "hazards provide the essence of great golf."  I have heard 18 at TOC descriped as a "great" hole, and it certainly is not defined by hazards in the commonly-held definition of the word.  I can see how we can consider the Valley of Sin a hazard, however.