[Tommy Williamsen]

The discussion about penal courses that are great got me wondering what constitues a penal Golf course.  obviously, Pine Valley, Carnoustie, and the Ocean Course could characterized as penal.  PV is not so much penal off the tee, it certainly is around the greens.  Carnoustie is penal off the tee and around the greens.  The only caveat is the the wind needs to be blowing.  Without the wind Carnoustie is pretty fair.  Likewise the Ocean Course without the wind is difficult but very playable.  With the wind it is a brute with severe penalties for wayward shots.

I would not consider Muifield or Shinnecock as penal.  They are difficult to be sure but the penalty for missed shots are not what I would call penal.  They are shotmakers courses who need to control the flight of their ball.

How would you personally define penal arhitecture.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Sean, I tend to agree with your characterization of Muirfield.  I find the l design fair but narrow fairways, high rough, and wind can change the layout.  I like your designation of "penal by Maintenance."  As far as design is concerned Muirfiel is pretty "fair" and strategic in in nature.  The bunkers are deep and well placed but I think they add to the strategic quality of the course.

Under this definition, Merion might be categorized as Penal.  Wander off the fairway and you are in deep rough.  The last time I played it therre was no first cut.  I presume it is still the same.

I have not played Woodhall Spa yet, but will get there on my next visit.

[Jeff Doerr]

To me penal is "No Options!"

17 at Sawgrass

Vs.

16 at CPC

One gives you an option to choose depending on wind, ability, etc.

Penal means there is no bailout or layup or wide side of the fairway.

There is a very ugly penal hole in Portland at the new Redtail course (used to be Progress). #15 has OB left, Water Right and demands a long tee ball to be able to carry to hazards fronting the green. The only option for a conservative play is to hit three mid shots and play as a par 5.

The carry penal spoken of is very evident at Crosswater in Bend/Sunriver. From the white tees many of the carries are eliminated. From the blue and back, you have to carry 200+ to play the course.

[Lloyd_Cole]

To me penal is "No Options!"

17 at Sawgrass

Vs.

16 at CPC

One gives you an option to choose depending on wind, ability, etc.

Penal means there is no bailout or layup or wide side of the fairway.

There is a very ugly penal hole in Portland at the new Redtail course (used to be Progress). #15 has OB left, Water Right and demands a long tee ball to be able to carry to hazards fronting the green. The only option for a conservative play is to hit three mid shots and play as a par 5.

The carry penal spoken of is very evident at Crosswater in Bend/Sunriver. From the white tees many of the carries are eliminated. From the blue and back, you have to carry 200+ to play the course.

Jeff

Agreed, regarding an individual hole

But how does one classify a whole course?

None have 18 forced carries.

I'm still mulling it.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tommy,

My idea of a penal golf course is one that doesn't give a golfer a fair chance to play bogie-golf if that's what he aspires to.  

Peter


 

[Lloyd_Cole]

Tommy,

My idea of a penal golf course is one that doesn't give a golfer a fair chance to play bogie-golf if that's what he aspires to.  

Peter


 

Peter,
I like that idea but see no need for the word 'fair'. I see little use for the word when talking about golf.
Bethpage Black can certainly take a 90 shooter and give him a 120.

[Peter Pallotta]

Lloyd

I'll take your word on Bethpage, and I don't know if that means the course is penal by my definition.

I used the word "fair" as a rough synonym for "likely". If a golfer aspires to shoot 90, it's probably because he doesn't have all the shots in the bag; and if he starts off a round with a strategy of playing "bogie-golf," he's probably aware of this fact. I think a penal golf course is one that doesn't make it "likely" that this average (if unusually thoughtful) golfer will accomplish his goal, either because it demands shots that he simply doesn't have, and/or because his occasional poor shot is most often irretrievably lost, i.e. it's automatically penalized at least one full shot, as any possible recovery shot (if any recovery is even possible) is not one that this level of golfer is capable of.

Maybe a clearer definition (?), but not as pithy as the first.          

Peter

edit: My idea of a penal golf course is one that doesn't give a golfer a likely chance to play bogie-golf if that's what he aspires to.  

[Lloyd_Cole]

edit: My idea of a penal golf course is one that doesn't give a golfer a likely chance to play bogie-golf if that's what he aspires to.  

Peter
I like that
I liked the first post, too
I'd just like to eradicate the word 'fair' from this forum.

[Andy Troeger]

To me penal is "No Options!"

17 at Sawgrass

Vs.

16 at CPC

One gives you an option to choose depending on wind, ability, etc.

Penal means there is no bailout or layup or wide side of the fairway.

There is a very ugly penal hole in Portland at the new Redtail course (used to be Progress). #15 has OB left, Water Right and demands a long tee ball to be able to carry to hazards fronting the green. The only option for a conservative play is to hit three mid shots and play as a par 5.

The carry penal spoken of is very evident at Crosswater in Bend/Sunriver. From the white tees many of the carries are eliminated. From the blue and back, you have to carry 200+ to play the course.

Jeff

Agreed, regarding an individual hole

But how does one classify a whole course?

None have 18 forced carries.

I'm still mulling it.

Lloyd,
Wuskowhan Players Club has 22-23 forced carries! There's only a few holes without at least one, and close to half have two!

[Adam Clayman]

For me, any course which precludes the recovery shot is penal.

This implies all those courses which do not manage their surrounds. Either controling the over-spray or thining out the results of unintended overspray.

If you are looking for balls all day, this is good first sign of penal golf.

[Lloyd_Cole]

To me penal is "No Options!"

17 at Sawgrass

Vs.

16 at CPC

One gives you an option to choose depending on wind, ability, etc.

Penal means there is no bailout or layup or wide side of the fairway.

There is a very ugly penal hole in Portland at the new Redtail course (used to be Progress). #15 has OB left, Water Right and demands a long tee ball to be able to carry to hazards fronting the green. The only option for a conservative play is to hit three mid shots and play as a par 5.

The carry penal spoken of is very evident at Crosswater in Bend/Sunriver. From the white tees many of the carries are eliminated. From the blue and back, you have to carry 200+ to play the course.

Jeff

Agreed, regarding an individual hole

But how does one classify a whole course?

None have 18 forced carries.

I'm still mulling it.

Lloyd,
Wuskowhan Players Club has 22-23 forced carries! There's only a few holes without at least one, and close to half have two!

Andy,

My bad.

That is a Penal course.

[Lloyd_Cole]

For me, any course which precludes the recovery shot is penal.

This implies all those courses which do not manage their surrounds. Either controling the over-spray or thining out the results of unintended overspray.

If you are looking for balls all day, this is good first sign of penal golf.

Adam

Surely it's a question of how often the recovery is precluded.
There are many bunkers at TOC which necessitate the sideways or backwards exit, and aren't we mostly agreed that it is the ultimate strategic test?

[Tommy Williamsen]

Does the skill level of the player make a difference  whether course whether or not a course is penal?  Take Wuskowhan for example, since it was mentioned.  I realize there were forced carries that from which the player can't escape.  As I recall the carries off the tee were not that long, and the ones onto the greens should not be a problem for the better player.  It certainly is penal for a high handicapper.  They could lose half a dozen balls.  The better player can get his/her way around without losing any.
I did not find the course all that penal but my Dad didn't have mcuh fun.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Does the skill level of the player make a difference  whether course whether or not a course is penal?  Take Wuskowhan for example, since it was mentioned.  I realize there were forced carries that from which the player can't escape.  As I recall the carries off the tee were not that long, and the ones onto the greens should not be a problem for the better player.  It certainly is penal for a high handicapper.  They could lose half a dozen balls.  The better player can get his/her way around without losing any.
I did not find the course all that penal but my Dad didn't have mcuh fun.

I don't think the quality of the player changes the nature of a course.  A course is what it is regardless of who plays it.  

Ciao

Sean, I suspect you are right, but I  also think that penal is   in the eye of the beholder.  I didn't find Wuskowhan penal.  Actually I don't find as penal as I do stragetic.  I can however think of #11 at Royal North Devon to be penal.  The driving area is not only blind but pretty darn narrow.

As one of the posters above said, maybe we should look at holes rather than courses as penal. Maybe he is on to something.

[Adam Clayman]

Surely it's a question of how often the recovery is precluded.
There are many bunkers at TOC which necessitate the sideways or backwards exit, and aren't we mostly agreed that it is the ultimate strategic test?

Lloyd, Playing sideways or backwards out of a pot bunker does not stop the thrill of recovery. Losing one's ball with only a slight deviation from acceptable dispursion penelizes one dis-proportionally.

[Doug Siebert]

This is easy.  Penal golf is where a bad shot from any given location has a good chance of costing you more than one shot, either due to stroke and distance penalty, or the likelihood that whatever you can do from where you put yourself will end up worse than if you'd just hit a decent shot in the first place!

[Doug Siebert]

Sean, I have to disagree.  I could play all day with a 100 yard carry over ponds or ravines or whatever and not even think twice about it, and probably that's true for most GCAers, so it isn't penal at all.  Take a 24 handicap and he's going to knock a couple in there and think the course is fairly penal.

Put me on a narrow course with OB on both sides due to not enough land for golf and too much housing, and I'll probably find it pretty penal.  Moe Norman would disagree.  Or at least he would if he were still alive.

I don't think you can declare a certain course to be penal or not without any regard for the quality of the player.  What's a penal course for Tiger?  Is a course he considers penal even playable for a 90 shooter?

[Paul_Daley]

Tommy:

A fascinating yet, on the surface, pretty simple question: what makes a hole penal? While there are 300 pages waiting to be filled on the answer, I sense the abridged version comes down to this: when shaping up to play a shot that has 'penal' written all over it; it doesn't matter by how far you miss; if you miss the shot; the result (and penalty) is the same. There is no disadvantage by degrees - no slowly awakening realisation of the impending doom - no requirement to be playing the next shot from a worse position, namely, over a bunker to a tight pin, or of being 'blind' on the next shot. No! If you miss by twenty yards or by three inches, the result is the same.

Remember Phil M a few weeks ago when he carved his 72nd hole iron within 6 inches of getting wet. Had his ball just trickled in; well ... he may as well missed by fifty yards - no real difference to the score. Come to think of it, Phil's always been wet ... but that's a story for another day.

And surely, too, there are holes that would not be classified as 'penal' that have elements within that are, most assuredly, penal.

Contrast this philosophy with strategic design. Under this credo, a golfer will be hung out to dry by varying degrees, based on the inability to place the previous shot. But the hole is rarely 'lost'; it's just that fancy footwork is required from then on to extricate oneself from the mire.

Many of the best golf courses have holes, and layouts, that embody a combination of the strategic, penal and heroic.  

Pine Valley, for one, has long been touted as an example of the penal school. Yet any one who has played it could think of many examples of strategic choices available, plus a healthy dose of 'heroic' opportunities to indulge. Naturally, it has holes that are wickedly penal in nature - and these have helped create the PV mystique - and other holes that are a combination of all three modes.

Royal Melbourne (West) ... it's just wall-to-wall strategy; your granny could play it - not well, mind you, but she'd finish. The old gal may even finish with the same ball.
 

[TEPaul]

I think there are some really good answers on here from Sean Arble, Jeff Doerr, Peter Pallotta, Adam Clayman et al and the interesting thing is they are not the same answers at all. I guess this goes to show how hard it is to pin down what "penal" golf and architecture really is.

One said Shinnecock is not particularly penal but it is difficult. That's very true. Right now it's pretty difficult even though the rough is down and hasn't grown much. They will only cut that rough in the fall and so as the season goes on Shinnecock will certainly get both more difficult and also a whole lot more penal.

As for Pine Valley, essentially it doesn't even have rough. It's an interesting distinction to make vs Shinnecock or even what penal might mean.

Take Merion East. Those bunker surrounds look great right now with that high wispy fescue on them but the rest of the grassing on the surrounds hasn't grown much. They won't cut those bunker surrounds for the rest of the year either.  

[Lloyd_Cole]

Surely it's a question of how often the recovery is precluded.
There are many bunkers at TOC which necessitate the sideways or backwards exit, and aren't we mostly agreed that it is the ultimate strategic test?

Lloyd, Playing sideways or backwards out of a pot bunker does not stop the thrill of recovery. Losing one's ball with only a slight deviation from acceptable dispursion penelizes one dis-proportionally.

Adam

I think 'the thrill of recovery' is generally accepted to refer to hitting a successful shot, from the rotten spot you'd left yourself in, not hitting said shot after you had chipped out sideways.

[redanman]

I hope that I get it right (Or closely enough) but Mr. Fownes set out to do it (did it!) and stated more or less:

"A shot poorly played is a shot irrevocably lost"

That about sums up "Penal". How you do it - water, sand, trees, narrowness, carries, small targets and smaller effective targets, the statement I tried to quote about says it all to me.

The "Best" penal courses can do it without you even losing a ball, I suppose.  Golfers just hate to lose balls.

[Tom_Doak]

I've come to think that "penal" and "strategic" are just labels in the modern world, the same as "minimalist".  I think I know what they were intended to mean, but there are so many different interpretations of them that it's hard to use them without someone getting the wrong impression.

Plus, no course is entirely penal, nor entirely strategic, nor entirely minimalist.

[Adam Clayman]

Lloyd, If Tom Doak is correct, theres very little thats generally accepted.

When starring at a double and make a single that is a thrilling recovery.

Plus Lloyd, I think the size of the bunker matters. Smaller pot bunkers are not viewed as harshly as a poorly placed one because the golfer blames himself for finding the smaller one.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom D

your last point was surprising, at least to me. Which is to say, I assume you're right, but I'd never thought of it that way before. But, just for the sake of discussion:

Isn't being "a little bit penal" sort-of like being "a little bit pregnant"? Or, to put it another way, can a golf course be "suitable/ enjoyable for all level of golfers" if only some of its holes fit that description?

Probably not great questions, actually, since the analogy is a poor one (we all know what pregnant means, while what we're discussing here is what penal means); and that phrase has been used so much by so many people as to become almost meaningless....but I thought I'd ask.

Peter

By the way, my idea that "a penal golf course is one that doesn't give a golfer a likely chance to play bogie-golf if that's what he aspires to" assumes that there are at least a  few holes on a penal course that a golfer striving to play bogie-golf would likely have his round ruined by.  

[Lloyd_Cole]

Lloyd, If Tom Doak is correct, theres very little thats generally accepted.

When starring at a double and make a single that is a thrilling recovery.

Plus Lloyd, I think the size of the bunker matters. Smaller pot bunkers are not viewed as harshly as a poorly placed one because the golfer blames himself for finding the smaller one.

Adam

Regarding the English language - It is certainly very flexible. Clearly your idea of 'thrilling' and mine differ. No problem there.

Regarding bunkers - I'd reply if I could understand your position.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()