[JESII]

Just asking...


You can do whatever you want with the area that will no longer be fairway...but please provide an example of a hole that would be improved if the fairway were narrower...


I don't think I can think of one off the top of my head...


#8 at Pebble got me thinking about this...someone on there mentioned that it would be better if you could go for the green from virtually anywhere up there...I agree.

[Tom Huckaby]

JES:

There was a great battle about almost this issue many years ago here... back when the great David Moriarty used to participate.  It's not exactly what you are asking, but close.

The hole:  #10 Pasatiempo

DM:  the trees on the right are stupid and should be removed - doing so allows more strategic choice, more choice of angles into the green.

TH:  the hole plays better with them (as does 17).  In each case, removing the trees takes away most if not all of the pressure on the drive.

I guess you have to know Pasa to give this any relevance... and if you do know the principles, you know also that we never came to anything close to agreement.

 

[JESII]

That's really hard to believe Tom...that two guys on here wouldn't be sure to comprimise a difference of opinion...must have been the only time it's happened.



How were the holes at Pasa built? With or without the trees?

[Tom Huckaby]

LOL
Yeah, tough to imagine, eh?

I do believe the trees were added after MacKenzie's time... as I recall this was part of DM's point.  My counterpoint was something to the effect of most times I am with this - hell at Pasa there are instances all over the course where added trees and/or those that grew up made holes lesser - just in this case, the trees made both holes better... Mackenzie after all not being God.. was he?

 

[Jason Topp]

I think there are many.  A wide fairway with no real difference in challenge for the approach is simply boring.  I think that careful thought needs to go into making wide fairways interesting or else the tee shots become thoughtless efforts at wailing away with the driver.  

Today - I think too many courses make the mistake of being too wide (or, more accurately, not effectively using width) compared to courses from the 80's and before.

I believe that many recent Jack Nicklaus courses would be more interesting with narrower fairways.  For example - Bearpath in Minnesota has extremely wide fairways with reasonable greens that can be approached from the wrong side of the fairway.  I find the tee shots boring.

My first impression of We Ko Pa Saguaro was that the fairways are too wide (on only one playing) and that the penalty for being in the wrong spot is not sufficiently significant.

I believe the front nine at Windsong Farm in the Twin Cities has a very boring front nine despite width, great par threes,a terrific short par four and interesting greens that invite all kinds of run up shots.  Off the tee you face a bunch of 450 yard holes with 90 yard wide fairways.  The tee shots are boring and position does not matter for most because you are slugging it as far as you can to get to the green on the approach.  
 
An interesting course forces a player to make a decision related to risk, and hit a good tee shot in the face of danger for a poor tee shot.  If fairways need to be narrowed to bring risk into the equation, I think they should be.

[JESII]

Thanks Jason,

Would firmer greens add to the interest and challenge of the tee shots on any of those examples you cited?


TH,

Interesting about MacKenzie...I think as a rule I'd fall in line with you about true preservation of what was built versus what's better today...if it's clear cut, go with what's better today...

[mike_malone]

 The famous very narrow fairway at The Island seems appropriate because the hole is dead straight and short. I can imagine it being narrower I guess

[Jason Topp]

Thanks Jason,

Would firmer greens add to the interest and challenge of the tee shots on any of those examples you cited?

Windsong - no - they are already as firm as possible - ballmarks are rare

Saguaro - no - was pretty firm when I played it

Bearpath - probably.  I have tended to play the course in the spring when it is pretty wet.

[Tom Huckaby]

Well at Pasatiempo, I think they'd love to get it back to exactly how Mackenzie had it - they sure have done huge amounts of work on restoration in recent years - but they are also realistic about what works today and what won't - as well as what is worth the expenditure and what wouldn't be.  

But we have MANY experts on this course participating in this group, including the club historian as well as Tom Doak, who's people did all the restorative work.  Perhaps they will chime in.

I just am an odd duck golfer who thinks 10 and 17 both work better with the trees... and a lot of it goes along with what Jason just posted.

TH

[Adam Clayman]

Sully, That was me that thought #8 would have more freedom if the entire LZ was short grass. It would also illustrate perfectly how short grass could be a hazard. Especially on the far left side on this photo.
Watching the final day of Q-school today, behind the 18th, there is a low mowed ramp that all the aggressive players seemed to find. Completely a function of an ideal maintenance meld since the course was considerably drier than on previous days.

To answer your orig q... Narrowing to pinch points is refreshing variety on a strategic option filled golf course. The over-use of narrowness is a major drawback on too many of the repetitive mediocre designs built over the last century.

[CHrisB]

#16 at Cypress Point

Make 'em think twice about laying up instead of taking on one of the most exciting shots in golf.

[Philippe Binette]

Hard to come up with an answer on that one...

Thinking about it, maybe weak holes can be made better with narrower (and smarter) mowing lines or trees...

under specific circumstances a good hole can be made slightly better by narrowing it

but

I doubt you can turn a hole into a great hole by narrowing it...

It just depends what you're aiming for

[Andy Troeger]

Tom,
I'd side with you on the trees between #10 and #17 at Pasa from one playing. There already seems to be an option off the tee as to the line you want to try to play, shorten it left but have a worse angle or play a little further right and have a bit better second shot. I don't think getting rid of those trees would add anything personally.

Jason,
I think the width at Saguaro is part of what separates it from so many of its other desert neighbors. It actually gives one the opportunity to play. Could some of it be maintained at rough length to add a little more challenge? Sure, but I wouldn't want it to all be desert.

[Kyle Henderson]

I can think of many holes with wide fairways that I would prefer if the short grass was narrowed at one or two carefully placed "necks," particularly some par 5s. The necks would challenge longer tees shots or preferred lay up landing zones.

#1 at Tobacco Road is a great example of this as it has very wide landing areas that are semi-hidden and semi-separated by sandy hillocks.

[Walt_Cutshall]

The 3rd at Bandon Trails could do with a little less fairway, IMO. At least if I recall the hole correctly.

[J_ Crisham]

Shivas, I agree With your discription of #1 at Seven Bridges. Can't say I cared much for this design. Played it once-so many other great tracks in Chicago-so little time.

[TEPaul]

"Are there any holes that would be better with a narrower fairway?"

Sully:

In my opinion, definitely.

I think #8 at Gulph Mills could lose some on the right by the right pond and I think Applebrook's #10 could lose a lot down to the right of the green (I also think the right bunker fronting the green could lose at least half its size on the right to make room for a right to left fairway "Kicker").

[Phil_the_Author]

Other than #17 at the TPC Sawgrass... no.  

[Jason Topp]

Jason,
I think the width at Saguaro is part of what separates it from so many of its other desert neighbors. It actually gives one the opportunity to play. Could some of it be maintained at rough length to add a little more challenge? Sure, but I wouldn't want it to all be desert.

Andy - my impression was a first impression so I do not know if that change would be for the better.  I would need to play the course a few more times to have an opinion.

 

[Marty Bonnar]

I can't believe no-one has yet attempted the ritual slaughter of one of our sacred cows.
Don't make me resurrect the Case for the Prosecution thread on y'all.
TOC 1/18 could easily do with a strip of rough down the middle and/or the complete and total re-instatement of the Shivas bunker.

love,
moi.

[Peter Pallotta]

JES
I'm in over my head here, but I wonder if the short Par 4 on the front 9 at Augusta (the 3rd?) might not be more interesting with a narrower fairway.

I'm not sure I'd like to see that - I enjoy the fast start players get on the front 9, with the short Par 5 and then the short par 4; both always seem to be amongst the easiest holes on the course.

But I think technology has impacted the short par 4 category quite a bit, because those holes tend to rely on challenging green complexes.  Since Augusta doesn't play dry and fast very often (and thus doesn't require players to shape their shots) maybe narrowing that fairway would have players playing shorter off the tee, and having to come in with more club.

Peter

[rchesnut]

Chiming in a little late on 10/17 at Pasatiempo.  I'm pretty sure that the trees between 10 and 17 did exist at the time MacKenzie designed the course...if you go to Pasatiempo's web site and look at the historical photos, you can see the trees on the left looking back down the 17th fairway from the 17th green.   There were  a fair number of trees on the back nine, even back then.  There's a better angle from the 10th tee in a picture that's hanging in the clubhouse, I'm headed up there tonight and I'll confirm.   And I agree with Tom, the trees put pressure on your tee shot (and provide some protection to players coming up 17)...so in a number of respects, the trees are an important part of the hole and help it play better.  But I don't think that the hole would be better if the fairway were narrower.  

There was an interesting article in The Weekly Standard this past October where Dean Barnett made a strong case for wide, playable fairways, pointing to courses from the Golden Age of golf architecture, and to Tom Doak's work, as examples of great courses that were fun for everyone to play.  He attacks narrow fairways and tight courses built from the 40s to the 90s this way:

"But there followed several decades of golf architecture dreck. Architects like Robert Trent Jones and his regrettably prolific scions dotted the American landscape with courses that were difficult and unpleasant to play--largely because they deviated from the tradition born in St. Andrews. Instead of letting each player figure out his own route from hole to hole, they funnelled all into a single narrow path.

Rees Jones, Robert Trent Jones's son, is still one of golf's most prominent architects. He describes his theory of golf architecture as follows: "My style emphasizes definition. I work hard at giving the golfer a concept as he stands over the ball. I want him to see the intended target and be able to visualize the shot." What Rees Jones omits from his reckoning is that some golfers, indeed most golfers, may be incapable of pulling off the shot that he compels them to see. Golfers have enjoyed finding their own way around St. Andrews for over 500 years. Speaking on behalf of the modern golf architecture establishment, Rees Jones in essence insists that he has discovered a better way: He will officiously preside over each and every golfer's each and every shot."  

Rob

[Tom Huckaby]

Chiming in a little late on 10/17 at Pasatiempo.  I'm pretty sure that the trees between 10 and 17 did exist at the time MacKenzie designed the course...if you go to Pasatiempo's web site and look at the historical photos, you can see the trees on the left looking back down the 17th fairway from the 17th green.   There were  a fair number of trees on the back nine, even back then.  There's a better angle from the 10th tee in a picture that's hanging in the clubhouse, I'm headed up there tonight and I'll confirm.   And I agree with Tom, the trees put pressure on your tee shot (and provide some protection to players coming up 17)...so in a number of respects, the trees are an important part of the hole and help it play better.  But I don't think that the hole would be better if the fairway were narrower.  

Thanks.  Just do note that I never said I would want it narrower than it is now - good lord, no.  My point was against the suggestion to remove completely the trees that are there now.  

[Andy Troeger]

Jason,
I think the width at Saguaro is part of what separates it from so many of its other desert neighbors. It actually gives one the opportunity to play. Could some of it be maintained at rough length to add a little more challenge? Sure, but I wouldn't want it to all be desert.

Andy - my impression was a first impression so I do not know if that change would be for the better.  I would need to play the course a few more times to have an opinion.

Jason,
You're certainly entitled to your original thought, I just wanted to add another viewpoint. I appear to have thought more highly of it than the rest of the GD panel!

[rchesnut]

Well Tom, I was wrong.  I checked the better pictures and talked to our longtime superintendent.   Originally, the 10th and 17th holes at Pasatiempo shared a common fairway, with only a couple of isolated trees near the 10th green.  That openness created a lot of very interesting angles and approaches to both greens.  But 10 was originally a par 5, with the tee on the other side of the road, so using the 10th fairway was an option for the second shot, and it was a smart play when the pin on 10 was tucked on the left side.  But with traffic to the Hollins House along the road, in post-MacKenzie years the 10th tee was moved to its present location, and changed to a par 4, which made it much easier to hit tee shots from 10 into the 17th fairway.  With increased play, that created safety issues, hence the trees.  So I think I agree with you that, with the tee in its current location, the trees make 10 a better hole.  In the old days, with the tees back, and with fewer players, I can see how 10 without the trees would have been an even better hole...but that era has passed.  

Rob

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()