[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Are LONG drives the Achilles heel of golf course architecture ?

What can be done to counter LONG drives that doesn't harm the lessor golfer, the higher handicap more ?

More bunkers
Deeper bunkers
More severe greens
Narrower fairways
Higher rough
cross bunkers
water features

The addition or introduction of these features would seem to have a more harmful impact on the higher handicap player than those who are capable of executing LONG drives.

Is there no ARCHITECTURAL antidote for the LONG drive ?

[noonan]

Shorter courses and doglegs.....(Olympic Club)

Jerry

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

noonan,  

With amateurs carrying the ball 300-340 yards how are shorter holes and doglegs going to counter LONG drives ?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
Certain types of terrain offer protection. I'm thinking of a hole like our first, a 410 yd. par 4. At 180 or so from the tee there is a downslope, or turbo boost, that gives a good forward kick to a ball that finds it. At 250 yds. or so from the tee the fairway slopes up, flattens a bit at 300 then rises again to the green.
Our 3rd, a 400 yd. Alps, is downslope to about 250 from the tee then rises again until 320 or so from the tee where it gently slopes back down to the green. These configurations have little negative effect on the shorter player while reining in, to some degree, the longer hitter.
We are lucky to have these naturally occurring features well routed into the course but I don't see why holes of this type couldn't be constructed elsewhere, even if they were only
used once or twice per course.  
  
I wish the USGA would consider a rules change that would allow relief from bunkers in the same manner as lateral hazards. I think this would lessen player's fear of them in general and, by extension, bring them back into the fairway.  

[Craig Disher]

On a member's course, high rough and narrower fairways will make it too tough and is probably unacceptable to the mid-high handicappers.  But anything that cuts across the fairway - streams, bunkers, tongues of rough or segmented fairways, would help restrict the option to just blast it down the middle and would create something of interest for all levels.

E.g., our opening hole is barely 350 yards, downhill with a sharp uphill that begins 50 yards in front of the green. The long hitters are free to aim and fire. The downhill/uphill valley is caused by an old stream bed that was piped many years ago. Opening it up, even though it's dry most of the year, would at least present them with a decision of carrying it, running their drive over it (pretty narrow), or laying up.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Jim Kennedy,

I believe that Bobby Jones once called Montclair golf course the longest short course he'd played.

I believe the reason was that Montclair had more than its share of fairways that pitched upward in the drive zone, which muted length.

I'm familiar with another hole where the architect indicated that he pitched the fairway upward to stifle the long ball, but, the fairway crests at about 250-260.  Even with the prevailing wind in your face, some big hitters now carry that point.

But I think the idea you mentioned is a valid ARCHITECTURAL method for countering length that doesn't unduly penalize the higher handicap.  Good thought !

[Phil_the_Author]

What about something as simple as a fairways that are at an angle to the tee boxes?

When you have a hole that runs generally straight, it allows a big hitter to slam away. By the fairway running at an angle to the direction of the tee box, your landing area is greatly reduced. Depending on how far you hit it, this can lead to greater or lesser penalties.

A great example of this is the second hole at Bethpage Black. The only hole on the course that is less than 400 yards, it still managed to play at above par for the Open. Everything from driver to 5-iron was hit from the tee in an effort to land in the heart of the fairway. It allowed for someone to attempt a long draw with a driver to leave them with a small wedge in, where by playing safe and laying back to place it safely in the fairway, leaves a long and uphill iron.

This hole makes a person think and decide the way to play a tee shot rather than just getting on the tee and wailing away.

Holes that run serpentine along the centerline of the hole also accomplishes this same idea.

Length can be attacked by landing area sizing as much as by high rough and penal bunkering.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

CDisher,

Your solution may work very well on that particular hole, but what can you do to counter length on the other 13 ?

Phil the Author,

Would you conceed that existing courses can't embark, on a wholesale basis, upon your suggested course of action ?

Would you also conceed that an element of boredom would be the result of a golf course designed along the lines you suggest ?

Lastly, # 2 at Bethpage enjoys unusual terrain, a fairway that cants from right to left off of a hill, to an uphill, plateaued green.  A draw seems to be the prefered ball flight on this hole.  In playing the hole in the OPEN, I wonder how much of a factor the overhanging trees on the left were ?

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Why would you want to counter long drives?

[HamiltonBHearst]

Would love more details about Bobby Jones comments about Montclair.  Were they published?  When did he play there? Is there documentation?  Did he say specifically that it was because of the pitch in the fairways in the driving zone?

I would love to hear more as I have heard similar statements about Eckwanok in Vermont though I have not played either course.

[noonan]

noonan,  

With amateurs carrying the ball 300-340 yards how are shorter holes and doglegs going to counter LONG drives ?

When a hole doglegs at 220 - 250off the tee....if it is sharp enough....it makes a long hitter think if the rough/bunker/ob is worth taking out the big stick and hitting the correct line to wind up in the fairway.

Most other glfers of less distance and possibly skill will hit driver and take it right to the corner of a dogleg.

Jerry

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

noonan,

I played with a fellow yesterday who hits it a mile, and like a mortar.  300 yard carries are not unusual for him.
Most doglegs, including 90 degree doglegs at 220-250 wouldn't bother him.  It's not unusual for him to drive the dogleg 14th hole at Pine Tree, or be hole high in the rough or green side bunker.

I believe Dick Wilson designed the hole such that the riskier drive, closer to the edge of the lake would be rewarded with a better angle of attack into the green and that the more conservative drive hit further away from the lake would suffer a far more difficult angle of attack into the green.
Somehow, I don't think he ever envisioned golfers driving over the lake onto the green.

The other day, a fellow drove it into the left green side bunker with one bounce, on the first hole at Seminole, a dogleg right.

With today's equipment, players are not only long, they're straighter than in the old days.

Adios, a golf course in South Florida has an abundance of doglegs, and that is one of the harshest criticisms of the golf course.

I understand your point, but don't think doglegs are an architectural defense to today's bombers.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
There is a course near me that features a hole whose relatively flat fairway drops off sharply at about 260 from the tee. It continues downhill to about 30 yds. short of the green where it flattens out, for a total yardage of 450 and a par of 4. The green is some 50' below the drop off. The downhill portion of the hole is mowed at around twice the fairway height so a ball that carries to the downslope won't usually roll to the bottom. This leaves a severe lie to a green that slopes from left to right kicking the naturally fading shot, that's short on spin due to the taller grass, further right when it lands on the green. It's tempting for the righty to aim left for this shot but the green sits in a 1/2 bowl, it's steeply slanting rim on the left side. A player must be careful to not hit the slope or it will kick his shot further right. Needless to say a left side cup on this hole is a pain.  
The shorter player will be hitting from a level lie somewhere on top of the hill but the green is blind unless he is 20 or so yds. from the edge of the drop off. If he doesn't carry the green with his second shot it will stop short in the flat area that I mentioned earlier. There is also a set of bunkers front right which complicate matters.          
While this hole doesn't necessarily negate length it does provide for a distinctly different set of challenges for players of varying lengths. It is definitely a site-specific hole but I think it's a good one although one or two in 18 is enough.

[Craig Disher]

Pat,
In the local case, the stream that was piped in front of our first hole meanders across two other holes, and guess what?, it was piped under those fairways as well. On other holes, a diagonal bunker or two would have the same effect. Flynn's original plans seemed to recognize the need to put some constraints on raw power and he set up a wide range of driving options with appropriate risks for the gain to be had from a long drive. He did it with bunkers, segmented fairways, and the small natural streams that cross the property. I'm hoping that our restoration will recreate his ideas, if not his exact design.

But length ought to given a reward every once in a while. Anyone who has seen me play would not describe me as a bomber but nevertheless, I'd like to give the long hitters their due every once in a while. Why should I be allowed to bump and pitch my way to halving holes with them while they're constantly forced to lay up or take a risk that I don't have to deal with?

[noonan]

I am a shorter hitter....
With tight fairways if I hit a good one....mybe 285...
At the muni I play....usually 265 if I hit it good....and I am a 5...
The muni I play is 6700 from the whites....and long hitters doinate....
#5 is maybe 360 and tight......I hit driver (in the fairway) -  7 iron for a birdie today.....while my opponent hit 3 wood in the trees...

From my perspective...the only way to defense long hitters is to take the big stick out of their hand.......shorter yardages and hazards/trees and doglegs has to accomplish this.

[noonan]

Another short hole here at another City of Dayton muni.....#7 at Madden Hills.......a driver does you no good here.....you run out of fairway if you are long.....I sometimes hit driver here.

Until 2 years ago....there was a huge tree at the corner......you had to hit 3 wood to the right side of the fairway just to have a sniff of the green.

I do not believe in long hole that take a driver out of your hand......if you make a long hole...let people hit it.....I think that you should hit a driver at 10 times in 18 holes.....2 times each side.....make the .golfer think about course management.....definately make them hit a driver on 18!

I am no architect......just a bowler.

[CHrisB]

Patrick,

Does the solution lie in the undulation of the ground?

What if a hole became increasingly undulating, so that shorter tee shots produced flatter approaches and longer tee shots produced shots from random lies?  Sure, they might get a reasonable stance/lie, but they might get an awkward one.  Check out this fairway (you might be able to go even more severe).

Combine this concept with false fronts and firm greens, and suddenly the challenge is heightened.  Add to that the psychological impact of bogeying a hole or worse with a wedge approach and I see some real potential there.

We spoke on a previous thread about what we thought were the most difficult pin positions.  Here's what I wrote:

The most difficult pin for me is a front pin just over a false front or steep fairway slope, especially when the green is firm but the area short of the green is a little softer or unpredictable.  Fly the ball all they way to the pin, and it bounces long, with a tough putt.  Land it short and try to run it up and it just might stick and release way back down the front, leaving a tricky pitch that will come back to your feet if left short.

Examples: #10 CC of Charleston, #6 and #18 Pinehurst No. 2, probably #9 ANGC, to a lesser extent #5 and #18 TOC (a little easier with a shorter club, and TOC is firm all the way around).

The problem is compounded when there are also falloffs left and right, so you get a "hood-of-your-car" effect like at #14 CC of Charleston.

And it's really compunded when the green falls away from you once over the false front or slope, like at #18 CC of Charleston or #15 Palmetto GC.

In these cases, although there are multiple options, you not only have to hit a very small target area, you have to hit it with the right trajectory and amount of spin, and that's pretty demanding.

Add an increasingly undulating fairway to greens like this, and you have holes that are playable by all but still challenging to the best.  Imagine approaching greens like this from a downhill-sidehill lie or straddling a small hummock.  Anything below the false front gets drawn back, and anything landing without the right spin bounds above the hole.  Tougher to control the trajectory and spin from awkward stances and lies.  Bring in the rough a little so that missed fairways mean awkward lies and higher grass, and the difficulty is magnified (but still playable by all if the rough isn't too high).

Another feature of undulating fairways is the unpredictability of the first bounce of a ball carrying into them.  A ball carrying 290 into an undulating fairway might hit the face of a hummock, killing it, or it might kick left, right or forward any number of yards.  Tougher to play to your favorite wedge yardage, tougher to ensure the proper angle, tougher to get the stance/lie you want.

So I think that undulating fairways keep all the clubbing decisions on the table, are playable by all, and provide an added challenge to the longest hitters.

[Willie_Dow]

Patrick

As I said before, on the Kittansett thread, the bottle hole is the great arbitrator.  Not a comfortable way, but along with doglegs it will confine big hitters.  Then, too, the optional fairway approach, eg. Hanse at Inniscrone.  

[texsport]

Is it good architecture to make the best players use only 13 clubs?

The answer to the distance increases is the same it's always been-multiple tees. As long as there's no reasonable control on equipment and the players continue to get bigger and stronger, you can't fight it by tricking up the courses.

Old, short courses will have to remodel or be satisfied with older memberships who like the short, tight courses with "tradition".

If I were building a new course today, there is no way I'd build something to make the best players lay up all the time. That would be a prescription for certain mediocrity. My architect would also have to design so that the course could be further lengthened in the future. This goes double if I'm building a resort or tournament course.

Texsport

[DMoriarty]

More width and angles and routes that allow the shorter hitter to outthink the longer one, or at least equalize the longer hitters advantage through smart, accurate play.  

[noonan]

In reality....the courses are only becoming short for a small segment of the golfing population.....the long professional/long amateur golfer.

The LPGA isnt setting scoring records every week....they are still playing 6250 yd. courses.

If the pro's go 30 under in 4 rounds....who cares?

JK

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

DMoriarty,

Doesn't more width just favor the LONG hitter ?

Noonan,

In your first schematic, wouldn't the LONG driver take all the trouble out of play and have an L-wedge into the green.

Chris B,

Great picture, but just like on super tight tree lined fairways, I'd rather be pitching out from 80 yards from the green, then from 160 yards from the green, so with your picture, I'd rather be going at the green with a wedge, or alternate club, than with a forced 6 iron.

[Mark_Fine]

I realize that the length guys are hitting it these days is amazing but we're too focused on the wrong players.  Forget the top 1%.  Check how many +2's you have at the clubs you each belong to or play regularly at.  You can count them on one hand if that.  There aren't too many players obsoleting the courses we have now.  Heck, we have a fairway bunker at Lehigh that's 160 yard carry (if you bother to try) and half the club thinks it's unfair!  

Just keep the pro's from playing your golf course (or influencing what the member's think you should do to modernize it) and you'll be fine!
Mark  

[CHrisB]

Chris B,

Great picture, but just like on super tight tree lined fairways, I'd rather be pitching out from 80 yards from the green, then from 160 yards from the green, so with your picture, I'd rather be going at the green with a wedge, or alternate club, than with a forced 6 iron.

Patrick,
The title of this thread that you started is "Long Drives - Is there no ARCHITECTURAL defense?", and in the opening post your question is: "What can be done to counter LONG drives that doesn't harm the lesser golfer, the higher handicap more?"

The word you use in the title is "defense", not "deterrant".  The word you use in the opening question is "counter", not "prevent".

Yes, long hitters are still going to want to bomb it down there, so undulating fairways are not a deterrant, not something that will deter long hitters from bombing it--they'll still choose the wedge over the longer shot.

But undulating fairways are an example of what you asked for, a defense against long hitters that, unlike "More bunkers, Deeper bunkers, More severe greens, Narrower fairways, Higher rough, cross bunkers, and water features", doesn't harm the lesser (high handicap) golfer.

Open, firm greens with false fronts are another feature that, especially when combined with undulating fairways, provide defense against the longer hitter while remaining playable for the higher handicap golfer.

So I believed I've answered your question adequately as I read it.  Now, if what you meant by your question is "What architecturally can be done to deter/prevent long hitters from hitting driver?", then I'm not as interested in answering that question, because I believe that players should be allowed to have options off the tee, and that includes the option to hit it as far as you can.

[DMoriarty]

Doesn't more width just favor the LONG hitter ?

Nope.  Not necessarily.  

To borrow a hole from Hanse\Wagner\Shackelford, this somewhat resembles the landing area and green of No. 5 at Rustic, a par 5 playing up canyon from the mid 500s.

Because of the lateral waste area/hazard, I think of the hole as having a inverse cape feature on the drive, and a cape feature on the second shot.

My proportions are a little off, the fairway is very wide, but not 100 yds wide.  Also, there is actually quite a bit more room (approx 70 yds) between the last right bunker on the right and the green. One can actually "lay up" directy right of green, but this brings in the collection bunker, and the slope on long shots.


The big hitter can whale away to the left side of the fairway and get within 200 yds of the green (A), but he then faces a tough angle to the green in two--  Over the waste area, a bunker, and the closely cut steep sidehill which fronts the left side of the green. If he goes over or the ball doesnt stick it (because the green sits up a little, it generally dries out pretty good.) there is a collection bunker right/back.  

Another option is hug the drive right and flirt with the hazard/waste area (B).  This offers an easier angle to the green but a longer shot.  It also offers the best chance to well place a lay-up (C).

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()