Line of instinct?

[Joe_Tucholski]

Is the line of instinct always a straight line from tee to green?  If the answer is no can someone provide an example?

[Patrick Kiser]

Joe,

May I suggest you refer to the latest interview...

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/feature-interview/interview-with-the-emperor/

[Kalen Braley]

joe,

With tongue planted firmly in cheek, my line of instinct is never a staight line because its not often I hit a straight one.

That being said, I think there are "curvy" line of instincts.  For example:

Take a par 4 hole that dog legs from left to right with a nest of bunkers on the inside of the dogleg.  My line of instinct as one who plays a fade, is to aim up the left hand side of the fairway and bring it back to the middle past the bunkers.  This would be a good play for me and certainly would be my line of "instinct" when standing on the tee.

[Mark Saltzman]

If Tommy were posting here I am sure he'd quote Max:

The trouble with most inland golf holes, as I see it, is that they emphasize instinct. And the golfer's instinct upon the tee is to drive on a bee line to the hole. This line in most cases is down the middle of a fairway, which permits too much latitude for mistakes. Instinct supplies the motive power, but it is the degree and manner in which instinct is opposed that calls upon intelligence. In other words, it is the peculiarity of the manner in which instinct is transformed by hazards that makes or breaks a hole. According to the conformation of the ground, there is for all of us a definite line that we will plump for. If the ground slopes gently down from right to left, the line of instinct will be bent out to the right. We will want to overcome the throw of gravity. This we may call the line of charm . Before construction, this line must be felt. When determined, nothing must be done to deny it. The golfer must not be turned from it. But we can render it tremendously exciting for him to take it. In other words, if we could always accurately determine the line of instinct of a hole, all we have to do is to dig bunkers into it, with the result that we make the firing line hot for him.”

[Rich Goodale]

This is one of the many tragic flaws of Max Behr's "philosophy."  Only idiots pay any attention to what he calls the "line of instinct."  Of course, since 97% of all golfers are idiots (when golfing), maybe Maxie was onto something....

[Tom_Doak]

I don't remember ever reading that full quote about the line of charm before.  I was familiar with what I meant, but not with the example used.

The example dovetails nicely with something Pete Dye taught me a long time ago.  He said that if you are playing a hole along a sidehill, you will nearly always prefer to have the landing area above the beeline to the hole, instead of below it, because it is people's natural instinct to look toward the hole and then play to the high side.

One good hole I know of that breaks this rule is the 4th at Crystal Downs ... but it works there because the inside of the dogleg is protected by a big slope, trees, and a carry bunker, so that you can't really play above the beeline.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe,

May I suggest you refer to the latest interview...

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/feature-interview/interview-with-the-emperor/

Patrick that's why my question was initiated.  The image of first hole at Lakeside shows a line of charm instinct that is a straight line from tee to green.  Maybe I'm reading the map wrong but it appears the line of charm instinct doesn't touch a fairway.

joe,

With tongue planted firmly in cheek, my line of instinct is never a staight line because its not often I hit a straight one.

That being said, I think there are "curvy" line of instincts.  For example:

Take a par 4 hole that dog legs from left to right with a nest of bunkers on the inside of the dogleg.  My line of instinct as one who plays a fade, is to aim up the left hand side of the fairway and bring it back to the middle past the bunkers.  This would be a good play for me and certainly would be my line of "instinct" when standing on the tee.

Kalen from the interview if you had the shot to play over the bunker guarding the turn of the dogleg would that change things?

From reading the definition Tommy presented in the interview I thought he felt the line of instinct is always the shortest line.  The golfer then sees the "natural lines of hazards, hills, bunkers, creek beds, folds in the land, etc" and adjusts their strategy based on the level of risk their willing to take.  The line of charm almost seems like the easiest route.

From your interpretation of the definition I'm sensing your opinion is everyone has their own line of instinct based on their skills?

This is one of the many tragic flaws of Max Behr's "philosophy."  Only idiots pay any attention to what he calls the "line of instinct."  Of course, since 97% of all golfers are idiots (when golfing), maybe Maxie was onto something....

Rich maybe that's why the 10th at Riviera works so well.  Since the straight tee shot or right tee shot is fairway the line of instinct becomes a more viable option for the 97% of us that are idiots than if it were rough.  While most holes reward a shot that challenges hazards on the line of charm the heroic shot is punished (a theme that seems like it would be used in a greek tragedy).

The example dovetails nicely with something Pete Dye taught me a long time ago.  He said that if you are playing a hole along a sidehill, you will nearly always prefer to have the landing area above the beeline to the hole, instead of below it, because it is people's natural instinct to look toward the hole and then play to the high side.

Tom I think that's a keen observation.  I wonder if people instinctively play to the high side of a shot because it makes the approach easier or because the high side will move the ball back towards the hole as opposed to away from (or something else).

[Kalen Braley]

Joe,

Probably I would, because then that would mean I would have more length off the tee and hence would have to aim at a more severe angle compared to the dogleg... as opposed to being able to aim further back and hit more of a striaght shot that I knew would fade around the corner of the dogleg.

I think what Tommy may have been trying to say is the player takes the shortest line.... that they think they can pull off.  Even a pro would never aim at the shortlest line to the green if it was a 350 yard carry....so its all relative.

This is why "bite-off-as-much-as-you-can-chew" holes work so well IMO.  Because its the same for everyone, assuming the diagonal is sufficiently long, and everyone gets to test themselves based on their perceived ability.

[Colin Macqueen]

Joe,

I am very, very confused!

You say that

"The image of first hole at Lakeside shows a line of charm that is a straight line from tee to green.  Maybe I'm reading the map wrong but it appears the line of charm doesn't touch a fairway."

When I look at the image depicted the Line of Instinct (red) is the straight line and the Line of Charm (purple) has a reflex angle to it!

Have I missed something? Has the image been re-jigged since you made your comment?

God knows Behr is difficult enough to understand without any added complications!!!

Cheers Colin

[Sean_A]

We must remember that Behr isn't the last or first (see John Low first when thinking of anything to do with strategic architecture) word on this subject.  It is my understanding that the line of instinct is the shortest line intended by the archie.  The idea being that the shortest line should always have hazards to face or at least more trouble to deal with (other than the obvious added yards) than the line of charm.  The implication being that the line of charm is often an easier way to score better for the thinking golfer.  Being more to the point, the hole with both lines offers golfers the opportunity to play to their strength and/or take the risk or not.

Ciao

[Colin Macqueen]

Gentlemen,

If the Line of Instinct is the "...shortest line intended by the archie" (Arble, GCA, 2012) or "...the bee-line..." (Doak, GCA, 2012) is the Line of Charm then "The line of skill (which) is not obvious but is concealed in the line of thought." (Behr).

I wonder, Joe, if the Line of Charm becomes "the easiest route" as the golfer takes into account their skill level in tackling the hole?


“Great strategic holes primarily challenge thought.  Knowledge of what to do is not immediate.  It must be sought.  The line of skill is not obvious but is concealed in the line of thought.” (Behr)

Cheers Colin

[Rich Goodale]

Gentlemen,

If the Line of Instinct is the "...shortest line intended by the archie" (Arble, GCA, 2012) or "...the bee-line..." (Doak, GCA, 2012) is the Line of Charm then "The line of skill (which) is not obvious but is concealed in the line of thought." (Behr).

I wonder, Joe, if the Line of Charm becomes "the easiest route" as the golfer takes into account their skill level in tackling the hole?


“Great strategic holes primarily challenge thought.  Knowledge of what to do is not immediate.  It must be sought.  The line of skill is not obvious but is concealed in the line of thought.” (Behr)

Cheers Colin

Thanks, Colin .  So now we have "the line of skill" and the "line of thought" from the Master as well as "the shortest line" and the "bee-line" from two of his modern disciples and/or groupies.  Not to mention "the plumb line" and "the tram line" when we finaly get onto the green after following all these other lines clueslessly...  No wonder it is such a difficult game and takes 4-5 hours to "play."

Rich

[Sean_A]

I get headaches trying to read Behr.  He makes simple concepts (as if anything about golf is really difficult to grasp) so complicated.  

Colin - I would argue that either line is skillful, just an emphasis on different skills.  I know many on this site decry the long ball, but it takes skill to a hit a ball a long and straight way - which is often required for the line of instinct.  Though I admit that "instinct" is a poor term for the aggressive line because many golfers don't have that instinct at all.  Meaning many know the line of instinct is really the line of impossible.  It is this dichotomy of skill which has really caused all sorts of problems for the modern archie.  How do they create both lines for most golfers?  Some would say the failure to achieve this is at the heart of what ills architecture.  I think thats a bit harsh because the bar was set to high and it only gets higher each and every day.  Archies are forced to choose between designing for the 80% (number plucked from the air) of golfers and sacrificing the other 20%.  Usually, archies just plug along and say that design for the 95% (the other 15% is women and children and they have largely been ignored) by adding extra tees.  I don't think this is a viable solution, but then I am not convinced building three distinct types of courses is viable either.  

Ciao  

[Neil White]

To whom does the 'line of instinct' really matter?

Is it merely a phrase coined so that those in the know (or not as it would appear) can have something else to discuss at great length and elaboration?

How many architects actually sit down and use any of the lines - be they instinct, charm, skill or thought when determining a holes design?

Just wondering.

Neil.

[David Harshbarger]

Finally!

This is day that my training dissecting obtuse fragments from long dead pontificators, learned in Philosophy 101, pays off!

The Line of Instinct is just that, the direction any fool would point their shot because "the hole is over there".  If the architect does nothing to add complications along the line of instinct as it runs from tee to hole, then the line of instinct will be the line of play, and crucially, no thought will intrude on musings on the beverage carts next visit.

To engage the brain, Behr says the architect should ensure that complications intrude on the Line of Instinct, complications that force the golfer to at least consider alternative directions to point his shot.  If the complications on the line of instinct are formidable enough, the architect knows the player will cast about for an alternative route. The knowing architect provides that alternative, expecting many players to turn to this "Line of Charm".  In the course of the entire hole, is this the best play?  Maybe, maybe not. 

Reading into this, I think Behr's thinking was that things get really interesting when the architect muddies the waters by masking the difficulties or lack thereof along the different lines, or forces the player to integrate the movement of the earth into their assessment of the likely outcomes along each line.  Again, any fool can figure out where a straight ball to level ground will end up.  Add in slope, and the brain is engaged. 

That's my take.

Dave

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe,

I am very, very confused!

You say that

"The image of first hole at Lakeside shows a line of charm that is a straight line from tee to green.  Maybe I'm reading the map wrong but it appears the line of charm doesn't touch a fairway."

When I look at the image depicted the Line of Instinct (red) is the straight line and the Line of Charm (purple) has a reflex angle to it!

Have I missed something? Has the image been re-jigged since you made your comment?

God knows Behr is difficult enough to understand without any added complications!!!

Cheers Colin

Colin sorry I mixed my words.  The image is correct and was always correct.  I've adjusted my post to the correct terms.

[Bill_McBride]

I have always wondered about the Line of Charm vs. Line of Instinct when one plays as close as possible to a hazard in order to get the possible angle for the next shot.   Is it necessary to challenge the Line of Instinct in these cases?

For example, #12 at The Valley Club.  The closer you play to the deep barranca, the easier your approach up the axis of this short par 4. 

[Joe Bausch]

Bobby Jones wrote on this topic (Nov 1, 1933 issue of the NY Sun):

[Colin Macqueen]

Joe,

I hope you don't mind that, for ease of reading, I have retyped the article you, presumably, scanned and placed in this thread.  Hopefully others will be more encouraged to read it and now easily copy and paste it for future reference.
I was very taken with it and the explanation within. It is the first time I have seen Bobby Jones commenting on Max Behr and I like the explanation very much. Thanks for that. Cheers Colin

Bobby Jones Says

Max Behr who designed and constructed the Lakeside golf course, in Hollywood California, thought, with respect to golf course architecture, that the straight line to the hole is the line of instinct and must be broken to create the line of charm. Perhaps an argument of the point involves a little closer acquaintance with the strategic possibilities of golf than the average golfer's skill would allow him to possess. Nevertheless, I think a real golfer ought to have interest in all angles of the game. He ought to at least have some concern in discovering what it is that makes a hole interesting to play.

I think that Mr. Behr's observation is certainly correct, for I know of nothing so dull as the hole which is played straight away from tee to cup, regardless of how many cross bunkers are put in the way. Such a hole can be made difficult but never interesting, for the playing of it can never involve the least bit of strategy. The most rigorous demand made upon mechanical skill can never make a hole intriguing.

But to say that the straight line of instinct must be broken in order to create the line of charm is not saying that every hole must be a dog-leg; nor is it saying that a hazard must be located must be located in the middle of every fairway. It is sufficient that the line of play should be broken, so that the best line is away from the straight and obvious route. It is better too, to my mind, if this best line of play can be made to vary with changing conditions of wind and ground, and for different locations of the flag.

I find what I think is the most interesting contrast between two methods of breaking the line in the tenth hole at Lakeside and the sixteenth at St. Andrews. Of approximately the same length - 350 to 3705 yards - both are exceedingly interesting holes, yet the design is as different as could be imagined.

The sixteenth at St. Andrews lies along the railroad track, which bounds the entire length on the right. Directly in line from tee to green is the famous Principal's Nose bunker, and fifteen yards or so further on, and behind the Principal's Nose, so that it cannot be seen from the tee,, is a smaller bunker, called, I think, Deacon Syme. The Principal's can be carried by a good sock in calm air, but it is almost impossible to get over the second bunker except with a following breeze.

Thus the line of instinct is broken. If the hole be cut to the left the best position for the second shot results from a drive down the right, between the Principal's bunker  and the railroad, but the margin is appallingly small, especially with a right to left wind. The safer line and the correct one when the hole is on the right of the green, is to the left of the Principal's Nose. In any case the hole requires a good deal of thought and the weighing of chances. Without the bunkers in the middle of the fairway there would be nothing to do but hit two ordinary golf shots.

On the tenth hole at Lakeside, Max Behr's line of instinct is just as effectively broken, although the wide expanse of fairway is innocent of bunkers until the green is reached. The straight line to the hole is here entirely open; indeed, it is inviting, because of a large bunker over on the right, apparently out of the field of play. But when one plays straight the second shot has to be played over a bunker at the front of the green and stopped very quickly to keep from running over. Here the proper line , except under unusual conditions, is directly over the bunker on the right, which appears to be entirely out of the way. From there the hole opens up to almost any kind of shot, and one has the added help of a favourable slope to the hole.

These are the things that make a golf course interesting - problems which require thought, a certain amount of local knowledge and an accurate appraisement of wind effects and the probable roll of (on?) the ground. When we attempt to take all these things away from the game and make it only a test of the mechanical ability to swing a club we destroy a large measure of its attractiveness.

        Signature - RTJ
Copyright 1933 by The Bell Syndicate, Inc.

[George Pazin]

The example dovetails nicely with something Pete Dye taught me a long time ago.  He said that if you are playing a hole along a sidehill, you will nearly always prefer to have the landing area above the beeline to the hole, instead of below it, because it is people's natural instinct to look toward the hole and then play to the high side.

Can you expand on this a bit more? Was Pete saying this is a good thing, or just that it is the more common instinct? Would he prefer to break this in an effort to make pros more uncomfortable?

[Joe Bausch]

Joe,

I hope you don't mind that, for ease of reading, I have retyped the article you, presumably, scanned and placed in this thread.  Hopefully others will be more encouraged to read it and now easily copy and paste it for future reference.
I was very taken with it and the explanation within. It is the first time I have seen Bobby Jones commenting on Max Behr and I like the explanation very much. Thanks for that. Cheers Colin

That's fine Colin.  Later I noticed I had over-processed the jpeg file resulting in the hard read.  I've since redone it and it is much better now.

[Mark Saltzman]

Finally!

This is day that my training dissecting obtuse fragments from long dead pontificators, learned in Philosophy 101, pays off!

The Line of Instinct is just that, the direction any fool would point their shot because "the hole is over there".  If the architect does nothing to add complications along the line of instinct as it runs from tee to hole, then the line of instinct will be the line of play, and crucially, no thought will intrude on musings on the beverage carts next visit.

To engage the brain, Behr says the architect should ensure that complications intrude on the Line of Instinct, complications that force the golfer to at least consider alternative directions to point his shot.  If the complications on the line of instinct are formidable enough, the architect knows the player will cast about for an alternative route. The knowing architect provides that alternative, expecting many players to turn to this "Line of Charm".  In the course of the entire hole, is this the best play?  Maybe, maybe not. 

Reading into this, I think Behr's thinking was that things get really interesting when the architect muddies the waters by masking the difficulties or lack thereof along the different lines, or forces the player to integrate the movement of the earth into their assessment of the likely outcomes along each line.  Again, any fool can figure out where a straight ball to level ground will end up.  Add in slope, and the brain is engaged. 

That's my take.

Dave

Dave, I think this is well said.

In my opinion, the key is creating the doubt/indecision/temptation in the golfer's mind.  He knows the line he should play on, and yet the temptation (the Line of Instinct) beckons.  I think this concept is an important and powerful one, and a key part to the greatness of many holes.  Pete Dye, I don't know if instinctively or by study, is a master of the concept.

[David Harshbarger]

Mark,

Interesting thought about Riviera 10.  It's reported to be on a dead flat plain, but what if the hole sloped left to right?  Reading into the comments here, now the hole would not work, as the slope left to right would make the play to the left above the line of instinct more attractive.

(I am shocked and awed that you plucked this quote from the way back. Thanks, and thanks for all the tours.)

I haven't played a Dye, or The Old Course, but one thing that seems to characterize that course is that both The Line of Instinct may not be initially observed to be mined with hazards, but once that is known, the Line of Charm(s) are not necessarily unambiguously better, or are only better if the player chooses a shot that matches conditions and the hazards to be navigated.

Doubt/indecision/temptation: you capture it in a nutshell.

[Doug Siebert]

The example dovetails nicely with something Pete Dye taught me a long time ago.  He said that if you are playing a hole along a sidehill, you will nearly always prefer to have the landing area above the beeline to the hole, instead of below it, because it is people's natural instinct to look toward the hole and then play to the high side.

Tom,

Why is it a good thing to put the landing area where the golfer wants to go?  I mean, if you want to make things easy on him, sure, but isn't one of the things an architect wants to do to create difficulty by making the golfer's instincts be the wrong play, and going against his instincts be the right play?

This is why I love this "line of charm" / "line of instinct" thing.  With a long dogleg it's obvious you don't want to play at the green, it's when there's a small dogleg, a 'S' bend in the fairway or an offset fairway that this can really get you.

The best use of it I've ever seen is on a course local to me, on a 565 yard par 5.  The tee is about 10 feet to the right of a boundary fence, and the green is about 30-35 feet right of the fence, which runs dead straight for the entire length of the hole.   The fairway, however, isn't straight, it sort of bends out to the right and then back to the left.  The kicker is that the fairway bend isn't really visible from the tee, you can only see about 200 yards out from the tee and then the last 100 yards or so to the green in the distance, the rest of the fairway containing almost all the bend is below your line of sight.  There's a short wide mound just left of the fairway exactly between the teebox and green.  Man does it look like such an obvious play to aim it over that mound!  Even though I know that's the wrong direction it still beckons every time I step onto the teebox.  Fiendishly evil design....I love it!!  Taking that line lands you in the rough, and going really long on that line gets into long grass that'll cost you the ball.  The center of the generously wide fairway is about 60 yards right of that spot for a 300 yard drive, but you'd never know it from the teebox - you want to aim about about 15* right of the green, which really goes against one's instincts since you don't want to a make a 565 yard hole longer than it already is.

There are no trees or other features that would have prevented running the hole straight from the tee to green, with boundary fence on the left awaiting a hook, but that hole has been done a million times, and would have been far less interesting.