Unfair holes - The 5th at Bandon Dunes ?

[BThomps]

It seems this is an issue as to the definition of unfair. A hole that gives no option at all to the player and makes them hit a shot they are not capable of is what I would call unfair.  A hole that puts obstacles in the line of the preferred line of play yet gives other options is just good design.  That hole is interesting because you must take into account the wind direction, your own ability, and your guts when you decide how to hit your opening shot.  If the wind is against a couple of those options are eliminated, ie. going down the left side, and the player must choose to challenge the right side or lay it back and take the big number out of play.  To me it is interesting and fun.  Not unfair

With regard to par.  That is just an arbitrary figure to put on a scorecard usually with respect to the yardage of the hole only.  The weather conditions, yardage, and golfers ability determine what the real par of the hole is for each individual golfer.  On the 5th at Bandon, with the wind howling against, 5 is a good score for anybody.  The challenge on that hole is straight forward.  The more aggressive you get with the hole the more precise your shots must be.  I thought that was the makeup of most good golf holes.

What do you think of other holes with obstacles in the middle of the fairways/greens?  Like the 6th at Riviera or the 18th at Pebble.

[John Foley]

I'm a victim of Patrick's exact problem. Played there (summer '00) on a relatively calm day and hit a good drive right into the gunk. Never found the ball. I don't remember how I felt about it at the time, but afterwards reliving the round I do remeber thinking "Why is that stuff there?". I think the penalty for missing that shot by a little is excessive. I wouldn't have a problem w/ a bunker no matter how deep. I've never been a big fan of hazards which allow no recovery, especially those in the middle of a fairway! That hole has enough straetgy w/out the ball-gobbling gunk. If the gunk's been cleaned up then it's somewhat better. Still, the penalty is harsh.

As for the tree's on 18 at pebble, yoiu not going to loose the ball in them

[Patrick_Mucci]

BThomps,

You can't take a lost ball penalty of stroke and distance for hitting the ball in the bunker at # 6 at Riviera or behind the tree on # 18 at Pebble Beach.

By your definition is the 17th at TPC unfair because there are no options ?

Having no options isn't my definition of unfair.
Many great par 3's have no options.

Hitting a near perfect tee shot, in the middle of the fairway, on a hole with dire consequences on both sides of the fairways, and having a lost ball in the gunk is excessive, and unfair.

[Dan Kelly]

I haven't played the hole, so am not qualified to comment on the question, but from what I've gathered from this thread...

Patrick keeps saying that the "clump" is in the middle of the fairway. From what I've heard here, it sounds as though it's on the left of the right fairway and on the right of the left fairway -- not in the middle of "the" fairway at all. Am I misunderstanding something?

I'm curious about what Rich said. What's on the tee side of the clump? Open fairway all the way up to the clump? Is there any forced carry? Is it a wide target?

When Rich suggested 2-iron off the tee, Patrick replied: "Hitting a 2-iron off the tee would leave me a wood into an extremely narrow fairway with penal surroundings.
If I elect to lay up short of the narrow fairway, it will leave me a longer shot into the green. I prefer to use the most perfect lie in golf, a ball on a tee to execute a demanding shot, rather then a ball on the ground."

To which I say: Well, of course you prefer that! But isn't one of the hallmarks of good architecture that it forces you to think about whether what you prefer isn't necessarily the smartest way to play a hole?

Isn't one of the hallmarks of good architecture that it inspires a player to think it all through, from tee through green -- and then to choose what the hole prefers?

From what I've read here -- potentially exceedingly punitive landing area for driver, potentially punitive green surroundings -- it sounds as though a player somewhat less skilled than Patrick might conclude, after a few rounds at Bandon, that the best way to a par there would be long-iron short of the gunk, iron layup, pitch and putt. Beautiful! Sounds like a great hole. (As someone said up above: Who says every green should be hit in regulation?)

Here's my guess -- and as I said above, I'm not qualified to make it, but anyway: Make that gunk a bunker, even a very punitive one, and almost everyone will blast away with a driver. Lesser players will aim right at it, figuring they can't hit what they're aiming at, anyway. The best players will aim the driver right or left, with a fade or a draw -- comfortable in the knowledge that, even if they miss their aim, the worst the hazard will exact is a one-stroke toll.

And there goes the thinking.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

Never playing or seeing the golf course and hole in question never disqualified others from offering their expert opinion, so don't feel so bad.

The three blind men examining the elephant didn't get it right, and neither did you.

A severe bunker or dune would serve the same strategic purpose as the gunk, but without a lost ball penalty.

Do you consider a 150 shot into a 2-3 club length wind a pitch and putt shot ?  I don't.

You really need to see and play the hole to comment intelligently on it.  

[CHrisB]

Here it is.



Patrick,
Simple, serious question: Why should golf holes be fair?

[Dan Kelly]

From www.bandondunesgolf.com: "Remove your attention from the breathtaking scenery long enough to muster the concentration necessary to drive the ball into the right half of the split fairway. Since the hole will play directly against the prevailing wind, it may be necessary to consider conceding this as a three shot hole, rather than risking a big number."

Based on the pictures and the drawing (and on Patrick's question about a 150-yard shot into a stiff wind), I'd have to say: Playing it as a three-shot hole would certainly not eliminate the risk of a big number!

Are all of those landing areas -- short of the gunk, left of the gunk, right of the gunk, in front of the green -- as narrow as they look? Or are the landing areas deceptively large? The whole thing is giving me a touch of claustrophobia.

It looks as though only a MADMAN would try to hit that left fairway! That's an indictment of a split fairway, to my way of "thinking." (I put the quotation marks there in case these remarks are just as unintelligent as my previous post.)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

AHA,  Now you see what I'm talking about  

You see how narrow and dangerous the tee shot is.

What you don't see is the 3 club wind in your face, which exacerbates the problems.

Redanman,

Only a 224 and 206 yard carry

Into a 3 club, prevailing wind, or more ?

Probably plays 246 and 266 yard carriy, with the wind exagerating any mis-hits.

It's a wonderful hole, a challenging hole, but I still feel that the gunk/underbrush/gorse will cause near perfect drives to suffer lost balls, stroke and distance, with the golfer facing the same difficult tee shot.

A wonderful hole can still have an unfair element.

[Dan Kelly]

AHA,  Now you see what I'm talking about  

Well, yes, I think I do -- though, of course, who can tell a thing from pictures?  

What I don't like about the hole -- to judge by the picture and the drawing! -- is the uniform narrowness of the ... 150 yards? ... leading to the green. It looks to me as though an average player determined to play the hole SMART, as a three-shot hole (especially into the wind), has no way to play it SMART that isn't, at the same time, very risky.

I ask those who've played it: Is that runway to the green so narrow, and the price of missing it so high, that only a MADMAN would attempt a layup there? That's what it looks like to me.

It's a wonderful hole, a challenging hole, but I still feel that the gunk/underbrush/gorse will cause near perfect drives to suffer lost balls, stroke and distance, with the golfer facing the same difficult tee shot.

A wonderful hole can still have an unfair element.

Don't you really mean "stupid," rather than "unfair"?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

No, I meant that the gunk was an unfair element due to the probablity of suffering a lost ball or unplayable lie.

MThomps,

You never answered my question about the 17th hole at TPC.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

Why would an architect create a five yard wide driving zone ?

Why force someone to carry a ball 250+ yards to reach the ideal approach zone, with a potential lost ball penalty for failure to carry ?

I love the hole, but dislike the gunk feature in the middle of the drive zone on a hole that plays into a prevailing wind of substantial velocity.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

You didn't have to give it any thought, you played it downwind and from a forward tee.

Try it into the wind and from the back tees,

Then let me know your thoughts.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

Back tee to carry is only 224.  I seem to remember hitting driver over it and it was downwind, I admit.

Playing the hole downwind, as you claim you did, in your post above, is dramatically different from playing that hole into a 3-4 club wind.

A downwind carry of 224 is dramatically different then a carry of 224 into a 3-4 club wind, especially when the driving area in that zone is narrow and lined with gorse and underbrush.

Play if from the back tees into the teeth of a 3-4 club wind, and then tell me what you think, based on your actual experience.  Also tell us what you made on the hole, with the ball you tee off with.  

[Mike_Cirba]

I ask those who've played it: Is that runway to the green so narrow, and the price of missing it so high, that only a MADMAN would attempt a layup there? That's what it looks like to me.

At least now I know why I went left purposefully off the tee (and surprisingly, successfully).  

Sanity is for the unimaginative.  

[Mike Hendren]

I like Patrick's premise.  How often to you see a small pond, better yet a tub, or water in the middle of a fairway?  Even then the penalty would only be a stroke.  

The equivalent to losing a ball in such a situation is to place a circle of white stakes in the middle of the fairway, thus yielding the same stroke-and-distance penalty as a lost ball.  

There is a disconnect between the punishment and crime.  

Mike

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Shame on you Mike! Haven't you ever heard of a hazard in the middle of the fairway?

What about Cypress Point #8 and it's inverted dune-like bunker that was once totally natural gunk & grunge? That "natural feature" interfears after a harrowing carry off of the tee, and if you play it left to the lower side of the fairway, your blinded by that dune. while the holes and the strategies are far different their intent is the same.

What about the Bottle Hole at NGLA? while years of cleanliness have somewhat changed the face somewhat, the intent is the same as #5 at Bandon Dunes, and that is a wise decision from the tee must be made, and then an even more wise decision on where to place the approach in relation to the pin. Bandon uses the element of blindess in that ahllway of a approach. The Bottle uses the height of its target, as well as an extra added element of blindness which is aided by deception on where the pin actually is. (Can you believe it? I'm singing the praises of the National Golf Links of America!  )

Once again the holes are completely different, but the strategies are exactly that--strategerieries or however our president pronounces it.

[Mike Hendren]

Tommy,

I'm not sure whether your public shaming of me is a badge of honor or a wound from which I shall not recover   Nonetheless, my point, and I hope Mr. Mucci's, is that the hazard in the fairway should cost its victim one, but not two shots, not to mention $3.95 for the straight flying ProV1 and the most embarassing walk in golf.  

That is all.

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

And you might be getting carried away.

You would have us believe that you drove the ball 85 yards from the green, into the extremely narrow neck of fairway, which is a drive of 360 yards or more.  Possible ?

You're contention that you can drive a ball in excess of 224 yards into a 3 to 4 club wind is...............

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike,
Never a badge of honor, but hoping that their is enough integrity left in this Game to far out balance that Titliest (which in my opinion really isn't a golf ball at all.)

I'm not questioning your integrity, I'm relying on it!

[Mike Erdmann]

Since I last played there, I believe they removed the furthest mound from the tee and cleared some more room around the green, so I suppose the hole might play differently now than from what I remember in that you're now more enticed to play towards the left side of the fairway.  I've just never considered those gorse covered mounds to be in the middle of the fairway.  Rather, they're on the left side of the target for me and I've just always played to the right.  When you're playing into the strong summer (northerly) wind, playing the left side and going for the green in two is a huge gamble.  I can understand what Pat's saying in that the "most ideal" area for the approach shot forces you to play over the gunk, but in a way, hasn't the architect gotten the best of you if you fall for the trap and try to put your ball in that location?  Those mounds force so much decision making on the tee that the hole would be completely different without them, and in my opinion, it'd be a lesser hole.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Erdmann,

My objection has to do with the onerous nature of the gunk.

A lost ball seems an excessive penalty for an almost perfect drive.

[Doug Wright]

I haven't had time to read this thread but in my mind the 5th is anything but unfair. There is ample room to the right when into the wind and over the gunk with the wind or if no wind. A damn tough hole into the wind, yes--unfair, no.

Unfair is the 3rd at Bandon Dunes into a strong wind, where regular players playing the regular tees or strong players playing the back tees can't reach the fairway and have no layup, bailout or other alternative--just a barranca short of the fairway.  I've seen this happen when I visited Bandon and faced a south wind (opposite of the wind that might cause a problem on the 5th).

All The Best,

 

[SPDB]

Pat - maybe this has been asked and answered, but I don't have the stamina to read through and check. If the gunk were a bunker, would you have the same quarrel? Isn't this akin to a cross bunker?

Also, isn't a well struck tee shot one that successfully avoids trouble? A tee shot that heads for the hazard (or similar ground) is in error, no?

[Norbert P]

 The outcroppings were there before the course was laid out, therefore they are appropriately natural.  If all the danger was on the edges we'd go back to the RTJ years.  The islands are unique and have an impact on the game and the psyche.  I doubt there are very many golf balls lost in such little area.  Like Mike E says, they're actually just on the left side of the obvious (right) fairway.  
  If the wind is from my back, I try to clear them, if not, I go right, hopefully.

  Pat, if the mounds were mowed and denuded of the shrubbery, would that make it more fair?  Less disturbing?
 
  I detest looking for golf balls but this area isn't a cornfield of angst but an oasis of character.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug Wright,

I didn't say that the 5th hole was unfair, only that a lone element of it is unfair.

SPDB,

I did say, in an earlier post, that a bunker or dune would be a more suitable substitute.  A lost ball in the middle of the fairway is excessive, as is an unplayable lie.

Slag,

Over the years, I'd say that I've been a consistently good driver of the ball, and perhaps because of that, a little on the aggresive side, but I know trouble and what to avoid when I see it.

Aiming at a narrow strip of fairway is difficult enough, but when you have to do it into a 3 to 4 club wind, with both sides of the fairway lined with gorse, lost ball and unplayable lie potential right in the middle of the fairway, AND the need to hit a long drive if you hope to hit the green in regulation, that gunk, which can and does result in a stroke and distance penalty, is too extreme, too penal, and as such, unfair.

A bunker or dune, which could provide a one-half, one or two stroke penalty would seem to be a better hazard,  while still creating decisions from the tee.