Three Choices On Every Shot

[Wade Whitehead]

In an interview following this week's Open Phil Mickelson was asked about his caddy's role in his win.  He said something like "I had at least three distinct choices on every shot and he made sure I picked the correct one."

Could it be said that the great courses offer multiple choices on most every shot?  I think it could.  My favorite courses don't just present themselves differently under different conditions; they require the player to choose from among many options, over and over again.

What courses require the player to choose on every shot?  Ballyhack certainly does.

What courses don't?  Harbour Town, though I like it very much, doesn't seem to.

As I try to identify a singular hallmark that the greatest courses share, this may be it.

WW

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wade,

I would think that US Open courses would NOT meet that standard.

I also think Phil's comment had more to do with playing in the wind.

[Phil McDade]

Wade,

I would think that US Open courses would NOT meet that standard.

I also think Phil's comment had more to do with playing in the wind.

And very fast and firm conditions.

[Tom_Doak]

I actually think some architects work too hard to try and make this happen, resulting in too many bunkers / hazards.  I agree with Patrick that the wind is what makes for more options on links courses.

There should always be at least two options -- an aggressive choice and a more conservative one -- but only the most boring of courses fail to offer that much.

[Andrew Buck]

I actually think some architects work too hard to try and make this happen, resulting in too many bunkers / hazards.  I agree with Patrick that the wind is what makes for more options on links courses.

There should always be at least two options -- an aggressive choice and a more conservative one -- but only the most boring of courses fail to offer that much.

Of course this has to be a little dependent on pin position and turf playing conditions.  If there is a center pin from a fairway lie on receptive greens, you still may prove options on line and if they want to leave it short or long, but I would think it's harder to provide club options (for the tour caliber player). 

Wind and firmer sandy soil can change that a lot. 

[RJ_Daley]

TD, besides aggressive and conservative, can those two options also take into consideration the skilled and weaker player, giving both the high and low end of the skill spectrum, aggressive and conservative options?  That then multiplies the options from two to at least 4;  the strong player's aggressive and conservative options, and the weak player's aggressive and conservative options.  Mostly, I guess that implies width to me, with LZs at shorter distances off the tee providing different lines of play to different lay-up areas for the weak player, and risk rewards at greater distances off the tee and also varied lines of play for the strong player.   This is not a fully thought out question, but conceptually, I think width at specific distances and greens with varied slopes from varied directions of lines of play would also mean larger greens with more varied surrounds slopes.  Which doesn't point to the most economical course design.  So, there is that....

[Jason Thurman]

I don't fault a course like Harbour Town for limiting options a bit. I think it's the right design for the site. Likewise, I think Muirfield presents an appropriate mental test on its site.

I guess for me, every course should challenge a player mentally. While they do it in different ways, there's no doubt Harbour Town and Muirfield both present a mental challenge. Muirfield requires you to choose the correct option, while Harbour Town requires you to stay patient and disciplined and play percentages. Both are valid, enjoyable, and have a place in the game.

[Lyne Morrison]

RJ - I believe options for both skilled and weaker play can be addressed at the tee if not through the green.

In general I have observed that where a lack of width is present the weaker player may be left with the choice between a defensive or conservative line only, rather than the more interesting and rewarding aggressive vs conservative option. To me this is an unnecessary deterrent to the enjoyment of the game, particularly where carries that do not affect strong play are evident.   

While fairway play and setup is more random in nature, overly defensive golf presented at the tee hardly makes for interesting golf for the masses imo and the merit of the design becomes questionable.

Lyne

[Tom_Doak]

TD, besides aggressive and conservative, can those two options also take into consideration the skilled and weaker player, giving both the high and low end of the skill spectrum, aggressive and conservative options?  That then multiplies the options from two to at least 4;  the strong player's aggressive and conservative options, and the weak player's aggressive and conservative options.  Mostly, I guess that implies width to me, with LZs at shorter distances off the tee providing different lines of play to different lay-up areas for the weak player, and risk rewards at greater distances off the tee and also varied lines of play for the strong player.   This is not a fully thought out question, but conceptually, I think width at specific distances and greens with varied slopes from varied directions of lines of play would also mean larger greens with more varied surrounds slopes.  Which doesn't point to the most economical course design.  So, there is that....

RJ:

In theory, there are millions of options, since every player has a slightly different set of strengths.  [I suppose Phil Mickelson could have opted to gear down to our level and hit a right-handed 5-iron from 175 yards; thank God Bones didn't let him try that.]

But how many realistic options is any particular player going to consider?  Two, or maybe three, if there's a sensible compromise between aggressive and conservative routes.  But then that compromise is probably the conservative route.

[Matt MacIver]

There should always be at least two options -- an aggressive choice and a more conservative one -- but only the most boring of courses fail to offer that much.

Tom - I (think) I know a lot of Doak 4s in this category - penal fairway bunkers either side of the fairway with no benefit for picking the right line nor distance.  So are most 4s really 3s...?

[David_Elvins]

As I try to identify a singular hallmark that the greatest courses share, this may be it.

I agree with you Wade.

Average courses make me think I played a bad shot.  Great courses lure me into thinking I played the wrong shot. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Wind and width are a great combination.

While playing Pine Valley with some GCA fans, we were discussing how great PV was with it's width, but, how it might be even greater if it enjoyed the winds that sweep Sebonack, NGLA, Shinnecock and Southampton.

Wind with width affords the golfer an inordinate number of options, all of which make for a more enjoyable round.

Our discussion transitioned from PV to Sebonack and how, despite generous fairways, 9 holes at PV required aerial approaches (2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14, 17 and 18.  That's a high demand, especially when you consider the consequences for failure.

I think Sebonack's width is one of it's outstanding features.

[JESII]

RJ,

I think the idea is for each player on their own to see multiple realistic ways to play the shot, not to aggregate all the different shots all players could come up with.

The course itself can do a little of this, but conditions carry the bulk between ground firmness, ground speed, wind and temperature.

Hintingdon Valley, at its best, does this better than any non-links course I've played because the ground conditions frequently meet the standard and the green contours cause fits from the fairway.

[Andrew Buck]

Wind with width affords the golfer an inordinate number of options, all of which make for a more enjoyable round.

I don't know, I've always rather enjoyed 80 with little wind.  Curse of growing up in the midwest and modern era I guess.

Having said that, there is no doubt that a reasonable wind automatically brings in two options on every shot.  On cross winds, the choice to work the ball with it for distance, or against it for control.  In downwind and headwind shots the choice between more normal and knockdown.