The case against "play it forward" (as well as "play it back")

[Ulrich Mayring]

How can a par 3, that plays between 135 and 240 yards have any integrity to its design?

How ugly must a par 5 be, if the first 250 yards are just tee boxes?

Case closed.

Ulrich

[Brent Hutto]

So do you recommend the single set of tees be placed at 7,500 yards or at 5,500 yards?

[David_Tepper]

"How can a par 3, that plays between 135 and 240 yards have any integrity to its design?"

The reality is that you can have various players of varying ages, sexes and abilities hitting pretty much the same club on such a par-3.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ulrich,

I think your point illustrates that this is a substantive dilemma that architects face today.

[Patrick_Mucci]

So do you recommend the single set of tees be placed at 7,500 yards or at 5,500 yards?

Brent,

Do you think that the 8th at Troon would work at 180, 200 and 220 yards ?

[Ulrich Mayring]

So do you recommend the single set of tees be placed at 7,500 yards or at 5,500 yards?

Depends on the golfer you wish to attract with this course. I don't mind a second set of tees, but anything more than that should be on another course.

Also, I don't think that a good golfer hitting a 7 iron from the back tee, me hitting the 7 iron from a middle tee and my wife hitting a 7 iron from the forward tees will result in three identical shot shapes.

Ulrich

[Gary Slatter]

Ulrich, you have stumbled upon one of modern golf's greatest design problems.  Women have had the same problem for years, I first noticed it at TPC Sawgrass, the holes my wife got to play were so different from mine (except 17).   Two sets of tees work for me, maybe drag another set in for Championships.

[David_Tepper]

"Also, I don't think that a good golfer hitting a 7 iron from the back tee, me hitting the 7 iron from a middle tee and my wife hitting a 7 iron from the forward tees will result in three identical shot shapes."

Ulrich -

I certainly did not say that it would, but it certainly comes a lot closer than 3 players teeing off within a band of 10 yards, with one player hitting a 3-wood, one player hitting a 5-iron and one player hitting a 9-iron. Those 3 shots will not even remotely have "identical shot shapes."

By the way, what is your definition of "architectural integrity?"

DT     

[Brent Hutto]

I'm having trouble seeing where this could head other than another instance of the eternal "The Ball Goes Too Damn Far!!!!" thread.

[noonan]

The poster child for a couple long tee boxes.

[Ulrich Mayring]

Well, what is artistic integrity in general? Like, say, for an author, a painter or a musician? If they are trying to pander to everyone, then the quality of their product suffers. They just have to make too many compromises, if they are trying to maximise their potential audience.

Same in golf. Build a deep pot bunker in front of the green and the old lady trying to roll it on from 100 yards will end up in the pot and take three more shots in there, before picking up the ball. Whereas the pro will usually fly the pot and if not, will easily get out. But for the middle tee players the pot might be an exciting feature. Architectural integrity means you put the pot bunker in and get rid of the forward and back tees. Or, if you are building a course for the old lady, you get rid of the back and middle tees and turn the pot bunker into a larger, but shallower sand area.

Ulrich

[Garland Bayley]

Did you see Tom Doak has been awarded the job to do a second course at Forest Dunes? He has indicated that he has approval to put into practice some of the ideas that he has been wanting to do for some time. One of those ideas is holes at a specific distance differential throughout the whole course. Such a course could have one set of tees and play par 68 for the low handicappers and par 75 for the much weaker hitter. I'm guessing that the land there is such that he will let the land dictate hole lengths, so it may not happen this time, but one can only hope he gets to put that idea into practice. Anybody with a flat piece of prairie want to let Tom work his magic?

[Jason Thurman]

Ulrich, I'm going to take a guess here. Tell me if I'm right.

You like to play somewhere between, say, 6300 and 6600 yards.

[David_Tepper]

"If they are trying to pander to everyone, then the quality of their product suffers. They just have to make too many compromises, if they are trying to maximise their potential audience."

Sorry Ulrich, but I fail to see how having multiple tee boxes (or lengthy tee boxes that allow for multiple tees) causes the quality of the product to suffer, especially the green sites & surrounds.

With tee boxes ranging from 140 to 200+ yards, a variety of golfers of varying abilities have a least the chance of encountering the green and the green surrounds on relatively similar terms, assuming they are playing from the proper tees. If everyone is teeing off from between 160 & 170 yards, some golfers will have no chance to reach the green and others will be reaching it with an 8- or 9-iron.  
  
Castle Stuart is one of my wife's favorite courses. The main reason she likes it so much is that, on the par-4's, the women's tees are anywhere from 30 to 50 yards in front of the men's tees. If she hits 2 good shots, she actually has a chance to reach the green in two. She gets to encounter the (excellent) green sites in the same manner I do and the same manner the players in the Scottish Open do. What is wrong with that?

DT

[cary lichtenstein]

So I guess the 17th  at the tp cat Sawgrass must be  a piece of %#€¥. Tell that to Sergio

[BHoover]

How can a par 3, that plays between 135 and 240 yards have any integrity to its design?

How ugly must a par 5 be, if the first 250 yards are just tee boxes?

Case closed.

Ulrich

Perhaps not everyone who plays golf is focused on concepts such as architectural integrity? Maybe someone just wants to play the game and have fun.

[Garland Bayley]

I think Ulrich's point is that your wife does not encounter the green site the same way you do no matter what club is used, and you do not encounter it the same way the tour pro does no matter what club is used. You wife cannot hit the ball as high as you do, nor can you hit it as high as the tour pro.

[David_Tepper]

"I think Ulrich's point is that your wife does not encounter the green site the same way you do no matter what club is used, and you do not encounter it the same way the tour pro does no matter what club is used. You wife cannot hit the ball as high as you do, nor can you hit it as high as the tour pro."

Garland -

Well, as I said in my earlier post, if 3 players are hitting roughly the same club into a green, the chances are they are encountering that green site in a far more similar manner than if one player is hitting a 3-wood, the second is hitting a 5-iron and the 3rd is hitting a wedge into that green.  

I understand Ulrich's point. I just happen to think it is flawed and mistaken.

DT

[Joe Sponcia]

Ullrich,

I kind of get your point, but then I don't.  

My club is 7200 yards with 5 sets of tees.  I am not a long hitter, but a low handicap, so the course is fine from that distance.  I believe my wife plays from 5500 and it beats her a bit.  I play Men's league quite often on Tuesday nights, they play from 6500, much different golf course.  Much different hitting a hybrid or long iron vs. a 7-8 iron...but on a normal day, I hardly notice the 'other' tee boxes during my round.  

I played Tobacco Road with my wife in the early spring and am a huge Strantz...but didn't 'get' some of the shots.  I thought it was good, but not nearly as enjoyable as True Blue or Caledonia...but my wife, a legit 39 handicap loved it?  Go figure.

[David_Tepper]

Garland -

By the way, the concept you cite re: Doak at Forest Dunes having different pars for high and low handicaps playing from roughly the same teeing areas is not particularly new.

Royal Dornoch is a par of 70 from the yellow (mens') tees and a par of 76 from the red (ladies'). On most of the holes, the red tees are rarely more than 5 to 10 yards in front of the yellow tees. Most of the courses I have encountered in Scotland have a higher par for the red tees.

DT      

[David_Tepper]

"How ugly must a par 5 be, if the first 250 yards are just tee boxes?"

Ulrich -

Can you cite 3 par-5 holes where the first 250 (or even 200) yards are just tee boxes?

DT

[Peter Pallotta]

I think Ulrich's point is that your wife does not encounter the green site the same way you do no matter what club is used, and you do not encounter it the same way the tour pro does no matter what club is used. You wife cannot hit the ball as high as you do, nor can you hit it as high as the tour pro.

GJ - yes, that's what Ulrich is saying, and then he's adding further complexity by raising the issue of artistic integrity vs pandering to all tastes/needs. But I'd ask, tentatively, why I (as an individual golfer) should care, and why these issues should matter in general to anyone? What I mean is: why is it a problem that every golfer -- say the three types you mention - experiences the same golf hole differently? Don't we all experience everything we encounter in life "differently", especially in a subjective sense? Why should my shot (a 7 iron) into a green have anything in common with my wife's 7 iron or Phil Mickleson's 7 iron? And why is it a problem when an architect tries to use all of his/her skill and imagination and talent to make sure that, while different, those three experiences are each, in their on way and to the relevant golfer, me, my wife, and Phil, enjoyable and challenging? Far from pandering to tastes and losing artistic integrity, isn't it a sign that the architect is trying to fulfill his/her primary task and highest calling, which is to create a field of play for all to enjoy?

Peter

[Garland Bayley]

"I think Ulrich's point is that your wife does not encounter the green site the same way you do no matter what club is used, and you do not encounter it the same way the tour pro does no matter what club is used. You wife cannot hit the ball as high as you do, nor can you hit it as high as the tour pro."

Garland -

Well, as I said in my earlier post, if 3 players are hitting roughly the same club into a green, the chances are they are encountering that green site in a far more similar manner than if one player is hitting a 3-wood, the second is hitting a 5-iron and the 3rd is hitting a wedge into that green.  

I understand Ulrich's point. I just happen to think it is flawed and mistaken.

DT

Good chance the tour pro's 3 wood would stop as well as your 5-iron, and you wife's wedge. Assuming F&F of course.

[David_Tepper]

"Good chance the tour pro's 3 wood would stop as well as your 5-iron, and you wife's wedge.    Assuming F&F of course."

Garland -

I am afraid you too are mistaken. It is my wife's 3-wood, my 5-iron and a big-hitter's wedge.

DT

[Garland Bayley]

Golf was (and should be IMO) a game pitting players against one another. Tee it forward is an ego massaging program for the misguided players that think they are playing against the course. Tee it forward is dishonest from the get go, as it wants you to tee it forward so you can hit wedge into most greens as the pros do. Frankly, that is not golf. Frankly that is just technology gone wild.

Forget what par is and try to get the ball into the hole in fewer strokes than your opponent. Forget a bunch of absurd looking "tee boxes" and play golf by teeing off near the last green, and beating your opponent.










And David, you need to extend your thought processes and take the blinders off. I am not wrong. You just misinterpret.