News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #75 on: October 25, 2014, 06:38:44 AM »
Brian

On reflection I think you're correct in that my post was poorly stated. Much requested and discussed but very rarely implemented. I suppose what I was trying to say is that I disagree/dislike much of the clamour.

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #76 on: October 25, 2014, 07:46:26 AM »
I'll chirp in with at least partial defence of Ryan's point. There does tend to be a somewhat black and white mentality towards trees which implies that you're either pro trees or anti trees. Such simplification isn't necessarily helpful, although anyone can be forgiven for concluding that it's the only way to get the message across to the average club member. Start assessing each tree on its individual strategic merits and before you know it exceptions are being made for the most misplaced of stumps because uncle Thomas once had a more than fortuitous hole in one via its branches.

But all trees, strategically speaking, are not equal. Swinley Forest isn't bad as a result of being build through, er, Swinley Forest. The long dogleg par 4 I played the other day with a copse of trees on the corner of the dogleg at about 320 yards were clearly committing a crime, as was that lone oak smack back in front of another green.
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #77 on: October 25, 2014, 08:23:59 AM »
Ironically, in my opinion my home course would benefit greatly from a programme of tree clearance.

Horses for courses and all that.

I was fortunate to play a few of the surrey heaths this week: St Georges Hill, West Hill and Worplesdon. Of the 3, I believe Worplesdon had done extensive tree felling. It was by far the wettest and the heather was nowhere near as healthy and prevalent as at the other two. I looked through a few old threads about West Hill and many concerns were expressed about the trees. The turf is healthy, the heather plentiful, I wouldn't taken any trees out.

Chris Pearson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #78 on: October 25, 2014, 04:40:46 PM »
I tend to fall into the Mackenzie school of thought here—specifically, hunting for lost balls (and losing balls) considerably reduces the pleasure of golf.

Water hazards, forced carries, and OB are often identified as the culprits here, but I can accept these as part of the game. Sure, some routings that crisscross man-made ponds on nearly every hole are ridiculous, but unless you live in a place like Florida, courses that commit these sins are easy to avoid.

The real problem, as I see it, has two consistent manifestations:

  • Unplayable terrain (super thick grasses, shrubbery, rocky outcroppings, etc) WAY too close to fairways (and oftentimes not even marked with red stakes or OB stakes)
  • Groups of trees with low branches and unplayable undergrowth in the field of play (again, often rarely demarcated as hazards)

As a player, there is nothing worse than blocking a drive into an unmarked black hole, failing to find your ball, and then taking a "walk of shame" back to the tee to try and salvage a double bogey after hitting 3 off the tee. That's not golf—that's torture. I'm confident Mackenzie would agree.

Certainly, some of the "unplayable terrain" identified above adds to the local flavor of a course, but wherever these elements are retained, great care should be given to marking them as hazards where stroke and distance are the penalty (and not effectively OB, which takes bogey out of play).

Furthermore, huge clumps of trees—as well as even evenly spaced trees lining fairways—are all too common among courses of all types (in the US, at least). As far as I'm concerned, the presence of trees along fairways massively reduces options off the tee. In effect, the strategy becomes "hit it straight, or else," and that removes the heroic aspect of golf that is so exciting on links courses.

Tall (but sparse) grasses, bunkers, longer approaches, and hillocks are perfectly acceptable penalties for offline drives, but fatal penalties for poor tee shots likely do more to harm interest in golf than people currently realize. Yes, you should be rewarded for hitting it straight, but at the same time, you shouldn't be killed for hitting a ball offline, either.

After all, even one heroic shot can transform a round, but if there are no opportunities for heroic recoveries (and BS line drive punches under and around trees don't count for your average player), then a distinct and exciting element of golf has been lost.

Based on what I've read, I think Mackenzie would agree :D

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #79 on: October 25, 2014, 06:34:23 PM »
I tend to fall into the Mackenzie school of thought here—specifically, hunting for lost balls (and losing balls) considerably reduces the pleasure of golf.

Water hazards, forced carries, and OB are often identified as the culprits here, but I can accept these as part of the game. Sure, some routings that crisscross man-made ponds on nearly every hole are ridiculous, but unless you live in a place like Florida, courses that commit these sins are easy to avoid.

The real problem, as I see it, has two consistent manifestations:

  • Unplayable terrain (super thick grasses, shrubbery, rocky outcroppings, etc) WAY too close to fairways (and oftentimes not even marked with red stakes or OB stakes)
  • Groups of trees with low branches and unplayable undergrowth in the field of play (again, often rarely demarcated as hazards)

As a player, there is nothing worse than blocking a drive into an unmarked black hole, failing to find your ball, and then taking a "walk of shame" back to the tee to try and salvage a double bogey after hitting 3 off the tee. That's not golf—that's torture. I'm confident Mackenzie would agree.

Certainly, some of the "unplayable terrain" identified above adds to the local flavor of a course, but wherever these elements are retained, great care should be given to marking them as hazards where stroke and distance are the penalty (and not effectively OB, which takes bogey out of play).

Furthermore, huge clumps of trees—as well as even evenly spaced trees lining fairways—are all too common among courses of all types (in the US, at least). As far as I'm concerned, the presence of trees along fairways massively reduces options off the tee. In effect, the strategy becomes "hit it straight, or else," and that removes the heroic aspect of golf that is so exciting on links courses.

Tall (but sparse) grasses, bunkers, longer approaches, and hillocks are perfectly acceptable penalties for offline drives, but fatal penalties for poor tee shots likely do more to harm interest in golf than people currently realize. Yes, you should be rewarded for hitting it straight, but at the same time, you shouldn't be killed for hitting a ball offline, either.

After all, even one heroic shot can transform a round, but if there are no opportunities for heroic recoveries (and BS line drive punches under and around trees don't count for your average player), then a distinct and exciting element of golf has been lost.

Based on what I've read, I think Mackenzie would agree :D

+1

Excellent post, Chris.

Clearly you're new here and brain rot hasn't begun to set in yet.  :D
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Brett_Morrissy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #80 on: October 25, 2014, 09:47:44 PM »
Thomas, thanks for a couple of really great topics/threads.

I still don't understand an architects refusal to remove a cool tree/shrub that sits between you (in a deep pot style bunker off the edge of a FW) and the green 85m away. Especially when said vegetation is prickly, nasty business, and only a few paces from the forward lip of the bunker - so unless you can perfectly execute a steep bunker shot from a small deep pot 85 m, you are in trouble. Wipe.
:(
@theflatsticker

Neil White

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #81 on: October 26, 2014, 04:08:44 PM »
Thomas,

A bit late to the party with this one but it needs saying........

The >90 degree dog-leg......



If you're not convinced try watching this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm26byKURA4

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #82 on: October 26, 2014, 06:04:32 PM »
Thomas,

A bit late to the party with this one but it needs saying........

The >90 degree dog-leg......



If you're not convinced try watching this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm26byKURA4

Oh my f.......

No doubt the one brain in that room felt pretty lonely.
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #83 on: October 26, 2014, 08:41:03 PM »
Asked and answered before but just don't like collection areas . 

Jim Sherma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #84 on: October 26, 2014, 08:54:02 PM »
Wow - that looks utterly awful. The phrase "Oh the Humanity!" surged into my head.

Thomas,

A bit late to the party with this one but it needs saying........

The >90 degree dog-leg......



If you're not convinced try watching this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm26byKURA4

John Connolly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #85 on: October 26, 2014, 09:01:48 PM »
I guess technically it's <90 not >90. An acute angle.

Of "greater" severity is what you're describing. And man is that one nasty hole. I'm not sure it's just because of the severe dog leg. That hole's bigger problem is the approach in. Claustrophobic much?
« Last Edit: October 26, 2014, 09:04:10 PM by John Connolly »
"And yet - and yet, this New Road will some day be the Old Road, too."

                                                      Neil Munroe (1863-1930)

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #86 on: October 27, 2014, 05:59:52 AM »
I guess technically it's <90 not >90. An acute angle.


No, it's more than ninety, because in play you're turning through the outside part of the angle, not the inside.
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #87 on: October 27, 2014, 06:12:21 AM »
I guess technically it's <90 not >90. An acute angle.


No, it's more than ninety, because in play you're turning through the outside part of the angle, not the inside.

I was thinking the angle is more like 100, an obtuse angle.

Ciao
« Last Edit: October 27, 2014, 06:21:39 AM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #88 on: October 27, 2014, 06:19:13 AM »
Actually I just realised I expressed this badly. The angle of the dogleg is the angle off the straight ahead line.
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Neil White

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #89 on: October 27, 2014, 06:40:56 AM »
I guess technically it's <90 not >90. An acute angle.


No, it's more than ninety, because in play you're turning through the outside part of the angle, not the inside.

I was thinking the angle is more like 100, an obtuse angle.

Sean,

Ciao

Sean,

Agreed - I wrote obtuse and then changed it before posting - guess my high school geometry lessons didn't sink in as well as I'd hoped.

Neil.

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #90 on: October 27, 2014, 07:04:45 AM »
I guess technically it's <90 not >90. An acute angle.

Of "greater" severity is what you're describing. And man is that one nasty hole. I'm not sure it's just because of the severe dog leg. That hole's bigger problem is the approach in. Claustrophobic much?

Possibly not of greater severity but I did think something similar. I'd be fuming if I played the layup supposedly well and found, because my ball had rolled out to 193 yards as opposed to the required 191 yards!
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #91 on: October 27, 2014, 07:06:04 AM »
Thomas,

A bit late to the party with this one but it needs saying........

The >90 degree dog-leg......



If you're not convinced try watching this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm26byKURA4

Have we ever had a World's Worst 18?
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #92 on: October 27, 2014, 08:15:16 AM »
What is the green in the corner for?

Jon

John Connolly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #93 on: October 27, 2014, 11:58:56 AM »


Sean,

Agreed - I wrote obtuse and then changed it before posting - guess my high school geometry lessons didn't sink in as well as I'd hoped.

Neil.



Well, this is now very interesting to me. It seems intuitive that you'd measure the dogleg angle as you'd measure any angle - in the example shown here you'd measure "out" to where the ball would land and then back "in" slightly, giving you an acute, <90 angle. Whether or not you'd play to the "outside" of the apex of the angle wouldn't change whether that angle was acute or obtuse - so I'm not sure I'd buy Adam's explanation of why it's appropriate to characterize it as >90. The only way it could be considered >90 is if the dogleg's supplement angle was being measured, and that would seem like an odd way to characterize/measure a dogleg. I realize it's semantics - it's seems pretty clear that we're all in agreement that the hole is of questionable design. The flyby in the link makes that entry into the green seem very uninviting.

"And yet - and yet, this New Road will some day be the Old Road, too."

                                                      Neil Munroe (1863-1930)

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #94 on: October 27, 2014, 12:14:46 PM »


Great post Neil. The hole is so, um, different, that I'm almost keen to play it!

Made me chuckle to see that the curved red line shows the front edge of the green to be 209, 202 and 153 yds from the white, yellow and red tees respectively. I wonder if there are marker posts on the line from each tee behind the green to aim at and how tall they are (sic!).

atb

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #95 on: October 27, 2014, 12:22:02 PM »


Sean,

Agreed - I wrote obtuse and then changed it before posting - guess my high school geometry lessons didn't sink in as well as I'd hoped.

Neil.



Well, this is now very interesting to me. It seems intuitive that you'd measure the dogleg angle as you'd measure any angle - in the example shown here you'd measure "out" to where the ball would land and then back "in" slightly, giving you an acute, <90 angle. Whether or not you'd play to the "outside" of the apex of the angle wouldn't change whether that angle was acute or obtuse - so I'm not sure I'd buy Adam's explanation of why it's appropriate to characterize it as >90. The only way it could be considered >90 is if the dogleg's supplement angle was being measured, and that would seem like an odd way to characterize/measure a dogleg. I realize it's semantics - it's seems pretty clear that we're all in agreement that the hole is of questionable design. The flyby in the link makes that entry into the green seem very uninviting.



 ::)

If someone says the hole doglegs 3 degrees, do you come back practically to the same place as the tee?
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Neil White

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #96 on: October 27, 2014, 12:28:25 PM »
At times like this a diagram is invaluable  ;)




John Connolly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #97 on: October 27, 2014, 12:29:55 PM »
Exactly. I don't know why a different convention would be used to describe doglegs than what was taught in grammar school. I mean, I know we golf hobbyinsts are brilliant but ...  ;D
"And yet - and yet, this New Road will some day be the Old Road, too."

                                                      Neil Munroe (1863-1930)

John Connolly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #98 on: October 27, 2014, 12:33:09 PM »
At times like this a diagram is invaluable  ;)





Brilliant. If that is the design convention, then doglegs are measured as either the supplement of the near angle or the actual angle from a line extending straight from the tee. Thanks, Neil.
"And yet - and yet, this New Road will some day be the Old Road, too."

                                                      Neil Munroe (1863-1930)

Neil White

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What design feature do you dislike the most?
« Reply #99 on: October 27, 2014, 01:13:47 PM »
What is the green in the corner for?

Jon

Jon,

It looks as though it could've been the original 7th green - and that they have extended the 8th so much that to play it as such would mean crossing the driving zone of the 8th - hence the little beauty that is the 7th now........