The Best Strategic Holes Have Highly Penal Hazards. Discuss.

[Paul Gray]

Over to you......

[Tom_Doak]

Absolutely.  I think I said the same thing somewhere in The Anatomy of a Golf Course.

A pretty good test case for this idea is Pacific Dunes.  It's not especially long, and it's pretty wide, but many of the hazards are potential card-wreckers you just have to stay out of ... and yet if you play wide of them all it's really tough to get an approach shot close to the hole.  #6 is a great example.

[Matthew Petersen]

"Most severe" might even be more apt than "most penal."

That bunker Tom references on #6 at PD is not in theory as penal as a water hazard. But even if you won't lose your ball in it, probably, it could well wreck your score worse than any "drop and hit it again" pond could.

[Marc Haring]

I would dearly love to one day play the hole (in my dreams) but reading Ran's review, the penal bunker would not seem to be the one short left but in terms of startegy more the bunker that one has to flirt with off the tee in order to avoid that large pit and i'm not sure if that bunker is a card wrecker. Lovely hole mind.

[Jason Topp]

I do not know whether or not the premise is accurate but there are plenty of examples of very penal hazards on very strategic holes:

Old Course - 14 Hell Bunker, 17 Out of bounds/greenside bunker; 18 Out of bounds

Sand Hills - 7 greenside bunker

Augusta National 11, 13 - pond, creek (although I am not sure 11 is a strategic hole any longer)

Royal Melbourne West - 10 - greenside bunker

Woking - 4 - out of bounds

[Sean_A]

I do not know whether or not the premise is accurate but there are plenty of examples of very penal hazards on very strategic holes:

Old Course - 14 Hell Bunker, 17 Out of bounds/greenside bunker; 18 Out of bounds

Sand Hills - 7 greenside bunker

Augusta National 11, 13 - pond, creek (although I am not sure 11 is a strategic hole any longer)

Royal Melbourne West - 10 - greenside bunker

Woking - 4 - out of bounds

Jason

TOC 17 strategic?  Hows that with bunker left and OOB right?  Off the tee, OOB right and deep right left?  Great hole, but a posterboy penal jobbie.

Ciao

[Sven Nilsen]

Thought this would be appropriate here:

Alison's thoughts on bunkers from the April 1908 edition of Golfers Magazine:

[Ian Andrew]

In my mind consequence creates strategy.

I’ve always felt golf architecture - at its very best - is a dance where you should feel compelled to flirt with disaster in order to score. The player may often play well away from a critical hazard to avoid getting in serious trouble. But they also understand the advantage of playing closer to the hazard and begin to take a more aggressive line in order to shoot lower scores. Eventually the player will find they’ve overplayed their hand and ended up in the hazard and now have to scramble to save strokes. This will affect their next round where they will inevitably play well away from the same trouble to avoid disaster. But they know they need that aggressive line in order to score, so each subsequent round they will begin the same dance by playing closer and closer to the hazard until they find trouble once again.


I also think there’s a tremendous psychological thrill from the same holes. It helps that most golfers are ridiculously optimistic and tend to want to challenge these holes for the chance of “actually” succeeding. Why because overcoming long odds is a rush.  But whether we fail or succeed, that infamous hazard becomes emblazoned upon our memories.

[Jason Topp]

I do not know whether or not the premise is accurate but there are plenty of examples of very penal hazards on very strategic holes:

Old Course - 14 Hell Bunker, 17 Out of bounds/greenside bunker; 18 Out of bounds

Sand Hills - 7 greenside bunker

Augusta National 11, 13 - pond, creek (although I am not sure 11 is a strategic hole any longer)

Royal Melbourne West - 10 - greenside bunker

Woking - 4 - out of bounds

Jason

TOC 17 strategic?  Hows that with bunker left and OOB right?  Off the tee, OOB right and deep right left?  Great hole, but a posterboy penal jobbie.

Ciao

Off the tee - line to right creates better angle to green

On the approach - you have the choice to hit it to the front right corner of the green or to try and get it back near the hole or to hit it long left as many have chosen to do on certain days in the Open.  The narrowed fairway has taken away some of the strategic interest but it remains a very strategic hole.

[Paul Gray]

I do not know whether or not the premise is accurate but there are plenty of examples of very penal hazards on very strategic holes:

Old Course - 14 Hell Bunker, 17 Out of bounds/greenside bunker; 18 Out of bounds

Sand Hills - 7 greenside bunker

Augusta National 11, 13 - pond, creek (although I am not sure 11 is a strategic hole any longer)

Royal Melbourne West - 10 - greenside bunker

Woking - 4 - out of bounds

Jason

TOC 17 strategic?  Hows that with bunker left and OOB right?  Off the tee, OOB right and deep right left?  Great hole, but a posterboy penal jobbie.

Ciao

If pursuing a 5 though, as would have been the case historically?

[Thomas Dai]

The Best Strategic Holes Have the Most Penal Hazards - ?



atb

[Daniel Jones]

One that comes to mind for me is the 5th on Streamsong Blue. A few weeks ago, it played all of 112 yards to a front pin. If I heeded the starter's advice, I would have played right of the pin to avoid going long. Instead, I went at the flag, and learned the hard way why he said "Whatever you do, don't go long on #5." I couldn't see the flag from down there, and felt fortunate to walk away with double.

[Sean_A]

I do not know whether or not the premise is accurate but there are plenty of examples of very penal hazards on very strategic holes:

Old Course - 14 Hell Bunker, 17 Out of bounds/greenside bunker; 18 Out of bounds

Sand Hills - 7 greenside bunker

Augusta National 11, 13 - pond, creek (although I am not sure 11 is a strategic hole any longer)

Royal Melbourne West - 10 - greenside bunker

Woking - 4 - out of bounds

Jason

TOC 17 strategic?  Hows that with bunker left and OOB right?  Off the tee, OOB right and deep right left?  Great hole, but a posterboy penal jobbie.

Ciao

Off the tee - line to right creates better angle to green

On the approach - you have the choice to hit it to the front right corner of the green or to try and get it back near the hole or to hit it long left as many have chosen to do on certain days in the Open.  The narrowed fairway has taken away some of the strategic interest but it remains a very strategic hole.

Playing between two hazards is penal, especially when the fairway is as narrow as 17.  Granted, one can play lay-up golf for the bogey, but if laying-up is strategic, there are very few penal holes in the world...a lay-up is on offer a huge percentage of the time....but we would never say a design is strategic if pitches a ball short of the hazard than pitches over the water.  The key is the hazard still has to be met head on...just as the player has to eventually play between the hazards on 17.  In its nature, the hole is penal.  If the hole were truly strategic there would be a designed way around the hazards.  

Thomas

Your example isn't a strategic hole...so this isn't what Doak is talking about.  He is saying the best strategic holes have penal hazards.  Your example is a penal hole with a penal hazard.  


Ciao

[Jim Tang]

Yes.  A severe hazard that will extract a heavy price from a golfer, should the hazard be found, will dictate play.  I find these types of hazards play on my mental deficiencies and emotional insecurities, which are abundant.  I try to avoid them at all costs which means really trying to figure out a way to best play the hole.  In other words; strategy.

[Sean_A]

My idea of the best strategic holes are those which are the most tempting combined with a hazard(s) which has the potential to create a double bogey type score if one doesn't execute.  The hazard doesn't have to be death or anything close to death, indeed, for decent players par may still be had...or else the players will not be sufficiently tempted by the risk.  You don't want a lot of running away from hazards at all costs.  Its a fine balance, but like anything in golf, variety is important.   


Ciao   

[Thomas Dai]

Firstly, post 10 contains the use of a '?'.

In addition, "discuss" as used in the title can be understood to mean examine from both sides so examine the question the other way around and "The best strategic holes have the most penal hazards" can be read as "The most penal hazards are on the best strategic holes".

Also, "most penal hazards"? Does that mean 'most severe' or does it means 'most number of'?

Words and interpretation.

Atb

[Mark Pavy]

I agree with Thomas, the wording of the thread title is wrong.

Maybe something like: The best strategic holes have a range of penal hazards (and rewards) that cause the golfer to think about their own personal strategy longer than normal.

This raises another point: Does the hole become less "strategic" if the golfers decision is already planned?

[Paul Gray]

Sean,

When did my name become Oak? Not that I mind, but I'd like an explanation. If it's a reference to a certain lack of flexibility, fair comment. 

All,

Hold on, what's wrong with the wording? For the sake of confusion, amendment made.

[Marc Haring]

Yes.  A severe hazard that will extract a heavy price from a golfer, should the hazed be found, will dictate play.  I find these types of hazards play on my mental deficiencies and emotional insecurities, which are abundant.  I try to avoid them at all costs which means really trying to figure out a way to best play the hole.  In other words; strategy.

Well maybe a flawed strategy. As Ian Andrew say's, "you should feel compelled to flirt with disaster in order to score". I feel for you though. Have you thought about alcohol?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Many great holes have been listed with hard hazards creating more dilemma along with the same basic strategy.  Someone noted on the other thread that its all in the golfers mind, so adding that bit of fear with harder hazards does make a hole memorable and often great.

The question might be whether it would be a great course if every hole were similar?  At that point, it would probably be penal.  I do think 17 TOC is among the most strategic in the world, even if penal.  It wouldn't stand out if others were close to it.

[Mark_Fine]

I can not think of a single "great" hole on the planet that does not contain some kind of hazard!  Furthermore, if you think about your favorite holes, they all contain some unique feature/hazard.  Hazards are the essence of golf!  I know a good book on this topic 

[Paul Gray]

Sean,

When did my name become Oak? Not that I mind, but I'd like an explanation. If it's a reference to a certain lack of flexibility, fair comment. 

Of course, if you just meant 'thick'..... 

[Paul Gray]

And yet just to play devil's advocate: is a cape template better executed when the hazard is less penal, eg. sand rather than water?

[Joe Zucker]

And yet just to play devil's advocate: is a cape template better executed when the hazard is less penal, eg. sand rather than water?

That's a good question.  I don't mind cape holes with water if there is a large bail out on the other side.  Pete Dye seems to have large bail out areas on his cape holes (#4 at Fowlers Mill or #14 at the Kampen Course) that make the holes very playable even though they are guarded by water for hundreds of yards.  If a cape hole is going to be tight opposite the hazard, water is probably too much IMO.  It makes it difficult and slows the round down.

[Paul Gray]

And yet just to play devil's advocate: is a cape template better executed when the hazard is less penal, eg. sand rather than water?

That's a good question.  I don't mind cape holes with water if there is a large bail out on the other side.  Pete Dye seems to have large bail out areas on his cape holes (#4 at Fowlers Mill or #14 at the Kampen Course) that make the holes very playable even though they are guarded by water for hundreds of yards.  If a cape hole is going to be tight opposite the hazard, water is probably too much IMO.  It makes it difficult and slows the round down.

I'd go so far as to say that if there isn't width then there isn't really strategy and the hole is simply penal. I suppose you could argue that the strategy comes in by way of you choosing whether or not to bite off less by taking less club but, much as I pondered on earlier, is that in itself really strategic design?