Can you have a good course if it has OB on most holes?

[Jerry Kluger]

I am a member at a club which has 3 courses that were built as part of a housing development so there is OB on nearly every hole.  I was discussing this with a fellow GCAer this weekend as we played one of the courses and I told him that I felt that a course cannot be very good if there is OB on nearly every hole.  My reasoning is that I generally believe that a good golf hole gives you different options of how it can be played and also gives you a chance to make a good recovery shot.  Obviously, you cannot make a recovery shot from OB so you usually wind up playing defensively as you cannot recover from OB.  Water is also a feature which I generally dislike for the same reason if it is in play on most holes.  What do you think?

[jeffwarne]

No


seriously though OB on both sides is monotonous


Nearly all courses would have OB on one side on many holes unless enormous property

[Wayne_Kozun]

Doesn't the Old Course have OB on most holes?

[Joe Zucker]

I think you're right about the Old Course.  I don't know about Jerry's course, but many housing development courses have OB on both sides as you play between houses.  No hole at the Old Course has OB on both sides, so maybe a corollary to Jerry's question is "Can a hole be good with OB on both sides?".  In general, I would say no.  Limited recovery options and the width to create favorable angles is generally not likely with OB on both sides, unless the corridor is enormous.

[Pete_Pittock]

Doesn't the Old Course have OB on most holes?

1, 12-18 I believe

[Duncan Cheslett]

"Out of Bounds" generally means the boundary or perimeter of the property on which the course lies.


On many old courses in GB&I, especially links courses, the property is narrow - typically occupying land between a railway line and a public beach. If both are OOB, as they almost inevitably will be, most holes will be affected.


This has not been detrimental to these classic courses.


Reddish Vale is not a links, and its property is not linear. Such is its layout however, that OOB directly affects 17 of its 18 holes. It is even possible to go out of bounds on the other one - the par 3 12th, with a vicious shank over the 7th fairway!


It is a very good course.


 

[Mark_Fine]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example. 

[Thomas Dai]

"Out of Bounds" generally means the boundary or perimeter of the property on which the course lies.
On many old courses in GB&I, especially links courses, the property is narrow - typically occupying land between a railway line and a public beach. If both are OOB, as they almost inevitably will be, most holes will be affected.
This has not been detrimental to these classic courses.
Reddish Vale is not a links, and its property is not linear. Such is its layout however, that OOB directly affects 17 of its 18 holes. It is even possible to go out of bounds on the other one - the par 3 12th, with a vicious shank over the 7th fairway!
It is a very good course.

Nicely put Duncan.
Yee olde courses were built in the days when the ball didn't go so far, either forwards or sideways or somewhere in between, so less space was needed in comparison to modern times.
atb

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example.

Indeed.
Jerry and many others have fallen for the "options" and "recovery" mantra of modern day golf course architecture -- a near unanimous/consensus opinion that, IMO, has dramatically narrowed the concept of what constitutes good and engaging design. The inevitable result (or, at least logical conclusion) is a course like Mammoth Dunes:  absolutely *more* of absolutely *everything* -- more acres, more width, more friendly sand, more turf, more options, more recoveries etc etc.
You can probably fit 2 or 3 Merions on the same footprint as MD.
But I'm sure glad that in our more enlightened age we've embraced such a sane and sustainable approach....

[A.G._Crockett]

I think there are a LOT of housing development courses that have OB on both sides, and I think THAT is a deal-breaker, especially when the OB is very tight to the lines of play.

I would assume that this is one piece of the reason that the USGA is looking at a change in the red stake rules.

[Andy Stamm]

Doesn't the Old Course have OB on most holes?

1, 12-18 I believe

There's no OB on 12 or 13.

[Jerry Kluger]

We did compare it with the Dormie Club which has plenty of width but you can still lose a ball but that situation is failure to carry a wetlands or hit one in the woods and are unable to find it.  However, that is not something that is likely to happen more than once or twice a round at worst and isn't really something that would affect how you would play the course.  OB very often makes you try and steer the ball around the course which just isn't much fun.

[Brian Potash]

Jerry,


As some other have mentioned, I think it starts first with how you define OB.  For me (at least here), Ill define it as meaning I am forced to re-tee if I miss either badly right or left, whether because I'm strictly OB, in the water/environmental hazard, fescue where I think I have a very low probability of finding the ball, woods to the same effect, rocks, etc.


As a slightly better than average golfer (normally between 9-14 index), who plays more like a 15-20 off the tee, I very much struggle to take an aggressive swing when I know there are no safe misses.  This obviously exacerbates my difficulties, and causes me to really struggle on courses with very few (or in some case) no recovery options.


As an example, I recently played Manele Golf Course in Hawaii.  From the whites the slope was a modest 126, but 17 of the 18 holes allowed for no recovery options.  Unplayable rocks left and right of every hole.  For me this plays more like a slope of 140. My home club has a slope of 141, but on almost all holes you can miss to one side, and though it may cost you 1 shot, it wont cost you a minimum of 2.


The best of players obviously don't have this issue.  I'm not sure I would say a course as described above can't be good, but it would not be one I would care to play too often.  Exceptions would be a course like Ballyneal, where almost all holes are bordered on both sides by Yucca (likely lost but sometimes findable), but the fairways are wide enough that I don't get too tight on the tee.


Playing scared (I wish there was a better word) is no way to spend 4 hours, and that is the unfortunate reality for many on courses as you describe.


From the pictures I've seen, isn't Pine Vally bordered by forest on both sides of almost all the holes?, or does this go in the very generous fairway category?


Mark mentioned Merion below, but I felt that as a good portion of the course played towards the middle of the property, there were safe misses to be had.


Brian

[Mark_Fine]

Brian,
I am guessing but I think about 12 holes at Merion have OB somewhere in the hole corridor. 

[Sean_A]

"Out of Bounds" generally means the boundary or perimeter of the property on which the course lies.
On many old courses in GB&I, especially links courses, the property is narrow - typically occupying land between a railway line and a public beach. If both are OOB, as they almost inevitably will be, most holes will be affected.
This has not been detrimental to these classic courses.
Reddish Vale is not a links, and its property is not linear. Such is its layout however, that OOB directly affects 17 of its 18 holes. It is even possible to go out of bounds on the other one - the par 3 12th, with a vicious shank over the 7th fairway!
It is a very good course.

Nicely put Duncan.
Yee olde courses were built in the days when the ball didn't go so far, either forwards or sideways or somewhere in between, so less space was needed in comparison to modern times.
atb

Most of the time these classic links are designed to minimize the impact of OOB - hence the reason people forget it is even there. The effect OOB at a place like TOC is a totally different ball game to housing estate OOB.  The housing estate OOB is far more in the face of the golfer, more prevalent and there is often a serious element of danger.  When we encounter OOB such as this in GB&I it can be seen as great architecture because it is so rare....and therefore deemed more charming even if it is dangerous. Honestly, the far bigger problem in GB&I is danger with walkers on/near courses....not with balls leaving properties. 


To answer the question...being pedantic, sure, a course can be great with loads of OOB, but there is OOB and there is OOB. 

Ciao   

[Matt MacIver]

My neighborhood course was built in 1989 and has OOB on all holes save two both left and right.  Due to technology at the time, it wasn't "super tight".  Today, for me, it's too tight / limited fun.  I can slice / pull one OOB on the straight holes and drive it through the doglegs.  I could hit 8-i off the tee - but that's not fun and I've shanked a few of those OOB too.  There's frankly no fix - aside from when I play with my hickories - the course suddenly moves forward a bit on the fun factor. 

[jeffwarne]

My neighborhood course was built in 1989 and has OOB on all holes save two both left and right.  Due to technology at the time, it wasn't "super tight".  Today, for me, it's too tight / limited fun.  I can slice / pull one OOB on the straight holes and drive it through the doglegs.  I could hit 8-i off the tee - but that's not fun and I've shanked a few of those OOB too.  There's frankly no fix - aside from when I play with my hickories - the course suddenly moves forward a bit on the fun factor.

Yest another reason that the "technology makes it more fun" is an oversimplified, often wrong, generalization.
To say nothing of decreased safety for courses(nearly all) that can't expand their corridors.

[Eric Smith]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example.

Indeed.
Jerry and many others have fallen for the "options" and "recovery" mantra of modern day golf course architecture -- a near unanimous/consensus opinion that, IMO, has dramatically narrowed the concept of what constitutes good and engaging design. The inevitable result (or, at least logical conclusion) is a course like Mammoth Dunes:  absolutely *more* of absolutely *everything* -- more acres, more width, more friendly sand, more turf, more options, more recoveries etc etc.

With a Rebel Yell,
She cried mow, mow, mow
Mow, mow, mow!

[Tim Martin]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example.

Indeed.
Jerry and many others have fallen for the "options" and "recovery" mantra of modern day golf course architecture -- a near unanimous/consensus opinion that, IMO, has dramatically narrowed the concept of what constitutes good and engaging design. The inevitable result (or, at least logical conclusion) is a course like Mammoth Dunes:  absolutely *more* of absolutely *everything* -- more acres, more width, more friendly sand, more turf, more options, more recoveries etc etc.
You can probably fit 2 or 3 Merions on the same footprint as MD.
But I'm sure glad that in our more enlightened age we've embraced such a sane and sustainable approach....

Don't we laud the ODG's for "options" and "recovery"?   Please keep your reply under 1000 words.

[Joe Hancock]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example.

Indeed.
Jerry and many others have fallen for the "options" and "recovery" mantra of modern day golf course architecture -- a near unanimous/consensus opinion that, IMO, has dramatically narrowed the concept of what constitutes good and engaging design. The inevitable result (or, at least logical conclusion) is a course like Mammoth Dunes:  absolutely *more* of absolutely *everything* -- more acres, more width, more friendly sand, more turf, more options, more recoveries etc etc.

With a Rebel Yell,
She cried mow, mow, mow
Mow, mow, mow!

You're my idol.

[Jeff Churchill]

I was a member for 11 years at an RTJ designed course in Ipswich MA.
When I joined the housing component of the project was not fully completed and subsequent construction introduced out of bounds on 14 of the 18 holes.
The best description of the course would be a claustrophobic tree lined trip through 18 corridors of pain. Large pines with branches extending to the fairway created a canopy that not only forced shaping a fade or draw but demanded low elevation to avoid clipping these guardians of par. The close proximity of the OB stakes in relation to the fairway cut lines and the positioning of the cart paths adjacent to the fairways, and frequently in play, made the difference between a good shot and a re-tee more a function of luck than skill.

I consider luck to be acceptable as an element of the playing experience but when the course becomes a graveyard where good shots go to die then my enthusiasm diminishes.

IMHO

[David Davis]

The first course that pops out in my mind as a good course with a lot of OB, mainly the front 9, is Quaker Ridge. My bad playing miss is high right like many other hackers....high right on the front 9 at Quaker Ridge works 0% of the time. Luckily I was playing well there the last time I played but still it was in my head on every hole. Might be strange but the result is that I think the course is really good but don't like it for this reason.


OB on both sides is not that common among great courses in my opinion. Off hand I think about the first hole at Royal Portrush, a testing hole in the wind with OB on both sides. I like that about as much as internal OB's. Hoylake has one of the more well known ones here and would also be a course with a fair bit of OB that's considered great by many. My first visit there I hit my best drive of the day cutting off the par 5, only to realize once I walked to my ball that I was in the middle of the practice area, though there wasn't a ball on it and I was OB. Had a 7 iron or something into the green and was far too lazy to walk back. New local rule for first time visitors playing casual rounds....ignore the internal OB. 

[John Sabino]

Yes. From what I remember of Chicago Golf Club if a right handed golfer hooks the ball there are a lot of OBs. Macdonald was a famous slicer of the ball so the layout favors that particular affliction.

[Matthew Petersen]

Yes there are many.  Merion is one example.

Indeed.
Jerry and many others have fallen for the "options" and "recovery" mantra of modern day golf course architecture -- a near unanimous/consensus opinion that, IMO, has dramatically narrowed the concept of what constitutes good and engaging design. The inevitable result (or, at least logical conclusion) is a course like Mammoth Dunes:  absolutely *more* of absolutely *everything* -- more acres, more width, more friendly sand, more turf, more options, more recoveries etc etc.

With a Rebel Yell,
She cried mow, mow, mow
Mow, mow, mow!

This is fantastic

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes - and thankfully he didn't include the "In the midnight hour" part. It would make no sense, and would turn the whole thing vaguely creepy...