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.


Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Adverse cambered doglegs
« on: March 15, 2018, 06:26:35 PM »
Are adverse camber dogleg holes, ie where the fairway tilts one way but the hole doglegs the opposite way, appropriate?

Atb

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2018, 06:46:53 PM »
I think when done well they can be very attractive looking holes visually.


From a playability perspective, the dogleg has to be very gentle if the camber is even slightly steep. If the camber is gentle, the dogleg can be a bit sharper.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2018, 07:07:13 PM »
I think its either a dream or a nightmare for the average player.


A left to right dogleg with some camber to keep my fade/gentle slice in the fairway!  Sure!
The opposite?  A complete nightmare  ;D

Evan_Green

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2018, 07:52:34 PM »
There are many such holes at Olympic (Lake). Given the trees that line the course, you are called upon to hit certain kinds of shots on demand. E.g. you cant hit a fade into #4 which is a dogleg left with a camber to the right (and tall trees on the left side guarding against a left to right shot getting to the green). You ideally hit a draw into this hole (you can get away with a straight shot if your drive is long enough or enough to the right of the hole). You have to be able to work the ball both ways to score on the Lake. If you can't you are going to struggle to get on in regulation. So in that case for a low handicap, its a great challenge, but for a higher handicap the par 4's are usually too much and are 3 shot holes.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2018, 07:56:35 PM by Evan_Green »

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2018, 08:43:16 PM »
Southern Hills in Tulsa has these. Maybe if you want a major, you best build some. ;)
"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

Tim Passalacqua

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2018, 09:26:19 PM »
I enjoy it.  I think it's a great thing in architecture that isn't used much.  If you execute the tee shot with the proper shape, you are rewarded.  If you don't pull it off, you will probably be a little farther away from the hole.  I see it being similar to a wide fairway with a hazard.  If you can execute the tee shot and hit it close to the hazard (bunker, water, OB) you are rewarded with the optimal angle to the green (it opens and and the green is receptive).  If you don't pull it off, you might be coming in over a bunker and the green pitches away from you.  As far as the Lake course, I think #4 and #5 are the extreme examples of reverse camber.  Plenty of the holes have slopes that go with the dogleg or a neutral landing areas.  The smart play on the reverse camber holes, if you don't have the shot shape, is to hit a club off the tee that doesn't put you through the fairway into trouble. 

Evan_Green

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2018, 11:05:40 PM »
I think the key factor that makes #4 and #5 on Lake such difficult reverse camber holes is due to the trees/lack of width thus dictating difficult shots (hitting draw off a fade lie). A reverse camber with width is not nearly as difficult in my opinion.

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2018, 03:14:05 AM »
Evan, does the reverse camber at #5 at Olympic Lake impact things much?  I saw it from the gallery in the Tour Championships in 1993 and 1994, and my memory is that the highly elevated tee meant the drives didn't roll much after they hit the ground. 

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2018, 03:42:08 AM »

Thomas,


I am pretty sure this has been covered in a previous thread. I would say yes as the require the player to shape the shot in order to hold the fairway. The best example I know of in GB&I is the 17th on Wentworth's Burma Road although Huddersfield Golf Club has a pretty good example with their 14th hole.


Jon

Tim Passalacqua

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2018, 07:22:44 AM »
I think the key factor that makes #4 and #5 on Lake such difficult reverse camber holes is due to the trees/lack of width thus dictating difficult shots (hitting draw off a fade lie). A reverse camber with width is not nearly as difficult in my opinion.


I agree that 4 and 5 are two of the harder tee shots at Olympic, #5 has my number (I usually try to bite off too much).  But right now, I bet #4 is over 50 yards wide.  That seems like plenty.  They have really expanded that fairway due to the slope of the fairway to make it more playable.

Evan_Green

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2018, 10:54:54 AM »
Evan, does the reverse camber at #5 at Olympic Lake impact things much?  I saw it from the gallery in the Tour Championships in 1993 and 1994, and my memory is that the highly elevated tee meant the drives didn't roll much after they hit the ground.


Jim - the reverse slope on #5 is less steep than on #4 so the effect is less, but nevertheless there is still a significant effect, particularly if the course is playing under firmer conditions. Cant specifically comment on the firmness of the course in the Tour Championships, but in general the course does play significantly firmer now than it did in that era due to the tree removal and added sand that was done ~10 years ago. In the last US Open, it was playing super firm.


Its quite easy to run the ball through the fairway and too far left on #5 and find yourself with tree-trouble from the left tree line, particularly if you play the hole from the members tees. So you either have to hit a straight 3-wood or lesser club, leaving 200+ into the green, sling a cut with a driver, or try to bomb a driver OVER the right tree line (and as Tim eluded to, "bite off as much as you want to chew") which is possible since the tee is elevated. In this way if you play from a reasonable tee and have the ability to hit those 3 shots, its actually one of the more strategic drives at Olympic because you have numerous options, but in any case the reverse camber does add difficulty to the hole.

John Ezekowitz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2018, 06:15:32 PM »
Hi Thomas,


I personally like these holes. I think they provide a good challenge to the golfer to hit a shaped shot. One slight variation that I have seen on two Ross courses around Boston: a hole where the fairway cuts in from one side and slopes towards that side (diagonal rather than a dogleg).


Who knows with mowing lines having changed whether Ross intended that design feature, but I find it interesting and almost more challenging than the dogleg because you don't have the eye fit to shape a shot.

Bill Healy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2018, 11:31:23 AM »
Thank you for presenting this topic.
However, "adverse cambered dogleg" seems like a scientific term rather than a golf architecture term!

This design characteristic clearly adds rigor to a hole, but I am not sure it adds interest or aesthetics.
If we want to make golf holes more difficult, this design will help.
In general, I side with Donald Ross and his opinion that we can always make golf holes more difficult, but it is a challenge to present challenges and playability together.

The adverse cambered dogleg appeals to me when it follows the natural terrain, and when the slope away from the dogleg is not severe.
I am not in favor of this design characteristic  when it is manufactured by moving dirt.

Bill Healy

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2018, 12:35:04 PM »

Generally no.  Golf is hard enough as it is for most of us, without setting the course up deliberately to kick shots off the fairway.


Occasionally - maybe once per course as a unique tee shot challenge, sure.  I loved Olympic, having to hug the inside tree line, but I am (was) a straight driver.  Others hated it.


It also helps that the lush conditions keep shots from rolling a lot, so maintenance conditions have something to do with it.  In general, the design should not purposely divert a well struck shot off the fairway in normal conditions.  There should be a way (perhaps less than ideal, but a way nonetheless) to play the hole without hitting one prescribed shot (i.e., hook into a right draining slope, etc.)


I recall the pros hating Olympic 17.  the only two things that kept them from complaining publicly - It was the US Open and not a PGA Tour event where they felt they had a say, and 2, Everyone's shot went into the rough,  negating any advantage, and
perhaps negating
the longer hitters advantage.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Evan_Green

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2018, 02:35:26 PM »

The adverse cambered dogleg appeals to me when it follows the natural terrain, and when the slope away from the dogleg is not severe.
I am not in favor of this design characteristic  when it is manufactured by moving dirt.

Bill Healy


Curious as to examples of artificially created reverse camber holes (e.g. created by moving dirt)?

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Adverse cambered doglegs
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2018, 11:23:15 AM »
The 18th at Rolling Green is an example. It has a downhill tee shot and then doglegs uphill to the right ( see my world famous Facebook photos). It follows another short three shotter that goes uphill all the way as it turns left. The combination is pleasing.
AKA Mayday