Trees as Strategic Hazards

[Michael Chadwick]

I’d like to consider—and learn from others—how trees can be strategic hazards on a golf course, and explore instances of where that may occur. I’m going to structure my few thoughts around three quotes from Max Behr’s “Design in Golf Architecture,” an article appearing in the November 1952 issue of USGA Journal and Turf Management:

1. “[T]heir locations should guard the most favorable positions from which the next stroke can be played.”


1

By this definition, the first shot at MacKenzie’s Cypress Point presents an opportunity to aerially challenge a strategic hazard. And no, I’m not referring to the hedge concealing 17 Mile Drive, though surely caddies have seen numerous players nervously top their drives into it! Instead I’m referring to the right side tree in the distance. At first glance, it could be mistakenly assumed as merely a divider between the hole and the members’ driving range. While true, it also guards the inner corner of the gentle right dogleg. Carrying a drive over that tree (approx. 220 yds from white tees) results in the ball settling nearly in the middle of fairway, optimal for any pin location, whereas driving towards the bunkers left would leave a constricted angle to any hole cut on the left side of the green. For the best array of options on the second shot, the preferred tee ball is one that takes on a tree.

I admit that one of my first thoughts, standing on the tee box of one of the most storied and revered Golden Age designs, the era responsible for spurring our modern day tree removal, was that my driving target was a tree?!?!

It isn’t just variety of terrain that MacKenzie, Hunter, and their team incorporated into holes routed through the triad of pine forest, dunes land, and rocky coastline, but also the hazards they utilized. Artificial (and stunning) bunkering, native dunes, water, and, yes, trees. Holes 1, 14, 17, and 18 all incorporate pines and cypresses in ways that showcase trees as strategic hazards rather than their customary penal position on the outskirts of hole corridors.

The primary way in which MacKenzie achieved that is for presenting a tree, or trees, in such a way that they could either be carried over, or played around on both sides. And, most importantly, that their positioning directly influenced the decision making process of a tee shot’s line and yardage, in order to ensure the best odds at having an unrestricted angle approaching the green.   

2. “[T]he first principle of all hazards is to attack the mind of the golfer, never to waylay the ball.” 


17

A somewhat confusing dictum, given that a waylaid ball is often the result of a hazard. But for Behr, the primacy of the hazard is not its consequence, rather the degree to which it affects the player’s decision for how to proceed through a hole. In that case, cypress trees on 17 and 18—apart from the coastline of 17—take the most mental toll in determining one’s yardage and line from the tee box. A grove of trees stand sentinel in the most favorable position on 17 fairway, requiring the player to either push beyond them with more club, play short, or out left enough to be able to carry their height on the approach shot. The caddies suggest carry yardages not with regard to the coastline but for how best to avoid the trees.


18

So too are cypresses seemingly blocking the entrance to 18’s serpentine fairway, a perplexing hole especially as a first-timer. For they too are to be carried, more left than what initially seems sensible, until you begin walking the fairway and realize just how serpentine its shaping is until it bends for the final time towards the green and clubhouse. What’s unique about the perspective from 18 tee is the towering cypress located near the left bunker in the foreground. The fairway bunkers flanking the right side imply that your tee ball should be placed to the right of the tree in question, since the opposing bunkers offer the illusion of framing the fairway corridor. But taking the tall cypress on directly, or even further left of it, will yield a straighter line to the green on the second shot.     

3. “And it goes without saying that trees lined to hem in fairways are not only an insult to golf architecture, but the death warrant to the high art of natural landscape gardening, aside from the fact that, of all hazards, they are the most unfair.”



14

The only hole that, to me, has seen significant change from the images presented in Geoff Shackelford’s Alister MacKenzie’s Cypress Point Club is the 14th. Though the density of 18’s canopy may have grown in over time, that hole from opening had the cypresses to carry. 14, however, used to only have two trees pinching in the beginning of the bottleneck approach. 1 and 14 fairways were a wide swath of turf, which I believe better explains the functionality of the three bunkers set against the left hillside of the approach towards the green. For conservative drives could err far left initially, leaving what would be a long club into the green, directly over that left hill. Those bunkers could then collect poorly struck shots, whereas with today’s growth I do wonder how many balls find any of them. They are effectively blocked out by trees for any ball on the left side of the hole now. The only way I can see those bunkers being used would be players who drove too far right from the tee, and who are not able to cut their approach shot enough towards the green. In nearly all cases, a missed drive doesn’t have the option to go around the trees anymore except only through the bottleneck of fairway, whereas MacKenzie first presented more options for the good and bad player alike on this hole. Those initially strategic trees now rub shoulders against many others that are in place for other reasons (safety, concealing a parking lot, etc.) that render them more penal for missed shots. 


14 approach
 
Needless to say, CPC is a marvel, and one of the exemplars of design and strategy routed on a peerless site. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that MacKenzie’s genius there would also extend into producing thoughtful strategy from trees, that most maligned natural feature of American golf.

One thing I certainly learned from MacKenzie in that round, despite my initial bristling at his instruction, is that a tree need not always be penal. The problem isn’t the tree in and of itself. It’s the way in which a tree is presented on a hole that characterizes its strategic (or lack of) value, and that proper use certainly has its place on a golf course.

What other holes elsewhere does a tree, or trees, possess exciting strategic value?

The tee shot of Rustic Canyon 14 has a pivotal tree blocking visibility to the landing area of the fairway set like a cape relative to the tee box. Depending on the wind, one may choose to err to the right of the tree (shortest carry, longest approach to green), or go over the tree (risking blockage), or even left of the tree (longest carry, shortest approach). It’s a wonderful tree because it “attacks” the mind as you decide where to line up for the tee shot.

The only other best example I can immediately think of is Press Maxwell’s 12th hole at Prairie Dunes. The longer one drives the ball, the tighter the landing area becomes, for the trees function as a funnel along the sides of the fairway. Accommodatingly wide for the shorter hitter and longer approach, and narrowed in for the player wanting the shortest approach to the green. 

Sean’s current thread on Crystal Downs, particularly the tee shot off 5, encouraged me to put these thoughts into words. Looking forward to hearing about other holes that respect a tree’s strategic potential!

[Ira Fishman]

I can think of several holes with strategically placed trees but of only one that has generated such a great debate on this board. Mid Pines 4. Still one of the best threads ever.

[Carl Johnson]

I guess it's a matter of taste.  I like nice looking trees, but they have no place in my golf course (mental) design.  Most trees grow, and that means they change, or must be pruned, or die (old age or disease), and then where are you.  I suppose very large artificial trees might be the solution to these problems, but I don't see those in the immediate future.

[Charlie Goerges]

The problem isn’t the tree in and of itself. It’s the way in which a tree is presented on a hole that characterizes its strategic (or lack of) value, and that proper use certainly has its place on a golf course.

Seconded. Fantastic take Michael!




I would love for "trees as strategic hazards" to get a fair hearing on GCA. My expectations are low, but my hopes are high.


There are tons of things to say about this, but I'll just say a couple.


In the current technological era, trees are virtually the only hazard that can compel a player to "flight" the golf ball. Any other hazard, whether it be bunkers, water, even wind doesn't matter in flighting or moving the golf ball. Players just play their shot, aiming slightly more one way or another. (You can make a case for large-scale ground contours as well).


Additionally, I feel like the golf course architecture community has simply let rabid greens committee chairmen be the last word on trees. Virtually every tree that has been rightfully removed by restorations was not originally placed by a golf architect. Put it in the architect's hands and you'll have much better usage of trees.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I always felt that once or twice per course, we should leave a mature (i.e., tall) tree about 2/3 of the tee shot distance to match both the vertical apex and horizontal apex of a curved shot, forcing players to hit a fade or draw around them.  Of course, enough fw should be available for those who can't summon the necessary shot shape.  And, despite reports to the contrary, I think many good players still shape shots, just not as big a degree as they used to.


I say once or twice because no idea is so good it should be used exclusively, as in RTJ and Wilson putting sand bunkers on both sides of every landing zone.


Another good use, similar to 14 at CPC shown, is trees just beyond the landing zone, positioned so one side allows an open shot, while the other requires some sort of alteration to the basic straight shot to hit the green.  I also liked the bottleneck approach when I found it naturally, usually paired with a very wide fw where only the middle offered an easy approach.  That said, many golfers figure they should have an easy shot anywhere in the fw, and clamor for such pinching trees to be removed.

[Charlie Goerges]

And, despite reports to the contrary, I think many good players still shape shots, just not as big a degree as they used to.

Overall we agree, just to note that I stated not that good players don't shape shots, almost every shot is shaped, but trees are the only feature or hazard that seems to be able to compel them to do so (or to change their usual shot shape).

[Charlie Goerges]

I should also say that I'm not convinced by the argument that trees can die. I say so what. CPC 14 only had a couple trees at its conception and now there are many more, someday all of them will die and maybe they'll be replaced, maybe they won't. Fine by me. They provided some challenge, then more challenge and eventually maybe less challenge or even none. That's kind of cool to me. A smart architect can take it into account and probably does.

[Tom_Doak]

I should also say that I'm not convinced by the argument that trees can die. I say so what. CPC 14 only had a couple trees at its conception and now there are many more, someday all of them will die and maybe they'll be replaced, maybe they won't. Fine by me. They provided some challenge, then more challenge and eventually maybe less challenge or even none. That's kind of cool to me. A smart architect can take it into account and probably does.

I agree with this.  The argument that you should cut down a beautiful tree [or avoid it] just because it's going to die eventually is a real head-scratcher, but too many people in golf are black-and-white thinkers.  There is room for trees that come into play, as long as there is room to play around them.  [Ooh, that should be a quote or something.]


Cypress Point is an interesting example because today, unlike when the course was built, it is forbidden to cut down those Monterey cypress that "get in the way".  So, would you not build the 17th hole because the trees sometimes interfere?

[Mark Mammel]

The main problem with trees has been mentioned, but deserves more comment. Trees grow, and their location may become obsolete as time and changes in the game take their toll. A tree or trees that challenged the strong player initially too often become the bane of the weaker player, as shot distances and ball flight change over time. Trees also have the propensity to attract others. When initially placed by the architect, their location and density may have been great. But club members often love trees for reasons not related to golf, resulting in more planting, reluctance to thin, until we find ourselves where many clubs are today- with a beautiful arboretum but a poor golf course.

[Charlie Goerges]

The main problem with trees has been mentioned, but deserves more comment. Trees grow, and their location may become obsolete as time and changes in the game take their toll. A tree or trees that challenged the strong player initially too often become the bane of the weaker player, as shot distances and ball flight change over time.

Every single thing mentioned above is true of every type of hazard or feature. It is not an argument against trees in particular.

Trees also have the propensity to attract others. When initially placed by the architect, their location and density may have been great. But club members often love trees for reasons not related to golf, resulting in more planting, reluctance to thin, until we find ourselves where many clubs are today- with a beautiful arboretum but a poor golf course.

In the statement of the above, you don't appear to be making an argument against trees, but rather an argument against club members. In which case, you're probably correct. 




There are real problems with trees, but none of them have been brought up yet in this thread.

[Peter Flory]

As long as the trees are gnarly cypresses, I'm OK with them. 

[Charlie Goerges]

As long as the trees are gnarly cypresses, I'm OK with them.

I’d like it if you could be more specific and expansive.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Ballyhack only has a couple of trees that are in line of play. This one on 18 will impede a pushed tee shot. Nobody at the club wants it cut down. It is a beautiful tree and does add to the strategy of the hole.

[Sean_A]

I don't think there is any problem with trees per se, it's which types, numbers and how they are used which are the questions. For me, a tree can be highly strategic, but if I think it's not attractive I want it or them gone, assuming there is no over riding reason to keep them such as screening.  Trees for me help set a scene and generally, the fewer it takes to do this the better. For example, assuming I could trust the powers that be not to eventually remove it, a beautiful lone oak is a great opportunity to be incorporated into the playing design of a course. I would go so far as to remove lesser trees nearby so the beauty of the tree is the aesthetic and architectural showcase of a hole. I played a course recently which had three holes showcasing beautiful and limited number of trees on the tee shot. On one hole I thought the man made elements detracted from the beauty of a lone tree. Well enough could have been left alone. But, I still appreciated the use of the tree.

My bottom line is not all tees are equal. Use trees which visually enhance a hole and in nearly all cases that means fewer is usually better.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sean,


To use the fewest trees (when I had a planting budget, which was really quite rare outside of Tom Fazio who once had $1Mil per hole for it) I would draw lines from the tees past the doglegs, to denote vision zones.  I tended to place tree clusters in an area where they were visible from two or preferably three holes.  It's a sneaky way to use the same trees three times for the price of one.

[Thomas Dai]

Harry Colts comment that “Trees should be part of the scenery not part of the stage” quote seems apt.
Atb

[Mark_Fine]

Michael,
My guess would be that trees present some kind of hazard/impact the esthetics/strategy on 95% or more of all the golf courses out there. Basically only the true links (and even some of them) have trees.  Granted they all might not be in the middle of a fairway or hanging over a green but they make their presence known.  Trees can create separation, turn golf holes, sometimes provide an element of safety, cast shadows, divert the wind, force certain shaped shots, create risk/reward,…, the list goes on.  While many courses still have too many (often the wrong kinds and/or in less than ideal locations), trees play an important aspect in most all golf courses. 

[cary lichtenstein]

I remember a tree on the 10th hole of Green Acres CC that I could never hit over because the fairway was downhill and very narrow. I hated that tree. Another one at Trump in Jupiter on the 9th hole that I hated.


It's kind of like placing a bunker in the middle of the fairway to grab a perfect drive, makes no sense to me.


I can only imagine what the higher handicaps say

[Charlie Goerges]

It’s kind of funny that everyone on this thread who has designed a golf course has (more or less) said trees can be used well. For everybody quoting an ODG on trees (not you Michael) maybe look at what they built rather than what they said/wrote. Mackenzie said the course should look natural… how natural did the original 8th at ANGC look? No ODG had much good to say about blind shots, and yet…


And if you need an architect quote to form an opinion on trees, Tom Doak gave you a nice, concise one earlier in this thread. Use that.

[Charlie Goerges]

Ballyhack only has a couple of trees that are in line of play. This one on 18 will impede a pushed tee shot. Nobody at the club wants it cut down. It is a beautiful tree and does add to the strategy of the hole.

Thanks for the example, this does look like an example of a good use. There appears to be plenty of room to go around, and for someone whose natural shot moves left to right, well, they're not at a large disadvantage on the next shot because their nature shot shape should help them get around the tree to the green.

It seems more well thought-out than a great many bunkers or water hazards I have seen.

[Kyle Casella]

The B hole on the Whiskey route at Ohoopee Match Club has a tree smack dab in the middle and at the end of the fairway about 70-90 yards from the green. The hole is 350 yards so most players should be able to clear the tree with ease as long as they are not too close. The hole slopes from high left to low right and the fairway runs out faster on the right side than the left. The best angle, from the low right, is also mostly blind as it is uphill to the green. There is sandy scrub in the area between the tree/end of fairway and the green. The best strategy (in my view) is to hit it short enough to have enough space to clear the tree regardless of line. However, if you have a lot of confidence in your accuracy then getting it close to the green and left or right of the tree is a good play. The hole should also play well in the event there is no tree as you will still need to make a decision to lay back for a better view and choose which side of the fairway you like better, although that would be less important without the tree. It's essentially a different form of a center line hazard you need to think your way around and I like its effect in this instance.

[Charlie Goerges]

Kyle, is this the hole you're referring to? (scroll right to see the area in question)

[Kyle Casella]

Kyle, is this the hole you're referring to? (scroll right to see the area in question)

This is the one!

[Charlie Goerges]

Good, I like your example Kyle and thanks for even going so far as to consider what the hole might be like without it. Is it fair to say it's a nice-looking tree, something worth preserving? (not that a tree needs to be a gorgeous example in order to be worthwhile to use as a design element/hazard in my opinion)


Additionally, could you estimate how many trees are used in this fashion on the course (i.e. trees used as a hazard, not the ones off to the sides that might define the playing corridors)?

[Jeff Schley]

Wade Hampton, so beautiful and this par 3 certainly makes you hit it straight. Scenery hard to match, especially in the fall with the leaves turning.