Bad course design!

[Chilli Dipper]

I wouldn't call it "bad design" per se. It's a hole that gives you options. You can bomb it over/draw it around the trees with driver and find short grass or the green if you do it right, and eliminate the bunkers from play. If you play it safe, and hit an iron down the right side, you bring the bunkers into play on your second shot. I know that they aren't really "in play" unless you chunk your wedge, but they're in play from an architect's standpoint because they are visually intimidating. I can't tell from above, but I'm assuming that from your eye level, the far bunker appears to be greenside. From the fairway with a wedge in your hand, the architect is making you think that you have far less room than you actually have.

In theory, that all is correct, but here are the problems. For the first 200 yards or so from the tee, the architect isn't making you think there is less room than there is; there really is no room. The stretch of land there gives the player 25 yards at most between the cartpath (and the OB that breaches it) and the hazard, with all of it canted heavily towards that hazard on the left. It's asking a lot of high-handicappers to hit that ribbon of fairway when a miss either way is dead, and it's unrealistic to think they can carry their drives safely past the hazard, which is a 230 yard carry from the back tees. It would actually be a good strategic par 4 if there was room on the right where players could hit a safe tee shot and leave a full short-iron to the green, which should always be an option on holes of its length. On this hole, that perfect place to lay back to is somewhere in the backyard of the house with the brown roof.

[bwdial]

In theory, that all is correct, but here are the problems. For the first 200 yards or so from the tee, the architect isn't making you think there is less room than there is; there really is no room. The stretch of land there gives the player 25 yards at most between the cartpath (and the OB that breaches it) and the hazard, with all of it canted heavily towards that hazard on the left. It's asking a lot of high-handicappers to hit that ribbon of fairway when a miss either way is dead, and it's unrealistic to think they can carry their drives safely past the hazard, which is a 230 yard carry from the back tees. It would actually be a good strategic par 4 if there was room on the right where players could hit a safe tee shot and leave a full short-iron to the green, which should always be an option on holes of its length. On this hole, that perfect place to lay back to is somewhere in the backyard of the house with the brown roof.

Ah yes... the old coffee table with the legs on one side two inches shorter than the other. Love those.

[double_j]

It does look like they've moved the green. The shape of the bunkering doesn't really make sense and the dogleg is really unnecessary.

That hole would be nice as a straight driveable par 4 with heavy bunker protection upfront. At 333 yards, you could either hit two mid irons to play it safe or go for the gusto with driver off the tee.

[bwdial]

Here is an example

Backing up a hole, I see an "element" of design that I can't stand... the cart path crossing the fairway. Put it on one side of the hole and keep it there. If it does

have to cross the hole, do it as soon after (or even between) the tee boxes as humanly possible.

[sacm3bill]

The stretch of land there gives the player 25 yards at most between the cartpath (and the OB that breaches it) and the hazard... It's asking a lot of high-handicappers to hit that ribbon of fairway when a miss either way is dead, and it's unrealistic to think they can carry their drives safely past the hazard, which is a 230 yard carry from the back tees.

But high-handicappers wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be playing from the back tees. And from the forward tees it's only about 270 to the green, following the dogleg, so one could hit 9i/PW to get to the green, maybe 8i/9i at the most. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect even a high capper to hit an 8i into a 25 yard fairway, as long as it's not the case on every hole. My point being, I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with this hole - on the contrary, it actually presents you with some good risk/reward decisions.

[sacm3bill]

What about this one? It's the one that runs NE with a hazard bisecting it. From the men's forward tees, it's 351yds. Your choice is to carry the hazard with a 200yd tee shot to a 30-yd wide fairway, or lay up and have a minimum (assuming a perfect tee shot to just short of the hazard) 180yd 2nd shot to a small, blind green with hazard left, right, and long. I hate this hole.

[golfro]

What about this one?

sheesh, thats an ugly one. not sure what the point is to have a blind green. only leaves players with one choice which is to drive it left of the teebox so they can have a "somewhat" clear shot to the green...

[rebby]

What about this one?

It's kindof difficult to see exactly what's going on from the overhead view but, from what I can see, I like it. Nice risk/reward kind of hole.

[golfro]

can't stand this hole. sharp dogleg right. the teebox is on such a steep cliff (70ft) with hazard in between. from the tee box (blue circle), you can't see the bottom of the fairway that you're hitting towards. without a range finder, no way of knowing how far it is down... i usually hit a 7 iron then have to hit a long approach shot.

[sacm3bill]

It's kindof difficult to see exactly what's going on from the overhead view but, from what I can see, I like it. Nice risk/reward kind of hole.

What's the risk/reward though? My definition is generally that you can be rewarded with a birdie at the risk of a bogie, like with a driveable par 4 or 5 with trouble around the green. Or the one that Chilli Dipper posted, where you can use driver if you want but it's easily par-able with a short iron and wedge. With the hole I linked to however, bogie is basically your only play.

[jetsknicks1]

I sometimes play a course that has a par 4 with a huge oak tree about 200 yards out right in the middle of the fairway. It just sems stupid to me that you can hit a straight drive on a straight hole and either hit or end up behind a tree.

Here in central Fl. another problem is alot of holes looking the same, very flat, with zero character.

[Tugglife2]

While I wouldn't consider this bad design per se, I HATE courses that chose to just throw a bunch of water around the course in an effort to make an extremely boring and straight forward course seem unique and snazzy. It's not fooling anyone.

[Chilli Dipper]

While I wouldn't consider this bad design per se, I HATE courses that chose to just throw a bunch of water around the course in an effort to make an extremely boring and straight forward course seem unique and snazzy. It's not fooling anyone.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every course in South Florida like that?

[rebby]

What's the risk/reward though? My definition is generally that you can be rewarded with a birdie at the risk of a bogie, like with a driveable par 4 or 5 with trouble around the green. Or the one that Chilli Dipper posted, where you can use driver if you want but it's easily par-able with a short iron and wedge. With the hole I linked to however, bogie is basically your only play.

I see several ways to play that hole. For example;

Safe - Hit an 8-iron off the tee leaving about 180 into the green which sounds like a difficult blind shot. The bonus here is that you have a much bigger and safer landing area off the tee. Down side is obviously the shot into the green that you're subsequently left with. Moderate - Hit a 4-iron off the tee and just clear the water. From the aerial, it doesn't look like a bad landing area for this type of shot. Enjoy the 9-iron or PW into the green. Aggressive - Hit a 2-iron, 5-wood or even a 3-wood off the tee. As before, a 200 yard carry isn't that big of a deal and a 30 yard landing area isn't that narrow. Miss the fairway though and in you're in pretty bad shape (it looks to get narrower as you hit it further). Hit the fairway though and you've got a short pitch (75 to 110 yards or so) into the green. This is a pretty significant advantage if you ask me. High Risk - Pound a driver and see just how close you can get to the green. Chances are if you really catch one you're looking at 50 yards or so. Depending on the terrain, you might even be able to get closer. Based on what I can tell from the aerial, it looks like you need to play a little cut off the tee (especially the further you try to hit your drive). Thus, the risk increases exponentially with distance giving the golfer a ton of options. Just how much do you want to push the issue? From what I can see, I like this hole. Chances are, I'd go with the moderate approach the first time around and stretch it out from there as I get more comfortable with the hole. Likely setting on the safe side of the aggressive play and hitting a 2 or 3 iron, maybe even a 5-wood (depending on what I've got in my bag that day which course/conditions tend to dictate). The biggest reason that I like this hole is that I've never even seen it yet I can come up with a ton of options to play it. I like when a hole makes me think, gives me several options and leaves me to decide exactly how to attack it.

[rhodes81]

I played a course this weekend for the first time that was excellently maintained but not very fun to play. There were too many blind layup shots. I'm a guy that hates the grip it and rip it style of golf and prefer to think my way around a course, but geez, I dont like to lay up on every hole. There was no risk reward as the hazards were impossible to carry and there were no bail out areas that weren't either OB or deep rough. I expect to hit a 3 wood or long iron off a tee on a par 4 or 5 no more than 4 times a round, and even then, I want there to be an option. This course left you no choices, which is fine occasionally, but not every hole. It was my first time playing it and would have been impossible without help from others who had played it before. Put all the trouble you want, but don't hide it from me!

[sacm3bill]

Safe - ...leaving about 180 into the green which sounds like a difficult blind shot.

Forgive me for belaboring the point, but you might have missed that the distances in my post were with respect to the *forward* tees. The options you lay out above might apply to a 3 or 4 handicapper like yourself, but they aren't an option for most people. If you play the middle or back tees, which I presume you'd do at your skill level, add 54 or 75 respectively to all your carry/approach distances. I.e., even with the safe option you're hitting 234/275 to a green surrounded by hazards. And in the moderate option you need to carry 254/275 to clear the water.

So, still think it's a fair hole? If so I'll agree to disagree.

...This course left you no choices, which is fine occasionally, but not every hole...

That's fair - I guess I can live with a hole or two like the one I'm talking about in my posts, as long as the entire course isn't like that.

[Where's the Cart Girl?]

Hole 11 at the course our work league played this year is a shortish dogleg right. Probably 220 straight away to th center of the dogleg then. 140 left to the green. What I take issue with is a tree that once guarded the right side of the green but now overhangs 3/4 of the green and forces any second shot that is played from the fairway to be a punch or bail out left and try for an up/down.

If the flag is anywhere but the absoute extreme left side of the green its inaccessible from any part of the fairway. You stand on the teebox knowing that driving it through the dogleg is position A.

If you hit the correct side of the fairway you shouldn't still be forced to bail or go under a tree because a tree overgrew its bounds. The design may once have been alright but it needs a respin.

[bwdial]

Sounds like that course just needs a tree trimmer. It sucks when a lack of upkeep and maintenance interferes with play.