Welcome to the ozgolf.net forums.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 315
  1. #1
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default Understanding Strategic Golf Design

    Since it has been clogging up the Ryder cup thread I thought I would move it here.

    In summary - strategy doesn't mean wailing away all day on driver with no consequence.

    Strategy means a variety of options are available, each with a credible amount of risk, and resultant reward attached to it. It means hitting a driver is viable - get it right you will get a great reward. Get it wrong, and you will get hurt.

    Going back to LGN hole 1, in theory you could hit any club in your bag, but the only viable option is to hit a club that puts you in the meat of the fairway (long iron or hybrid). Driver is not a viable option, as it brings in great risk (water or death rough), for little reward (hitting a wedge instead of an 8i into the green).

    Anyway, believe it or not Mr Fried Eggs does know a little about arketechture, so for those interested, have a read of this:

    http://www.friedegg.co/golf-courses/playability-width-strategy


    Edited for confusing thread title.
    Last edited by benno_r; 3rd October 2018 at 12:42 PM.

  2. #2
    Admin Team Golf Hall of Fame Inductee
    Join Date
    Apr 01, 2006
    Location
    Sergei, Bubbles!
    Posts
    30,933
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    I started that journey reading "Golf by Design" by Robert Trent Jones Jr. Its a solid read and I probably should read it again.

    I like the first example fried egg puts up. A great comparison between 2 holes that could hardly be more different strategically.





    spasticrap
    Sim 2 Max / PRGR
    3W 7W 4H - Sim 2 Max
    Miura 57 CBs - ADDI
    Odessey #7


  3. #3
    Senior Member Multiple Major Winner
    Join Date
    Dec 08, 2011
    Location
    Reaching for my Laser cos I'm a few paces off the green... :)
    Posts
    19,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benno_r View Post
    Since it has been clogging up the Ryder cup thread I thought I would move it here.

    In summary - strategy doesn't mean wailing away all day on driver with no consequence.

    Strategy means a variety of options are available, each with a credible amount of risk, and resultant reward attached to it. It means hitting a driver is viable - get it right you will get a great reward. Get it wrong, and you will get hurt.

    Going back to LGN hole 1, in theory you could hit any club in your bag, but the only viable option is to hit a club that puts you in the meat of the fairway (long iron or hybrid). Driver is not a viable option, as it brings in great risk (water or death rough), for little reward (hitting a wedge instead of an 8i into the green).

    Anyway, believe it or not Mr Fried Eggs does know a little about arketechture, so for those interested, have a read of this:

    http://www.friedegg.co/golf-courses/playability-width-strategy


    Edited for confusing thread title.

    Nice work benno

  4. #4
    Senior Member Touring Pro (European Tour)
    Join Date
    Mar 03, 2007
    Location
    Hobart TAS
    Posts
    4,843
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    The 4 best courses in Australia (RMW KH BBD BBLF) are all wide, but ask you to play to a particular part of the fairway (if one wishes tominimise the difficulty of an attacking approach shot). Out of position players can go for heroic shots if they wish but the margin for error is reduced and the penalty higher if they miss! That is the essence of strategic golf.

    If u are a chopper who doesn’t know where it is going, it is all irrelevant! Strategy only really exists for players who can aim at somewhere that they believe will improve there next shot. Otherwise they are just trying to avoid a hazard. Wide fairways but scary hazards introduce playability and interest to all levels of players as long as the strategy is appropriate!

    Hope that helps the discussion!
    Gamers
    Ping G430 Max10K 9* Driver with Accra TZ6 stiff flex shaft
    TM Stealth 2+ 3 wood with Crazy Boron 75g Stiff shaft
    Tour Edge C721 19* Hybrid with KBS Tour 80 stiff shaft
    Srixon ZX 5 (mk2) irons with Proj X LZ 5.5 shafts 4 to PW
    Callaway MD5 Raw wedges 50/10 56/14 60/12
    Lajosi Custum Flow Neck putter *Titty Pro V1X ball.

  5. #5
    Member Club Champion
    Join Date
    Nov 21, 2007
    Location
    Hawkesbury River NSW
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Great thread benno and an important topic. Andy's website and that series is fantastic, as is his series of podcasts with Tom Doak found here. http://www.friedegg.co/tom-doak-podcast/
    There are some fantastic books on the subject as well for those keen to explore a bit more, Geoff Shackelford's Grounds for Golf is a good starting point as is Alister Mackenzie's Spirit of St Andrews. I know a lot of people say they aren't interested in architecture and think its elitist and wanky but that's not really true. It's a fascinating part of the game, just like shiny new equipment or swing theory .

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 19, 2015
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benno_r View Post
    Since it has been clogging up the Ryder cup thread I thought I would move it here.

    In summary - strategy doesn't mean wailing away all day on driver with no consequence.

    Strategy means a variety of options are available, each with a credible amount of risk, and resultant reward attached to it. It means hitting a driver is viable - get it right you will get a great reward. Get it wrong, and you will get hurt.

    Going back to LGN hole 1, in theory you could hit any club in your bag, but the only viable option is to hit a club that puts you in the meat of the fairway (long iron or hybrid). Driver is not a viable option, as it brings in great risk (water or death rough), for little reward (hitting a wedge instead of an 8i into the green).

    Anyway, believe it or not Mr Fried Eggs does know a little about arketechture, so for those interested, have a read of this:

    http://www.friedegg.co/golf-courses/playability-width-strategy


    Edited for confusing thread title.
    And as always, it's based on (or should I say biased by) personal opinion. Why do you think there are so many differing opinions on golf course design? Because there's no right or wrong, it's personal opinion. It's not about understanding anything, it's about what you like or want in a golf course.

  7. #7
    Site Owner Golf Hall of Fame Inductee
    Join Date
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    44,754

    Default

    Saying it is just personal opinion is just personal opinion.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazz18 View Post
    And as always, it's based on (or should I say biased by) personal opinion. Why do you think there are so many differing opinions on golf course design? Because there's no right or wrong, it's personal opinion. It's not about understanding anything, it's about what you like or want in a golf course.
    It's not personal opinion though. Have a read and you start to see there are defining principles to each design style. It's generally easy to see if a hole fits a penal / heroic / strategic mould (as per the fried eggs examples). There is no opinion to that, there is demonstrable analysis and logic to his conclusions.

    Now if you like or don't like a certain style, of course that's personal opinion. But you can't say 17 at sawgrass being a penal hole design is "opinion".

  9. #9
    Admin Team Golf Hall of Fame Inductee
    Join Date
    Apr 01, 2006
    Location
    Sergei, Bubbles!
    Posts
    30,933
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Extremely penal golf hole, but great to watch.





    spasticrap
    Sim 2 Max / PRGR
    3W 7W 4H - Sim 2 Max
    Miura 57 CBs - ADDI
    Odessey #7


  10. #10
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteyD View Post
    Extremely penal golf hole, but great to watch.
    Of course, there is nothing wrong with Penal or Heroic (though I prefer to play strategic), there are plenty of great Penal/Heroic Holes. Nash Old 7th is an excellent representation of penal golf design in Australia.

    Anyway, for clarity, here are the definitions of heroic / penal / strategic:

    Strategic - Even designers with a penal or prescriptive bent, are prone to describing their philosophy as being strategic, such as overwhelming evidence that strategic golf makes the most sense. Strategic design is all about choices, and giving golfers the option of taking risk in order to reduce difficulty of a subsequent shot. Width is an essential ingredient of strategic golf, along with cleverly positioned hazards that tempt and test golfers across the ability spectrum.

    Penal - Penal design differs from strategic design by forcing golfers to take risks and then punishing mistakes more than rewarding a successful gamble. Penal courses are the most mundane, reducing the need for cerebral thought by instead prescribing how each hole must be played. Think water carry par 3's, and narrow par 4s and 5s through trees, bunkers, or thick rough. Little thought is needed; you simple step forward and hit the shots prescribed through design.

    Heroic - Straddling the line between strategic and penal design, heroic holes are those that allow the golfer to take large risks in order to set up a birdie opportunities. This often involves the carry of a hazard from the tee on a par 4 or 5, Whereas a misplaced drive on a strategic hole might leave you with a poor approach angle, on a heroic hole it might leave you without a golf ball.

    https://www.planetgolf.com/news/a-gl...e-architecture


  11. #11
    Senior Member Touring Pro (European Tour)
    Join Date
    Jan 20, 2013
    Posts
    4,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazz18 View Post
    And as always, it's based on (or should I say biased by) personal opinion. Why do you think there are so many differing opinions on golf course design? Because there's no right or wrong, it's personal opinion. It's not about understanding anything, it's about what you like or want in a golf course.
    Jazz: its ok to like stadium golf courses. Unfortunately GCA holds this stigma almost like a religion where 'if you don't think like us you're dumb'.

    Courses like Le Golf Nash and Sawgrass hold their rightful place and serve their purpose accordingly. On the weekend we had an exciting and stimulating ryder cup, so the course played a part in that and was designed to bring excitement and provide optimum viewing for a very large audience

  12. #12
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thecollective View Post
    Jazz: its ok to like stadium golf courses. Unfortunately GCA holds this stigma almost like a religion where 'if you don't think like us you're dumb'.

    Courses like Le Golf Nash and Sawgrass hold their rightful place and serve their purpose accordingly. On the weekend we had an exciting and stimulating ryder cup, so the course played a part in that and was designed to bring excitement and provide optimum viewing for a very large audience
    I think that's the point though - you can have whatever opinion you like on whether you like the course or not, but looking at design style is far less opinionated than most people think.

    That's why I loved the feedback from the RQ day at champs. A heap of people didn't like the course because "I hit a perfect drive to the meat of the fairway, but I had no shot to the green". Strategic golf courses aren't the be all and end all either - but for me, it is consistently the style I enjoy the most (especially as it gives me heaps of room to spray it and not be dead )

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 19, 2015
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyP View Post
    Saying it is just personal opinion is just personal opinion.
    Agreed.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Touring Pro (European Tour)
    Join Date
    Apr 16, 2014
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    Great thread. Will read it thoroughly after work.
    But for anyone interested in golf course architecture, The Fried Egg podcast is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL. I love it and for me it’s the most useful, interesting golf podcast out there. I also love The Shotgun Start, another podcast Andy Johnson has just started with Brendan Porath. I find both fascinating.
    Ping G400 Max 9* w/ KuroKage TiNi Silver 60
    Titleist 917 F2 15* w/ Aldila Rogue Max 75 S
    TaylorMade TP UDI 20* w/ KuroKage 70 S graphite
    Mizuno MP-4 4-PW w/ Project X Rifle 6.0
    SM5 Vokey 50* F Grind & 54* F Grind
    SM6 Vokey 60* S Grind
    Bettinardi Queen B 8

  15. #15
    Senior Member Touring Pro (PGA)
    Join Date
    May 27, 2013
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    5,898

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benno_r View Post
    Of course, there is nothing wrong with Penal or Heroic (though I prefer to play strategic), there are plenty of great Penal/Heroic Holes. Nash Old 7th is an excellent representation of penal golf design in Australia.

    Anyway, for clarity, here are the definitions of heroic / penal / strategic:

    Strategic - Even designers with a penal or prescriptive bent, are prone to describing their philosophy as being strategic, such as overwhelming evidence that strategic golf makes the most sense. Strategic design is all about choices, and giving golfers the option of taking risk in order to reduce difficulty of a subsequent shot. Width is an essential ingredient of strategic golf, along with cleverly positioned hazards that tempt and test golfers across the ability spectrum.

    Penal - Penal design differs from strategic design by forcing golfers to take risks and then punishing mistakes more than rewarding a successful gamble. Penal courses are the most mundane, reducing the need for cerebral thought by instead prescribing how each hole must be played. Think water carry par 3's, and narrow par 4s and 5s through trees, bunkers, or thick rough. Little thought is needed; you simple step forward and hit the shots prescribed through design.

    Heroic - Straddling the line between strategic and penal design, heroic holes are those that allow the golfer to take large risks in order to set up a birdie opportunities. This often involves the carry of a hazard from the tee on a par 4 or 5, Whereas a misplaced drive on a strategic hole might leave you with a poor approach angle, on a heroic hole it might leave you without a golf ball.

    https://www.planetgolf.com/news/a-gl...e-architecture

    This is where most opinionated people get lost.

    You can argue opinions relating to good or bad courses until the cows come home based on what you prefer.

    What you cant do is argue what is strategic and what is not.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 19, 2015
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BUSHY View Post
    This is where most opinionated people get lost.

    You can argue opinions relating to good or bad courses until the cows come home based on what you prefer.

    What you cant do is argue what is strategic and what is not.
    How so?

  17. #17
    Senior Member Touring Pro (PGA)
    Join Date
    May 27, 2013
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    5,898

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazz18 View Post
    How so?
    How so what?

    Have a read of....

    “The Spirit is St Andrews” by Alister MacKenzie
    “The Anatomy of a Golf Course” by Tom Doak
    “Golf Architecture-economy in course construction and green keeping” by Alister MacKenzie
    “The Links” by Robert Hunter

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 19, 2015
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    How do opinionated people get lost?

    Why can't you argue what is strategic or not? What might be strategic to one player may not be for another depending on any amount of variables, even the weather.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Touring Pro (European Tour)
    Join Date
    Apr 16, 2014
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    It’s pretty weird that this very, very interesting topic of conversation has come to this point where we need to state the difference between objective and subjective. But nonetheless, it has. So:

    “Objective means based on fact rather than on feelings and opinions. Subjective means based on feelings and opinions rather than on facts.”

    This is why you can’t argue what is strategic and what is not. It’s not a matter of opinion - it’s factual. You can argue whether you like or dislike strategic course design til the cows come home, but I can’t see any validity in arguing about whether a course is a strategic design or not.

    The whole point of strategic design is to create a course that is playable for everyone. You can choose your strategy; it’s not dictated to you by the design. Given that, how can a course be strategic for one player and not for another?
    Ping G400 Max 9* w/ KuroKage TiNi Silver 60
    Titleist 917 F2 15* w/ Aldila Rogue Max 75 S
    TaylorMade TP UDI 20* w/ KuroKage 70 S graphite
    Mizuno MP-4 4-PW w/ Project X Rifle 6.0
    SM5 Vokey 50* F Grind & 54* F Grind
    SM6 Vokey 60* S Grind
    Bettinardi Queen B 8

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FuzzyJuzzy View Post
    how can a course be strategic for one player and not for another?
    Wouldn't it depend on what a player can and can not do? A hazard across the fairway at 180-220 from the tee gives a short hitter who drives it 190 no choice, the same hazard gives a longer hitter who drives it 240 if well hit has a choice layup or bomb it over depending on what the next shot is.

  21. #21
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hacker View Post
    Wouldn't it depend on what a player can and can not do? A hazard across the fairway at 180-220 from the tee gives a short hitter who drives it 190 no choice, the same hazard gives a longer hitter who drives it 240 if well hit has a choice layup or bomb it over depending on what the next shot is.
    No not really. A strategic hazard gives people the option to flirt with the hazard - either going over it, or around it with an improved second shot for taking the risk - not an all or nothing "Hit over, or hit it short".

    The scenario you describe would be penal design if the hazard is a bunker or thick rough, or heroic design if the hazard is water.

  22. #22
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Sep 03, 2012
    Location
    Still on the green
    Posts
    13,241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benno_r View Post
    No not really. A strategic hazard gives people the option to flirt with the hazard - either going over it, or around it with an improved second shot for taking the risk - not an all or nothing "Hit over, or hit it short".

    The scenario you describe would be penal design if the hazard is a bunker or thick rough, or heroic design if the hazard is water.
    The bloke ranked 193 in driving distance on the pga tour averages about 250 and number 1 averages 280. To clear a hazard at 220 is a hero shot for these blokes?

    Well bugger me.

  23. #23
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 04, 2013
    Location
    Maryborough QLD
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3puttpete View Post
    The bloke ranked 193 in driving distance on the pga tour averages about 250 and number 1 averages 280. To clear a hazard at 220 is a hero shot for these blokes?

    Well bugger me.
    No, but it's a hero shot for me. I can't take it on. And referring to the definition of strategic golf:

    "Strategic design is all about choices, and giving golfers the option of taking risk in order to reduce difficulty of a subsequent shot."

    and

    "
    cleverly positioned hazards that tempt and test golfers across the ability spectrum".


    So while it might appear strategic for a bomber, it's not strategic for shorter hitters, so it fails the test of being strategic design.

    Edit: Modify the hole so the hazard no longer goes across the entire fairway, and now I have the option to try sneak up the side. All of sudden the 2 principles above become more relevant, and the hole changes to something that could be defined as strategic (you would also need to assess the following shot to see if my trying to sneak up the side offers an advantage of course).
    Last edited by benno_r; 6th October 2018 at 09:53 AM.

  24. #24
    Victorious Captain Golf Hall of Fame Inductee
    Join Date
    Feb 25, 2008
    Location
    Bonnie Doon Driving Range
    Posts
    29,787

    Default

    Mate, you blokes take it too seriously!
    Hit it, find it, hit it again till you hole out.
    I’m not good enough to know where any of my shots are going, course design is irrelevant to me....
    Keep up the discussion, I’ll get some Scotch Fingers for my coffee.

  25. #25
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Sep 03, 2012
    Location
    Still on the green
    Posts
    13,241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    I’m not good enough to know where any of my shots are going
    I think you mean you prefer a strategic course


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Breaking Par Strategy.
    By Richo1 in forum Golf Matters
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 28th December 2015, 09:13 AM
  2. 4 man ambrose strategy
    By WBennett in forum Golf Matters
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 19th February 2012, 06:16 PM
  3. Understanding shafts
    By jbhayman in forum Equip Me
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 17th April 2009, 09:07 AM
  4. Par 5 strategy
    By Scottt in forum Golf Matters
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 20th August 2008, 10:37 PM
  5. Ambrose strategy?
    By goughy in forum Golf Matters
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 29th October 2007, 01:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Back to top