We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Gimmicky Hole Designs

DGord said:
Just thought of another gimmicky hole but it probably falls into the unfair category. Since the course was designed in the mid1920s it was probably considered extremely gimmicky for the time:

200+yrd par 3 with a 180+yrd carry over water from a significantly elevated tee to a very deep green (maybe 50+ yards deep) with a Biarritz separating the front and back that is a couple feet deep and 8-10 feet wide. Lays out beautifully but if you are in the valley in the middle of the green or have to putt across it, good luck in 3-putting the green. The pin was seldom in the back but if it was in the back it became a 220-230 yard par 3 where if you landed the ball short of the valley on the green, you would be lucky to get a 4 and would be happy with a 5. It is the 9th hole and as a result can either kill a round or propel you with confidence onto the back 9. Overall a "fun" and beautiful hole but just plain unfair.

2a6bd351d58138b57cfe21f59829ccdb.jpg
Click to expand...

This is the a Ninth at Yale and is considered one of the most classically well done par 3's in the country. It is not gimmicky at all and was never considered as such. The designer, Seth Raynor, incorporates template designs and the Biarritz green had been around more than a 100 years before the course at Yale was designed.

I played it as a 20 handicap and parred the hole as well.

I don't think the hole is unfair at all; the green is enormous, so even if you end up in the Biarritz or on the other side, you are putting.

To me, gimmicky is something that is contrived, or existing only for attention. The floating green at Coeur D'Alene is a good example.
 
c.a.eleric said:
par 4. mid iron layup off the tee, mid iron into the green.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's the 13th at my home course. I'm usually hitting hybrid, hybrid. If the pin is back I gotta hit hybrid FW. It also has OB left and right. Hate that hole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
This is the a Ninth at Yale and is considered one of the most classically well done par 3's in the country. It is not gimmicky at all and was never considered as such. The designer, Seth Raynor, incorporates template designs and the Biarritz green had been around more than a 100 years before the course at Yale was designed.

I played it as a 20 handicap and parred the hole as well.

I don't think the hole is unfair at all; the green is enormous, so even if you end up in the Biarritz or on the other side, you are putting.

To me, gimmicky is something that is contrived, or existing only for attention. The floating green at Coeur D'Alene is a good example.
Click to expand...

Meant to be played on the ground and run the ball back to the last section.

Yale9old.jpg
 
Punch bowl holes where its total luck where your shot ends up...
 
Generally speaking I find it gimmicky when there is a bunker right in the middle of the fairway, in the landing area. If you're going to do that as a designer, you better have a huge fairway where there is room on both sides of the bunker. Some of the absolute best designers and best courses have holes like that I and hate them. Golf is hard enough, and I dont think you should ever be penalized for striping a ball down the middle.
 
Lions81 said:
Generally speaking I find it gimmicky when there is a bunker right in the middle of the fairway, in the landing area. If you're going to do that as a designer, you better have a huge fairway where there is room on both sides of the bunker. Some of the absolute best designers and best courses have holes like that I and hate them. Golf is hard enough, and I dont think you should ever be penalized for striping a ball down the middle.
Click to expand...

I love them on holes were they sit in the ideal area you want to be to have the best angle into the green while having plenty of room to bail wide but doing so makes your second shot much harder.
 
tahoebum said:
Par 5's where I'm forced to hit iron off the tee. This hole comes to mind although the picture doesn't tell the story. A 571 yard double dogleg par 5 that really requires a 210 yard tee shot perfectly placed to set you up for a much longer and tighter 2nd shot. The second shot requires that you hit a 20 yard cut with a 3 or 4 wood to stay in play or layup for a 175 yard approach. I hate this par 5 more than any other I've played and it's not close.

photoc.jpeg
Click to expand...


That's what happens when your a "beast" ... stop hitting it so far! Play like the rest of us ... driver, 3 wood, wedge, putt if were are lucky! LOL
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
This is the a Ninth at Yale and is considered one of the most classically well done par 3's in the country. It is not gimmicky at all and was never considered as such. The designer, Seth Raynor, incorporates template designs and the Biarritz green had been around more than a 100 years before the course at Yale was designed.

I played it as a 20 handicap and parred the hole as well.

I don't think the hole is unfair at all; the green is enormous, so even if you end up in the Biarritz or on the other side, you are putting.

To me, gimmicky is something that is contrived, or existing only for attention. The floating green at Coeur D'Alene is a good example.
Click to expand...

I happen to really like the Yale golf course overall - probably one of my favorite golf courses in the country - love the many, many challenges of the course which otherwise make a shorter course play very hard. I've played it a lot and and loved every minute of it. Don't get me wrong, I really like the look of the 9th hole and the challenge and fun of the hole and did not raise it as gimmicky because I didn't like the hole.

I've parred the hole many times but, having either been in the trench or having had to putt through it to the other side probably 15-20 times (would have been more if the pin wasn't most frequently on the front tier and if I didn't have a tendency to find the traps on the left) and still finding it almost impossible to figure out the break into the trench and how the ball moves out of it, I have always viewed it as "contrived" extra difficulty - virtually a penalty stroke unless you are lucky or have been able to figure it out over time - almost better to be in the front left trap than on the back of the green putting through the trench. Given the need to hit a long iron or hybrid off the tee and the firmness of the greens, it also made it more likely that a ball hitting on the front tier would run into the trench.

I don't know the history and background of the biarritz concept and so may not as a result be best able to appreciate its use. Plenty of greens have tiers and slopes, etc. but to have a wide and deep trench separating the two sides has always seemed a bit unfair to me and existing for attention/uniqueness or as contrived extra difficulty. Taken in the abstract, it almost seems like a crazy concept. Of course, there are many design elements that are used to make a course more difficult or to require certain types of shots on certain holes. Is this design element still used in current/recent courses? If not, is that because people thought it was unfair or is there another reason that it doesn't get used more often in design now?
 
Last edited:
It was meant to be a very long approach and the player needed to land on the front part as the ball goes in the valley not sure if it will come out and then you see it reappear knowing it was a good shot. This is a hole meant for the ground game, now players just fly the ball and stop it where it lands so it isn't as common anymore. A true modern equivalent would be rock hard green with about 265 yards to a back pin. That would force players to make the shot a player with hickory shafted clubs would have experienced it
 
ntanygd760 said:
It was meant to be a very long approach and the player needed to land on the front part as the ball goes in the valley not sure if it will come out and then you see it reappear knowing it was a good shot. This is a hole meant for the ground game, now players just fly the ball and stop it where it lands so it isn't as common anymore. A true modern equivalent would be rock hard green with about 265 yards to a back pin. That would force players to make the shot a player with hickory shafted clubs would have experienced it
Click to expand...

Good point - must have been a particularly difficult hole with the equipment people were using when the course opened.... Interesting, never thought about how it would have been played.

Did some searching around the internet on Biarritz greens and I got the sense that when the hole was designed, the front part of the green may not have been intended to have the flag but rather be a "fairway" of sorts running up and through the trench to the actually "green". Very interesting concept. Also found a video of someone playing from the trench and the height of it went up to at least his neck - I'd completely forgotten how deep it is - and this one seems much deeper than those at other courses (at least from the pictures that I found - for instance, it looks like the one at Chicago Golf Club is in front of the green and only goes to waist height at the most).
 
Last edited:
DGord said:
I happen to really like the Yale golf course overall - probably one of my favorite golf courses in the country - love the many, many challenges of the course which otherwise make a shorter course play very hard. I've played it a lot and and loved every minute of it. Don't get me wrong, I really like the look of the 9th hole and the challenge and fun of the hole and did not raise it as gimmicky because I didn't like the hole.

I've parred the hole many times but, having either been in the trench or having had to putt through it to the other side probably 15-20 times (would have been more if the pin wasn't most frequently on the front tier and if I didn't have a tendency to find the traps on the left) and still finding it almost impossible to figure out the break into the trench and how the ball moves out of it, I have always viewed it as "contrived" extra difficulty - virtually a penalty stroke unless you are lucky or have been able to figure it out over time - almost better to be in the front left trap than on the back of the green putting through the trench. Given the need to hit a long iron or hybrid off the tee and the firmness of the greens, it also made it more likely that a ball hitting on the front tier would run into the trench.

I don't know the history and background of the biarritz concept and so may not as a result be best able to appreciate its use. Plenty of greens have tiers and slopes, etc. but to have a wide and deep trench separating the two sides has always seemed a bit unfair to me and existing for attention/uniqueness or as contrived extra difficulty. Taken in the abstract, it almost seems like a crazy concept. Of course, there are many design elements that are used to make a course more difficult or to require certain types of shots on certain holes. Is this design element still used in current/recent courses? If not, is that because people thought it was unfair or is there another reason that it doesn't get used more often in design now?
Click to expand...

Yale is one of my favorite courses played as well and I agree with a lot of your characterizations of it. As for the Ninth green, I recall the Biarritz being taller than me when I was in it, so I think that's about right. But putting from one side to the other, or from the bottom to the top., isn't unfair IMO, it's just a helluva putt. Apparently, however, at a recent college match, a player chipped from one side to the other, tearing up the green. While many felt this was egregious, I think he was playing the shot he needed, so there's always that option I guess. The tees are fairly above the green, so it plays shorter than the stated yardage and makes it easier to stick the green.

As for why the Biarritz isn't prevalent in modern designs, I'd guess it's tough to maintain, which decreases preference for it. You see a lot more Biarritz fairways nowadays, but there are some more recent courses that incorporate them. Off the top of my head, Glen Mills and Black Creek have Biarritz greens. The one at Black Creek may even be more severe than Yale.
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
Apparently, however, at a recent college match, a player chipped from one side to the other, tearing up the green. While many felt this was egregious, I think he was playing the shot he needed, so there's always that option I guess.
Click to expand...

I recently played a course with a bunker in the middle of the green. I ended up on the wrong side of it and ended up chipping over it. I repaired my mark as best as I could, and didn't feel a bit guilty about making it. If you're gonna put something like that there, I'm gonna play it as necessary.
 
DGord said:
Good point - must have been a particularly difficult hole with the equipment people were using when the course opened.... Interesting, never thought about how it would have been played.

Did some searching around the internet on Biarritz greens and I got the sense that when the hole was designed, the front part of the green may not have been intended to have the flag but rather be a "fairway" of sorts running up and through the trench to the actually "green". Very interesting concept. Also found a video of someone playing from the trench and the height of it went up to at least his neck - I'd completely forgotten how deep it is - and this one seems much deeper than those at other courses (at least from the pictures that I found - for instance, it looks like the one at Chicago Golf Club is in front of the green and only goes to waist height at the most).
Click to expand...

Also if you aren't comfortable putting from the first part down and back up to the 3rd no reason you cant take a wedge and just go over the valley

And Philly pointed it out as well. No reason you have to use a putter on the green.
 
ntanygd760 said:
Also if you aren't comfortable putting from the first part down and back up to the 3rd no reason you cant take a wedge and just go over the valley

And Philly pointed it out as well. No reason you have to use a putter on the green.
Click to expand...

Interesting, never thought about chipping on a green - maybe because I'd have such a difficult time "picking" the ball clean and not tearing up the green at least a bit.
 
I find split fairways with trees/ditch in the middle to be gimmicky
 
This whole course - bogey club / log cabin.
It's the most exclusive place in St. Louis and I've played it once. There is no way I would pay to play it. The greens are fabulous but the whole course is a giant gimmicky goofy layout. The only thing it's missing is the windmill and the clown on 18 to win a free round.
f70462a1a708698d83f53f47ed9c8e17.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
One of my local courses has a par 6. First 200 yards or so is straight and flat, then the next 400+ yards is straight downhill. All balls hit onto this part of the fairway collect to a single point at the bottom like its mini golf.

6283-800.jpg
 
Would pay good money to watch someone lose control of their push cart and watch it going flying down that hill.
 
Any hole where I am in the course designers designated landing spot on a par 4 or 5 and I can't see any part of the green, just the flag. The Bull at Pinehurst Farms in Sheboygan WI has a classic example of this. It's a 321 yard par 4 #7 (by far the shortest). It claims to have a high risk reward factor, but unless you're Bubba and can carry the ball 321 uphill, you're not getting to this green. There is a huge bunker short of the green at about 285. To carry the hazzard on the left is 215, the beginning of the fairway is 165. All of this would be fine except you cannot see any part of the green with a layup. To make things worse, it slopes away severely. Here is what I mean.

http://prntscr.com/9z3byb
http://prntscr.com/9z3d8m

Unless you've played the course a dozen times, don't expect to make a birdie...
 
Sharkguy95 said:
Any hole where I am in the course designers designated landing spot on a par 4 or 5 and I can't see any part of the green, just the flag. The Bull at Pinehurst Farms in Sheboygan WI has a classic example of this. It's a 321 yard par 4 #7 (by far the shortest). It claims to have a high risk reward factor, but unless you're Bubba and can carry the ball 321 uphill, you're not getting to this green. There is a huge bunker short of the green at about 285. To carry the hazzard on the left is 215, the beginning of the fairway is 165. All of this would be fine except you cannot see any part of the green with a layup. To make things worse, it slopes away severely. Here is what I mean.

http://prntscr.com/9z3byb
http://prntscr.com/9z3d8m

Unless you've played the course a dozen times, don't expect to make a birdie...
Click to expand...

Don't quite agree with you on this. How do you really make a steep uphill approach shot so that the green surface is visible? The 1st hole on the (Lakewood, CO)Fox Hollow Canyon nine is so uphill that they even had put an extra long flagstick to make even the top of the flag visible from the driver landing area. It's still a very good par 4. I've played at least two or three others that were similar. If the intended shot is from a sufficient distance below the green, there is really no option. That doesn't make it a gimmick, just a difficult hole in my opinion.
 
That #7, I'd be playing from green, 229 yds, and I'd be hitting a 5 or 6 iron off the tee to lay up. No way am I trying to "go for it." Even playing with a group of women from the red at 204, I'm hitting an 8 iron to lay up because of that elevation change - the ball could hit the back wall and end up in that bunker with my driver shot.
 
Fourputt said:
Don't quite agree with you on this. How do you really make a steep uphill approach shot so that the green surface is visible? The 1st hole on the (Lakewood, CO)Fox Hollow Canyon nine is so uphill that they even had put an extra long flagstick to make even the top of the flag visible from the driver landing area. It's still a very good par 4. I've played at least two or three others that were similar. If the intended shot is from a sufficient distance below the green, there is really no option. That doesn't make it a gimmick, just a difficult hole in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I'm a firm believer that everything should be in front of a golfer if he or she is in the correct position. I'm not saying that all steep uphill upproach shots are gimmicky, or that false fronts are a joke. What I'm saying is that there should be a reward for being in the correct position off the tee, and a punishment if you're not. I have not played that course so I can't same anything about it but, on this particular hole with a perfect tee shot, you have to play a guessing game. Even from the beginning of the fairway 175 yards back you can't see the green.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 
Gimmicky Hole Designs

f8cdf3d6d5a959080d2c37de4bf0514e.jpg


#6 at 1757 Golf Club, Ashburn, VA.

You can see the tee boxes at the upper left of the pic. Your tee shot from everywhere but the most forward tees is out a chute of trees toward a huge retaining wall. Your approach is then a 90* right turn from your tee shot. How much water you have to carry depends on how far you hit your tee shot.

There are a couple other kludgy holes on the course due to the constraints of the site, but this is the worst of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
185 yd Par 3 with water short and right of the green. Tee to green is lined by trees on both sides and over time the trees have grown in on both sides pretty much eliminating any type of shot shape. I have a feeling the tight tee shot wasn't meant to be as tight as it is these days, but it appears they haven't trimmed the trees back in a while. It feels like you're trying to play a recovery shot out of the trees after hitting a bad drive. Interestingly enough, I typically play the hole fairly well (unless I'm on a great round) and probably have birdied it more than any other hole on the course, but just seems silly for the type of clientele the course is catered to.
 
I'm not good enough to really look at the way a hole should be played and then execute that, so it's diffucult for me to speak in this. The only thing I can contribute is the hole where the entire fairway slopes so drastically to one side that a ball landing anywhere on it will be wet unless you've hit a fade or draw to account for the slope.

I played a hole like this last weekend. Two of our foursome hit out tee shot so they landed within 10 feet of the right side of the fairway, and they ended up rolling into the water on the left. The only guy stayed in play landed in the rough to the right of the fairway, which is apparently the thing to do.

Thinking more about it I'm not sure if this was gimmicky or just poorly designed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top