Golf Club Atlas

GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Adam Lawrence on May 16, 2022, 06:37:03 AM

Title: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Adam Lawrence on May 16, 2022, 06:37:03 AM
An odd one. Can a par three be strategic (given the essence of strategy is risking a hazard to earn an easier next shot)?

I suppose it can if there is a potential reason for aiming somewhere other than the flag -- for example into Bobby Locke's Hollow on Calamity at Royal Portrush. Or if there is more than one way to access the flag, as for example on the ninth at Sweetens Cove, where you can either fire a high wedge at the pin or use the huge Redan kicker mound to run the ball down. But I have a niggling doubt that anyone who was genuinely focused on his score would do that. Is it really strategy if you'd only use a route if playing for giggles?

Thoughts on strategy in one shot holes please? And if you can think of holes that have strategy, please name them and explain why.

Adam

ps this is research for a potential article in GCA.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Adrian_Stiff on May 16, 2022, 07:24:54 AM
Yes. Strategy exists in different forms for different abilities so;


At a short hole a lesser player strategically is best to play away from extreme trouble, ie pond on left so miss on the right.


Strategy at short holes fades almost to zero as players become exceptional but there are still isolated holes where it creeps in. Pin locations too at high level golf can offer similar options where it is best to miss or play away from the direct route.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Thomas Dai on May 16, 2022, 07:34:37 AM
Billy Casper won the US Open at Winged Foot laying-up on one particular par-3 and making par in each round.
atb
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Niall C on May 16, 2022, 09:57:14 AM
Yes undoubtedly. Historically Hogan played short at the 16th at Carnoustie each day in his one and only appearance in the Open. These days the safe play on the 12th (?) at Augusta is to go over the front bunker and not aim at the pin. Of course on a par 3 the hole position on any given day would tend to have much more of a bearing on say the strategy for a par 4 or par 5.


Niall
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: John Chilver-Stainer on May 16, 2022, 10:06:08 AM
The 16th at ANGC is a recent reminder of strategy for the lower left pin locations.
Many players choosing to use the slope to bring the ball back to the hole rather than a direct howitzer with less margin for error.

Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Niall C on May 16, 2022, 10:11:19 AM
John


Do you think that is actually strategy ? After all it's a route to the same result. Seems like a no-brainer to me. A bit like going for the hole by hitting a draw rather than a fade. Either way you are still going for the hole, whereas laying up is distinct from going for the green/hole.


Niall
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Ira Fishman on May 16, 2022, 10:18:51 AM
CPC 16 is the obvious example. But to Niall’s point, pin location even on a shorter hole can influence strategy. If the pin is right on 16 at Somerset Hills, left short probably a better play.



Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Rick Lane on May 16, 2022, 03:48:11 PM
On a par three with the green edges higher than the middle section ie a bowl, or a potato chip type, or what some have called “collecting” greens (usually attributed to Tillie) , I think it’s a strategic play to NOT fire at a pin tucked on one side, where a miss would leave you short sided with a green running away from you, while if you played for the fat part of the green, even if you miss on that side, you have a green running now toward the pin….an easier recovery.


My home course has a couple of these, where the penalty for aggression is large, but laying off the pin leaves a more generous recovery, albeit a tougher or non existent birdie chance.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Peter Pallotta on May 16, 2022, 04:19:14 PM
I've long thought the penal-strategic divide a false one, more a function of our dichotomous (and conventional) thinking than of any actual playing experience -- as if severe hazards or difficult shot-demands necessarily preclude thoughtful decision-making, and conversely as if the mere possibility of making a bold/prudent choice automatically elevates this garden-variety decision-making into the lofty realm of 'strategy'. Which is to say: I think when it comes to the vast majority of all golf courses/golf holes it's more appropriate to talk about 'tactics' than about 'penal vs strategic'; and even then only when it comes to Par 4s and 5s, when we can at least try to 'plot together' and execute more than one single shot as part of our plan to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes -- and then only if that was actually our plan in the first place, which it often isn't for many fun-loving golfers, not all that concerned about score (or for those who get to play 16 at CPC and who already know they haven't come all that way to lay up!). So, my answer: No, since Par 3 holes can barely be considered 'tactical', I'm almost certain that they can't be 'strategic'. Personally I'd prefer them all to be 'penal' and be done with it -- surrounded by deep bunkers and with small contoured greens, played in the wind and rain. The thrills and drama and satisfaction I'd then get playing them would more than make up for any lack of, ahem, 'strategy'.

 
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Sean_A on May 16, 2022, 05:01:13 PM
I've long thought the penal-strategic divide a false one, more a function of our dichotomous (and conventional) thinking than of any actual playing experience -- as if severe hazards or difficult shot-demands necessarily preclude thoughtful decision-making, and conversely as if the mere possibility of making a bold/prudent choice automatically elevates this garden-variety decision-making into the lofty realm of 'strategy'. Which is to say: I think when it comes to the vast majority of all golf courses/golf holes it's more accurate and appropriate to talk about 'tactics' than about 'strategy'; and even then only when it comes to Par 4s and 5s, when we can at least try to 'plot together' and execute more than one single shot as part of our plan to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes -- and then only if that was actually our plan in the first place, which it often isn't for many fun-loving golfers, not all that concerned about score (or for those who get to play 16 at CPC and who already know they haven't come all that way to lay up!). So, my answer: No, since Par 3 holes can barely be considered 'tactical', I'm almost certain that they can't be 'strategic'. Personally I'd prefer them all to be 'penal' and be done with it -- surrounded by deep bunkers and with small contoured greens, played in the wind and rain. The thrills and drama and satisfaction I'd then get playing them would more than make up for any lack of, ahem, 'strategy'.

While I fully appreciate the concept of blurred lines between between absolutes of strategy and penal, I couldn't disagree more that there are no ends of the spectrum which are manifested in design.

Ciao
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Peter Pallotta on May 16, 2022, 05:09:39 PM
I've long thought the penal-strategic divide a false one, more a function of our dichotomous (and conventional) thinking than of any actual playing experience -- as if severe hazards or difficult shot-demands necessarily preclude thoughtful decision-making, and conversely as if the mere possibility of making a bold/prudent choice automatically elevates this garden-variety decision-making into the lofty realm of 'strategy'. Which is to say: I think when it comes to the vast majority of all golf courses/golf holes it's more accurate and appropriate to talk about 'tactics' than about 'strategy'; and even then only when it comes to Par 4s and 5s, when we can at least try to 'plot together' and execute more than one single shot as part of our plan to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes -- and then only if that was actually our plan in the first place, which it often isn't for many fun-loving golfers, not all that concerned about score (or for those who get to play 16 at CPC and who already know they haven't come all that way to lay up!). So, my answer: No, since Par 3 holes can barely be considered 'tactical', I'm almost certain that they can't be 'strategic'. Personally I'd prefer them all to be 'penal' and be done with it -- surrounded by deep bunkers and with small contoured greens, played in the wind and rain. The thrills and drama and satisfaction I'd then get playing them would more than make up for any lack of, ahem, 'strategy'.
While I fully appreciate the concept of blurred lines between between absolutes of strategy and penal, I couldn't disagree more that there are no ends of the spectrum which are manifested in design.
Ciao
In terms of Adam's question, then, does this mean you think Par 3s can definitely be 'strategic' -- and clearly manifest that 'end of the design spectrum' in marked contrast to penal Par 3s?   
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Tim Martin on May 16, 2022, 05:18:11 PM
Isn’t strategy a consideration for every hole/shot if the end game is to finish in the least amount of strokes?
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Sean_A on May 16, 2022, 05:46:22 PM
I've long thought the penal-strategic divide a false one, more a function of our dichotomous (and conventional) thinking than of any actual playing experience -- as if severe hazards or difficult shot-demands necessarily preclude thoughtful decision-making, and conversely as if the mere possibility of making a bold/prudent choice automatically elevates this garden-variety decision-making into the lofty realm of 'strategy'. Which is to say: I think when it comes to the vast majority of all golf courses/golf holes it's more accurate and appropriate to talk about 'tactics' than about 'strategy'; and even then only when it comes to Par 4s and 5s, when we can at least try to 'plot together' and execute more than one single shot as part of our plan to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes -- and then only if that was actually our plan in the first place, which it often isn't for many fun-loving golfers, not all that concerned about score (or for those who get to play 16 at CPC and who already know they haven't come all that way to lay up!). So, my answer: No, since Par 3 holes can barely be considered 'tactical', I'm almost certain that they can't be 'strategic'. Personally I'd prefer them all to be 'penal' and be done with it -- surrounded by deep bunkers and with small contoured greens, played in the wind and rain. The thrills and drama and satisfaction I'd then get playing them would more than make up for any lack of, ahem, 'strategy'.
While I fully appreciate the concept of blurred lines between between absolutes of strategy and penal, I couldn't disagree more that there are no ends of the spectrum which are manifested in design.
Ciao
In terms of Adam's question, then, does this mean you think Par 3s can definitely be 'strategic' -- and clearly manifest that 'end of the design spectrum' in marked contrast to penal Par 3s?   

I wouldn't go that far. You described a classic penal par three with a carry requirement and trouble on all sides as your preferred par 3. There are plenty of short holes which offer more choices than that. The Redan is one such type of hole. Although, I would suggest that part of strategy on a short hole can be identifying the miss which offers a decent chance at a recovery par. Because golfers usually choose to ignore these outlets or aren't good enough to take advantage of these outlets on a consistent basis doesn't negate their existence. The real difficulty in the strategic-penal continuum is to keep courses playable, yet interesting for most golfers. Variety is king.

Ciao
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Mark_Fine on May 16, 2022, 06:06:28 PM
Thomas,
That was #3 at Winged Foot West. 


Adam,
I am late to the party but how are you defining “strategy”?  The strategy (or how best/what options you have to play) some par threes can change dramatically depending on hole location. And what I call the “hazard value” of certain hazards whether it be a bunker, water, a hollow, a tree,….can change significantly as well depending on where the flag is located.  Sometimes a bunker for example can be your friend whereas other times that same bunker can be death.  Our 3rd hole at Lehigh is just one of hundreds of examples.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on May 16, 2022, 06:34:20 PM
I've said it before, but because there is no shot relationship inherent in par 3 holes, I like the template or other shot concept holes where the main thing is to hit a certain type of shot for best results.


The precision shot (small green) is great for par 3's, with little strategy, because you can control the distance from all tees.  The


Redan is good, or any hole calling for high backspin, using a kick slope to roll closer to pin (maybe Dell hole). 


I feel like the Biaritzz is okay on other holes, even better than most par 3 holes. 


Calling for a shot pattern for similar reasons is good, i.e., overhanging trees semi force a fade or draw.


A very large green with several smaller targets is good, spreads wear, may make golfer fall asleep.


With a ball on the tee, and yardage control (again) of par 3 holes, a green sitting 45 degrees where you have to combine distance and angle would be good on a medium to long medium par 3.  That is a pretty hard shot from the variety of distances you would get on longer holes.


Most architects have felt water (or native) carries are fairest on par 3 holes, iron in hand, ball on tee minimizes hazard.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Tommy Williamsen on May 17, 2022, 05:24:36 AM
We can say that par threes generally afford fewer strategic choices than other holes.
If I were to play 16 at Cypress Point with my aged body I might take the strategic choice of playing out to the left.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Thomas Dai on May 17, 2022, 05:54:37 AM
Doesn't, shouldn't, a players strategy on a par-3 depend on whether or not their handicap gives them a shot or maybe two or more shots on the hole?
And then there's playing into or against the wind amongst a few other variables.


atb
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Adam Lawrence on May 17, 2022, 07:04:33 AM
Isn’t strategy a consideration for every hole/shot if the end game is to finish in the least amount of strokes?


No, I don't think so. Let's posit a par three with a very large and almost totally flat green. There is no strategy there, just execution -- how close to the hole are you capable of hitting it?
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Brett Meyer on May 17, 2022, 07:45:30 AM
Unless you're shooting at every flag, there's strategy on par 3s.

As several others have sort-of mentioned, I think that a decision is strategic when you have to multiple decisions to achieve an objective. The objective in golf (usually) is to hole the ball in the fewest number of shots. The strategy is in thinking backwards from the objective and leaving yourself in the best position at each decision node to achieve that objective, taking into account to risk it takes to get to each. Clearly there can be strategy on par 4s and 5s because you need multiple shots to hit the green and there will be more and less risky routes. Thinking backward from the green, you'd want to leave yourself the easiest approach. But that usually requires a riskier first or second shot to get to that position. That's strategic thinking and everyone here understands it.

It's less clear that you have this on par 3s because most people are going for the green in one. But there are par 3s on which there's a decision to go for it in one for most (16th at Cypress Point) and a lot of golfers always have this decision on a par 3. Then there's strategy because you have to consider your score if you take on the risk and fail vs. laying up/bailing out. So long par 3s or ones with a lot of bunkers on one side and a bailout area on the other are strategic.

There can also be strategy on par 3s on a smaller scale. Even if you're going for the green in one, there's a choice whether to play at the pin or play away from it. Even though the difference may only be 30 ft., it still requires this thinking so there's still strategy. Greens with a lot of pin positions that require you to take on risk to get near them are strategic because you might choose to play a few dozen feet away from them. It's not as stark as the long par 3 where you aim away from the green, but it's still strategy. So some of the Mike Strantz par 3s with greens with long skinny sections are strategic. Or even just a green with some heavy contour and a pin where going right at it and missing leaves you with a really tough putt.

But a lot of what we're talking about on par 3s, as others have mentioned, is tactics rather than strategy: not a decision about where you're trying to get but how you're going to get there. The redan is an example of this. You've decided that you want to go at the pin, but you can do that two ways, going right at it or running one in. That's an example of tactics, not strategy. Well, there might be some strategy if you think that the likelihood of getting really close is higher if you go right at it than if you run one in...
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: mike_malone on May 17, 2022, 07:55:57 AM
Flynn’s use of angles creates strategy on par threes. When the green angles and the bunker is set at an angle there is green beyond the bunker. The decision is how much bunker to take on or to just use the opening he often provides.


I can never understand bunkers parallel to the green. What’s the strategy?

Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Ira Fishman on May 17, 2022, 08:24:09 AM
Isn’t the Dell at Lahinch a strategic Par 3?


13 at Blackwolf River might be borderline sadistic, but it is strategic.


Links courses when the wind is blowing present several strategic Par 3s.


Ira
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Tim Gavrich on May 17, 2022, 11:37:52 AM
Strategy is all about what the next shot is going to be like. As long as there's a next shot, there's strategy.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on May 17, 2022, 11:47:10 AM
Right down to the 4th putt?
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Tim Gavrich on May 17, 2022, 11:48:30 AM
Right down to the 4th putt?
I misplay, I misplay, I misplay, I make.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on May 17, 2022, 01:57:39 PM
Adam,


I just had a thought.  Instead of analyzing par 3 holes in the traditional fashion, could you look at them in light of the Broadie/Fawcette type strategy of modern day?


We have all seen the tee shot strategy, usually knowing that the total dispersion pattern is about 20% of length, i.e. 60 yards on a 300 yard tee shot, so aim at least 30 yards away from trouble, but I'm not sure how they attack the similar strategic thinking on par 3 holes.


My first thought might be that the Eden Hole isn't a terrible concept, especially if there is a deep sand hazard or water vs easier hazards on the other side.  Of course, many greens feature this, but again, the chance to test that statistics strategy from distance controlled tees and the perfect lie might make it even better on par 3 holes?


Also, it seems like at least one par 3, focused on distance control, i.e., shallow greens might be considered in a set of 4, and as mentioned, the 45 degree green, a la Augusta 12 could be an oft used type of green.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: John Chilver-Stainer on May 17, 2022, 02:38:24 PM
John


Do you think that is actually strategy ? After all it's a route to the same result. Seems like a no-brainer to me. A bit like going for the hole by hitting a draw rather than a fade. Either way you are still going for the hole, whereas laying up is distinct from going for the green/hole.


Niall


I take your point, if Strategy is defined as choosing a shot deliberatly not to get in or close to the hole. But is a Strategic golf course just about laying up or not laying up?


I've always understood a Strategic golf course is where one is confronted with a choice of alternative shots.


Approach shots, where a bounce off a kicker plate, or playing to a back stop, or a bump and run negotiating gaps between bunkers, or just a well struck shot with backspin, can all be defined as requiring "Strategic" consideration.
Strategic consideration of the "risk and reward" of the different shots to get close or into the hole.


A strategic Par 3 would be no different?



Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: V. Kmetz on May 17, 2022, 03:28:57 PM
I hate to also parse terms with a good exchange, but I think there HAS to be strategy in a one shot hole, otherwise strategy would have to be only in a sequence...anytime one put a tee shot in the fairway, the strategy of the hole would be done, no? Unless one is saying that because of the flat teeing ground, lie is the only part of strategy in approach shots, then there HAS to be strategy.


I've not been playing much for going on ten years, but I still caddie 30x a year and I still recall one shot holes, I still observe, advise and still recall playing all sorts of different ways, even sub,<100 holes where it was right to fly it or bounce it; or try low ones or super high ones... there's a course (Richter Park - Danbury CT) I've played all my life with two -over water one shot holes with vastly different greens that I've played with every club from 3 iron to 9 iron, fades and draws... the essence of the holes didn't change... wasn't that strategy?... what the hole/the shot forces me to consider, under changing conditions?  I agree that the better the player and/or plainer the hole, the less strategy comes into play...a 5 foot down hill 125 yard shot into a 2 acre green with few contours, gentle rough and no hazards is probably an un-strategic hole.
 
For me, strategy comes into mind when you DO NOT hit the sweet shot, as much as when I think I can take advantage of a contour feature... where do I want to miss?  where CAN"T I miss? What's the likely place I'm going to hit it?....The wind, the pin, the club, the feel of the day... The essence of strategy is in the choices of method of attack.  ... I (have always) disagree with poster(s) who cite the 16th ANGC as absent strategy... for certain pins, for elites... perhaps.  But those right side pins are another matter, because going for a "2" can easily result in a 4 or 5, or put great stress on putting...and long misses on that hole, to any pin are a delicate matter...and so this goes back to the strategy I think on the tee...that factor of how bad a long miss is, is a strategic consideration if one is between or nearer a long club.


Lastly, strategy implies that one choice presents one level of risk for one perceived reward, and so on with any other choice-combinations.  For me, all but the plainest par 3s carry this.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Niall C on May 18, 2022, 07:56:11 AM
John


Do you think that is actually strategy ? After all it's a route to the same result. Seems like a no-brainer to me. A bit like going for the hole by hitting a draw rather than a fade. Either way you are still going for the hole, whereas laying up is distinct from going for the green/hole.


Niall


I take your point, if Strategy is defined as choosing a shot deliberatly not to get in or close to the hole. But is a Strategic golf course just about laying up or not laying up?


I've always understood a Strategic golf course is where one is confronted with a choice of alternative shots.


Approach shots, where a bounce off a kicker plate, or playing to a back stop, or a bump and run negotiating gaps between bunkers, or just a well struck shot with backspin, can all be defined as requiring "Strategic" consideration.
Strategic consideration of the "risk and reward" of the different shots to get close or into the hole.


A strategic Par 3 would be no different?


John


You make a good point and indeed after I typed my response I think I came to the same conclusion as you although really I think it only applies to the top class player. I think for the normal rank and file golfer they really only have one shape of shot and don't really have the wherewithal to work the ball different ways.


Re "strategic" I think you are correct in that also. There needs to be more than one viable option such that a conscious decision is made by the player. Ira mentions the par 3 at Cypress point and requiring to go for the fairway because you can't reach the green, in which instance that wouldn't be strategic (for Ira and indeed me) since there is no option.


Niall
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Sean_A on May 18, 2022, 08:47:02 AM
John


Do you think that is actually strategy ? After all it's a route to the same result. Seems like a no-brainer to me. A bit like going for the hole by hitting a draw rather than a fade. Either way you are still going for the hole, whereas laying up is distinct from going for the green/hole.


Niall


I take your point, if Strategy is defined as choosing a shot deliberatly not to get in or close to the hole. But is a Strategic golf course just about laying up or not laying up?


I've always understood a Strategic golf course is where one is confronted with a choice of alternative shots.


Approach shots, where a bounce off a kicker plate, or playing to a back stop, or a bump and run negotiating gaps between bunkers, or just a well struck shot with backspin, can all be defined as requiring "Strategic" consideration.
Strategic consideration of the "risk and reward" of the different shots to get close or into the hole.


A strategic Par 3 would be no different?


John


You make a good point and indeed after I typed my response I think I came to the same conclusion as you although really I think it only applies to the top class player. I think for the normal rank and file golfer they really only have one shape of shot and don't really have the wherewithal to work the ball different ways.


Re "strategic" I think you are correct in that also. There needs to be more than one viable option such that a conscious decision is made by the player. Ira mentions the par 3 at Cypress point and requiring to go for the fairway because you can't reach the green, in which instance that wouldn't be strategic (for Ira and indeed me) since there is no option.


Niall

The strategic aspect of the design is that there is alternative. An absolutely penal hole would offer no alternative. The penal-strategic continuum exists independently of player ability. Stick with CPC 16, imo the hole leans heavily on the penal end of spectrum because there is a forced water carry. Offering the length of carry gives the hole a choice between penal strategies...which is still penal. I think (not sure) this is partly what RTJ Jr was speaking about with his idea of heroic carries.

I honestly think much of the confusion about penal/strategic has to do with the ODGs assigning positive and negative value to each end and that thinking carried forward to today. The best architecture will explore the entire continuum. Depending on the design purpose the archie can design toward one extreme or the other. There really should be no good or bad about it unless the archie misjudges the target audience.

Ciao
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Thomas Dai on May 18, 2022, 03:12:25 PM
Worth mentioning that there are likely different strategic, penal even, implications for physically weaker and frail players and for those who can’t reach a particular green in one shot even with a one-in-a-million tee shot played downhill and downwind. And before someone mentions tee-it-forward remember that there’s a likelihood that no further forward tee or even a place to casually drop a ball is available.
Atb
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on May 21, 2022, 01:47:57 AM
The 9th at Cavendish (viewed here from the adjacent 14th tee) has a viciously back to front sloping green. A putt from above a front pin will almost inevitably end up in the bunker at the bottom of the hill.


The strategic shot to a front pin is to find the grassy bowl immediately short left of the green and hope for an easy chip and putt.


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52088293179_bc8b5a366b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nmS7Qk)9a (https://flic.kr/p/2nmS7Qk) by Duncan Cheslett (https://www.flickr.com/photos/185291780@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Mike_Trenham on May 21, 2022, 02:13:11 AM
If par three is not strategic, then it must be penal, if it’s not strategic or penal then maybe it’s too assessable, if it’s not strategic, penal or too assessable, could it be unplayable, if it’s not strategic, penal, too assessable, or unplayable then it must be way over-rated.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Forrest Richardson on May 21, 2022, 08:39:57 PM
At present we're designing more par-3s that ever before. Jeff and I feel we're becoming "The Short Course Experts" given that we've got 14 par-3 courses on the planning boards, with one fully under construction.

Can par-3s have strategy? Absolutely. It rests in the putting surfaces, but also in how those surfaces work with the ball coming inbound.

As many know, I've opined that ALL golf holes have strategy, it's just that some have different types and different doses. When I re-wrote Trent Jones' theory about "Strategic Design," I offered, instead, that there are five basic golf hole types. Each golf hole can present itself to players differently, and with different forms of these five strategic qualities.

The types of "strategy" being:

• Heroic
• Detour
• Lay-up
• Penal
• Open

You combine the above to create golf holes, and in many cases the same finished hole will be mostly heroic to one player, while perhaps a lay-up or detour hole to the next. And, on a windy day, even the typical player who might approach it as heroic, could be playing it as a lay-up.

At the par-3, a heroic quality would be one where the player decides how much to bite off and I think we can all agree what this looks like. The more risk an a particular angle toward the flagstick or green area requires more risk..."Be the hero." There are numerous features that can bring this strategy about — including the particular tees (and angle created) being used.

A Detour strategy would be a quality where there is more than one way to get to the flagstick. It may be a draw around a hazard or feaure; or another, completely different line of play, perhaps using the ground game. Hence: "Detour." I might place a bunker in the front-center of the green from a set of tees, and there could be three fully unique shots to attack a cup location.

A Lay-up strategy — even at the one-shot hole — is the purposeful decision "forced" upon the player to throttle back. Like Hell's Half Acre, where a strong hitter must carefully gauge a tee shot to come as close to the broken ground as possible, yet not too far. At the par-3, this strategy is simply to "wait it out" and take the chance of the decent short game, and a one putt in favor of the full on attack. It may even be that a lay-up purposefully 20-30 yards short is better that the dreaded 7 yard pitch.

The Penal strategy is a forced play — "This way, or no other..." whether it be the angle...the width...the distance or other factor. Penal is the absence of choices, at least for a particular player at a particular moment in time...and on a particular shot. How is that a "strategy"? Well, for one, it is the player who is deciding what type of shot, and it is this decision that "makes" the hole what it is. So, to be "penal", a player must come to the conclusion that there is no other option. Once he or she drifts outside that notion, another type of hole (shot) is brought on to the scene. That self-inflicted decision is, of itself, "strategy" on the part of the designer. Like Indiana Jones — we think there is only one way out...PENAL...yet, we often find we were wrong.

Open is unmistakeable. It is the no-hassle approach with absolutely nothing (or barely anything) as an obstacle. How is that "strategy"? Like all "easy" things in life, it is often the unremarkable stretch of highway for the trucker, the "easy" airspace for the pilot, or the seemingly "easy" report to write that often "gets" to us. Many times it is the easy parts where we fail the worst. We've all been there. So, the absence of any overt challenge in golf can, at times, allow us to rest on our laurels and perform our worst. Such can be the case when we leave the door wide open. Take the full open, flat green — yet with a sharp drop off to the back rear. That is open, yet carelessness in the distance and even a small angle error can bring about trouble.

Anyway — The simply answer Adam - YES. All shots in golf are "strategic" and one cannot exclude the one-shot hole.

Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: James Bennett on May 21, 2022, 11:11:27 PM
I can't believe Brian Walshe hasn't responded to this thread yet.   :o
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Erik J. Barzeski on May 22, 2022, 07:45:59 AM
We have all seen the tee shot strategy, usually knowing that the total dispersion pattern is about 20% of length, i.e. 60 yards on a 300 yard tee shot, so aim at least 30 yards away from trouble, but I'm not sure how they attack the similar strategic thinking on par 3 holes.
We analyze it just how we wrote in our book: you aim where the lightest shade of grey exists based on the size of your Shot Zone. It's not complicated. Everyone's Shot Zone will be a different size/shape.

But also realize that not everyone can coolly apply this type of thinking, too. People like to think "oh, but this time, I can go at the flag because…" of whatever. So, you can't necessarily design a par three for this type of cool customer, because 90% of your golfers are still going to be aiming at the flag "because I have a short iron in my hands" and they have no idea how bad they actually are with that club (or PGA Tour players are with that club, etc.).
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Forrest Richardson on May 22, 2022, 10:38:27 AM
Erik says: "...90% of your golfers are still going to be aiming at the flag 'because I have a short iron in my hands' and they have no idea how bad they actually are with that club (or PGA Tour players are with that club, etc.)....

Well, that sums up the 'old' tone on GCA, that golfers are "stupid." I thought we got past that? First of all, this is not a statistic, but an opinion. Golfers are typically very intelligent people. Sure, we have the occasional "bust it all the time" player, but my experience is that more and more golfers are thoughtful and purposeful. The education about golf design and such factors as the ground game, green contours, etc. are now a part of a foursome's discussion and social interaction.
Title: Re: Strategy in par threes
Post by: Erik J. Barzeski on May 22, 2022, 03:52:55 PM
Well, that sums up the 'old' tone on GCA, that golfers are "stupid."
They kinda are. Often.

I thought we got past that? First of all, this is not a statistic, but an opinion.
Why would one "get past" an opinion (I never billed it as a statistic)?

Golfers are typically very intelligent people.
They may be, but yet… they often don't understand statistics or have reasonable expectations.

Sure, we have the occasional "bust it all the time" player, but my experience is that more and more golfers are thoughtful and purposeful. The education about golf design and such factors as the ground game, green contours, etc. are now a part of a foursome's discussion and social interaction.
I don't know what to tell you. We regularly consult with some higher level players who don't understand the size of their Shot Zones, etc. And this is years after we (and others) have been educating players on these types of things.