[Patrick_Mucci]

The discussion on the 11th hole at Shinnecock caused me to think about how the hole would be affected by introducing a dual tee 15-20 yards right and below the existing tee.  That caused me to think about the 2nd hole at Bandon Dunes and how much I enjoyed playing from both sets of tees.

How different the shots were, how differently the green accepted those shots and how differently the wind affected those shots.  I enjoyed the great diversity in the hole.

I also thought of # 13 at NGLA and my theory on dual tees on that hole and how they replicated the approach shots on # 7 and # 11 at TOC.
The angles are different, green acceptance is different and the affect of the wind is different.  A great deal of variety is created with the introduction of a second tee left of the 12th green.

Then I thought of the 8th and 12th holes at NGLA and George Bahto's revelation that different tees were employed on those holes.  Tees which presented entirely different tee shots and challenges.

Then I thought of # 16 and # 17 at NGLA with their dual tees and how much variety those tees brought to those holes.

Examining each applicable hole, the dual tees provided great variety.

Examining the entire challenge, the golf course acquires another facet, another playing attribute ..... great variety.

What holes, where a dual tee is readilly available would benefit from a dual tee ?

While maintainance costs would rise, wouldn't architects and owners be well served by creating a number of holes on their golf courses with dual tees.  Tees that present a substantively different challenge ?

What courses have a number of dual tees where the dual tees present disimilar challenges ?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

You are right of course.  I try to get dual tees in a few holes on every course.  I think they often work better on long holes than par 3's, but can work there, too.

I doubt the costs go up that much for dual tees, assuming you make them each a bit smaller than normal. Its not like it doubles, but it would go up by 10-15% to account for perimeter areas that can't be used.

[Rick_Noyes]

Patrick,

First let me say that I appreciate your truly "architectural" posts.  Rather than the "How could they rank Outer Mongolian Dunes over Mongolia National on the top courses you can play in Mongolia" threads.  Yours and those like them have me thinking strictly architectural.

Reading the first interview with George Bahto, I came across a quote that says a lot,
paraphrasing "other than the par-3's at NGLA, there is no direct route tee to green".  In alot of today's designs, there is a direct route.  The tees are designed and built to that route, the landing area and subsequent hazards are designed and built along that route and the green and surrounds are designed and built along that route.
I would say that any hole that does not subscribe to that formula would be well served by as many alternate tees you could get on it.

My golf cours architecture education continues..

Rick

[wsmorrison]

Consider another holes at Shinnecock Hills.  The 7th hole was completely remodeled by Flynn with the green in the same location as Macdonald green.  However, Flynn's green was elevated well above the Macdonald green and the green outline changed as well as a complete revision of the bunkering.  Flynn designed (and we think built) a new tee 7 yards to the left of the Macdonald tee, which remains in use.  We have played shots from the Flynn tee and the green is much more accessible from that slight shift in approach angle as you are hitting more into the right to left cant of the green.  Under daily conditions, you can hit a draw into the green and hold it.  I like the idea of restoring the Flynn tee and retaining the Macdonald tee.  Under different conditions (wind and firmness of the green) the two tees provide great variety and demands.  To think this comes about by such a slight shift in the tees.  As Tom Paul proved to me, some holes are not impacted by large shifts in tees, others are impacted by slight shifts.  The 7th at Shinnecock Hills is one of the later ones.

[Mark_Fine]

I remember standing on one of the tees at Jim Engh's Sanctuary course in CO and hitting shots to about 5 different greens from that one tee.  It was pretty cool.  I'd call this multiple angles of attack  

In all seriousness, I'm sure Pat knows that there are hundreds of courses out there that offer such options.  It is very common.  Sometimes even changing the line of play by as little as a few feet can dramatically alter a golf shot (even if it is only from a perception standpoint).   Furthermore, think about how a golfer will use one side a 15 foot wide tee vs. the other.  The difference might only be five or six feet but the feel and view of the shot can be altered in the mind's eye.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Personally I think multiple angles of attack can be a great idea on par 3 holes but only if there's something about the hole (green or whatever) that makes it make real sense in concept and play (strategic concept).

A really good example is the 9th hole at Gulfstream. Ross designed that hole with separate tees on either side of the previous green (a separation of about fifty yards). Ross seemed to love that hole as he mentioned it in his manuscript and the fact of its two very different angles of attack.

For some reason the club obsoleted the left tee many years ago but in the last restoration (Silva) it was restored.

From lots of experience with that hole I can tell you the two angles of attack in relation to the actual architecture of the green don't make all that much difference even separated by fifty yards but the effect of the constant prevailing wind on that hole sure makes those two tees play very different. There aren't that many par 3s I'm aware of that are as "wind related" as that particular par 3 at Gulfstream. I can remember in some strong winds aiming as much as 25-30 yards right of the green and just watching the wind bring it right into the middle. And I can't tell you how often I've hit it maybe 10-15 yards right of that green in that kind of wind and watched the wind take it right over the green to about 15-20 yards left of the green------very cool stuff.

From the left tee in that kind of wind you could probably cut that "wind borrow" down about 3/4 or more but you'd have to use a lot more club than from the right tee as you'd be playing almost into the wind.

[Tim Nugent]

To expand on Jeff's reply, multiple tee angles provide greater interest than single, one dimensional tees.  For the player who plays the same course alot, it adds some variety.  Par 3's actually can allow for interesting multiple tees.  Take the 2nd at the Dunes Club. From the left, it's a short iron, all carry shot, while from the right tees, it's a long iron with a bit of approach.  Although the green is on the larger side,  each shot is reflected in the shape of it.  Since there are several tees at each location, one could use almost every iron in his bag.

[John Kirk]

Pat,

An excellent point.  To me it's obvious that a golf course will be more fun and challenging from day to day if different angles of attack are possible.  It's important to make the green to tee walks logical.

Holes in my golfing universe that employ tees with significantly different angles (say 10 degrees or more) include:

Kingsley #9, rather notorious for its 90 degree tee setup
Kingsley #2, #13
Stone Eagle #9
Pacific Dunes #10
Ballyneal #5, #6, #11, #15, #16, #18
(Generally, no tee markers are used at Ballyneal.  The custom at Ballyneal is for the player who has honors selects the next tee.)
Kinloch #5, #11
Stanford #2, #5, and #12 are all long par fours with tee boxes that offer different angles/difficulties.  #15 also has an alternate box.  #17 has rotating upper and lower tees.
Pasatiempo #10, where they should let the men tee from the women's box sometimes.

Note that nothing of the sort exists at the Pumpkin Ridge 36 hole complex.  This Cupp/Fought design from 1991 has virtually all tees in a line, except for some women's tees, which enables improved pace of play for mixed groups.

Is this one of those lost Golden Age ideas that is being revived?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Another par 3 that has multiple angles of attack is Muirhead's #5 Stone Harbor. It doesn't have multiple tees just one mammouth arcing tee that's on a big curvilinear berm that you actually use to walk to the green on the left.

That hole, its tee and its green are not the prettiest things to look at but I don't think I have ever seen a par 3 green that has as many and as neat architectural elements and angles than that one. In a strategically functional multi-optional context that par 3 hole is probably one of the very best in the world.

[Peter Pallotta]

This is probably a dumb question/idea, but has anyone ever used a "diagonal" version of RTJ's runway tees?

To be effective, would such a teeing ground, placed and designed so it would change both the length of the hole and the angle of attack from day to day, have to be so long as to be too ugly/unwieldy/impractical?

I ask off Mark's post, which struck me as a good one, i.e. you don't need to move too much in either direction to alter a shot, or at least the perception of that shot....especially on a Par 3

Peter

just saw TE's post
 

[Tom_Doak]

Should not an architect decide which is the better location for the tee on a par-3?

I understand that at a member club, having more variety within the course is never a bad thing.  It's also a great idea for a par-3 that will play into the sun at times ... allowing you to move the tee based on the season. 

But, some of those alternate tees for par-3 holes just don't make sense.  The 2nd at Bandon Dunes is a case in point ... the approach angle from that right-hand upper tee just doesn't work well at all, to me, with the contours on the green (which tends to make balls run off the green back left) and the deep hollow that sits in front of the green from that angle.

On the 10th at Pacific, the upper tee was originally meant to be the middle tee, with the lower tee for the back tee.  When we decided to build the alternate green on #9, it made more sense to alternate the tees as well, so we expanded both.

[Sean_A]

Pat

I am with you 100%.  I can tell you a course which has several different tees which seriously alter the way a hole plays without changing the yardage very much if at all - Burnham & Berrow.  I can't think of many courses which use width the way Burnham does and that is why my affection for the place has grown immensely over the past 6 months. 

Holes with tees utilizing width over length

#5 - a short par 3 with tees about 25 yards apart changing the angle completely, but no longer
#6 - a med length par 4 with tees on and below a dune ridge changing the view of the hole, but no longer
#7 - a longish par 4 with tees on and below a dune ridge bringing a bunker, water or the dune ridge itself and another ridge more or less into play, but no longer
#8 - a reachable par 5 - the alternate tees are 125 yards or so across the water from the "normal" tees using the water as a cross hazard on the drive and probably 50 yards longer from the tees all the way back
#10 - a short par 4 with tees about 25 yards apart and onw much lower than the other which effects the angle of this dogleg hole (can easily run out of room) and how one drives over the huge dune making this shot blind, but no longer.
#11 - alternate tees on the other side of #10 green, perhaps 70 yards away - making the drive slightly blind over broken ground and facing a bunker one the safe line, but no longer - I didn't understand this bunker until I played this tee.
#15 - 3 sets of tees spanning 60 yards wide and a difference of 15 feet in height, but anly a few yards difference in length, changing the angle completely for this blind drive
#17 - 3 sets about 25 yards apart (sideways) and 15 feet in height only 15 yards longer

Holes in which there is a choice to take on as much as you like:

#3 - a short par 4 doglegging right
#4 - a short par 5 doglegging right - can be reached if one cuts the corner
#16 - a short par 4 in which either way around a bunker can be taken
#18 - a longish par 4 doglegging right - the player can use the slopes to sling one around the corner or go left and try to bomb it down the fairway risking a few kitchen sinks which leave blind approaches.

As I say, I can't think of another course I have seen which uses width to alter angles & looks and hazards to the degree Burnham does. 

Ciao

[Tim Nugent]

Tom, are you saying the architect should determine the best location on a par 3?  In essence, (99.9%) of the time, don't we?  After all, the contours on the green are (at least in my case) derived from the line of play and since on a par 3, that starting point is fixed.  (I think we have to also include short 4's).  The 2nd at the Dunes Club originally had the 2 tee (short/long) to allow the course to play a bit different the 2nd time around.  I think (you'ld hav to ask Mike for certain) it was this variety that led to the creation of other tee locations (the dual at #7 and the extras for the par 3 6th.  If this wasn't a 9-hole course, I don't know if this would have happened - but I liked the outcome.
I struggle with how flexible greens/holes should be.  An augument can be made that the more options there are, the better the hole, while the converse that there is/are certain positions to be in to give yourself the best opportunity to score.  Does a hole that is too flexible allow for less than optimal shotmaking and reward marginal shots to a degree greater than should be?  

[Mike Bowline]

Back in the formative days of high school when we had lots of time, the course wasn't busy, and our imaginations ran wild, some of the hardest par-4s we ever played were par-5s played from the forward tees.(they were named Ladies Tees back then). Plus, it was fun to fly the ball right past the tee-shot hazards placed for the regular mens tees!

Take a 520-yard par 5 and play it as a 420 yard par 4 from the forward tees and everything the architect had in mind goes out the window: you are now hitting the tee shot into a portion of the fairway not designed to accept a tee shot, hitting long shots into par-5 greens not designed to accept long shots, etc... you get the picture.

Great fun.

[David_Madison]

Tobacco Road #6 is a good example of the benefits of multiple tees on a par-3. From one area of tees, it's a short shot to a very wide but shallow green, with hazards both front and behind. Swing around to the side tees, and the shot becomes a good deal longer to a deep but narrow green, with the hazards to either side. I've always thought of this hole as being the one I'd love to build if I had a really big back yard wanted a great place to practice all kinds of shots.

[wsmorrison]

The 14th hole at The Creek has a wonderful curved tee box offering a variety of distances and angles to the dogleg right fairway. 

I dare anyone to try and hit the small bridge to the right of the fairway.  If you succeed (~300 yard carry) you get a lot of extra distance off the bounce and only have a half a lob wedge into that 439-yard hole.   I didn't try to do it, the line of play wasn't in the Spalding Guide Book, but it worked out great 

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
What is "less than optimal" shotmaking?  Doesn't everyone playing from that particular teeing location have the same challenge/opportunity at hand?  Sounds to me like you are trying to make the game "fair" and "equitable"  

On a side note, think about how shot demands can change on some holes just by varying the pin location. 
Mark

[TEPaul]

"I dare anyone to try and hit the small bridge to the right of the fairway.  If you succeed (~300 yard carry) you get a lot of extra distance off the bounce and only have a half a lob wedge into that 439-yard hole.   I didn't try to do it, the line of play wasn't in the Spalding Guide Book, but it worked out great."

Wayne:

As you recall, I saw that. What is it they say about blind squirrels occassional find a nut?

But that bridge story reminds me of one my Canadian buddy Webster told me about his old friend Moe Norman.

Moe was playing a course he didn't know with a couple of really big names like Snead and maybe Canadian Kel Nagle and Demeret or something.

On the first hole there was a stream crossing the fairway with a small narrow bridge across it. Moe watched his three playing partners take out something other than their driver and lay up in front of the creek. To their amazement Moe, after watching those three layups, took out his driver and landed his ball right in the middle of the narrow bridge from which it bounded over and was maybe 100 yards ahead of the others.

The others said something like: "Moe, didn't you see us lay up in front of that creek, didn't you know your driver could land in it?" Moe just said: "That's what the bridge is there for, that's what the bridge is there for."

Of course the truth is Moe was probably the damnedest shot maker and the most accurate one anybody ever heard of and he probably could have landed his driver on that bridge 9 times out of 10.

That day on the 14th at The Creek you got lucky and found out what it feels like to be Moe Norman. Since none of us could actually see your ball cross over that bridge I think a semi-blind squirrel probably just picked it up thinking it was a nut and walked it across the bridge and dropped it in the fairway beyond.

[Mike Hendren]

I like the 17th at Chambers Bay.  220 from a lower right tee and 140 from an elevated tee.   The green has a tiny elevated tier on the right that is very difficult to access that works well with the shorter tee.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Should not an architect decide which is the better location for the tee on a par-3?

Tom Doak

Why would you think otherwise ?[/color]

I understand that at a member club, having more variety within the course is never a bad thing. 

It's also a great idea for a par-3 that will play into the sun at times ... allowing you to move the tee based on the season. 

But, some of those alternate tees for par-3 holes just don't make sense. 


I haven't played that many par 3's with dual tees.
Springbrook's 10th hole seems to work well, but, I can't recollect many others.  Which ones stand out as inferior in your mind ?[/color]

The 2nd at Bandon Dunes is a case in point ... the approach angle from that right-hand upper tee just doesn't work well at all, to me, with the contours on the green (which tends to make balls run off the green back left) and the deep hollow that sits in front of the green from that angle.

# 2 at Bandon seems to present two entirely different holes.
I had understood that the right hand tee isn't used very much, but, that it was the original tee.  Is that correct ?

The right, upper tee would seem to present an approach shot with a much steeper trajectory.  Wouldn't that mute some of the negatives you mention ?

While the right hand tee might present an inferior hole when compared to the left side tee, it still remains an interesting and varied hole[/color]

On the 10th at Pacific, the upper tee was originally meant to be the middle tee, with the lower tee for the back tee.  When we decided to build the alternate green on #9, it made more sense to alternate the tees as well, so we expanded both.

Whether # 10 at Pacific Dunes is a product of circumstance or intentional would seem to be irrelevant.
It works extremely well, in no small part due to the duality of the greens on # 9.  The two holes work in tandem to provide great diversity, great variety, and they are a perfect example of the issue, that unfortunately I forgot to mention.

Another hole that I forgot to mention is the 2nd hole at Sand Hills, where very different tee shots are presented.[/color]

Wayno,

I really like the tee on # 14 at The Creek.

I like the setting and the variety of angles and distance presented by that tee.

TEPaul,

Wouldn't you like to play # 12 at NGLA from a tee to the left of # 11 green ?
A tee which presents you with alteratives/options with respect to driving over the string of cross bunkers fronting the fairway ?

And, I believe that a tee for # 12 to the left of # 11 green would present a far safer situation with respect to approach shots into # 11 in comparison to the current tees on # 12.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
Wouldn't you like to play # 12 at NGLA from a tee to the left of # 11 green ?
A tee which presents you with alteratives/options with respect to driving over the string of cross bunkers fronting the fairway?"


Pat:

I'd like to see both tees on #12. They would be very fine variety.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Agreed.

For some reason I don't have the same desire when it comes to # 8, although, I do like playing # 17 from the right.

[John Moore II]

I greatly anjoy the holes I have played with dual tees. They certainly offer more variety than the standard course or hole. What about The Old Course? No one has mentioned that one. It has dual tees for each hole, making for a dual golf course, which of course they advertise every so often.

[David Druzisky]

I absolutely love the use of alternative tees - why not.  It provides interest, memorability, brain stimulation, and variety.

We did one at SunRidge Canyon (17 par 3) that was very well received.  Two sets of tees at different angles and yardages to a large v shaped green and bunker in the opening of the V.

When the yardages vary, it can make determining handicap a little tough.

[JESII]

I think the use of multiple tee angles on one tee is generally a net loss.

I have not played many of the holes mentioned so I will not state unequivocally that it cannot work but I think Tom Daok's comment..."Should not an architect decide which is the better location for the tee on a par-3?[/i] goes to my point.

I believe greens, and green complexes should be the tool to suggest different angles and shot styles. I think different tee locations on par 3's is a crutch to not having the ability to build a green that suggests different shots or decisions well enough. On par 4's I don't think it impacts a hole enough to warrant much discussion.

I believe each hole should have a fixed starting point and all of the optionality and variety and creativity should be geared towards that one spot as opposed to two. I think two tees dilutes the benefits of each.

Pat, Tom Wayne, or anyone...How would #11 at Shinnecock benefit from an additional tee 15 yards to the right (away from the 10th tee) of the current tee? How could it be a better hole?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()