[Ian_L]

Personally, I rarely find OB to be compelling strategically because the penalty is so great that I always aim insanely far away from it. I never feel tempted to aim close (say within 50 yards) to OB or long grass because the loss is two full strokes and the gain over a decent drive away from trouble is unlikely to be more than half a shot or so.


A bunker or other feature with no more than a full shot penalty seems like the ideal penalty for getting aggressive and missing, in my opinion.



This calculus is probably different for more accurate golfers, I am a 7 with a wild streak off the tee!

[Kyle Harris]

Personally, I rarely find OB to be compelling strategically because the penalty is so great that I always aim insanely far away from it. I never feel tempted to aim close (say within 50 yards) to OB or long grass because the loss is two full strokes and the gain over a decent drive away from trouble is unlikely to be more than half a shot or so.


A bunker or other feature with no more than a full shot penalty seems like the ideal penalty for getting aggressive and missing, in my opinion.



This calculus is probably different for more accurate golfers, I am a 7 with a wild streak off the tee!

You aim closer to OB than a Tour Player would. /DECADE

[Duncan Cheslett]

14 Aeriel by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr

Dr Mac's 500 yard par 5 14th at Cavendish is a simple concept, with a dry stone wall curving the entire length of the hole denoting OB. The green is built into an embankment 20 ft above the fairway and features a severe false front.

Any realistic hope of reaching in two requires a 300 yard drive very tight to the wall. Historically play was forced away from the wall by a huge beech tree 100 yards in front of the tee, but this was blown down in this spring's gales. You can see the remnants of it in the pic. The consensus at the time was that the loss of this tree made the hole easier. In fact the opposite seems to be the case as more golfers are tempted to take the tiger line, with frequently disastrous results!

For those of us taking the more sensible 3 shot approach, being too close to wall with the drive makes the second shot really narrow and requires a carry over the corner - it is much better to be out on the right and have more to aim at.

Even then it's a nervy shot. The wall has a seemingly magnetic effect on golf balls!

[V. Kmetz]

Personally, I rarely find OB to be compelling strategically because the penalty is so great that I always aim insanely far away from it. I never feel tempted to aim close (say within 50 yards) to OB or long grass because the loss is two full strokes and the gain over a decent drive away from trouble is unlikely to be more than half a shot or so.

A bunker or other feature with no more than a full shot penalty seems like the ideal penalty for getting aggressive and missing, in my opinion.

This calculus is probably different for more accurate golfers, I am a 7 with a wild streak off the tee!

Does this change at all in match play?...either early in a match to realize an advantage, or perhaps when holes are running out and you need something?...Even so, I think this thread asks a good question that...whether the aversion you (we all) feel to an OB is ever righteously/effectively used as a strategic deployment on any hole...eg Which hole which poses that particular stroke and distance/two shot risk as a judgement issue on the golfer's part, is doing so, proportionately, if not fairly...


we KNOW what the risk is...what's the reward for taking it on...?  Is that a pleasing golf/design result?...


I admire DC's Cavendish example below...isn't THAT (despite your "insane" aiming away at all OBs) a fine and interesting strategic use of OBs...? it really gives something for the big hit that takes on the wall, but offers you (who will always drive away from the wall) a wide berth to play it conservatively...isn't (as DC rightfully exhibited) THAT the essence of strategic design?

[Michael Felton]

Personally, I rarely find OB to be compelling strategically because the penalty is so great that I always aim insanely far away from it. I never feel tempted to aim close (say within 50 yards) to OB or long grass because the loss is two full strokes and the gain over a decent drive away from trouble is unlikely to be more than half a shot or so.


A bunker or other feature with no more than a full shot penalty seems like the ideal penalty for getting aggressive and missing, in my opinion.



This calculus is probably different for more accurate golfers, I am a 7 with a wild streak off the tee!

You aim closer to OB than a Tour Player would. /DECADE

DECADE would have you aim around 35 yards away from OB (aim meaning where you want the ball to finish)

[Mark Mammel]

OB right on the 4th hole at WBYC is a vineyard- both lovely to see and odd in Minnesota!
A comment about OB left on 6 at Carnoustie- when I played there in 1977, the OB sign on the fence read as follows:

"Do not attempt to retrieve your ball. You may be killed."

They weren't kidding. OB was an artillery range at that time.

[John Crowley]

A slight tangent.
What about changes to OB lines over time?
Here's a photo of I believe James Braid (?) playing from the railway line at TOC. Apparently the railway wasn't OB at the time so I wonder if the railway sheds and yard on the 17th were always OB?
atb


N

Perhaps

Perhaps a tangent, but an excellent observation!

[Tom_Doak]

Hmmm . . . Bernard Darwin often referred to the 17th not as the Road Hole but as the Stationmaster’s garden.  It never occurred to me that at some point golfers might have been playing shots out of the stationmaster’s garden, but maybe they were?

[Tom_Doak]

The problem with most boundaries is when someone on the other side decides it’s a hazardous situation, at which point a hole that rewards playing close to the boundary must be changed.  Dr MacKenzie built a couple of these at Moortown when it was surrounded by other golf courses, that were later sold off for housing.  At Pasatiempo the house most in play was his own home!

[Ian_L]

Personally, I rarely find OB to be compelling strategically because the penalty is so great that I always aim insanely far away from it. I never feel tempted to aim close (say within 50 yards) to OB or long grass because the loss is two full strokes and the gain over a decent drive away from trouble is unlikely to be more than half a shot or so.

A bunker or other feature with no more than a full shot penalty seems like the ideal penalty for getting aggressive and missing, in my opinion.

This calculus is probably different for more accurate golfers, I am a 7 with a wild streak off the tee!

Does this change at all in match play?...


Yes, because the most I can lose is a hole vs 2 strokes, plus the potential to re-tee and lose another 2 strokes!

However losing a hole in one swing is also a pretty severe penalty, so I wouldn’t change my strategy much unless I were well behind needing to win holes to stay in the match (to your point).




either early in a match to realize an advantage, or perhaps when holes are running out and you need something?...Even so, I think this thread asks a good question that...whether the aversion you (we all) feel to an OB is ever righteously/effectively used as a strategic deployment on any hole...eg Which hole which poses that particular stroke and distance/two shot risk as a judgement issue on the golfer's part, is doing so, proportionately, if not fairly...


we KNOW what the risk is...what's the reward for taking it on...?  Is that a pleasing golf/design result?...


I admire DC's Cavendish example below...isn't THAT (despite your "insane" aiming away at all OBs) a fine and interesting strategic use of OBs...? it really gives something for the big hit that takes on the wall, but offers you (who will always drive away from the wall) a wide berth to play it conservatively...isn't (as DC rightfully exhibited) THAT the essence of strategic design?


I do think the Cavendish hole provides interest for 2 reasons:

1. By playing conservatively as a 3-shot hole, you still have to deal with OB on the subsequent shots and therefore it is unclear if the safe play off the tee is actually decreasing the odds of catastrophe.

2. The safe play appears to also require you to lay well back and lose distance, not simply aim away from trouble. This, combined with my point above, makes the wise choice less clear.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, it has me thinking!

By the way, TOC #17 is one of my favorite holes I have played. Seems to fly in the face of my original point, but I am ok with my hypocrisy!

[Michael Felton]

The problem with most boundaries is when someone on the other side decides it’s a hazardous situation, at which point a hole that rewards playing close to the boundary must be changed.  Dr MacKenzie built a couple of these at Moortown when it was surrounded by other golf courses, that were later sold off for housing.  At Pasatiempo the house most in play was his own home!

Not a course I'm likely to bring up on here very often, but at Leatherhead GC in Surrey, the 17th hole used to run right alongside one of the houses on the course. The house was owned by the guy who owned the golf course. He moved on, sold the house to someone else who a year or so later sued them, the club lost and had to move the tee 50 yards to the right so as to take the house out of realistic play.


Personally I think if you buy a house on a golf course, then golf balls in your yard is part and parcel of the deal and you should have to suck it up and deal.

[Jim_Coleman]

Michael:  Couldn't agree more.  But NY seems to be a particularly bad state on this issue.  I think it started with litigation brought by a neighbor of Quaker Ridge. Winged Foot had the same problem.  There was a thread on this several years ago.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Do a search and replace (in this thread) for "Out of Bounds" and substitute "water hazard" and you get the same result:


"Best holes with srategic "water hazards: - How does a golfer react and see risk/reward when faced with an immediately penal hazard?


Your ball goes "OB", it's usually gone or "AMF" as my childhood pals said. (Adios Mother f--ker)
You ball takes a rinse, it's basically the same thing with a few more options available.



Aesthetics may be different, but the penal nature remains.

[Sean_A]

The problem with most boundaries is when someone on the other side decides it’s a hazardous situation, at which point a hole that rewards playing close to the boundary must be changed.  Dr MacKenzie built a couple of these at Moortown when it was surrounded by other golf courses, that were later sold off for housing.  At Pasatiempo the house most in play was his own home!

Moortown still has a hole which borders houses and it isn't that hard to hit into the gardens.

I wonder if there was a stipulation when the Old Course Hotel was built that there would be no complaints about balls hitting the building. It would have been plainly obvious there was an issue of danger.

Ciao

[V. Kmetz]

I do think the Cavendish hole provides interest for 2 reasons:

1. By playing conservatively as a 3-shot hole, you still have to deal with OB on the subsequent shots and therefore it is unclear if the safe play off the tee is actually decreasing the odds of catastrophe.

2. The safe play appears to also require you to lay well back and lose distance, not simply aim away from trouble. This, combined with my point above, makes the wise choice less clear.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, it has me thinking!

By the way, TOC #17 is one of my favorite holes I have played. Seems to fly in the face of my original point, but I am ok with my hypocrisy!

...Ah golf doth expose hypocrites in us all...But right into the arms of this thread point (imo)... that if an OB is inescapable in the property, there are deft ways to incorporate what it represents...and we can call it a design virtue, if it's done well like at the Cavenidish hole and scores and scores of others...

[Pat Burke]

The OB left of 28 green at Carnoustie certainly has a big impact on the approach shots.


Not sure it’s a positive, but that front right bunker gets a lot of action due to it

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()