Friar's Head will displace Ran M's..........

[Gene Greco]

.....selection of Kapalua as C&Cs greatest architectural accomplishment. I have visited the site throughout the last two years and have seen it recently while pumpkin pickin' with my kids. A number of holes look much like what several dunes holes at Cypress Point did when it first opened. Look in Geoff Shack's book about Cypress for a refresher!
    (Let Ran explain why he originally picked Kapalua over Sand Hills, the greatest golf course in the world).

[Anthony_Nysse]

Gene,
 After working with C&C for 4 months at Friar's Head, it will be awesome.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gene,

I thought the look back to # 14 had a remarkable Cypress like appearance, and I think the course has other really neat looks as one transitions back and forth from the bluff over the dunes to the flats and than back and forth again.

I think the courses diversity, its several courses within a course, will be one of its many positive features.

I think some of the flat holes may be amongst the best

[Tim_Weiman]

Gene:

Much as you might like Friar's Head, I would be cautious about the reference to Cypress Point.

If you set the expectation that there are ocean views, people might well become disappointed.

Friar's Head will stand on its own, I suspect.  Based on my limited site visit (courtesy of Bill Talmadge and Dave Axeland), I would say Friar's Head is.....Friar's Head, a unique venue with its own story.

Yes, I agree there are shades of Cypress Point in places, but again, I wouldn't advise over doing this point.  The place won't need to be sold in that manner.

[Ralph Waldo Emerson]

Pat,

I think your observation regarding the holes down in the plain is particularly astute.  I agree that they are likely to be some of the most interesting from a strategic standpoint.  

You asked on the other thread how I can comment on a course that is not complete (I'm answering on this thread because I couldn't wade through all the mud being slung on the Bridge Photos thread).  My answer is that I was commenting on land, grading and shaping of the course, rather than how it plays.  Matt Ward is a great champion of limiting opinions on the shot values of a course to people who have actually played the course.  Of course, he is correct in that regard.  And if you believe that shot values are the ultimate arbiter of what makes a great course, then I imagine (having only walked the Bridge and not played it) that the Bridge will indeed be a great test of ball striking (I never said otherwise).  

My question was weather the course was eternal (i.e. grounded in nature and, therefore, unique).  My answer is no.  When I look at the Bridge, I see the hand of man.  For me, this limits the greatness of the Bridge.  The Bridge is a harpsichord masterpiece; Friar's Head is a grizzly chasing down a stag.  One is man in action; one is nature in action.  One is pleasant, witty, the other is riveting; visceral.

Tim,

Also a great point.  Friar's Head is unique and should be, and I think is, marketed as such.  One of reasons why I think Friar's Head will stand the test of time is that the person behind it didn't set out to build the Cypress Point of the east, but rather to build Friar's Head.  This sounds easy, but I can only imagine that it took a lot of courage considering the time and financial investment in the project.

[Ran Morrissett]

Gene,

Along with the overall exhilaration one might expect from playing at a really cool club that sits on a really cool piece of Long Island property, what I'm most looking forward to seeing next summer are:

a) the routing (i.e. how they brought the holes in and out of the dunes ala a Royal Adelaide)

b)the modest green to tee walks

c) the natural contours that were left in the fairways

d) how they made the flat holes interesting (i.e. how did they give those holes strategic merit) and how they made the bunkers look natural on the flatter property

Very few architects accomplish much of the above but I have high hopes that Friar's Head is different, given the time that the architect and his best people spent on-site.

As for it being a better design than Kapalua, I doubt it: the property at Frair's Head was too good. Plus, those three AWESOME greens that slope from front to back at Kapalua always help it to pull out a close match.

Cheers,

PS Gene, What can you tell us about Southampton GC?

[Gene Greco]

Tim:

  Just out of curiosity why is it that you feel a need to continually caution me about my posts?

  Let's see. Pumkin Pickin'with the kids and a reference that a few holes on a new golf course have a common look with the original look of 7, 8, 9, and 13 at Cypress.
Said nothing about cliff holes or real witches and warlocks for that matter. Most people who log onto this site know more than a thing or two about golf architecture including yourself and I felt "dunes holes" would be a sufficient description.  
 
   I don't believe I overdid anything.

   Nor is there anything which needs to be "sold". Ken Bakst will select those individuals for membership who fulfill his collective vision of what his golf club ought to be. My guess is (financial considerations not withstanding) he would want people like us - people who love the game of golf;  its traditions, history, etiquette, architecture, etc.

  When the people on this site hear of yet another great course in the making, we get excited. Furthermore, we have every right to act in this "manner".

 

[Gene Greco]

Pat:

  There are so many holes which have that MacKenzie look - 14 definitely. 1, 2, 10,14, 16 and 18.

   How great does 15 look?!!!!!! A Cypress- Pine Valley-Crystal Downs amalgamation if there ever was one!  

[Gene Greco]

Ran:

  Will report on Southampton GC, a 1925 Seth Raynor design, when it it is a little colder out, ie. when the sticks are put away, as I'd like to spend a fair amount of time describing  and then talking about it.

 Cheers

[Tim_Weiman]

Gene:

If it seems like I'm picking on you, I apologize.

In this specific case, I really believe what I said:

a) the reference to Cypress Point is  understandable but also misleading.  No doubt the course has some of that "look", but if you push the comparison too far, people are going to wonder where Long Island sound is (in place of the Pacific Ocean).  My limited site visit suggested that dramatic ocean views (which Cypress Point has) are not what Friar's Head will be all about.

b) At the end of the day, Friar's Head will be just that: Friar's Head.  I think Ran is right on target when he describes what he will be looking for when he visits next summer.  I also think he will find:

1) a routing that does weave in and out of the massive dunes and the relatively flat land

2) modest green to tee walks (I love #17 to #18)

3) fairway contour left natural and undisturbed (at least it certainly appeared that way in the high ground)

4) interesting things done on the flat ground.  This last statement is somewhat of a hunch as when I briefly toured the property I wasn't able to see much.  However, I'm particularly interested in the eastern most portion of the flat property where I suspect we will find at least two really cool holes.

In short, I think one should always be careful describing one course with reference to another.  You might remember a post a while back comparing Friar's Head to Pebble Beach.  Well, clearly that is not accurate.  All I'm saying is that the reference to Cypress Point really isn't much better.

Beyond that, I'll say that I'm excited about the prospects for Friar's Head so I understand your enthusiasm.  It doesn't need any comparison to courses like Cypress Point or the well known venues on the Island.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gene,

I have a nice picture taken from the tee at
# 15.  As spectacular as the view is, it's how you come upon that view that really magnifies the look.  Trudging through the sand up the steep slope from # 14 green, around the bend in the woods to....that view.

Looking up the 13th and 7th fairways, I think you'll also get that cypress feel.

I think that constant transition from one playing field to the next creates a neat expectation, partially satiated by the view that greets you, which creates another question in your mind, what's coming next.

But, the view that greets you after coming up and around the bend after # 14 green is spectacular.

My one curiousity is the play of # 2 and # 11
will they each have their own unique feel ?
What do you think ?

RWE,

My point was that the real test is in the playability of the course.  And since no one has played it, how could they make that determination, elevating it to supreme status, without a round played.  I don't think that's an unfair perspective.

I too, think Friar's Head will be spectacular in many ways.  I don't want to become too effusive lest I be accussed of some heinous act, but I think all the elements seem to be there to make this a great golf course... in many ways.

My prognosis is that I think Friar's Head would seem to represent a combination of a developer with knowledge and vision, blended with a great site, great architects, great maintainance standards, and a great membership.

I also have a confidence that if something needs to be tinkered with to refine, that will be done.  That there will be a constant striving for improvement in all facets of the course.

If you could also address my # 2, # 11 question I'd be interested in your response.

I have to stop now, I'm starting to sound like TEPaul.

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

That was a most informative and cogent post! Without question the first from you in well over two weeks. You should have continued now that you're on a streak, and thank you for the compliment!

There is much to talk about concerning Friar's Head and had you continued approximately five times longer your post would have looked like one of mine too.

[Gene Greco]

Pat:

  #2 is a wonderful par 5 hitting off an elevated tee through a shute. Classic risk reward. Ideal to hug that left fairway bunker if you'd like to get the forward roll and nail it in two. With prevailing SW wind bunker will come in play more often than expected. Play it right safe and slope of fairway pushes ball more to the right leaving one with a view of numerous bunkers leading to the green. Ideal tack to the left avoiding main fairway bunker 40 yds short of green leaving broad approach with wedge or knockdown into prevailing wind. Great Hole.

#11- appeared to be nondescript long par 4 or par 5 which somehow didn't make much of an impression on me for there was so much else to be enthralled with.

Tim:

 Apology accepted.

 To be able to provide people with visuals of some kind, ones with which they can easily identify and access, such as pictures in a book taken in 1930 of a course built in that year, written by a well-known individual such as Geoff Shackleford, I believe provides a great service to those reading this stuff who simply want to grasp some sort of feel for another course.

  Yes, there is only one Cypress Point.

  Correct. There will be only one Friar's Head.

[Tim_Weiman]

Gene:

I'm of the opinion that to really capture Friar's Head with photographs will take some work.

Many courses have the "wow" photo opportunties.  Friar's Head obviously will do so as well.

But, with Friar's Head, won't the trick be to also capture the changing moods as you make your way around the property?

[Ralph Waldo Emerson]

Pat,

That is very difficult to say since, as you know, I haven't played the course.  Therefore I can only speculate.  

My speculation is that 2 will be the more strategic of the two holes; it will cause you to pull a club out of your bag and then pull a different club out of your bag.  I will guess that 2 will be one of those holes where part of the challenge lies in committing to the shot you have chosen.  

I recall 2 much better than I recall 11.  I think this is also due to their being more contour to the fairway on 2 (adding to the decision process).

The strategy on Number 11, on the other, will be more dictated by the player's drive.  That is, if you have to decide to cut enough off the drive to allow you to get home in two, and then execute the shot.  

As for 3 shotters, I think most courses would gladly trade any of their present long holes for either one of these.  Perhaps I'm skewed by only having seen two of their best courses, but C&C seem particularly adept at making interesting long holes.

As to your other point, I disagree that "real test" is in the playability.  At least how I think you are defining playability.  I think the real test is in how a course makes you feel.  Yes, a large part of this is strategy and shot values, but the land is apparently more important to me.

Kenny says this is just a matter of perspective or preference.  I have my hunch that he is just being diplomatic.  I think the natural is superior to the man-made, and we are naturally drawn to it.  When artists choose a subject for their painting how often do they choose scenes of natural beauty?  Rough seas, rugged mountains, beautiful vistas, etc.  How often do they choose to paint a beautiful manicured garden?

I'm effusive about Friar's Head because it's a place I would like to take a walk with my wife even if there were not a golf course there.  Now that there is, the course doesn't disrupt the natural inspiring beauty of the place.

[Gene Greco]

Ralph Waldo:

  You can walk with your wife a few miles down the road at Horton Point lighthouse which was a source of inspiration for  modern day writer Nelson deMille in his book, "Plum Island". I know suspense, intrigue and murder aren't your thing but what the heck, live a little on the wild side.

[Henry David Thoreau]

"The finest qualities in nature, like the bloom on fruits, can be preserved only by the most delicate handling"

While walking with my friend Emerson and Ken Bakst through the wonderland that Friar's Head is I came to this conclusion.  It is the design's qualities which take into account the naturalness of both the holes in the dunes as well as the holes in the flat farm plain of the property that make it so special..C+C work in harmony with nature and use the most delicate handling in peeling back the layers of land to reveal the best holes while adding the minimum of human touch for strategy and green contour.

One of the things that impressed me most about Friar's Head, C+C and Ken Bakst's vision was the tee on the 16th hole..A footpath leads to a spectacular view of Long Island Sound roughly 50yds through the forest behind the tee..Many would have been tempted to put a tee here and true it would have been spectacular but it did not fit the hole, strategy and shot value, and nature best.  The willingness to sacrifice eye candy for the good of the course is what makes the Friar's Head enduring and why it is a symphony to walk and play (in the future) like my friend Mozart's The Magic Flute..

[Patrick_Mucci]

RWE and HDT,

I think you would have to say, they had a pretty spectacular canvas to start with.

RWE,

Remember, this is a golf course, not a garden, or painting, there is physical interaction with a golf course, absent in gardens and paintings hence the test will be in the playability not the aesthetics.

Pleasurable walks, are secondary to playing the game of GOLF, complete with the tension of a tactical decision, or watching that ball you just hit, hopefully waiting for that
ball, almost suspended in air by the stiff breeze, to carry that bunker.  

There are thrills in golf, thinking and  disappointments too, and I think the playability of the course brings out the best in all of these.

I've often wondered, on a perfect breezy day at NGLA, if a golfer just shot his worst round, did he look back and say, he had a pleasant round, or does he look back at some of his thrills, disappointments and mistakes, looking at how he could have avoided them and pledging to make improvements the next time he plays ?

Perhaps we get so caught up in architecture wer forget some of the  reasons for playing The GAME.

I'm curious on the differences in play of
# 2 and # 11.

But, that's just my opinion.

[T_MacWood]

Pat
Perhaps you could learn something from RWE.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

What could I learn ?

[T_MacWood]

Pat
That great golf and sublime aesthetics are not mutualy exclusive. That a golf course that possesses natural beauty is not a bad thing.

RWE spent 90% of his post talking about the golfing merits and strategy, and you chastise him for a single comment about the site being a place he would enjoy taking his wife on walk. Why?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Where did I say that a golf courwe that possesses natural beauty is a bad thing ?

I didn't chastise him at all.

He said in his post that he disagreed with me about the "real test".  Should I take that to mean he was chastising me ?
I indicated that I thought a golf course, was an interactive playing field, not simply a visual one.

Good old Ralphie and I have similar thoughts relative to the flat holes on the golf course, and were engaged in a polite discussion before you stuck your overly sensitive two cents in.

RWE seems quite intelligent and quite capable of speaking for himself, without the benefit of a ventriliquist.

[T_MacWood]

Pat
I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were having a private discussion. I believe you wrote: "Remember, this is a golf course, not a garden, or painting, there is physical interaction with a golf course, absent in gardens and paintings hence the test will be in the playability not the aesthetics." There isn't a physical interaction in a garden? What is your favorite ugly golf course?

[Ralph Waldo Emerson]

Pat,

The only objection I take to your posts is that you seem to be characterizing my position as relying solely on aesthetics.  In my post I said that the "real test is how a course makes you feel. Yes, a large part of this is strategy and shot values, but the land is apparently more important to me."  If I didn't think that strategy, shot values, and/or "playability" were an integral part of what makes a great golf course, I would spend my time in national parks or take George up on his offer.

I was speaking to greatness.  Now I think Friar's Head has superior strategic options than the Bridge, but if Friar's Head had shaping like the Bridge, I believe it would lose its essence.  It would still be a great test of ball striking, but that aspect of nature that makes you feel your mortality and at the same time your connection to all things natural would be lost.  

And you see, my comment had nothing to do with playing the course.  My comment was that one course has the ingredients to maximize its potential; the other does not.  If they both have perfect "playability", then the one will be one for the ages and the other simply contemporary.  If I hear Mr. Ward's analogy to rating a restaurant without eating the food one more time I'm going to scream.  I had the food, I skipped the desert.  

My intention is not to bash Matt.  His observation is quite right if someone is commenting on how a course reacts to shots, but to say someone can't make a reasonable assessment of the strategy of a course, to say nothing of its naturalness, without playing it is ridiculous.  Maybe you will be surprised at some of results of your shots after you play them, but if you couldn't tell a bit of the strategy of a course until you played it, how could anyone enjoy, or shoot a good score, the first time they played a course?  Don't we make decisions based on what we see; and don't most of these decisions turn out to be right; and isn't it those few miscalculations that give us so much frustration, and ultimately joy, once they're overcome?

Walking Friar's Head gave me chills of excitement.  I imagine it was the strategic options I was confronted with as I imagined how I would golf my ball over a course so integrated into the land.  This is what I mean when I say "how a golf course makes you feel".  I expect it to live up to this expectation.  I'll let you.

Now, as to the holes down on the plain; why do you think they might turn out to be some of the most interesting?  My hunch on this is that because the land had already been disturbed, C&C felt free to:  a) make it look as natural as possible while using man made contours to accentuate strategy and b) to insert manmade hazards, also to optimize strategy.  They also, chose to place 2 of their 3 shotters there and part of 14 (also a long hole) there as well (pretty smart).  

Which brings me to the routing.  After giving the property a good walk, I would argue that this is an extremely difficult property to route.  I can envision plenty of other routings that would have done irreparable harm to the interest in the course.  The course does not feel schizophrenic at all.  You weave in and out of the dunes, down on to the plain, back into the dunes.  Perhaps I'm reading something into it, but it seems that they deliberately routed the course to make the views have to compete with the course.  

When you emerge from the trail on to the 15th tee, you are struck by the view (amazing; beautiful), then bam!, the exposed sand of the dunes creeping down toward the fairway below, slowly giving way to sprouts of grass before seamlessly becoming fairway.  You really don't look at Long Island Sound again.  The views that other courses would tout as their big gun can't compete with what the golfer will golf his ball over.

Well, you might have guessed, I'm pretty high on the course.  What did you think of the ninth hole?  It was one of my favorites.

[Patrick_Mucci]

RWE,

I think The Bridge and Friar's Head may be two distinct canvases, as are GCGC and The Creek.

Certainly both our expectations are very high, based upon our visuals, but we've yet to interact with the golf course, hence, isn't there a void which can only be filled by the playing experience ?

I understand your preference in the STYLE and appearance of the golf course in conjuction with its surroundings, but as neat as that look is, if the course doesn't play well, the look is for naught.  
I'm fairly confident that the play might be better than the look, and if I had to choose between the two, that's the choice I'd make.

I like the routing a great deal too, the feel of several different courses within one, as you play 18 holes, but I'm not so sure that's the only routing that could have produced a good golf course.

At this point, other routings are speculative, the one that's in place will likely be permanent.

The 9th hole, will cause me some problems, especially with a wind off the sound.
I guess I'll have to figure out which club off the tee is going to provide me with the best shot in.

I have been having nightmares about hitting a long iron into # 18 in a strong southerly wind, that green sure looks small, and the planet ends just to the left of it.  Here again, depending on the wind, I think I'll hit driver or 3-wood to get as close to that green as possible.  That may be the scariest shot into any green.

What do you think about the tee shots at
#2, #3, # 5, # 10, #11 into a good southerly wind.  # 2 and # 11 especially off those elevated tees will be a little intimidating.
I'm fascinated by # 11 and how to play it with different wind directions and velocities.  

While I'm axious, like everyone else, to play the course, I'm intrigued by the play of holes 2-7, 11-15 in a good breeze.

I hope they get a great fall/winter/spring weather pattern for grow in and fine tuning.
All the ingredients appear to be there to make this a special place for GOLF.

Who knows, maybe we'll get a chance to play there together.

Just don't read me poetry while we play,
Okay Ralph !