News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #25 on: October 15, 2004, 12:34:27 PM »
michael

>the average Joe 10 hanicap will be sternly challenged.

I'm living proof of that!

Early in my round last weekend, I was on a continuation of a very hot putting streak that began at Myopia and ran on through Salem.  At the 5th, I hit driver, lob to about 15 feet, and proceeded to three-jack it.

Wannamoisett bit me and for the rest of the round, I was a basket-case on the greens!

My only solace was reaching 17 in two and 2-putting for my birdie!

"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #26 on: October 15, 2004, 02:14:36 PM »
Michael J Fay,

Keeping the greens at 13 on the stimp, as Tripp Davis indicates will mute scoring at any golf course, let alone one with some slope and contour.

At what speed are they over the threshold of reasonable and into the realm of goofy ?

When greens get much faster and firmer, hitting into them with more lofted clubs will always be preferable.

Those that would prefer hitting longer approach shots, using 3 or more clubs, into greens that are fast and firm probably can't fill out the entry form to get into the tournament in the first place. ;D

michael j fay

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #27 on: October 15, 2004, 03:30:32 PM »
Pat:

We played a five club interclub at Wannamoisett the last Tuesday in September and it rained the night before. It continues to rain all day Tuesday (I estimate about 1 1/2 inches). We played 27 holes in competition, the greens were about 13 in the morning, in the afternoon with all the rain they remained 13.

Pat, I don't think that most courses could reach the speeds that Wannamoisett maintains nearly all season. They can and I believe that their members like it that way. It gives the Northeast Amateur a twist that most courses cannot offer. As most courses it is challenging from tee to green, but unlike many others the real game is with the rolling iron.

Mike

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #28 on: October 15, 2004, 03:51:15 PM »
Mike,

I was a little taken back by the pace of the greens the first time I played Wannamoisett.

I'd agree that several variables would have to line up in order for a golf course to maintain perpetually fast greens.
Oakmont does it, and I'm sure a few other courses are blessed with the ability to produce those speeds, but, is that a good thing ?

Does it devalue the balance of the game ?

All too often members take pride in fiendish pin placements, super firm, fast greens, knee length lush rough, the great length of their course or a combination of the above.

The question is, does the course remain an enjoyable test for most types of golfers.

Highly contoured or sloped greens that stimp at 13 can't be fun for anyone.

At 13 on the stimp, I can't see a ball remaining on the green at # 5 or # 12 if the golfer has a downhill putt, and misses.  It's hit the hole or perish, and that's goofy golf.
Likewise, I've played greens where I hit an uphill putt which went a foot or so past the hole, only to begin to roll back, and down, off the green.

At some point common sense has to prevail over ego.

I love Wannamoisett, but when playing conditions are brought to extremes, the game loses much of its attraction, as well as its architectural values.

michael j fay

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #29 on: October 15, 2004, 04:01:12 PM »
Pat:

You make a good point but I am not sure that Wannamoisett ever really gets into goofy golf. A stern test of accuracy, a sterner test of nerves.

A couple of years ago a player in the Northeast Am had a three footer from above the hole on # 5 green. The pin was on the top level. He ginched the putt and it rolled 30 yards into the fairway. He immediately produced another ball, declared the original unplayable and putted the ball in. Pretty smart guy. The competition got to his nerves but not to his head.

I've played Wannamoisett many times including a round on Thursday of the Northeast (Guest Day, where the players are playing the first round as well as a two-ball with a partner not in the Tournament. I have to say that as fast as the greens get they are manageable in almost all instances. They are fast but extrodinarily true. A good putter will make his share. An aggressive putter will eat his liver, a nervous putter may give up the game.

Cliff Hamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #30 on: October 15, 2004, 04:22:36 PM »
Haven't had the pleasure of playing Wannamoisett but have watched numerous Northeast amateurs.  Over the past few years the two golfers that have stuck out for playing exceedingly well for more than one year have been Luke Donald and Jonothan Byrd.  Is it a coincidence that they are among the best of the younger pros?

Cliff

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #31 on: October 15, 2004, 05:47:12 PM »
Cliff Hamm,

It's easy to be a good steady putter with nerves of steel when you're a young college student on a golf scholarship.

Try putting those greens with a wife, an ex-wife, four dependents, two pets, in-laws, three hours sleep, a real full time job and a boss who doesn't think you're working hard enough. ;D
« Last Edit: October 16, 2004, 09:52:33 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

TEPaul

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #32 on: October 16, 2004, 08:57:03 AM »
This is a most interesting thread to me. I've never played Wannamoisett or even seen it but from all the Northeast Am competitors I've known all of them say the golf course is really wonderful and quite some challenge (mostly this came from Sigel).

But reading this thread and Tripp Davis's description of things as well as others like Michael J. Fay and Pat, it seems to me this golf course has experienced what I've called the "ideal maintenance meld" (or perhaps even somewhat beyond the "IMM) for a long time for the kind of course and architecture it is.

There're a couple of variables that've been mentioned here that make that so and frankly provable. I'm speaking of the fact that the course has 1/ significantly sloped and contoured greens; 2/ that the club has been able to run green speed at around 13; and 3/ It's run those speeds with a good degree of firmness on those greens.

When you have those THREE factors or variables on any golf course you're into the realm of UNDENIABLE physics---and it plays out the same way on the effects on "playbability" not matter what the golf course (if it has those THREE factors or variables)! This has also been the case with Oakmont and Merion East to a large extent as well as PVGC a good deal of the time.

Some can claim that the architecture of the greens of those courses is better than most any. That may sound true but it may not be. Because of the undeniable fact of physics any golf course that has those THREE factors---eg good slope and contour on their greens, a green speed that high, and a good degree of green surface firmness as well, will get the kind of "playability" that has been spoken about here at Wannamoisett!

This should not sound like I mean this type of playability should not be consistently maintained on any golf course but if and when it is, a club should understand what exactly is producing it----basically it's not just the architecture---it's the maintenance practices that bring that architecture alive to the extent that's been described here about Wannamoisett.

It's important to know that lest some club thinks that it's too intense and they decide to alter the architecture in some way. That should positively never been done or contemplated. All they need to do is simply back off on their green speed and in some cases the firmness of the greens.

I'm going to start another thread to ask those who know Wannamoisett well to tell me exactly how they think the "playbability" of Wannamoisett would change if they continued to run those green speeds but made those green far more receptive whereby a well struck short iron would pull up dirt in its pitch mark. I can pretty much guarantee that would be a whole different way to go in "playabliitly"!

All this kind of thing is simply differing factors in the concept of the "Ideal Maintenance Meld" and what all it can produce in "playability".
« Last Edit: October 16, 2004, 09:00:34 AM by TEPaul »

Tripp_Davis

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #33 on: October 19, 2004, 06:33:04 AM »
Patrick,

I appreciate your challenge to my thinking.  It is why I spend some time on this site.  Unfortunately, this topic probably derserves a great deal more time and thought than I can afford at the moment (I am getting ready to rebuild a Colt Allison green at Fresh Meadow this week and this will take a considerable number of brain cells as it is).

As with golf architecture itself, each individual's approach to the game is subjective to their taste and tendancies.  I, personally, prefer to be able to use shot making to get to many of the pins at Wannamoisett, which for me is easier with more club.  I consider myself a very good short iron player, but with many of the greens at Wannamoisett (and it varies greatly with the location of pins on each hole), I find it easier to have more club, or at the very least to use more club and work the ball and being at the right approach angle is something I have found to be critical there.  It is a very subtle thing, that again may be predicated a great deal by my individual taste.  However, I see a lot of the same tendancies when playing with the best amateurs in the world there.  Although each hole at Wannamoisett has great variety in the way the hole can play relatively to the pin locations, I will give you my thoughts on what I find interesting about each hole.

#1 - I can get the ball off the tee to within 125 yards of the green, but if the pin is in the back left, I would much prefer to be on the right side of the fairway and have a more like 150 yards so that I can a) see the green a little better; b) be able to take something off a 7 or 8 iron and let the ball release back to this pin rather than trying to fly it back there and hold it.  I found that if I throw something in there with spin, I have to get it all the way back to that pin and that risk short siding yourself to a pin that runs away from you.  I  personally find it more difficult to consistently take something off a 9 iron or wedge and let is skip back to this pin setup.  To this pin I normally cut a drive off the tee and usually end up with 140 to 160.

#2 - Similar thing with back pins here.  I want to avoid spin coming into this green.  I can hit driver down to wedge or 9 iron, but this hole often plays into the wind and I would rather have a little more and hit a shot that release a little.  The toughest pins here are on the front because it is hard to bump a shot in there and with much spin you are pulling it off the front.  I normally hit 3 wood off this tee and try to stay down the left so I can come at this green with a little draw.

#3 - Great par three that I would not want to hit more than 8 iron to.  The back pin is a no go and all you are trying to do is get it on this green.

#4 - I draw a 3 wood off this tee because it is very difficult to work a driver into this fairway (another way it is difficult to overpower this course).  Angle is not as much a factor here, but it is less visually difficult from the left side of the fairway.

#5 - I saw a lot of kids hitting driver here and ending up just short of the green.  I prefer to take 5 wood and leave myself about 100 yards.  The reason I want to be able to put a little spin on this ball is that the green seems to run away from you up top.  This is a green where you are simply trying to get the ball on the top level.  I saw the kids hitting bump and run shots that would not make it up and roll back to the fairway or run over the green.  I talked about this hole with Danny Green, one of the best short iron shot makers there is in the game (pro or amateur) and we decided that being at 100 yards is better to allow you to control the shot.

#6 Back left pin, stay down the left and hit a shot that releases and uses the slope.  Back right, stay down the left and do the same.  Driver is a risk becuase if you hang it all, you run out of fairway and have little to no chance to get it close to any pin.  I draw a three wood down the left here, as do most of the players.

#7 - I watched the kids hit driver here and make double and triple bogeys.  The hog back in the fairway makes it very difficult to keep a driver in the fairway and if you are on the wrong side of the hog back relative to the pin, you have a difficult par in front of you.  At 120 yards, you can get to the pins, but it is very helpful to be on the proper side of the fairway if you are looking for birdie.  I normally hit 5 or three iron here, as I would recommend to any player.  Anthony Kim, who won last year and who plays at the University of Oklahoma (where I played), and I talked about this hole and he realized that driver here is a stupid play - it almost cost him the tournament.

#8 - Great par three that requires you work the ball and use the slopes in the green.  Left side pins really require a draw to scoots up the hill.

#9 - Driver here is a risk because the fairway narrows and the closer you get to the green the less you can work the ball into all of the little shelves.  I personally think you can use the slopes in the green to get the ball close when you have more club to work the ball and let the ball release on the slopes.  I hit three wood here and have something like 7 iron.  I played the hole under par last year, so did something right.

#10 - Driver is again a risk because you have to fly the left bunkers and a cross bunker can be reached.  A back right pin takes a shot with less spin better, but this is the most tame green on the course and being in the fairway is more critical than angle.  This is one hole that I would like to be a little closer to, but 3 wood is a more prudent play.

#11 - A tough fairway to hit and driver does you little good becuase 3 wood leaves you 110 yards and a fuller shot gives you a little more control to a severe green.

#12 - Just get it on the green!  A very visual hole that can severely punish a greedy player.

#13 - Again, driver does you no good and a well hit driver will run out of fairway.  Also, to front left pins it is critical to be in the fairway and on the right side.  It is also much easier if not necessary to get to that little pin on the middle to back right from the right side of the fairway, playing slightly back into the slope.

#14 - Most kids try to drive this green, but if the pin is in the back right, I would much rather be back and be able to spin the ball.  If the pin is on the front or the left, being closer does help.

Sorry, I have a meeting at 7:30 with Course Crafters at Fresh Meadow (a great golf course builder by the way).  I will try to finish tonight.

By the way, I have played Augusta.






Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #34 on: October 19, 2004, 12:10:36 PM »
Tripp Davis,

I'd agree that each golfers game and approach to a golf course and a round are unique.  Comfort has a great deal to do with club selection on any given day.

I can't disagree with your approach, because .... it's your approach.  In jest, I"d tell you to work on 1/2 or 3/4 shots with your wedge and nine iron so you can bounce those shots into back hole locations instead of hitting longer clubs to accomplish the same thing.

With regard to spin, with today's wide variety of wedges, I've seen golfers put some serious rpm's on the ball from 30 yards and out.  Again, it's personal preference and comfort with the shot at hand.

Based on your club selections as you've described for your approaches, I think it would be safe to say that you'd be considered a long hitter, far longer then the average player, or even the good player, and as such, what to you is a driver-wedge, may be a driver 4-iron or more to most others.

A golfer who needs a driver/4-iron to get to the green would be ill advised to hit less club off the tee in order to hit a three wood into the green.

With today's equipment, f you can work the ball, does it matter what side of the fairway you're on ?  Especially when a tee shot hit in trying to maximize those angles of attack for the approach shot might result in your ball coming to rest in difficult rough, especially when approaching FIRM and fast greens ?  Could it be that the center cut of the fairway is the best percentage shot to go with ?

Playiing less then driver on holes # 4 and #5 makes sense due to the dogleg nature of the holes, and the individuals comfort level with the tee shot, and I don't think anyone could fault that thinking.  #7 has a unique fairway and finding the prefered LZ can't be faulted either.  The balance of your hole by hole playing description would seem to fall more into the category of comfort rather then.... demand strategy.

Hitting an approach below the hole on every green should be the ideal/primary objective of the golfer.

We have a difference of opinion on the definition of wildly contoured greens.  I don't see them at Wannamoisett.  Severe slopes exist on # 5, # 12 and # 15 but wild contours are not a trademark feature.    # 1, 3, and 6 at NGLA would be wildly contoured by my definition.

Having played Augusta, you know that no approach shot at Wannamoisett has the same physical characteristics, topography or strategic demand as the approach shot on # 15 at Augusta, from up close, versus farther out.  Shame on you for trying to deceive these innocent lurkers. ;D

With respect to Fresh Meadow, what green are you working on ?  That's a neat golf course, but could you get rid of the little pagoda in the pond ?  

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #35 on: October 19, 2004, 12:22:55 PM »
patrick

>We have a difference of opinion on the definition of wildly contoured greens.  I don't see them at Wannamoisett.

I found Wannamoisett's greens to be, by my definition, above average in contour - especially those specific ones you mentioned.

And right up the road is Metacomet - whose greens seem to be as wild or, perhaps, even more contoured.

However, my new definition of 'very wildly contoured greens' would have to be defined by those at Myopia Hunt Club.

 ;)

"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

TEPaul

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #36 on: October 19, 2004, 01:44:58 PM »
Pat:

I know it's not going to stop you but from the sound of the level of golf this Tripp Davis plays at I doubt any of us really need to be telling him how to look at any golf hole and we certainly don't need to be telling him how to play any golf hole. ;)

I know what I'm talking about because I do know a few really good golfers who in the past had the incredibly poor sense to actually listen to me. They were never the same again!

TEPaul

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #37 on: October 19, 2004, 01:49:43 PM »
You want to see truly wild contours on a green, I was just looking at a very old photo of the original 1st green at NGLA with a bunch of well known players standing on the green. One of them had one foot on one contour and the other foot on anther one and it looked like he had one foot on one step of a stair and the other foot on the next step of a stair!

Tripp_Davis

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #38 on: October 19, 2004, 09:49:44 PM »
Patrick,

I agree that comfort has a great deal to do with how a particular player plays the game.  In my opinion, the most strategic of golf courses create levels of discomfort, which may even be slight, while offering an option that is much more comfortable.  The best of strategic golf courses create ebb and flow of such throughout the round in a way that makes even the more simple holes more challenging mentally, due what is coming up or what has come.  In my mind a course that demands a certain strategic approach is not that strategic at all, because it lacks option - the heart of great strategy.  As such, Wannmoisett may on the surface seem to not provide the defense that does not allow it to be overpowered, but the underlying strategy and comfort with which to play the holes does.  I have to admit that my initial comment relative to the course being "one that cannot be overpowered", was my perception from my experience at the Northeast Amateur.  I played pretty well there this year (73-71-67-69-280 ~ 19th I think - 7 shots back) and did not feel indimidated by the golf course, so my perspective was not one of having a bad tournament and trying to justify it somehow.  After giving it thought from responses, I feel the same way.  I would suggest that I am not alone in my thinking.  I make a point of going out and watching players play when I am at the Sunnehanna, Porter Cup, US Amateur, etc., to see how others play the course and to have a chance to study the course without having to concentrate on my own game.  At the Northeast, I saw the best amateurs in the world playing the course the same way, basically, that I was playing it, with a few exceptions where youth and abandon was not too often being served.  

When designing a golf course, the hidden agenda of the most talented architects is recognizing what makes the good player get out of their comfort zone and "retreat" to shot making that is more comfortable.  This can be done visually or simply with angles and slopes.  For what it is worth, Wannamoisett gets the best amateur golfers in the world to play a less aggressive game and take what the course gives them, which happens to be a more conservative approach.  The reasons for this are obvious to me and has everything to do with approach angles to the green and/or the contour in the greens, and the way the driving areas are presented.  

As for taking somthing off my wedges and 9 iron, you could write a book about the changes in equipment and course maintenance that have changed shot making.  With today's ball, I find it much more "comforting" to hit full shots under pressure than to be getting "cute".  You often see the best players in the world pulling of these cute shots when they have no other option, but I can assure they are not regularly playing these shots as a part of a plan when there was another option.  I like to endice a player into thinking they gain a considerable advantage by giving them a shorter, but "cuter" or highly feel oriented shot, while offering a more simple shot from a greater distance.  It is the enticing of a player to hit the wrong shot that we are trying to accomplish.  I have had many conversations with a client in Memphis about defining the wrong way to play instead of the right one, while somewhat "masking" the more comman sense ways to play.

With regard to the 30 yard shot with a lot of RPM's, it is a shot that is not that reliable, especially on the contours of a Wannamoisett, and competitive play, and the objective is to get it close.  Another thing those 30 yards shots can do is make you feel you have to get them close.  For instance, an uphill birdie putt on the 5th hole at Wannamoisett is a bonus, but very few players will actually ever be doing more than trying to get the ball up top.  With the short high spin shot, the underlying desire is to get it close which opens a can of worms I want to avoid.

Great strategy would be more appreciated today by the better players if they did take more risk.  I think most of today's competitive golf centers on making fewer mistakes rather executing thrilling shots.  I think this is large part due to the equipment which makes risk taking less necessary due to the reliance of being able to hit the ball straighter.  I grew up working the ball and still see the game that way.

It is much harder to work the ball today, especially with short irons, than it used to be.  This is somewhat a continuation of what I was speaking to earlier in that the new ball does not let you move it as much and I find, and see other players doing too, that it is much better to be hitting full shots, as if you are trying to work the ball it is more easily accomplished while hitting the ball harder.

I guess I may have been tricked a little by the speed of the greens and how they set pins at Wannamoisett, but even in observation I don't see how anyone could in general call the greens at Wannamoisett anything less than severe.  Wild may not be the right word, but they are severe.  I found them every bit as difficult to play to, around and on as when the US Amateur was at Oakmont.

I would play anyone at Wannamoisett if I could give them 50 yards past my drive, but had the option to place their ball, in the fairway, wherever I wanted.

At Fresh Meadow we are working on the 14th green, softening the slopes to give them back the pins they had - also enlarging the green to closer to its original size (they can't cut a pin on this green now where a ball will stay on the green if you are above it and I saw two balls from under the hole roll up and then make a 360 right off the front of the green - this green rarely gets over 10 on the stimp).  And we are working on the 18th green to enlarge it and bring the greenside bunkers more back into play.    

     

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #39 on: October 19, 2004, 10:06:44 PM »
On some holes it's better to hold back on a drive to get a flatter stance;  is this true for any holes Wannamoisett?
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Tripp_Davis

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #40 on: October 19, 2004, 10:45:18 PM »
Paul,

Not really.  

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #41 on: October 20, 2004, 12:19:52 PM »
Tripp Davis,

I know of many clubs, where 13 on the stimp would make their greens unputtable, and I view those greens in the context of severe.  Courses like Stanwhich, Deepdale, etc., etc..

Wannamoisett's greens remind me a little of the greens at GCGC in that, with few exceptions, they have a good deal of slope and a little contour, and when brought up in speed, make scoring very difficult, although Wannamoisett's greens have more contour then GCGC's.

How many memberships could handle greens at 13 ?
I think the course, greens and culture of the club have to be unique in order for those conditions to exist.

Would Fresh Meadow be playable if the greens stimped at 13 ?

You're work on # 14 green is only about 300 yards from the pagoda  ;D

Next spring, I'm going to take you up on your offer of placing my ball 50 yards farther down the fairway, in the fairway.
Let's put dinner as the payoff.
I have some friends who are members at Wannamoisett and it would be an interesting competition and a fun bet.

Designing today, for the greater variety of players, juniors, women, seniors and the wide spectrum of other golfers has to make it far more difficult to present the feeling of discomfort to all factions on the same hole, or in the same manner.

Are # 8 and # 15 at NGLA good examples of discomfort for every level of golfer ?



Tripp_Davis

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #42 on: October 20, 2004, 09:49:36 PM »
Patrick,

I played the US Mid Am at Stanwich a couple of years ago (with many greens that were un-puttable at the 10.5 they had them) and I rebuilt portions of the 5th and 8th greens at Deepdale after they became unusable because of speed (they are regularly at 12 plus).  I don't really consider Wannamoisett's greens to be the least bit similar to those two because those two mostly have strong slope in one direction, often with few smaller changes in direction.  Wannamoisett's greens are severe because of the constant changes in direction and speed, and the multitude of small areas for pins.  

How many clubs can handle greens at 13?  Oakmont (because they have to), Deepdale (becuase they want to), ????.

I don't think a runaway dozer will make it from #14 to the Pagoda.  We got #14 laid out today and I can't wait to see this build.  It was quite a challenge to make that green playable while not venturing from the Allison style that is present on the rest of the course.  (email - trippd@sbcgloabl.net)

Your on for Wannamoisett!  I will be back up in the area in early April checking on work we did this fall and can make the time.  I also have a few friends there and I bet we could make a great time of it.  Winner chooses the site for dinner.  I had a bet with Justin Leonard and David Winkle (his agent) on the OU/Texas game (I played golf at OU), giving them the points, and won dinner - loser picked and we are going to Burger King in Highland Park.

#15 more so than #8 at NGLA.  #8 is an easier tee shot today and there is no realy conservative play today.  The most aggressive tee shot on #8 is really the most comfortable shot.  Although I would suspect #8 is more difficult for the average player.

TEPaul

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #43 on: October 21, 2004, 07:48:20 AM »
It just hit me that NGLA probably has more going on (more meaningful stuff to think about) across the levels of players off most all the tees than any golf course I'm aware of and #15 is one of the most interesting tee shots out there. Thinking through all the holes, though, there's just no question at all that #9 is the real weak link out there---it really does need something in the second fairway. #10 needs that fairway bunker left repositioned about 15-20 yards farther out and it will have far more impact for all (putting just enough pressure on good players to fly it and making it far more reasonable for weaker players to come up short of it). A restored tee left on #12 would also truly reestablish some real variety on the tee shot on that hole.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #44 on: October 21, 2004, 08:48:55 AM »
TEPaul,

We agree on # 9, but at # 10 wouldn't it make more sense to move the tee back and to the right, move the halfway house and trim a few trees, rather than tamper with CBM's bunkers ?

It's interesting to note how many bunkers come into play for the really long player at NGLA.  Holes # 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10,
the road at 11, 12 (especially if the tee were moved to the left of the 11th green), 14, 15, 17 and 18.

Was CBM a visionary, just lucky, or were those bunkers intended for lesser players ..... or a combination of the above ?

Tripp Davis,

Sounds like a good bet, I'm looking forward to it.

On both # 8 and # 15 CBM positioned center fairway bunkers, either for the second shot or a long tee shot.  On # 8 there's a 50 yard gap between the end of the centerline bunker complex and the principal's nose complex, probably about 260+ from the tee, usually into a prevailing wind.

On # 15 the center bunker in that narrow, hog backed fairway is about 290 from the tee.

In both instances, long drives will be challenged, although more so on # 15.

Is Fresh Meadow considering the resurrection of the back left, upper tee on # 12 ?  or any other changes to the golf course ?

TEPaul

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2004, 10:01:11 AM »
"TEPaul,
We agree on # 9, but at # 10 wouldn't it make more sense to move the tee back and to the right, move the halfway house and trim a few trees, rather than tamper with CBM's bunkers?"

Pat:

I recognize that one doesn't really want to tamper with CBM's bunker but it seems to me it'd be a whole lot more practical and certainly a whole lot more economical to just move that bunker and completely copy it 15-20 yards downfield from where it is right now. That would serve the same purpose distance-wise as moving the tee back and to the right and moving the entire halfway house and it would also be a large ton less expensive and complicated. One also has to keep in mind that moving the tee to the right, even a little bit, would significantly change the angle of the tee shot from the necessity of carrying over that left bunker and also the excellent angle of how fast the right side (and bunkers) come up on a tee shot from the present angle of the tee when attempting to play right of that left fairway bunker!!

ForkaB

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #46 on: October 21, 2004, 10:52:18 AM »
TEP

Did you notice that several posters, including Tripp Davis and mj fay have been quoting stimpmeter readings for Wannamorrissett without your express permission! :o

Shame on them and shame on you for letting them get away with it!

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Wannamoisett CC, Oct. 14th
« Reply #47 on: October 21, 2004, 11:21:24 AM »
TEPaul,

It's about a 187 to 200 yard carry to get over the entire left side bunker complex from the forward tee, it's probably about another 20-30 from the back tee.

I'm not so sure that that bunker complex isn't more of a flanking, rather then a carry bunker, especially in light of the prevailing wind, but I see your point.

I'd have to look at the angles again, but there is some additional room behind the current back tee.  Some might say it would be a safey hazard, but, would it be any worse then
# 2 tee, # 13 tee, # 15 tee, # 16 tee or # 18 tee ?

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back