National Golf Links images

[ForkaB]

Tommy N

My guess is that the old Leven routing was all south of the railway line (as the RR was elevated on a built up berm, I can't see how (or why) they would have crossed it).  That would mean that the only Lundin holes which are original would be 1-4 and 15-18 (maybe 5, but I suspect that was a fill-in when the routing was changed).

Tommy P

Yes.  As that great GCA critic Gertrude Stein once said:  "A hole, is a hole, is a hole."  But, then again, I'm glad so many of us think differently, or why would we be spending so much time on this site?

[TEPaul]

Dave:

I gave you the carry distances right, middle and left over the diagonal bunker. The carry distance over the bunker in the middle of the fairway is about 250 yards but the mid-fairway bunker is not on a direct line from the tee to the green. A direct line from the men's tee to the green is right over the middle of the big long diagonal bunker.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

Pat, it's OTHERWISE.  I hit the gambling stupid shots in casual rounds where there's something to gain!  That's it.  Try to reach a par 5 in 2 or drive a par 4.  If 17 was driveable, damn right I'd be likely to take a poke.  But when there is just nothing to gain by playing to a 25 yard wide fairway when there's a 100 yard wide fairway 40 or 50 yards shorter, and the second shot required is just some variant of a wedge, what's the point?  None.

This is where we disagree.

Hitting it 100 yards short of the green or shorter, brings most of the trouble into play off the tee, so why risk that drive ? and, if you were to be successful and were 100 yards from the green, you'd have an uncomfortable downhill/sidehill lie.[/color]

Look, I'd do the same thing on a 550 yard par 5 where the fairway is 100 yards wide at 270 and is super narrow at 320 with a pond and heavy rough and bunkers around it.  Why in the world would I try to hit into the neck of the fairway so I can have a 2 iron, when I can go at it with 3 wood, 3 wood and geometrically increase my chances of actually having a legitimate chance to go for the green in two?  I'd hit 3 wood all day, every day.  Why?  Because the extra 30-40-50 yards I might be able to squeeze a driver into just isn't worth it.  I gain nothing.  In fact I probably lose 3/4 of my chances to reach in two.  It's the exact same logic, only with a HARD second shot, not an easy one.

No, it's not the same logic because by going long, you just don't gain a shorter shot, you gain access to the best angle of attack into the hole, and the only clear visual of the entire green and surrounds.  The risk/reward is wonderful.[/color]  

What's so hard to understand about this? It's Golf 101.
Then you flunked that course.[/color]

Just FYI, I hit a 4 iron on #1 off the tee.

Bad club selection and bad play because you leave yourself with a longer blind or semi-blind approach to the most ferocious opening green in golf, from a less then ideal angle of attack.[/color]

Going for that green is equally stupid, especially when you don't get to warm up and hit balls.  

Failure to warm up can alter your ability to execute the proper or optimum strategy.  Where possible, one should warm up, that's golf 101.  [/color]

I went at #2.  I think I hit it over #5 with a 6 iron, maybe 5 iron.

We were hugely downwind, so I had an 8 iron into #7 and on #9, I managed to sneak a drive through the crossbunkers.  Why would I hit that shot?  Although it's hugely risky, I did it because it was the only way to reach the green in two, I thought.  I butchered the hole from there, but at least I gave it a go.  

That would seem to be a bonehead play, and inconsistent with your reluctance to hit driver to the slot on # 17.[/color]

I took a whack at #14 and butchered that.

Again, this more then anything reflects poor judgement on your part.  Water, sand and out of bounds are everywhere.
Of all the holes that signal safe play short, this is one of them.
Again, how do you reconcile driver here, with such dire consequences, and such little reward, and not hitting driver at # 17 ?[/color]

And my one real remorse is that I heel-fanned the driver on #18 and didn't get a decent chance to go for the green in two (still made 4, though).

Now I understand.

Finishing with a 4 is always a delight.

And, it's obvious that that finish has clouded your vision with respect to how you played and should have played the previous 17 holes  [/color]

[George_Bahto]

all this debate is truly interesting - just goes to show you how great this "shortie" par-4 is

"the befuddled" - hah - Martin Bonner:

those hole descriptions in Scotland's Gift:

although they are "numbered" that is not the rotation (or routing of those specific strategies he used at NGLA

examples: #4 (in his book) referes to the strategy for the Channel hole at Lido - never built at National

example:  #15 describes the Biarritz -not built at NGLA

example (in his book) he talks about the Alps and it's listed as #17 ..... so those are just a PARTIAL list of his group of ideal holes - there were more .........  he and SR had a chance to build some at Lido (1915-1919) later on

Bottle hole: was listed #1 in his book ....  

it is the second shot at Sunningdale (3rd or 14th, depending on 9 reversals) and the tee shot

one that I need some help from some of you fellas to help me with is the great 15th at NGLA:

he said the second shot is similar in strategy to the 2nd shot on 15th Muirfield (I think there is a drawing in my book about that  ......     but what is the drive like on the original hole"  he described it as the 1st shot at Perfection, 14th N Berwick

is there a resemblance??

like Raynor I have not been overseas (at least in not that direction)

Rich Goodale: the original yardage of the 17th NGLA was 311 - went to about 360 when he changed the green site - pthe hole got easier for the troops .....   so much for authentic restoration - hah

[Paul_Turner]

George

Regarding the Bottle hole at Sunningdale, I think it was the 12th.  Does Macdonald say it was this hole?  I don't think that the course ever had its 9s reversed, the 9th green is in the far corner of the property.   I can't picture Park's 12th at Sunningdale very well (the hole that Macdonald saw) because it was changed to its current design by Colt.

I'll have a look at an old plan of the 15th at Muirfield, the current hole is different.  When did Macdonald visit Muirfield?

[TEPaul]

" but what is the drive like on the original hole"  he described it as the 1st shot at Perfection, 14th N Berwick
is there a resemblance??"

George:

Interesting question and an interesting window into Macdonald's mind as to what potential "concept" copies were all about to him. The drives sure don't look anything alike but my recollection standing on that 14th tee at N. Berwick in comparison to NGLA's #15 is they both make the golfer on the tee feel really squeeeeeezed somehow!! I guess that's why he called it "Narrows". NGLA's 15th is one of the coolest and most interesting "distance option" tee shots around. It's sort of like the second shot into a back pin at PVGC. Direction is dictated and you sort of have to decide (option) how deep you can stand to try to go. I'm no big hitter but NGLA's #15 may be a candidate for increased tee length because if some of these big hitter are able to carry their tee balls today clear over the top of the "narrows" out into any width beyond the hole will lose some of it's strategic value to them. Belay that---I just checked my yardage book at it stays narrow far enough out there to not allow them to just fly the "narrows".

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

None of my plays at National were stupid.  

You seem to have this thing about thinking wedge shots are hard shots.  They aren't.  

Sure, I self depricate, and I'm nowhere as good with them as yoiu are, but I am quite confident that I can get a wedge within relatively easy par distance just about every time.  

I only butchered  14 because I bladed a little half-wedge over the green.  

Are you starting to see some inconsistencies, some conflicts in your posts regarding wedge play, specifically, yours ?

I am confident that I'm going to hit a driver at least 260 yards in the air within a 60 yard arc at least 90% of the time, and at least half of those are going to carry 270 or more.  

So why shouldn't I take a poke at 14?  

Because that's precisely where all the trouble begins.
The tidal water on the right starts at about 240 yards and extends to about 300 yards.  In addition the fairway pitches wildly, leaving a poor wedge player with a very difficult shot, and pot and flat bunkers are located in that area, and the fairway is angled and effectively about 15 yards wide at 270-280.

I would imagine you hit a poor wedge because you had an uncomfortable lie.

It was a wedge foul up, not a driver foul up.  That said, want to tell me I should have tried to do the same thing again on 17?  

Because the penalty for failure is less then it is at # 14.

You have so much to learn,  grasshopper  [/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave Schmidt,

Everyone hits bad shots,

But, not everyone makes mental or judgement errors.

For someone who has admitted to being a poor wedge or short game player on FLAT turf, why on earth expose and magnify a weak part of your game by undertaking a high risk drive that will leave you with nothing but difficult lies for wedges and half wedges, the weakest part of your game ?

Perhaps the difference is, a round that is a lark, and a round under competitive conditions.

A great golfer once said:
"there's golf, and then there's tournament golf"

I've played NGLA for fun, and under tournament conditions for both medal and match play , and there is a remarkable difference.

I think even TEPaul might agree with the above.

[TEPaul]

"I think even TEPaul might agree with the above."

Pat:

I certainly do---whole-heartedly. I agree with everything you say in post #74. Like anyone else I certainly didn't like hitting bad shots or just missing shots but that never pissed me off anywhere near as much as hitting a good shot, the shot I wanted to hit only to find I made a real error in judgement. That was much more irritating to me than just flat miss-hitting a shot.

And I certainly do agree that there really is a huge difference between recreational golf or golf for a lark and tournament golf. There's plenty of time and place for both but they really are worlds apart.

On that note, I'll never forget when I started to play good tournament golf and a good golfer friend of mine noticed I'd improve my lie a lot when we were just out fooling around. He told me don't ever do that again. When I asked why he said because if you do that it'll only piss you off more when you're playing tournament golf and you get a bad lie. How true that was.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

I can't tell you how to play the golf course because so much depends on the game you bring with you on the day of play, combined with the wind, hole locations and conditions

However, when the pin is up, on either tier, on # 11, especially the left tier, I don't know anyone who thinks about making 3.
Off the tee, whatever drive puts you in the position short of the road, that makes you the most comfortable, is right for you.  Some like to see the green, others like the bottom of the hill, others like the upslope to the berm.

On # 12, the logic of an iron off the tee totally escapes me.
And, I don't know many golfers who think of three if the pin is behind the ridge in the green.  That green can be very difficult to approach and to putt.  I've seen alot of perfect drives end up with bogie or worse.

# 15 is a very difficult driving hole.  It's narrow with a hog's back down the middle, and that green is no bargain either, especially with the hole cut near the back edge.

# 1 may be the most frightening starting hole in golf.
Walking off that green with a par to start your round is more than acceptable.  Many rounds have been ruined just as they are starting.

Hole locations can easily make a 10 shot difference.
Hole locations on # 's 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17 and 18 can offer some extremely challenging approaches and putts.

The mix of firm, fast conditions together with the wind and challenging hole locations can turn what many view as an easy golf course into a difficult one under tournament conditions.

Perhaps, as you play the course more often, things that seem self evident to me, will become apparent to you.

Playing the course and not keeping score or not caring about score would seem to undermine the intent of the architecture.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong

[George_Bahto]

Patrick: I think the Narrows refers to the narrowing of the approach than the tee-ball.

On subsequent Narrows renditions there would be long bunkering left and right short of the green - these often dramatically pinched in the area short of the green.

It is similar to pinching in the same area on a shortish par-5 that then puts the player in decision-making mode .... go for it and flirt with trouble if off line ......  or lay up safe.

Raynor and Banks used this Narrows strategy very often and mostly on medium par-4s but  they never seemed to identify the strategy in their (Banks') writings.

I spoke with a number of old timers about this hole because it really never made too much sense to me in the beginning - that because the fairway too soft ......  too soft for CBM's thinking.

These old timers all said that when the course was kept "Macdonald-firm"  (rock hard) it was nearly impossible to keep the ball on 15-fairway because the way CB shaped the undulations on the fairway.

They told me most balls bounded to about the 275 area and went off the right side of the fairway into the bunker in that right corner.

Now from there you had a long bunker shot over more sand and you had to contend with the bunker in the middle of the fairway short of the green - very well placed for this typical recovery on those days.

If the fairway is soft it obviously negates all the above CB strategy.

(That same second shot occurred on the 12th hole from the original tee - doesn't work from the present tee.)

From an aerial view this (15 NGLA) is one of the most dramatic set of fairway bunkering - skirting artistically nearly all the way up both sides to the hole.

gb

[George_Bahto]

Paul (Turner that is):

3 and 12 are the same holes with 9s reversed.

You posted a great drawing of that hole if I remember correctly.

I guess it was one of the great holes of the course because there are also a lot of photos of it..

CM used the "ditch"/or bunkers on the great bias/diagonal of the 2nd shot Sunningdale ...... but he stated he like it as the tee-ball rather than the second .......  he picks up the Sunningdale name, Bottle hole making it his 8th-NGLA.

And again, it is the pinching in of the landing area that created the "Bottle-Neck" ............. either he or Raynor referred to it a number of time as Bottle-Neck rather than Bottle hole.   

I have no idea when CB saw (recognized the use of)  the hole strategy but it had to be in the time frame of1 to 4 or 5 years before he built his “Ideal Course” .... so we’re talking 1902 thru 1906

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Bahto,

# 15 is very narrow, and the effective width of the fairway is further compressed by the hog back and roll off feature that will funnel balls off of the fairway in the LZ, more then halving the effective fairway width.

Your photos, on page 125 provide some insight into the difficulty of the hole.  Unfortunately, the photos don't capture the hog back and roll nature of the fairway in the drive zone and beyond.

The photo with the lateral view of the 15th green is also spectacular and gives the viewer an idea of what a golfer faced with a pin high up on the green, near the back edge.  By looking at both photos on page 125 a golfer can interpolate the intimidating nature of the shot, from a visual and playability point of view.  Especially now, that the tree behind the green is gone.

Your schematic, on page 124 clearly shows the "wasp waist"
narrowing of the fairway at the 225 yard mark.  From 200 yards off the tee, that's a narrow fairway by any standard, even without the hogback feature.

Did that old timer happen to be a former caddy ?

I've often thought that the bunkering schemes on # 15,
# 8 and # 18 were brilliant

[TEPaul]

George:

When you say the Narrows refers to the approach shot I certainly do doubt that's what Macdonald intended at NGLA's #15. That "narrows" concept is definitely the tee shot not the approach shot on that hole. That certainly doesn't mean he didn't pick up the idea from the approach shot to the 15th at N. Berwick or some "narrow" approach shot somewhere else before building NGLA. This is just another good example of how Macdonald borrowed "concepts" and did not necessrily intend to create copies of holes. Using the same concept on a tee shot rather than the approach shot as was the prototype hole with the concept is just another great example of a clever architect borrowing a strategic concept and using it in another iteration.

[ForkaB]

one that I need some help from some of you fellas to help me with is the great 15th at NGLA:

he said the second shot is similar in strategy to the 2nd shot on 15th Muirfield (I think there is a drawing in my book about that  ......     but what is the drive like on the original hole"  he described it as the 1st shot at Perfection, 14th N Berwick

is there a resemblance??

like Raynor I have not been overseas (at least in not that direction)

Rich Goodale: the original yardage of the 17th NGLA was 311 - went to about 360 when he changed the green site - pthe hole got easier for the troops .....   so much for authentic restoration - hah

George

First, thanks for the clarification/confirmation (?) re #17 and Lundin/Leven.  Where was the original green and what did it look like?

Vis a vis the 14th at NB (Perfection), from my memory the tee shot on 16 NGLA is much more evocative of the shot on that hole.  Blind, uphill to a lumpy fairway, with a big falloff to the right (I've been there on both courses!).  I don't see any similarity with #15 NGLA.  As for the 2nd shot to #15 Muirfield, it seems simple, but there is a lot of side slope in the green which (with the heavy bunkering) narrows the target areas significantly.  Can't remember #15 green at NGLA well enough to compare .

Hope this helps.

[TEPaul]

"but what is the drive like on the original hole"  he described it as the 1st shot at Perfection, 14th N Berwick"

George:

Again, the drive on Perfection is not exactly narrow it just looks like it is and feels like it is from the tee! That's probably what Macdonald was referring to when he apparently referred to the 1st shot on #14 as being narrow (it just seems so). Obviously at NGLA's #15 he took that "seeming feeling" and made it actual with a long and narrow stretch along the entire effective LZ length of the 1st shot area on NGLA's #15 and then called NGLA's #15 "Narrows" because of that.

I believe this is just another good example of the way Macdonald used "concepts" to design his golf holes. Some think what he did on all these "named" hole was, or should be exactly the same or very near to it---it certainly wasn't always that or not in all or even most cases. It seems he was most often using "concepts" from holes elsewhere (in Europe) to create similar concepts, shot values, strategies etc but in some cases they may not have looked similar at all.

His most recognizable "template" holes generally had to do with greens, like Redan, Eden, Short, Road etc. His more amorphous holes that are considered template holes like Biarritz (probaly mostly from the green of 16 N. Berwick because of the common swales and not the original Biarritz in France that was played across a bay that's more charateristic of Fisher's #5, Yale etc) but not Piping Rock's or the others), Leven, Knoll, Narrows, Sahara, Alps, Bottle are all much more unrecognizable "concept copies" of various aspects of other holes.

[Gene Greco]

Rich:

    You don't remember #15 green because that night you dreamt about dental nurses instead of rehashing the golf courses you played that day.

        Gene


     

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave Schmidt,

Pat, why wouldn't you (or at least a guy like me, who carrys a 2 iron 220+) hit an iron on #12 in a tournament?  What's the hole, maybe 420 or so from the back tees and maybe a tad under 400 from the regular tees?  

The fairway gets narrower the further you go up into it, so I'd just be trying to hit a fairway there and not make a stupid mistake with a driver that would set me up to make 6.
That's not true.  It's just the opposite, the fairway gets wider once you clear the last fairway bunker on the left.  
In Fact, the 12th fairway merges with the 7th fairway at that point making it one of the widest LZ's for long hitters like yourself.[/color]

You gotta remember, on a course like NGLA, in any scratch amateur tournament (probably even the Singles), all you gotta do is hang around and not make doubles, and you're in good shape.  Let everyone else blow themselves up, because on a course like that, it's inevitable.  I'd play for the fattest part of fairways like 12.  I'd be driving into the neck otherwise.
I think TEPaul and I would disagree with you.
Three putts and bogies can be abundant and add up pretty fast.
As for double bogies, as an admited weak short game player, all you have to do is miss a green, hit a poor recovery and thee putt and that's a quick double bogie.[/color]  

BTW, none other than Ran disagrees with you about #11.  See below:

Now you know why Ran is 1 for 20 in matches against me  
(Sorry Ran, I just couldn't resist)[/color]

With the 11th green complex in a field, Macdonald needed to create interest. The Double Plateau green,
with its two plateaus divided by a lower middle section, accomplishes just that. The day's hole location
is on the front left plateau, which is at least a 1/2 stroke easier than a hole location on the back one. (emphasis added)  

The prevailing wind is usually at your back on this hole, and downwind, the left tier is by far the most difficult to approach and hold.  The back tier is easier to approach because the smart player will hit to the flat center tier, or short of the green and let their ball feed back to the back tier.

On the day Ran played the hole, it's possible that there was little wind, or that the wind was in his face, altering his perspective on the play of the hole.  Down wind, the left tier is by far the most difficult tier to approach and hold.

But, if you're going to cite a Morrissett as an authority on the play of this hole, perhaps you should consult with other members of the family, first.  [/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave Schmidt,

Depending on the time of year, the winds are fairly consistent, direction wise.

The tournament is a medal play qualifier with match play by flight.  Play is for golfers with handicaps of 7 or below.
Scores vary.  Great golf will produce a great score, but, scores tend to be high in the medal play qualifier.

Why wouldn't you hit driver on # 16 ?
That makes no sense at all.
The same with # 12, why wouldn't you hit driver ?

If you make a 3 at # 11, chances are you've picked up two strokes on the field.  With a two club, down wind, how would you play a shot to the left tier ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

It's about 260 yards, which downwind is duck soup for you.

As for playing in tournaments and managing the golf course under firm and fast conditions, just remember what Mike Tyson said, "Everyone's got a game plan, until they get hit".

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

Ran has a great eye for golf course architecture.
Unfortunately, his hand-eye co-ordination and judgement on the play of a hole is sometimes lacking.  

Tyson's words ring true in every arena.

[Tags:]

Tags: