260 yard uphill par 3 in 1926

[wsmorrison]

Tom Paul and I firmly believe that William Flynn, when given the green light to build championship golf courses, liked to test a golfer's ability to hit specific shots.  An example of this specific shot testing is the uphill 10th hole at Rolling Green Golf Club in Springfield, PA.  This course opened in 1926 to local acclaim as a stern test of district golfers.  While under many people's radar screens, the course today remains a great test of golf.  

Flynn's orginal design for this hole was 260 yards.  Currently, the middle of the back tee is 243 yards.  What could Flynn have been thinking to have such a long par 3 back in the 1920s?  Well, he wanted the golfer to execute a low running draw.  Without irrigation systems, this ground game option was really the only way to maximize the ability to reach the green.  The topography readily accepts a low running draw and feeds the ball onto the green if placed just right.  If the shot started just inside the right bunker it would have a good chance of reaching the green.  A bit right, the ball goes into the rough requiring a very delicate pitch to the green.  A bit to the left and the ball takes the right to left slope and either goes into a bunker or one faces a difficult pitch from an undulating lie.

Today, long par 3s from the Golden Age are being lengthend around the country (17 at Merion East for example).  It is my desire that the 10th at Rolling Green be lengthened to Flynn's original plan.  This is not length for length sake, but to recover the specific shot demand that Flynn required on this hole.

[wsmorrison]

Today, the 2 large bunkers on the left have been converted into 4 bunkers.  One of these bunkers is hidden from the tee.

[James Edwards]

Wayne,

Thank you for posting.  Its always good to see the master architects work.  Its also interesting to see that he had 550 yards on his squared paper - his thinking was clearly beyond his time ?

[BCrosby]

Wayne -

Let's say - very conservatively - that good players today hit it about 10% farther than good players in the 20's. (I suspect it is much more than 10%, in fact.)

For the 10th at RG to play today the way it played in the 20's, it would have to be about 290 yards. And you didn't mention that the 10th at RG is uphill.

I can't think of a modern architect with the guts to design a par 3 like that today. No one.

That suggests to me that Flynn and his cohorts viewed the challenges of the game very differently from the way we view them today. I would also suggest that their view was much more liberating.

Bob    

[wsmorrison]

James,

I think you are absolutely right, Flynn was a foreward thinker and in several ways ahead of his time.  Tom considers Flynn a transition architect into the modern age.  If he would have lived longer, his influence might have been tremendous.  So many of the great architects practicing in America had died before Flynn's death in 1945 at the age of 54.  The next generation of American architects practiced their craft in a different direction from their predecessors.  Flynn started in 1909, a rudimentary phase, and practiced through the Golden Age up until the day he died in 1945.  Architecture was certainly changing over this time period.

By the way, the 9th hole that precedes the tenth depicted above opened as a 614 yard (from the middle of the back tee) uphill 3 shotter that has yet to be reached in 2 shots to this day!  I say we should put the tee all the way back and make it 640 yards.  Interestingly, the first 400 yards has a severe left to right cant to the fairway which made for a precisely struck fairway wood shot to advance very far up the fairway.  Flynn had to squeeze the drawing of RGGC's 9th on the grid paper.

The 8th hole at Rolling Green is a 425 yard par 4 with an island fairway and then a very steep rise to a severely sloped back to front green.  The hole plays much more than the scorecard yardage.  The 7th is a downhill 488 yard par 5 (4.5 really).  Between 8 and 9, it doesn't matter if you score 4,5 or 5,4...if you walk away with 9 strokes between these 2 holes you're in good shape with holes 9 and 10 coming up.  I like that the 7th preceeding the next 3 difficult holes plays as sort of a half par.  You put pressure on yourself to score well there knowing what is coming up and that is an interesting mindset to play from.

[wsmorrison]

Bob,

You've played this hole and you have a great capacity to see clearly what the hole played like in 1926.  Yet, I think without irrigation some of the yardage is mitigated.  But I agree with you, it took some big gonads to design a hole like this and they had differing sensiblilities.  I think matchplay mentality and a different regard to golf challenges (fairness and the like) enabled the classic architects to work without many limitations.  Certainly environmental and other restrictions also enabled them to have greater liberty in pushing the design envelopes.  

You know Ross far better than I.  I know he built some rather long par 3s (220 yards and such).  Did Ross design with specific shot testing in mind?  What other classic age architects designed such long holes or holes with a very specific shot demand?  

As for courses, Flynn designed Mill Road Farm as a 7000 yard course in 1926.  The land was much less rolling than at RGGC.  I'd say that Rolling Green at 6600 yards in 1926 played closer to 6900 yards due to elevation changes.

Aronimink, when it opened in 1928 was about the same scorecard length as Rolling Green but played much closer to the indicated yardage.

[wsmorrison]

What modern day architects demand specific shot testing?  Which modern holes/courses push the envelope in terms of sensible hole yardage?

Other means of shot testing and ball striking ability are evident at such courses as Huntingdon Valley CC.  Adam Messix is there today so perhaps he'll weigh in on the shot demand testing that Flynn practiced on that great golf course.  At HVCC you have to hit draws off fade lies and fades off draw lies.  Ball striking is at a very high premium and this is the testing that is systematic and desired by Flynn on this particular course.  Flynn's mandate from the club was to build 3 progressively harder 9-hole courses, A,B, and C.  He succeeded very well with C perhaps having been the hardest 9 in the area.

[mike_malone]

 I do not see "par" on the design.

[TEPaul]

"That suggests to me that Flynn and his cohorts viewed the challenges of the game very differently from the way we view them today. I would also suggest that their view was much more liberating."

Bob:

They certainly did view the challenges of the game differently than we do today. The most significant diffrerence, in my mind, between the way we view the game and the way they did back then is they were virtually not saddled at all as we are today by an almost locked in perception of things like GIR and even what "par" now means (in perception). Another thing that has virtually gone out the window between their time and ours is the use of the driver and where it should be used in an architectural sense. I think it's hard to appreciate that holes like PVGC's #5, RG's #10, Whitmarsh's #4 and a host of other super long par 3s in the Philly area from that era were designed so that the best player had to use a driver to even have a ghost of a chance of reaching the putting surface. Not only that but those super long par 3 generally had extensive run-up fairways that needed to be firm. Today most good players feel very odd about playing a long par 3 with a driver in their hands. But that's what those super long par 3s of that day were designed to demand---plain and simple! I can even produce some writing from some of those early architects to prove that.

On reflection, that super long par 3 that was fairly common in the Philly region from that era are all holes and designs of a similar type (the long run-up fairway). For that reason alone the 17th at Merion East may've just been stretched about 15-20 yards too much for even the good player of today (the feeling of one of Philly's best young players)! It is not the same type of design as those old super long runway par 3s of that day.

[wsmorrison]

Your eyes do not deceive you, Flynn did not indicate the par on this drawing.  However, if you check the opening day scorecard or the newspapers from opening day you will see that it was indicated as a par 3 and the overall par was 71.  

On opening day, Ben L. Carroll, one of the best local amateurs from Aronimink, nearly aced the 10th hole as his shot ended up 6 inches from the hole on his way to the low amateur score of 79.  Aronimink's pro shot the best round of the opening, a 75.

[wsmorrison]

"You must be as blind and ignorant as me, Mayday.

IFFFFFFFFF the hole is kept firm firm firm it could be a good idea.  

I certainly cannot even imagins to have imagined to imagine to have a thought that Flynn might have even dismissed,  however a firm running shot seems to me, someone who knows absolutely nothing about architecture, let alone Flynn, that a running shot landing perhaps as much as 40 yards short of the front of the green may have been what someone, (Surely NOT Flynn) might have fleetingly had in mind.

Maybe Thomas had that idea"

I don't speak French and therefore have no idea what the hell this means!

[mike_malone]

 While this hole is uphill it enables quite a bit of roll;there are other holes on this course like #13 that grab the ball much more.
    Wayne,
     Do you think the "Quakes" would not agree to 260 or did Flynn just change his mind from plan to execution?

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

Pure speculation, but I think that 260 was beyond comprehension to most folks in golf, even those such as RGGC members that wanted a championship golf course.  Like Bob Crosby said, it really took some guts to design a hole like this.  But the Philly architects were definitely pushing the envelope led by Mr. Crump.

I don't know why it wasn't implemented, the room is obviously there, so no physical constraints would have prevented it.  Maybe the president of the club only could hit it 245 and that's what they stuck with  

[Steve_ Shaffer]

The 11th at Flynn's Philmont North at about 220y looks like a mini version of the RG 10th.

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

It seems to me that few today truly understand all the ramifications of the meaning of "shot-testing" in golf and architecture from that time that some used so dedicatedly in some rare designs of that era. They've heard the phrase perhaps but I doubt they really appreciate what-all it meant in that day. In a certain sense to understand what it was takes a bit of rethinking today in what "strategy" back then on certain courses was all about.

[michael j fay]

Ross designed many a long three. Prime example is the 4th at Worcester (1913) which is 246. The hole plays from a tee behind three green over a 185 yard depression then uphill to the green. To run the ball onto the green the player had to drive the ball 210 yars over two guarding bunkers. The green is large and mean. It is severly sloped back to front and left to right. Overall the hole plays uphill.

When he designed the hole he did not suggest par.

There are two monster par threes at Metacomet in Providence, 230 and 245 in succession. Once again par was not stipulated on the plan.

With all the 450 yard par five holes, the 310 yard par four holes and the 445 yard par four holes I have played on Ross courses, I cannot help but think that Ross put much more emphasis on the continuity and less on par of the individual holes.

If on one side he had a 475 par five and a 445 par four the par for those two holes is nine. Most of the Ross courses I have played have a give and take on the par three holes. An example is the front side at the Orchards. Number 5 is a downhill par three of 145 yards, number 7 is an uphill semi-blind 215 yards.

At the Essex County Club in Manchester by the Sea, Ross exhibited this give and take with his threes and fives. The # 3 hole is a 630 yard bear that plays into the prevailing wind, the 5th is 457 downwind. Both are played at par of five. The 4th is a 210 yard three par over water and the seventh is a 130 yard downhill pitch.

I have seen this type of balance on many Ross courses and feel that his par was more aggregate than singular.

[TEPaul]

redanman:

Even if you tried I doubt you'd be able to come up with posts more unintelligible than you do!  

[TEPaul]

michael j fay:

That's interesting to know. I did not know Ross designed holes like that and certainly I never knew he designed holes like that so early. Ron Prichard is also of the belief that in the very early days Ross also expected everyone to play off the same tee markers as in very early golf there generally was only one at any particular time.

[NAF]

When I saw this hole last week, it immediately made me think of George Thomas who looked at designing holes that could be either a par 3 or a short par 4.  It made more options and obviously elasticity.  Now I realize Flynn was probably never considering this anything but a par 3 but if we were not obsessed with card and pencil golf, it would be interesting if one of the half par holes at Rolling Green (such as #7) could be made a par 4 on some days and #10 as an uphill 260 yard par 4 on others.. The variety would make for fun golf.. but the traditionalists never took to Thomas' idea.  

The second shot on #7 and the tee shot on #10 call for very similar shots and the ground aids both in finding the green.. Terrific use of natural contours by Flynn

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Quote from 'World Atlas of Golf' (not me):

In 1930, Interlachen's 17th hole was the longest par-three (262 yards) in Open history.  The best Jones could do in four rounds was a bogey four (in the entire Open, the 17th gave up but two birdies).  

This was Ross, I think.

[wsmorrison]

Noel,
It was great to see you last week, look forward to getting together again soon after your life changes take hold.  Best of luck to you.

Interesting that you mention changing pars at RGGC.  Some indications are that Flynn meant to rotate par between the 7th, 17th, and 18th holes.  On any given day one of those would be a par 4.  Today, I like the 18th as a par 4 and 7 playing as a par 4.5 preceeding the next 3 difficult holes.

[mike_malone]

 Noel,
   That is a good observation about #7 and#10--and you hit a marvelous shot on #7.
   There is a neat difference though--on #7 the hill   drops quite sharply down to the green at the end allowing most shots to roll on-but good luck with stopping the ball.   On #10 if you hit it to the right of the ideal line the ball keeps going away from the green.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Stanley Thompson's best courses all feature a LONG par 3 as well, of which I am a fan.

16 @ Capilano
4 @ Jasper
16 @ Banff (original sequence)
8 @ St. George's
12 @ Highlands Links

[NAF]

Mike-

I love the second shot on #7 considering the contours..it feels like an old world UK type shot demand.  I do like Wayne's idea to rip out some of the trees and put a bunker up on the hillside on the right to make sure you don't get too carried away with a push draw..

[Paul_Turner]

The longest, old (1925) one I know in GB&I is the 1st at Meyrick Park: 245yds uphill to perched green (little run).  NAF has seen it.

[Tags:]

Tags: