[Jeff Fortson]

#10 at Riviera is a much talked about short par-4.  At 315 yards it is reachable by many longer players today.  However, trying to drive the putting surface isn't always the smartest play.  For those of you that have never been to Riviera or seen the hole, I hope this gives you a better idea of why some think so highly of it.


First of all lets take a look at a view of the hole from the clubhouse...




With my disturbingly bad painting skills I have painted numerous different shot possibilities from this view.  Green=good, Yellow=playable, and Red=little if no chance.




As you can see you want to keep the ball out of the hazards first.  Secondly, any drive that ends up in the right rough is in big trouble.  Ideally, a tee shot that can be placed on the putiing surface, just left of the putting surface, or over the back left of the putting surface is ideal.  The safest, most prudent tee shot, ala Weir, is down the left side of the fairway just short of the long bunker left.  This shot is generally played with a 2-iron or 3-wood for the scratch player.  

Here are what the angles look like for different tee shots...

This is a safe, layup tee shot played toward the green but well short (approx. 100 yards).  Not ideal, but playable.




This is a Tee shot missed into the right rough.  As you can see with a shallow green sloping away from you, you have little chance of holding the green, even with a wedge.





This is a tee shot missed into the bunker made famous by Charles Howell that fronts the alternate green well right of the regular green.  The shot he hit out of this trap would have gone down in LA Open history had he made the putt.  They would  have put a plaque in that bunker for him.




This is a layed up tee shot placed in perfect position.  This is where Weir hits his tee shot.  Look at how much smarter it is to play left with a lay up shot.




Here is the view of a perfectly driven tee shot with a driver that doesn't make the putting surface.




Here is a drive that goes a little past the green over the left side.  This is another great spot to drive it if you can pull it off, as you are now chipping or pitching back into the slope.




Here is a view from the back right of the green looking back toward the front of the green to give a different perspective.  Look at how narrow this green is.  It is truly a pleasure to be challenged with a hole like this on a daily basis.



Here I am hitting a tee shot on #10.  Just another ass shot.  As you can see I hit driver.  I made par from 5 yards short of the green.  It's a tough pitch shot from there.




I hope this helps those of you that have never seen the hole understand it a little better.

Remember, these are my opinions and others may feel differently about the strategy of the hole.  That's what makes the hole so great..... OPTIONS!!!


Jeff F.

[Philip Gawith]

Thanks for the great pictures Jeff. For someone who has not played the hole, you have really brought it to life. It is only, however, when you see the two pictures of the green taken from the left that you appreciate how small it is, and the slope - and then everything falls into place!

[TEPaul]

Jeff:

In 2001 I went to the west coast and did a number of things but my primary reason to go was just to see that hole. In my opinion, it might be the best example of a perfect man-made architectural arrangement "in play" in the world. And to think it's on basically a smallish, naturally featureless landform.

To think that such a short hole has, not only such a wide variety of tee shot options, but all the 3-4 tee shot options seem to remain in such a perfect balance or equilibrium in relation to one another. That alone, makes the hole almost a perfect enigma through the years. But how could that be? Probably because each of those tee shot options never really seems to end up in any kind of consistently identifiable result when one is done with the hole day after day. So the risk and reward relationship of each option must be nearly ideal too!

I have a tape of the final group in the 1998 La Open (Woods, Love, and (I forget the name of the third)) all basically tied with one another and they all used a very different tee shot option with fascinating results that one would never have expected. But at the end of the line it's probably the temptation of that green right there so seemingly reachable that makes it!

Again, if someone asked me to pick what I would consider to be the most perfect man-made architectural arrangement in both concept and in fact in the world it would be this hole every time.

The only possible drawback I could say about Riviera's #10 is the green is so small that eventually it necessitated that alternate green to its right. I wish it didn't have to be there but it's a lot better they did that then change that original green in any way. That probably would have wrecked the incredibly balanced optional arrangement of the entire hole.

Geo Thomas very well may've been the true conceptual genius in the annals of golf architecture and this hole may be the proof of it!

[Philip Gawith]

How do visitors get to play Riviera which, I assume, is private?

[James Edwards]

Jeff,

Could be up for the most informative, architectural post of the year on GCA?  Excellent work and one I thoroughly enjoyed reading.

I have studied this hole at some length when we were shown around by Matt Morton and this is clearly a great example of a green which dictates the smart play off the tee, which would be refreshingly welcome in today's world of architecture.  As Tom said, for a flat hole that has been strategically considered from tee to green or green to tee - this hole must be a contender for confusion experience of the year.  I would add though that in my opinion, the hole is a greater conundrum for the better player..

[TEPaul]

" I would add though that in my opinion, the hole is a greater conundrum for the better player."

James:

That's a fine point. If a golfer doesn't have the ability of some really good length off the tee, the most transfixing option of all on that hole really isn't available to him.

I guess that's a great example and probably proof that any golf hole can never be all things to all people!

However, there is a way, I believe, that that particular hole alone overcomes even that. More on that and why that may be later!

[wsmorrison]

Thank you, Jeff for posting these detailed photographs and explaining the hole in a way, short of being there with you, that gets to the heart of the design.

What I simply fail to understand is why this hole is not conceptually copied in modern golf designs.  It is so good, and yes more of a mental test for better players which in my opinion is great because their ability to hit the shots they want is a tighter spectrum than golfers with less ability so it tests the better player's strategy and ability to pull it off.

If I were building a new golf course, I would inisist on creating a conceptual version of this hole.  Talk about templates, this is one that should've been replicated!  Did Thomas do other versions of this concept elsewhere?  Is this a great example where this hole actually got better with technology since the added distance added more permutations to the decision making?  How did this hole play for the better player in the Golden Age?  They didn't have the same options as they do today, do they?  Maybe without irrigation, the ground game was more into play.  How is the hole maintained vis a vis maintenance meld?

Sorry for so many questions.  But this is the top of the pyramid in golf architecture--at least from this 3000 mile vantage point.

[TEPaul]

Matter of fact, I've mentioned Riviera's #10 so many times on here over the years as a really great example of architecture, I think I'm just going to say, in my opinion, it IS the greatest example of architecture in the world.

I may be different than most on here, though, in how I actually define "architecture". To me "golf architecture" is that which is man-made---not that which is inherently interesting about a landform in a natural sense. I may be very different than most in looking at it that way, but anyway....

But since I look at "architecture" that way and since the pre-existing landform of Riviera's #10 was so bland and lacking in "interesting natural aspect" I'd say this hole is the best example in the world of great golf architecture.

Nature didn't have much of anything to do with this one---it was pretty much all George Thomas!

[wsmorrison]

Is it the camera angle, or does the tee really orient to the far left of the fairway?

[Mark_Fine]

There are many versions of this hole out there if you look, however, the hardest part to duplicate is the green because it is so small and narrow.  I've played Riviera many times and because of its small size, it is sometimes out of play (resting) while the other green is used.  The same goes for the famous #16 hole.  The first thing I always ask when I go there is, "Are they playing the original greens"?  

The tee is aligned to the left.  Also, just because you can't drive the green (of all golfers, very few can) doesn't mean strategy is taken out of the hole.  There are still numerous options available for the shorter hitter.  One of the most intriguing aspects is that often the best play is "away" from the green to the left.  It is very hard for most golfers to purposely play away from their target.  It doesn't sit well with the ego.  If the pin is middle or back and you are not coming in from the left hand side, you are all but dead!  

This hole always has been one of my favorites because it is so simple yet so complex.  
Mark

[TEPaul]

Jeff F, and all;

But here's the real architectural question about that hole and its fascinating architectural arrangement and the real question when one gets into asking whether or not it should be more often completely replicated or whether only it's basic concept should be;

Could that hole maintain the entire spectrum of it's enigmatic optional arrangement if one were to remove all the bunkering on it's fairway?

Personally, I believe it could with the possible exception of the fairway bunker long left. But even that one I wonder about, and here's why. If it weren't there obviously the left side on the tee shot would not be so intense and that would allow golfers to drive the ball with longer clubs from the tee down the left side instead of having to decide whether to lay up in front of that bunker or carry over it off the tee.

From a lay-up before the left bunker it's sort of a full SW in but if that bunker weren't there more golfers could drive the ball to the bunker's position or just beyond it. And what's a more difficult approach shot to a green like that---a full 100 yd SW or some finesse shot from 50-75 yards? I think, there's little question the latter is more difficult.

[wsmorrison]

"There are many versions of this hole out there if you look, however, the hardest part to duplicate is the green because it is so small and narrow. "

For an uninitiated, could you please mention a few versions so that I know where to look?  Are these others by Thomas or are they also by other architects?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Jeff,
Great job. I told Will before he was out with you the other day that it is my favourite short par in the world. I love that he went for it and missed, it shows its beauty all the more...

I love the pin in the "view from the back right of the green", is that the toughest pin? I know it is from the right side of the fairway, because your options are to hole it, or hit the pin.

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
I knew you would ask    If I can, I'll try to develop a list and post it.  I'm sure others can chime in in the meantime.  For now, one example would be Weiskopf as he loves the short par four and always includes at least one in his designs.  His inspiration is #10 at Riviera.   C& C love this hole as well and it's philosophy and strategy plays a role in many of their short fours.  Montgomery did one at Carton House that reflects the temptation and strategy of #10.  

If you think about it, the hole is relatively simple but yet so complex.  That said, a template of the design and its strategies is not hard to replicate.  I think architects tend to substitute different hazards compared to what Thomas used (and not always a full cross bunker) so the "duplicates" are sometimes harder to recognize.  However, they design their hole to have similar risk/reward playing strategies.  

If Tom Doak is on he might comment about this.  His course at Riverfront (if I remember correctly it is #7) has some similar playing characteristics in that it is a short par four that tempts a driver but depending on the pin location, a shot to the right away from the hole affords a better angle of approach.  The green is smaller and narrower than it appears due to the severe contours.  Angle of play is key to getting the ball close which is an important aspect of #10 at Riviera.  The hole is also well bunkered creating tempting options off the tee.  

Again, the biggest difference on most of these holes is the green size.  The green is so small at Riviera you can't believe it.  It wouldn't last a month on most courses that get a lot of play (which is why the alternative green was needed).  

Mark
 

[TEPaul]

I just emailed GeoffShac to see if he'll join in this discussion because he probably knows the hole and Riviera as well as anyone. I'll email Dan Wexler and Lynn too.

If I recall correctly from Geoff, originally Thomas had the hole with no bunker at all green-side right and he decided to add it later. I think GeoffShac felt without it the hole would probably be just as good.

And here's probably why. Apparently, it's not just that the green is oriented in such an interesting way on a real diagonal as well as being so narrow in the back (the back is a mere 7 steps across) but it's the fact that the green tilts so well from right to left.

I see from Jeff Forston's lines and colored dots on one of those photos that playing the ball anywhere to the right of center on that fairway is not a smart play at all---obviously because trying to hit anything from that angle at that green over that bunker and down the tilt of the green is virtually impossible to do. But what if that right greenside bunker wasn't there as Thomas originally designed the hole? Would that actually INCREASE the availale options on the tee shot and approach shot to some degree?

I remember in that final group of the 1998 La Open "what's his name?" went well left with an iron for an approach right into the orientation of the green and birdied, Woods went into middle of the fairway with an iron and parred and Love took out driver and tried to drive the green. His tee shot ended up right in front of that right greenside bunker just slightly to the right of the green and I believe he muttered on the tee "I'm dead"! Love hit a perfect soft little 15-20 yard flop shot to the back pin but his ball went right over anyway into the left greenside bunker from where he made a pretty nice par putt of about 10 ft!!

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

For starters, the 12th at Rustic Canyon is supposed to be basically a take-off on the same basic concept of this hole although it doesn't look like it. The thought on #12 Rustic though was to forego the fairway bunkering to see if golfers could figure out that they probably needed to place the ball on the correct spot on the large unencumbered fairway anyway in relation to the various pin positions on the green---that was supposed to dictate various tee shot placements!

[Bill_McBride]

Jeff, thanks for what might be the best pictorial ever on GCA.  Good stuff!

For another example of this hole style, with a tight driving area left to boot, check out #5 at Cuscowilla.  The huge central bunker forces a tee shot either into the "Elysian Fields," a huge area right, or a very narrow neck of land left.  The approach shot, usually with SW, from the right, is extremely difficult to a tiny crowned green.  Bogies are common, birdies are rare.

From the left, the green looks just like #10 Riviera from the left, open and inviting.  I've played Cuscowilla six or seven times now and only hit it left once.  I'll never hit it right again!

[Mike_Sweeney]

Jeff,

This is the type of stuff that gets lost after a week. It is a great post and you should send it to Ran as a In My Opinion.

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Montgomery did one at Carton House that reflects the temptation and strategy of #10.

Mark F,
Do you mean the 13th at Montgomerie (Stan Eby) at Carton House? It played to 340 yards and I really cannot see the similarites. Are you referring to the diagonal green? The thing about Riviera's is that from the right side the player is dead because of the angle. I think too few architects are willing to punish the golfer in such a way. In the following picture of the hole at Carton House, if you are right of where I took this picture, you have a bit of a backboard on the left side of the green.

[TEPaul]

Jeff F:

MikeS is right, you should do that. But wait a while first to see if hopefully Shackelford, Shackelford and Wexler get on here.

[Tony_Chapman]

"This is a shameless little harlot that sits at the end of the bar in her mesh stockings and winks at you."

-- LA Times golf writer Jim Murray, describing the 10th at Riviera

[Mark_Fine]

Bill,
That hole at Cuscowilla, #5 is another good example.   Tom I also agree with you about #12 at Rustic.  I know Gil has been inspired by #10 at Riviera and uses many of its strategies in his short fours.  

Ben,
The 13th hole is the one I was talking about at Carton.  It has some similarities and the 10th at Riviera was part of the inspiration.  It is Colin's favorite hole on the property.  

As I stated, you just can't make the green as small and as narrow as what exists now at Riviera without adding an alternate green.  If the 13th green at Carton was that small it would be dead in weeks with the amout of play that course gets.  Montgomerie had to make it larger, but frankly that is one of the best holes out there and there are many good ones.  When the pros come to play it this spring for the Irish Open, you will see all kinds of plays off the tee.  I love it when the Pro reaches for their driver than changes their mind and reaches for a five iron then goes back again.  Now the architect is in the player's head and all kinds of interesting things can happen.  That is the sign of a great strategic golf hole and that is what happens at #10.  The Montgomerie Course at Carton House will play hard and fast and players will have to think their way around that design this May.  #13 will baffle many of them as they won't be able to avoid the temptation to go straight at it.    

Mark

[wsmorrison]

How about the man himself?  Did Thomas have other renditions of this hole on other courses?  Did he recognize this hole as one of his great achievements?

[Brian_Gracely]

Jeff,

What happened to the Ben Hogan hat from KPIII?  Of any club, I would think it's appropriate at Riviera.

[Will E]

Another example of a hole at Riviera that I don't think could be improved upon.
I had no idea how incredible this place was until a few days ago.
If Geoff's vision of restoration was adapted, Riviera would be DRAMATICALLY improved.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()