Double greens - Extinct or do they have a future

[Forrest Richardson]

We have two separate projects on the boards now that have double greens; one each. I agree with Tom, I avoid them for marketing purposes -- although I'd not go so far as to say I hate them. There are much worse things to "hate" on golf courses.

In these two projects it simply makes sense and is fun. I relish the putts on the Old Course's many large surfaces. Fun is fun.

[Matthew Mollica]

At my home club, we have a double green on two on the three courses.

Forrest, you are right.

As much as I'm opposed to the marketing strategy behind inclusion of double greens, they can be fun to play.

In my only visit to TOC, I hit a very skinny wedge to 5, and ended up with a first putt from the front of the 13th green.

After introducing myself to the group about to putt out on 13, I proceeded to sink the most lucky, and certainly the longest two-putt of my life. I suspect it was close to 100yds. I will remember it always.

Matt

[Patrick_Mucci]

What I don't understand is, if they were built out of design necessity at St Andrews, why doesn't that design necessity exist at other sites ?

Why must double greens be viewed primarily in a marketing context rather than a design context ?

Are they restricted to a thin strip of land with and out and back routing similar to TOC ?

Must they be approached from opposite directions to make them work effectively ?

[Forrest Richardson]

Partick -- I'm not sure was can deduct that the double greens at TOC were out of need. The effect of the greens is really that they are large enough to actually be two separate greens with roungs in between, had that been the decision. The design need at TOC was to separate by distance enough to allow for less congestion. I suspect that the idea to keep the surfaces as one was to appease those who did not want any change at all. The result is one large surface which served the same purpose as two separate greens.

No, double greens do not have to serve opposite approached to be "safe". I've done one and it handles No. 9 playing east and No. 18 playing northeast. It is 20,000 s.f.+ and is well separated.

The key is a combination of size, separation, hazard placement, approach shot length and orientation. Both double greens currently on the boards are well over 25,000 s.f. each. One serves two par-5s (Nos. 9 and 16) and the other serves a par-4 and par-5 (Nos. 9 and 18). Both of these situations are converging, where the holes play roughly in the same direction along acute angles to the shared targets.

Management is also key on such surfaces. You have to have an owner willing to take responsibility for setting up the course appropriately. Just as tee markers cannot be poorly set, pins cannot create overlapping situations on double greens.

[Matthew Mollica]

Forrest I agree with you that they can play well from various approach angles.

As Michael Cocking said, the 8th and 16th at Kingston Heath share a boomerang shaped double green, which is approached from the north west (8th) and north east (16th). The central bunker complex gets balls from both holes on occasions, but good ground contours suitably seperate the respective pin locations, thereby enhancing safety of people holing out.

I wouldnt suspect that the lines of play have to be at one hundred and eighty degrees, for shared greens to be safe. Obviously size plays a factor, but there are others too...


I'm still busy trying to rack my brain for examples of others in Scotland, outside TOC.....

Matthew

[Dunlop_White]

A photo of the double green at Old Town Club is below.

Hole no. 8 green is located on the left, while hole no. 17 green is on the right. The approaches on both holes are from the same angle and are also from the same length....approximately 125 yards..... as hole no. 8 is a short par 4, while hole no. 17 is a 600 yard par 5.

[ForkaB]

Dunlop

That Old Town green wins the 2003 Symmetry of the Year award, hands down!

All

Calling the greens at TOC "double" greens is technically correct, but functionally a myth.  They are all simply separate greens that just happen to be connected by grass maintained to "greens" standards.  When was the last time any of you saw any pin on any hole at TOC placed anywhere near the middle of any "double" green?  Maybe in the off-season when they're trying to rest the "real" green complexes for the onslaught of the golfing season, but surely never in any Open or other significant competition.

[Dunlop_White]

Rich,

I agree! But it should win the "1939 Symmetry of the Year" award. Not the 2003! Great efforts were put into duplicating the orignal size and shape of Maxwell's double green through numerous aerial and topo photos. And considering that he had the penchant to use shapes which were far from symmetrical, perhaps this was just a change of pace.

In fact, the double green at Old Town was actually Cifford Robert's idea. Maxwell likely agreed because of his known affection for TOC.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

I don't know that symmetry is a bad thing, especially applied to the green pictured, with the creek or trench bunker short short and the other front and back bunkers.

I'd prefer to see the trees in the rear removed ASAP.

But it looks like a neat approach.

Dunlop, what's the length of the typical approach shot into those greens, and from what directions, using the photo as a guide ?

[Dan Kelly]

I'd prefer to see the trees in the rear removed ASAP.

Why?

[ForkaB]

Pat

I didn't mean to say or imply (I hope!) that symmetry was bad.  Also, if you are really into Blake, those trees should NOT come down:

"In the forest of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"

Dunlop

I  knew that "Old Town" was in fact (relatively) old.  However, my awards, like the Nobel Prizes, are for a lifetime of achievement, and not just some passing fancy.

[Mike Hendren]

Dunlop,

I was struck by the symmetrical PIN placements in the Old Town photograph.  Would one more typically see a front right pin placement on 17 coupled with a right rear pin on 8?  In other words, do they pin the area between the three bunkers?

Regards,

Mike

[Dunlop_White]

Pat

Hole 8: This short Par 4 bends gently to the right from the tee. A 250 yard drive to the shelf will leave you 125 yards downhill to the small lefthand portion of the double green.

Hole 17: This long Par 5 measures 608 yards. A 250 yard drive followed by a 225 yard setup will also leave approximately 125 yards downhill to the righthand portion of the small double green.

The approach shots are similar in distance; however, the landing areas are adjacent and crowned. The approach to Hole 8 is from a downhill sidehill lie with the ball ABOVE your feet. In contrast, the approach to Hole 17 is from a downhill sidehill lie with the ball BELOW your feet.

The trees behind the green are not agronomically adverse, being from a northern exposure. Plus, they are rather grand. In other words, Pat, I cannot take out all the trees on the course :-/ These may be a priority at a later date,  because of their negative impact on another hole though.

Mike:

The pin positions vary on both greens just like any other. There is no relationship between the two. I have yet to see a middle pin position.

Rich:

I agree with you. This double green is rather symmetrical. But, oddly enough, so was the Maxwell original. Thanks for the award

[Dunlop_White]

THE USGA's TREATMENT OF THE DOUBLE GREEN AT OLD TOWN!

I thought this would be of interest to you!

The USGA always stakes the middle portion of the double green at OTC with two markers, one in front and one behind, basically defining the green regions of both hole 8 (left) and Hole 17 (right). If you are playing Hole 8 and officially come to rest beyond the stakes on Hole 17 and vise versa, the player MUST take relief at the nearest point off of the green. (With the undulations and the central bunkers, this drop essentially penalizes the golfer as an up-and-down is nearly imposible) If he were allowed to play it as it lay, a two putt instead would be challenging, but feasible.

Any comments???

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly & Rich Goodale,

The trees should go for several reasons.

Maintainance & Playability

The falling leaves have to continually cover the green causing playability and maintainance problems.  In the picture it looks like a leaf blower was used just before the picture was taken.

Agronomic

The drip line on several trees appears to be into the green.
This will negatively impact the ability to maintain that green.

Dunlop has indicated that the trees don't create shade problems, but, as they continue to grow, and the drip line extends further into the green, I would imagine that that will become a problem.

Ask yourself, if you were building that green from scratch, would you plant trees in those locations, or would you move them further away from the green ?

[TEPaul]

Our regional USGA agronomist recommends that a tree should not be within ten paces of the rear of a putting green. The reasons are adverse effects on agronomy and also ten yards (paces) is about the standard amount for one club too many played over a green.

[Mike Erdmann]

Is anyone aware of any other courses in Scotland (or any where else in the British Isles, for that matter) that have one or more double greens? I am not aware of any others. If no other courses in the British Isles ever saw fit to emulate this feature of TOC, perhaps we should treat this aspect of TOC as another reason it is a truly unique golf course, one whose features are to be admired but not replicated.
  

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned it yet, but Carnoustie has a double green - the 4th & 14th.

[Forrest Richardson]

TEPaul -- Depends on what type of tree, how it is to be maintained, climate, etc. -- I do not agree with some USGA "standards" that get people thinking there is only one length, method, approach, etc.

[Dunlop_White]

Pat,

The trees create a northern exposure, so you are correct.... They do not create shade problems. The drip line is further away from the green than the picture indicates, perhaps 15 paces. We likely concur on many tree issues (hope you enjoyed my outline), but these trees do not impact the double green pictured.

Soon, however, they will become a priority for removal on hole no. 12 behind the green, where these trees form the righthand portion of an awkward shoot/tunnel golfers must drive trough.