[Patrick_Mucci]

The 11th at The Creek is an island green that can play from about 100 to about 275.

It is completely surrounded by water.

It is a Biarritz green.

It has several, aligned, tees.

It very close to Long Island Sound, and as such gets a good buffeting by the wind.

With a green that is 90 yards deep, with two plateaus and a trough, and water at every edge, is this the most versatile par 3 in all of golf ?

[Mike Hendren]

It is completely surrounded by water.... is this the most versatile par 3 in all of golf ?

Patrick,

Perhaps you've already answered your own question.

Mike

[wsmorrison]

I love The Creek and I think the "water holes" are very interesting as is the history surrounding them.  The club is one of the best in America and its hard to beat a round of golf at The Creek with George Holland.  The 6th is one of my favorite holes anywhere.  

With this in mind and my feeling that the 11th is beautifully situated and has all the features you mention, I'd like to ask you what do you think of the putting surfaces on the two plateaus?  Are they themselves interesting?   Should they be?  Maybe not because of all the things going on around the putting surfaces.  But they, like other Biarritz greens outside the one I know at North Berwick are not very interesting putting surfaces.

I am not a fan of the Biarritz.  Admittedly I am one of the few, maybe the only one on this site, but it is a contrived hole in most applications with uninteresting puttable areas.

I will give you its versatility in general and the beauty of 11 at The Creek in particular.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Pat,

The 10th at Friar's Head is pretty versatile. The green there is huge, and the teeing area is very, very flexible as well.

[Brian Phillips]

Can a Par 3 green be versatile if it is completely surrounded by water?

Does size and length mean that a hole is versatile?

Brian

[Keith Williams]

Pat,

Could a hole, buffeted by frequent winds, with no recovery options for shots that miss the green be considered the most versatile of its par in golf?

Keith.

[bstark]

  We got hosed with the tees up and the pin in the front. Much rather play it from way back with pin in the back.
#10 thru #15 at the Creek is one of the best stretch of holes anywhere.

  How did Champ Goldman play the 11th....??

[Brian_Gracely]

How often does #11 play as a 275yd Par 3?  And are you counting that as a back pin (say 40yds behind mid-green) and the furthest back tee, or is there really a tee that plays 275yds to the middle of the green?  

#6 at Tobacco Road can play from 100yds to 175yds, the angle of the green allows it to be anywhere from 8-50yds deep, or 8-50yds wide.  It isn't surrounded by OB, but it does have some areas where you could get a lie bad enough to take an unplayable.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brian Gracely,

Probably as often as it plays as a 100 yard par 3.

The variety offered by a 90 yard deep green thats probably 40+ yards wide, with substantive variation in the tee lengths is considerable.

Keith Williams,

YES.

Have you seen the hole ?

BStark,

He made par and lost to a birdie.

Brian Phillips,

When combined with varying tee length, a green that's a Biarritz and wind, the answer is yes.

A par 3 where you can hit sand wedge to driver, draw or fade, high or low, offers versatility.

Wayne Morrison,

The rear putting surface at Yale is quite sloped.

As to your question, a severe, beyond Biarritz putting surface might be excessive.

Putting from or through the swale is difficult enough.

If you added substantive contouring I think it would make it too difficult of a hole at the longer lengths, especially when you factor in the wind.

I like it exactly as it is today.

Interestingly enough, one of the original drawings reflects two flanking bunkers and the putting surface begining at the rear plateau.

[Keith Williams]

Patrick,

Let me rephrase my question:

Would a hole exactly like #11 but offering recovery options, as opposed to water, for a missed shot not be more versatile than what is existing.  In fact it would seem that since every shot that misses the green, regardless of direction or magnitude, meets the same demise one could state that the hole is in a way lacking a certain versatility.  A similar hole that offers variety in missed green penalties and variety in recovery options would seem to have greater versatility.

i.e. Current #11 = versatile

#11 + option for recovery = more versatile

In this respect I am viewing the hole in terms of how many different ways it can play, not how many different ways it can be set up.  I think that we may be comparing apples to oranges.  If not, then I am surprised at your unusually illogical reasoning  

Keith.

[Brian_Gracely]

So according to Pat's logic, when the hole is playing 275yds, a length that many people associate with a Par4 (or at least requiring a pitch to the green), then the hole essentially has nothing but fairway and OB.  

Would this ever be an acceptable design as a Par4?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Let me rephrase my question:

Would a hole exactly like #11 but offering recovery options, as opposed to water, for a missed shot not be more versatile than what is existing.  In fact it would seem that since every shot that misses the green, regardless of direction or magnitude, meets the same demise one could state that the hole is in a way lacking a certain versatility.  A similar hole that offers variety in missed green penalties and variety in recovery options would seem to have greater versatility.

i.e. Current #11 = versatile

#11 + option for recovery = more versatile

In this respect I am viewing the hole in terms of how many different ways it can play, not how many different ways it can be set up.  I think that we may be comparing apples to oranges.  If not, then I am surprised at your unusually illogical reasoning  

Keith,

The problem with your perspective is that it's limited by your narrowed perception of what constitutes a recovery shot.

A green that is three times the depth of an average green redefines what recovery encompasses.

With a hole location in the front of a Biarritz green, a ball landing on the back of the putting surface needs to "recover".
The golfer is faced with a shot in which he's totally unfamiliar, a 60-70 yard putt through a trough.

The width of the green provides the same situation.  Most approach shots that miss the center of the green laterally by 15-25 yards are faced with recovery, hence recovery on this green can't be viewed in the limited perspective of missing the green.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

So according to Pat's logic, when the hole is playing 275yds, a length that many people associate with a Par4 (or at least requiring a pitch to the green), then the hole essentially has nothing but fairway and OB.

NO,  That's your flawed logic.
       Especially since you choose to view the hole in one
       dimension, from the tip tee to the extreme back of the
       green.  Golfers have mulitple options on how they would
       play that particular configuration, which is similar to how
       it played last year.

At 275 yards, women, seniors and high handicappers aren't playing the back tees, only the better golfers.

And, the better players who are playing the back tees have numerous options for dealing with the approach shot, understanding the resultant risk-reward for devising and executing their strategy.[/color]

Would this ever be an acceptable design as a Par4?

I don't know.

Why don't you start a thread on par 4's.

This thread is about the versatility of the 11th at The Creek, a par 3.

Have you ever played the hole ?[/color]
 

[scott_wood]

for "grins", our foursome dropped a ball at the rear walkway, and putted to the front pin location.....
closest to the pin $5 per.....
at approx 80+ yards, through the swale, we didn't need "contours" to miss our putts by a mile  

i understand the concept of "recovery", and there is merit to that observation, but Pat is correct with his Big Picture thought...#11 is VERY versatile....

[Keith Williams]

No Patrick, it is not that my perception is limited.  

I am fully aware of the immense size of the green, but that does not allow one to disregard the fact that on the current hole when a shot is missed to a particular degree, in a windy locale, the result is that the golfer is hitting three.  

As I have said, an similar hole, with a similarly immense green (minus the surrounding watery grave) would still provide you with your time zone traversing putts and, in adddition, would provide equally vexing OFF-green recovery options.  Actually, come to think of it, maybe your perception is narrowed, assuming that every missed shot will still find the putting surface.  

I am by no means as familiar with the hole as you and some of the others in the treehouse, so maybe you can enlighten me... what percentage of all golfers, good and bad, on a day to day basis place their first shots on #11 on the green?

Keith.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I am fully aware of the immense size of the green, but that does not allow one to disregard the fact that on the current hole when a shot is missed to a particular degree[/color], in a windy locale, the result is that the golfer is hitting three.  

When you're given margins in multiples of three I think that's sufficient latitude.

Are you familiar with what flanks the left and right side of that green ?

If you sliced your tee shot on the first 6 holes of TOC by a lessor degree you'd be out of bounds, yet I don't see concern voiced over missing those target areas by a "particular degree".

How would you view an approach shot to a rear hole location at # 10 at Winged Foot that is 15 yards too long ?

How would you view an approach shot at # 18 at TOC that is 10 yards long ?

How would you view an approach shot to a rear pin location at # 18 at NGLA that is 10 yards too long ?[/color]

As I have said, an similar hole, with a similarly immense green (minus the surrounding watery grave) would still provide you with your time zone traversing putts and, in adddition, would provide equally vexing OFF-green recovery options.  
Could  you identify and describe the similar green and hole you reference ?   Or, are you dealing with a figment of your imagination ?

And, would that hole present the same challenge, physically and mentally to golfers standing on the tee ?[/color]

Actually, come to think of it, maybe your perception is narrowed, assuming that every missed shot will still find the putting surface.  

Are you familiar with what flanks the putting surface ?[/color]

I am by no means as familiar with the hole as you and some of the others in the treehouse, so maybe you can enlighten me... what percentage of all golfers, good and bad, on a day to day basis place their first shots on #11 on the green?

I wouldn't know the answer.

You'd have to know the handicap of the golfers that played the hole that day and what tees they played from.
There are about 4 or 5 sets.

The other day, in our foursome of a 15, 12, 10 and 6 handicap, all four hit the green into a slight breeze with the hole at about 136 yards from the tees we played.   Two shots were 25-30 feet from the hole, one at 10 feet and the last at 6 feet.

Others who played the other day would have to post the results of their groups to get a better handle on the field's results.[/color]

[Brian_Gracely]

Pat,

A hole is typically measured from the tee-box to the MIDDLE of the green.  So is #11 275yds to the middle, or back edge?  Or is it really only 230yds to the middle?  

From a distance perspective, that sounds about the same as the carry on #16 at CPC, which only has one tee-box.  So are you saying that a carry of roughly 200yds is not achievable for an average player or older player?  

Can you elaborate on the various options that a player has from the back tees?  You mentioned that a long putt or a shot putt are options, but what other options exist?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

A hole is typically measured from the tee-box to the MIDDLE of the green.  So is #11 275yds to the middle, or back edge?  Or is it really only 230yds to the middle?  

I thought I answered that question already.[/color]

From a distance perspective, that sounds about the same as the carry on #16 at CPC, which only has one tee-box.  

Have you played # 16 at CPC ?
And, have you played # 11 at The Creek ?[/color]

So are you saying that a carry of roughly 200yds is not achievable for an average player or older player?  
I'd agree with that statement.[/color]

Can you elaborate on the various options that a player has from the back tees?  

About the same as on # 16 at CPC.
Have you played those two holes ?[/color]

You mentioned that a long putt or a shot putt are options,

When and where did I mention that ?[/color]

but what other options exist?  

See the comment on # 16 at CPC above[/color]

[CHrisB]

From the above descriptions, I'd say that the 11th at the Creek is indeed a very versatile hole (imagine hitting wedge and driver on successive playings!).

But the most versatile in all of golf? Of course I haven't played every par 3 in golf, but it's hard to imagine one more versatile than the already mentioned #6 at Tobacco Road. The length can vary by six or seven clubs, but the angle can also vary up to 90 degrees due to all the tee boxes situated on an arc.

[Pete Buczkowski]

Patrick,

No.

If you qualify your statement by most versatile tee shot, I might by it.

Varying distances isn't the only factor in determining the versatility of a hole.

The green itself is not very interesting.  The front pin position is perhaps the easiest to read on the entire golf course.  Does the swale propel balls to the back plateau?  It seems way too mild.  

Is the long putt from the front of the green to the back interesting, except for judging the proper speed?  Certainly the large greens at St. Andrews are much more versatile.

The green has immense size, but relatively the same width from back to front.  

Could you make the statement if the wind were less of a factor?  

What about the Eden?

Pete

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

No.

If you qualify your statement by most versatile tee shot, I might by it.

Pete, it's a par 3.

The tee shot is the defining shot.[/color]

Varying distances isn't the only factor in determining the versatility of a hole.

No, but it's probably the major one on a par 3.[/color]

The green itself is not very interesting.  The front pin position is perhaps the easiest to read on the entire golf course.  Does the swale propel balls to the back plateau?  It seems way too mild.

So when the hole is cut close to the edge, right, left, front and back, just short of the swale, in the swale or just over the swale, you don't find the green very interesting ?  ?  ?

It's got to be one of the most versatile par 3's in all of golf,
without the wind, with the wind it's even more versatile.[/color]

Is the long putt from the front of the green to the back interesting, except for judging the proper speed?  Certainly the large greens at St. Andrews are much more versatile.

It depends on the location of the hole.

The large greens at TOC are versatile, but, none of the par 3's are anywhere as versatile as # 11 at The Creek.[/color]

The green has immense size, but relatively the same width from back to front.

Not really, the front and the back are ovular rather than square, and a huge swale running through the green, with water at every edge.

If you can't see the versatility, consult the Ray Charles-TEPaul school of basic architectural appreciation.[/color]  

Could you make the statement if the wind were less of a factor?  

YES.

The wind is merely the icing on the cake.[/color]

What about the Eden?

It's got versatility, although it's greatly limited by green speeds, and certainly not the versatility offered by # 11 at The Creek.[/color]

[JNC Lyon]

Disclaimer: I have never played this hole.

However, I understand that when the tide goes out, the creek in which the green sits is left with a sandy, marshgrass-filled bottom, thus allowing for a recovery shot. My idea of this recovery is similar to 8 at Brancaster. If this is true, than would this not negate the claims of no recovery options?

[Ian Andrew]

Pat,

I've played the hole and most in this dicussion. The Creek's 11th offers me little joy.

It has flexibility in yardage, but the water has too big an influence on chasing any edge pins. So to me, this is simply a hole played to one of the three central areas.

This hole would have been far more interesting if it were not an island.

But I appreciate and enjoy this type discussion.


Ian

[Pete Buczkowski]

Patrick,

No.

If you qualify your statement by most versatile tee shot, I might by it.

Pete, it's a par 3.

The tee shot is the defining shot.[/color]

Varying distances isn't the only factor in determining the versatility of a hole.

No, but it's probably the major one on a par 3.[/color]

The green itself is not very interesting.  The front pin position is perhaps the easiest to read on the entire golf course.  Does the swale propel balls to the back plateau?  It seems way too mild.

So when the hole is cut close to the edge, right, left, front and back, just short of the swale, in the swale or just over the swale, you don't find the green very interesting ?  ?  ?

It's got to be one of the most versatile par 3's in all of golf,
without the wind, with the wind it's even more versatile.[/color]

Is the long putt from the front of the green to the back interesting, except for judging the proper speed?  Certainly the large greens at St. Andrews are much more versatile.

It depends on the location of the hole.

The large greens at TOC are versatile, but, none of the par 3's are anywhere as versatile as # 11 at The Creek.[/color]

The green has immense size, but relatively the same width from back to front.

Not really, the front and the back are ovular rather than square, and a huge swale running through the green, with water at every edge.

If you can't see the versatility, consult the Ray Charles-TEPaul school of basic architectural appreciation.[/color]  

Could you make the statement if the wind were less of a factor?  

YES.

The wind is merely the icing on the cake.[/color]

What about the Eden?

It's got versatility, although it's greatly limited by green speeds, and certainly not the versatility offered by # 11 at The Creek.[/color]

Patrick,

Many holes can play from varying distances by moving the tee boxes.  This hole just allows an additional variable by moving the pin.  Pin positions by the edge or by the swale offer little concern.  The green contours (yes, even the swale) are too mild to force the player attack the pin or fear a 3-putt.  If a player is 60 yards short, then they hit a very bad tee shot.  Even so, the player can 3 putt for a bogey.   There's just not enough variety in the green surrounds and contours for me to call it the most versatile of all par 3 holes.

Besides, by the looks of the back of that green I don't think they put it there very often.

When you refer to the ovularity of the front and back, we are talking about 10 yards of a 100 yard green.  That's close enough for me to be uniform width.  

I didn't know that the Ray Charles/TEPaul school was so well known...I guess I'm not so special after all.

[Tom_Doak]

I wish I could take credit for extending the green to its current size.  It wasn't that way before we did the green reconstruction work there in 1993 ... ever, as far as I could tell from old photos.

But it really wasn't my idea to make it all green; it just sort of evolved.  The superintendent, Bill Jones (now at Friars Head), decided to gas and re-seed the whole island because he figured he would never have the chance again; and once he replanted it he just starting mowing it all as green.

I like the hole a lot more than most Biarritzes.  It's so big that if all you're trying to do is hit land you really should not miss it except maybe from the furthest back tee (which wasn't Raynor's either).  And for a good part of the day when the tide is low, the shoulders just off the green do allow for a recovery shot.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()