Unique, to the third power, Yale's 9th, 10th and 18th holes

[Geoffrey Childs]

Michael - I never tire playing #9 though I wish they would pin the back tier MUCH more often. The front tier puts the water into play and is challenging for distance control especially since that tier falls away somewhat towards the swale/"ditch".

On Sunday, Bill McBride hit the edge of the downslope, watched the ball disappear for what seemed like seconds and it reappeared hanging for dear life staying on the back tier. I'll never tire of seeing that shot. Anothr shot we watched tried to climb all the way up the slope and fell back into the "ditch".  Shots like that are a small joy that should be part of the game.

[Allan Long]

Pat,

From the courses I've played, I could agree with that statement.

Pete,

Although I think #3 and #4 are great par-4 holes (and I would also add #17 to the mix), for uniqueness, IMHO, they can't touch #10. There's no mistaking what I think about #9, but just when I thought it couldn't get much better I stepped on the tee box at #10. Although I have tried to explain the
hole a hundred times to people who have never played it, I tell them I just can't do it justice--they need to see it for themselves.

I guess that for me sets #10 apart.  

[Michael Moore]

Another shot we watched tried to climb all the way up the slope and fell back into the "ditch".

We can call that shot the "Edar Allan Poe" - fell into a ditch and died.

[Jim_Kennedy]

For some reason the ninth seems more daunting to me in the photo than when seeing it in person. I don't know if it's the different surroundings of today's version vs. what's shown in the photo or the camera perspective or just what happens with photos in general.            

This photo of the one at Fishers Island doesn't cause me any confusion, it looks equally ferocious in person or in photos.


The 4th, 5th and 6th holes at Fishers Island make for a pretty good string of par 4, 3 then 5.    

[Mike Hendren]

Michael - I never tire playing #9 though I wish they would pin the back tier MUCH more often. The front tier puts the water into play and is challenging for distance control especially since that tier falls away somewhat towards the swale/"ditch".

Geoffrey,

I would think that a front pin would be the rare exception, not the rule that you suggest.  

Mr. Bahto,

Is there anything to suggest that Messrs. Raynor and Macdonald envisioned the back tier to be primary?

Mike

[Geoffrey Childs]

Michael - I never tire playing #9 though I wish they would pin the back tier MUCH more often. The front tier puts the water into play and is challenging for distance control especially since that tier falls away somewhat towards the swale/"ditch".

Geoffrey,

I would think that a front pin would be the rare exception, not the rule that you suggest.  

Mr. Bahto,

Is there anything to suggest that Messrs. Raynor and Macdonald envisioned the back tier to be primary?

Mike

Mike-
 
Back pins are far superior, more fun and offer more challenge. At Yale I assume they want to move play along more quickly and so they put the pin in the front far too often.

I think its fair to say that MOST biarritz greens only have the back section mowed as green and that's the way they were designed.  The front is firm fairway height grass.

[HamiltonBHearst]

Patrick mucci has always been a gentleman on this site.  Micheal Moore has been something less. Why would anyopne expect anything else.

[Mike Hendren]

Geoffrey,

I asked because based on the photographs a front pin looks very intimidating, though I'm guessing the front tier is deeper than it appears.  What would be the distance from the "regular" tees to the front edge?  How difficult is it to hold the front tier?

Also, any idea how close the front of the green was to the original chasm hole?

Mike

[Michael Moore]

Patrick mucci has always been a gentleman on this site.

Always? Like when he told Gracely that he was talking out of his ass?

Geoff Childs -

The idea that the front of the Biarritz is maintained as fairway is a most interesting and new piece of information.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Geoffrey,

I asked because based on the photographs a front pin looks very intimidating, though I'm guessing the front tier is deeper than it appears.  What would be the distance from the "regular" tees to the front edge?  How difficult is it to hold the front tier?

Also, any idea how close the front of the green was to the original chasm hole?

Mike

Mike - The front section of green at Yale #9 is receptive to a 5-6 iron approach but it does slope a bit towards the swale. From the blue tee to the front is about a 170 yard carry to be safely above the water.

I don't know the answer to your last question.  Perhaps George can chime in.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

In response to Post #24, Question #2:

I never get tired of the 9th, especially when the pin is back.  I've heard a rumor that the club sticks the pin in "Whitaker's Ditch" during their Frostbite Tournament in the late fall/early winter.  "Whitaker's Ditch" also funnels drainage quite nicely to the left.  The most fun is to watch a put not reemerge and go back and forth in the funnel.

In regards to #10, I think it is one of my two favorite par 4's that I have played (PVGC #13) is the other.  Both require execution.  I really enjoyed showing my group the play the shot from the back of the green where one aims 30' right of the pin, and if struck properly, the ball will swing straight to the left.  A classic case of not using the direct and impossible line to the hole because C.B. gave one a usuable option if you were able to:

1. Creatively Think
2. Risk Take
3. Execute.

I was left on my tee shot Sunday, and took the right option on a push.  The fairway to the right is quite narrow.  

Geoffrey, I love the look of the 18th Green in the photo.

Also, does anyone know if #17 at Yale was inspired by #16 at Pine Valley?  The blind tee shot and the green structures appear to me to have a lot in common.

JWK

[Pete Buczkowski]

Apologize in advance for jumping into this thread so late.  Many Thanks to Scott for placing the pins in great spots on 9 and 10 on Sunday.  I stand behind my statement for replacing 10 with 3 as the most unique par 4.  The tee shot on 10 is only partially blind, since you can see the green in the distance and the line is clear.  The landing area is fairly level if you drive it properly, played to an uphill green.  The green is certainly unique, especially to the front pin.

The 10th tee shot - note that the line of play is fairly evident.  Is that containment mounding to the right of the fairway?



The 10th approach.  The front pin was visible, but I can't speak for every hole location.  That climb up to the green sure is steep!  This hole (sans green contouring) reminds me of some holes in western NC.



The front half of the 10th green viewed from the right, with a most interesting pin.  Note the steep slope behind the pin, and the alternate route by using the left side of the green.



Compare the 10th with the 3rd hole.  The line of play off the tee is certainly not obvious for the first time player.  The slope can take the tee shot to either side of the fairway, depending on where it lands.

The 3rd tee shot



The approach - where is the green?  I hit and hoped, and then stole Sweeney's ball.



Viewing the 3rd from behind.  The green is one of the least interesting on the course; likely because it is not original - the old green was closer to the creek on the right.



What really surprised me about the 9th is that you cannot see it from the 8th.  You walk about 30 yards from the 8th green and Voila, the 9th appears.  Then, you climb a mini-mountain to reach the 10th tee.  Very cool seculded part of the property.

The famous 9th:



What else can be said about the 18th.  I wonder if Mike Strantz spent any time here.  The tee shot from the somewhat abandoned back box:



From the tee shot landing area:



Looking down at the green from the left fairway:



Not pictured...the stump left of the fairway that provided a most heroic up and down.

[Andy Hughes]

Pete
Thanks for the pictures, they help to understand the holes everyone keeps talking about. Two questions:
1. Are the trees lining the fairways as stifling as they appear, or is it roomier than it appears?
2. The bunkers in these pictures seem kinda pedestrian. Is that accurate? Is that true on the rest of the course?

18 looks very impressive, if hard to understand!  

[Brian Krex]

That really was some hole location on 10 this weekend, wasn't it? I'm not really sure that that really is a viable spot for the hole.

As for the alternate route on 18, I understand this is a difficult hole, but for the better player, it really does make you think hard about the second shot. With a good tee shot (typically a 3 wood from the lower tee or driver from the top tee) you've left yourself in front of the second "mountain" with three choices: lay up on top (to the left) with anything from a 4 iron to a 7 iron, lay up to the narrow strip of fairway to the right, and avoid at all costs getting stuck on the hill (which is a guaranteed 6 or worse, and often results in a lost ball), or taking a bigger club, usually a 3 wood or other fairway wood, and hitting the second over the "mountain" where the fairways join and there is 30-45 yards of fairway to hit into. This last option brings the trees on the left and lateral hazard on the right into play, but a well executed shot can leave even a medium hitter a very short shot into a flat green, and really present an excellent birdie opportunity. It really does come down to how you're feeling--but nailing a 3 wood right down the middle with your second there is...great. Having played the hole about 200 times, I'm really just starting to understand how to play it--for me, that means hitting the longest club I can on the second shot, provided my drive is deep enough that I can carry the ball to the end of the upper fairway (where the fairways join) and take advantage of being able to roll the ball down the hill.

I'll look forward to seeing what Scott Ramsey (the King of the World) does.

[Pete Buczkowski]

Pete
Thanks for the pictures, they help to understand the holes everyone keeps talking about. Two questions:
1. Are the trees lining the fairways as stifling as they appear, or is it roomier than it appears?
2. The bunkers in these pictures seem kinda pedestrian. Is that accurate? Is that true on the rest of the course?

18 looks very impressive, if hard to understand!  

Andy,

There is room on most holes, but I did hit into hazards on 4 & 6 off the tee, and into the left treeline on 10.  From the back tee, the 18th landing area looks tiny.  However, it becomes much wider when you geet out there.  The course is fairly roomy overall.

As to your second question, that is a whole can of worms of about 50 old GCA threads.  Rulewich did some work on the course a few years back that is looked upon very unfavorably by most on this site.  Some of the bunkers are impressively deep - check out these photos of 8:

Approach on 8.  The famous 9th is up and to the left of the green, but cannot be seen from the 8th hole at all.



The bunker right of the green is really deep.  Mike, about 6'6" tall, is dwarfed on the side of that bunker.  It might be 20 feet deep.

[Pete Buczkowski]

That really was some hole location on 10 this weekend, wasn't it? I'm not really sure that that really is a viable spot for the hole.

As for the alternate route on 18, I understand this is a difficult hole, but for the better player, it really does make you think hard about the second shot. With a good tee shot (typically a 3 wood from the lower tee or driver from the top tee) you've left yourself in front of the second "mountain" with three choices: lay up on top (to the left) with anything from a 4 iron to a 7 iron, lay up to the narrow strip of fairway to the right, and avoid at all costs getting stuck on the hill (which is a guaranteed 6 or worse, and often results in a lost ball), or taking a bigger club, usually a 3 wood or other fairway wood, and hitting the second over the "mountain" where the fairways join and there is 30-45 yards of fairway to hit into. This last option brings the trees on the left and lateral hazard on the right into play, but a well executed shot can leave even a medium hitter a very short shot into a flat green, and really present an excellent birdie opportunity. It really does come down to how you're feeling--but nailing a 3 wood right down the middle with your second there is...great. Having played the hole about 200 times, I'm really just starting to understand how to play it--for me, that means hitting the longest club I can on the second shot, provided my drive is deep enough that I can carry the ball to the end of the upper fairway (where the fairways join) and take advantage of being able to roll the ball down the hill.

I'll look forward to seeing what Scott Ramsey (the King of the World) does.

Hi Brian,

Welcome to the board.  That hole location was perfectly fine at the green speeds this weekend - they were a 7 or maybe even slower.  At fast speeds it would be very difficult.  From the top tier, you had to play it well to the right to get it to stop near the hole.  

[Brian Krex]

Pete--agreed as to the green speeds--if the hole had been cut there at the speeds the greens have been at for most of the summer, the hole would have been impossible.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Haven't played Yale, but I find it very hard to believe (if we are to go along with this solecism of some sort of continuum of "uniqueness"....) that the holes at Yale are more unique (uniquer?) than 11, 14 and 17 at The Old Course.

Rich,

It's not even close.

What's also amazing is how two holes adjacent to one another can be so totally different, in every way.

# 10 and # 18 are wildly unique, as is # 9.

The next time you venture over here, don't miss the opportunity to play Yale.[/color]

Pat and Michael and Geoff

You can, in fact, get incredible texture (allowing for very good intimations of "playability") from aerial photographs if they are high resolution and integrated with detailed GPS readings at ground level.  I've seen this future, and it works.

You can probably get quality three dimensional rotating 360 degree photos as well, but, the aerial posted of # 10 and # 18 don't provide the slightest clue as to their playability, which is quite unique.[/color]

Geoff Childs and George Bahto,

I think it's mandatory that the right side woods be cleared out on # 18.

If you examine the pitch of the lower fairway, the deflecting nature of the sloped rough seperating it from the upper fairway, you quickly realize that under firm and fast conditions balls cannot hold the lower fairway.

In order for the lower fairway to be a viable option, the right side woods should be cleared.

As to whether or not a thin line of trees, or one giant common fairway should be created with # 10, I'd like to examine the site more carefully before forming a final opinion.

What do the original aerials, plans or ground photos reveal ?

My concerns aren't so much directed toward # 18 as they are to the impact on # 10.

But, it's clear, more trees need to be cleared on the right side of the lower fairway.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pete Buczkowski,

# 4 pales in comparison to # 10 when it comes to unique holes.  # 4 is a fairly common hole, difficult, but, nothing unique.

# 3 is more unique, but not as much as  # 10.

You forgot to mention the huge white directional pole that tells you all you need to know about approaching the 3rd green.

Let's start with the green.      Advantage # 10
The green surrounds              Advantage # 10
Uniqueness of the approach     Advantage # 10
Uniqueness of the drive           Toss up.

Elevation changes                  Advantage # 10
Missed approach recovery        Advantage # 10
Golfer Conditioning factor         Advantage # 10
Physco factor                        Advantage # 10
Impact of the wind                 Advantage # 10

James Keever,

The green at # 17 at Yale is totally different than the green at # 16 at Pine Valley.

The green at # 17 at Yale is similar to the green at # 11 at NGLA, a double plateau.

In addition, the tee shot at # 17 at Yale and # 16 at Pine Valley are totally different.

At # 17 at Yale you're hitting sharply uphill even though the top of the facing hill has been scalped down.  At # 16 at Pine Valley you're hitting down to the fairway.

The two holes are totally different.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Pete

#3 is a bastard hole with one of 2 completely new greens at Yale.  Rebuilt and restored it might be one of the truly great and unique par 4's in golf

Here is the original green a double punchbowl and the largest green on the course (bigger then the biarritz 9!)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff and George,

Remind me again, where was the original 4th tee ?

[Geoffrey Childs]

PAt
Scotland's Gift- Golf  pages 252-253

Hole 4 420- 440 yards.  The diagram has the tee just where it is (at least the lower tee) today.

Its about where that photo of the old double punchbowl #3 green was taken. What a green that would be to restore!

From MacDonald "Today there is no better test of golf then the Yale course anywhere, and as the years go by it will become more attractive   .  The water holes are exceptionally fine; I know of no golf course where the water holes are as wonderful as they are in New Haven"

[ForkaB]

Haven't played Yale, but I find it very hard to believe (if we are to go along with this solecism of some sort of continuum of "uniqueness"....) that the holes at Yale are more unique (uniquer?) than 11, 14 and 17 at The Old Course.

Rich,

It's not even close.

What's also amazing is how two holes adjacent to one another can be so totally different, in every way.

# 10 and # 18 are wildly unique, as is # 9.

The next time you venture over here, don't miss the opportunity to play Yale.[/color]

Thanks, Pat.

Yale has always been in my top-10 of courses to play/re-play when next in the NYC area, and this thread (particularly Pete's pictures) has re-inforced this "ranking."  However, resources, including time, are always limited during these occasions, and there are a number of more worthy contenders for my time and interest on that list.  Or, am I wrong and should I turn down (say, and if offerred) an oportunity to play Pine Valley to go to Yale?  Or, Friar's Head, Winged Foot, Merion, Sebonac, Garden City, NGLA or Shinnecock?  This is all fantasy stuff, of course, but is Yale really that good?

Vis a vis relative "uniqueness," I'm not yet convinced.  You can do some wild and interesting things when you have a big property with lots of elevation changes (viz. Dallas National, by Fazio).  The harder thing is to do it within a relatively confined space.  I can think of at least one example of two adjacent holes with wildingly varying character on a relatively small property.  I also wonder if #9 Yale can be any more "unique" than its likely prototype (#16 North Berwick).  Also, don't sell TOC short just because it is flat and confined.  If you put your GCA hat on (and take off the rose coloured glasses that Geoff Childs supplied you with;)) you might find that there is huge variation in the look, feel and playability of the 3 holes I cited above.  Isn't that what "uniqueness" is all about?

Cheers

Rich

[Sean_A]

I am starting to get the picture about the engineered look.  Some of those bunkers are so far off in keeping with the landscape (which looks like proper golf country) that it makes me chuckle and want to play Yale.  Very odd indeed.

Ciao

Sean

[George_Bahto]

Patrick: as Geoff stated the original 4th tee is the front of the present 4th tee.

The question came up while I was "touring" the course with the "restoration ?" architect: "well we can't put the 3rd green back to where it was because you would be threatening the people playing the 3rd as you teed off on the 4th"  .....

I don't buy that:
original 3-green is blind and the next group of players are still out in the fairway waiting for the green to clear and the bell to ring ........ by the time they play to the green, the players have left 3-green and have probably even hit off 4-tee and are on their merry way. I said ...... which drew blank stares .... duh

no one had a clue about the original 3rd green until I found it in their own photo files about 8-9 years ago

that picture of 3-green was taken from the 4th tee   and ...
it appears to me that the 3rd green at Yale has a great similarity to the 6th green at Creek, minus the kick-in shoulder