News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Sébastien Dhaussy

  • Total Karma: 0
GD article on Sebonack is now online
« on: December 01, 2005, 03:34:05 AM »
« Last Edit: December 01, 2005, 03:35:37 AM by Sébastien Dhaussy »
"It's for everyone to choose his own path to glory - or perdition" Ben CRENSHAW

A_Clay_Man

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2005, 11:36:40 AM »
Tanks for da link.

It is amazing how everyone on this site respected Tom's request not to disect who did what.

Now Whitten gets the exclusivity on that front?

Quote
To prod them further, Pascucci has course superintendent Garret Bodington, former superintendent at Bethpage Black, clear a dune behind the proposed 17th green to accommodate a back tee for a par-5 18th. When they discover the work, Doak's people are livid. "You don't sign my paycheck," Bodington tells them.

Quote
Jack clearly not liking the natural, prominent hump in its center, one that could obscure a view of the green for short hitters.

Quote
I know what Tom's trying to do," Jack later says in an aside. "He's trying to take this lake and make it into an irregular shape, something different, something you might find in nature. I just don't know how that fits into what we're doing. But we can fiddle with that."


After reading other recent Whitten articles about places I do know, I wonder how much of this is B.S. Anybody?

Quote
There's $5 million spent in obtaining myriad environmental and regulatory permits

Talk about taxation without representation.

Quote
Construction costs of the course will likely exceed $20 million

C'mon, This is B.S.

Jim Nugent

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2005, 01:36:56 AM »
I wonder if we'll see Doak and Nicklaus collaborate again on a course?

Michael Dugger

  • Total Karma: 1
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2005, 02:04:27 AM »




« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 02:07:10 AM by Michael Dugger »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2005, 06:31:46 AM »
"It is amazing how everyone on this site respected Tom's request not to disect who did what.
Now Whitten gets the exclusivity on that front?"

Adam:

That's why Ron Whitten gets paid the big bucks for golf architectural writing.  ;)

Seriously, that's a good article because it gets into a whole lot of what most were wondering about---ie how did the two diverse architects inter-relate with each other? Obviously, a pretty neat little addendum twist to the creation of Sebonack both actually and in the article was Mike Pascucci's tertiary part in the design.

I love some of those quotes and the way Whitten presented them. From listening to years and years of interviews with Nicklaus the tenor of his remarks and reactions sound right on the money. And I know Doak enough to know his actions and reactions sound just like I've seen him.

Obviously Pascucci and Jack must know each other pretty well with that needle by Jack over the redudancy remark by Pascucci.

But the little side-story on the collaborations of Sebonack by the trio that's apparently going to become real currency, maybe even legend about the course, is the alteration of the 18th hole despite Pascucci's original agreement with that "tiebreaker" understanding. I really like how he just told Bodington to clear that dune farther back on his own and when the architects became livid Bodington retorted "You're not the ones who sign my paycheck."

I sure don't know what Doak/Nicklaus's long par 4 iteration looked like but I sure do know that hole as a par 5 with its new back tee on the dune behind the par 4 tee is just stunning. The way golf holes play should always be the first priority in design, in my opinion, but when you have a potential setting like that 18th has, I say for God's Sake use it to it's visual potential if you can get a good hole to fit into it at the same time.

It sounds like Doak and Nicklaus might've been trying to pull off the now sort of cliched ball-busting long par 4 finisher so the course and its reputation could get in its last licks on those playing it.

I really like Pascucci's sensibility to go the other way, make it a par 5, give the members and players an easier par, a chance at a birdie (rather than perhaps a long par 4 double bogie), so they'd leave the course happy and in a good mood.

But once again, where was the tee on the Doak/Nicklaus long par 4 iteration? If Pascucci's new back tee par 5 gained even 10-12 feet of elevation on that jaw-dropping scene along the coast-line it would've been worth it for that reason alone, in my opinion.

Congratulations to the two architects and their crews for working together as well as it seems they did and certainly congratulations to Mike Pascucci for having the imagination to compromise (if that's what it was) and figure out a way of getting both. It sounds like all three of them probably had a better time working together to create Sebonack than they at first may've thought they would.

Lastly, I just can't wait to see that golf course in play and particularly to see where it's maintenance/set-up limit may be! It seems to me just walking around there looking at it that if and when they get some real speed on that course particularly "through the green" it just might be funner than a barrel of monkeys.  ;)

 
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 06:39:01 AM by TEPaul »

PThomas

  • Total Karma: -21
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2005, 07:33:14 AM »
if it was my money I'd sure insist on more than just "tiebreaker status"!
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

John Foley

  • Total Karma: 1
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2005, 08:23:02 AM »
Question for Tom (& others who may have seen it)

The pics in the article, and shown here, appear to have a number of trees left in place especially along water side. Why not clear them out & open up the vista & expose the wind?
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 08:23:55 AM by john_foley »
Integrity in the moment of choice

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 19
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2005, 08:28:00 AM »
Tom P:

The regular tee on the 18th is where Jack and I had our back tee to start with; I'm standing on it in that one picture in the dirt in GOLF DIGEST.  To get the back tee we had to clear a knob straight behind the 17th green so we could gain about thirty yards, but it isn't much higher at all.  We added more length to the hole on the green end, which brought that elm tree on the right into play more for the members' third shots.  I studied the change for three months and that, in the end, is why I agreed that it might be a better hole as a par 5, and Jack went along.  I think we still could have overruled Michael there if we really thought the par-5 was a mess, but we didn't, we knew it was just a matter of preference as to the character of the club.

Paul:

It is one thing when a client SUGGESTS something and another thing when they INSIST on it.

Do you know how many times the owner overruled me at Pacific Dunes, Cape Kidnappers, or Barnbougle?

Julian Robertson did ask to turn the 16th at Kidnappers into a par five, and after I studied that, I thought it was a good idea.  [It was a pretty expensive change, so I hadn't really considered it myself.]  At the same time, he did not like my 18th green setting at all to start with ... I had to get everyone from the golf professional to Michael Campbell to petition him to allow me to keep it.  We had to put in a few back tees we might not have done otherwise, because he wanted the course to be long enough for Michael et al., but I don't worry too much about an extra tee as long as it doesn't mess up the hole from where I wanted the tees.

Mike Keiser had us go through another complete iteration of the routing at Pacific Dunes before he was comfortable with it, and we did, and that's responsible for holes like today's fourth.  [But he didn't insist on that hole, or even find it himself; he just asked us to keep looking for a way to play one of the holes along the ocean from north to south.]  After that, he hung around a lot during construction, and he was partly responsible for the lower green at the ninth [he liked the lower 9th green and upper tenth tee, I liked the others, so we built them all].

Mike Keiser also suggested I look at reversing my original routing for the back nine at Barnbougle Dunes, so the coastal holes would run both east and west, much along the lines of his suggestion for Pacific Dunes.  After that suggestion, it took me about two days to come up with the new back nine routing.  

Greg Ramsay had all kinds of ideas for holes on the site ... he wanted the ninth to run down the valley to the left of where it does now from tee to green; he wanted us to leave a stand of trees in the middle of the sixth fairway!  Fortunately, Greg did not write our check!  Richard Sattler, the owner, told us that Mike Keiser told him to let us go ahead and do what we wanted and not to worry, and he did.

So, owners are always involved, but it's how they insert themselves that matters, and it matters much to the success of a great project.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 08:33:21 AM by Tom_Doak »

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 19
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2005, 08:33:01 AM »
Adam:

I was a little disappointed that Ron Whitten talked about the 17th hole in particular, because I was curious to see if anybody would guess who did what there.  A lot of my friends who have toured the course have really liked that hole, and when they said so they had no idea that the green complex was mostly from a drawing by Jack!  We had another version of the green that one of my associates had roughed in that we really liked, and that was the only time in the course of the job that I gave up something I really liked to keep the peace between Jack and myself.

However, there is an important difference to this article ... Ron was there several times watching the interaction.  That's much different from Jack or me or anyone that worked on the project taking credit for some piece or other of the design.  And, as Ron makes clear, there wasn't much that we didn't discuss back and forth before deciding what to build.

PThomas

  • Total Karma: -21
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2005, 08:40:15 AM »
thanks for the examples Tom!

perhaps I was coming across as I would be too stubborn  as an owner...I meant to say that of course I would defer to the expert- the gca - but I would certainly want him to consider all of  my suggestions and clearly explain why my ideas aren't the best

who knows:  even a blind squirrel gets a nut sometimes, so of the xxx number of suggestions I would offer hopefully at least 1 of them would be a winner!
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 19
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2005, 08:46:17 AM »
Paul:  Your last quote is exactly what Jim Urbina said in the GOLF DIGEST piece, and it's the bane of golf architects.  The overinvolved client just keeps throwing out ideas until you throw him a bone and let him point to something that's his ... and then he thinks he's doing great and wants another bone!  

When I suspect a client might be too involved, I will only take the job if I am convinced (as myself with Mike Keiser, or Bill Coore with Ken Bakst) that you have a great working knowledge of golf and architecture, and that we'll mostly be on the same page.  If we're not, and you come up with a lot of ideas and I've got to refute all the ones which don't work, you'd likely be stubborn about something which is "just a difference of opinion" and we'd be at loggerheads.  

Moreover, having to pander to a client's design ideas would take up too much of the time in which I would otherwise be thinking creatively myself, and in the end you would not get what you were supposedly paying me to do.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 08:49:55 AM by Tom_Doak »

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2005, 08:55:53 AM »
TomD:

Thanks for the response and clarification on the change to #18. If you backed up the rear tee 30 yards I'm assuming you must have pushed the new green out something like 70 yards, right? (570 minus whatever the par 4 was).

Being maybe 70 yards shorter the par 4 green must have been a bit lower right? Also, for players departing the 18th green on that par 4 on the way up to the clubhouse----did they walk right across in front of the tees on #2. The way #18 is now it does create a pretty cozy feeling up there, to say the least, with all that's going on in that area---eg 2nd tees, "by-hole" tees and not that far to the left of #1.

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 19
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2005, 09:03:57 AM »
The par 4 was 495 yards downwind.  It's about 535 yards from the same tee to the new green, and 565 from the back, I believe.

There is a small back tee for the second way back there, just a flattened part of the large mowed expanse to the left of the first green; you still walk in front of it when you come off the 18th green, as you would have before.  I don't think many of the members will ever play it from there, in fact, they might not even put markers on it.

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2005, 09:06:03 AM »
"if it was my money I'd sure insist on more than just "tiebreaker status"!"

Paul:

You know the way these big honchos can be---there's a not so nice way of breaking a deal and then there's a nice way of breaking a deal.

I like Mike Pascucci's style, though---certainly that move he pulled by getting the odd-couple together for the first time in the same room in Florida----and then walking out and leaving them alone together!

I mean what if he came back in ten minutes later and Tom was biting the shit outta Jack's ankles and Jack was pummelling the shit out of Tom trying to get Tom away from him?  ;)

TomD:

It sounds like you're something like 0 for 3 with your owner/clients with par 4 vs par 5 finishers. Why don't you just give them par 5 finishers to start with and if they object and want a long ball-busting par 4 finisher instead just bite the shit outta their ankles?   ;)
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 09:15:47 AM by TEPaul »

PThomas

  • Total Karma: -21
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2005, 09:09:57 AM »
allright Tom, you've convinced me:  when I make my fortune   ;) and hire you I promise to hold my tongue - for the most part!

I just thought of Pete Dye's book...in it he details some of the "discussions" he had with Herb Kohler....I remember the one about a certain tree he wanted taken down, which Herb INSISTED  he not touch...well, one day Pete had that rascal taken down, and then he left town IMMEDIATELY!!  of course was mad but all worked out in the end

199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

McCloskey

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2005, 09:14:51 AM »
Tom D

Very interesting!

Would it be possible for you to give us some kind of description of what you liked about your 17th green that is different from the green that was built from Jack's drawing?

Thanks for the insights.

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2005, 09:20:54 AM »
"I just thought of Pete Dye's book...in it he details some of the "discussions" he had with Herb Kohler....I remember the one about a certain tree he wanted taken down, which Herb INSISTED  he not touch...well, one day Pete had that rascal taken down, and then he left town IMMEDIATELY!!  of course was mad but all worked out in the end."

Paul:

Pete did a course for a friend of mine in Maryland and according to that friend of mine Pete stated right up front there would be absolutely no looking over his shoulder not even with binoculars---nada, zero, zitch! Everything worked out fine apparently.


ChasLawler

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2005, 09:30:30 AM »
Tom,
Did you all ever consider a short par 5 for the 18th?

Personally, I'm a fan of the 490-500 yard par 5 finisher. Designed properly, it can give the average member that chance for birdie - or even eagle eagle, but possess enough trouble around the green to make bogey or worse a real possibility.

In big time tournament play - you can call it a par 4, and there's your brutal finishing hole.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 09:37:28 AM by Cabell_Ackerly »

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2005, 09:30:44 AM »
TomD:

I'm gonna guess something here and I'm pretty sure you probably would prefer not to answer but I'll say the greens out there that're sorta shallow and wide, even if on a diagonal are from the Nicklaus side---excepting, what is it, #6 which you already explained.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 09:32:10 AM by TEPaul »

A_Clay_Man

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #19 on: December 02, 2005, 10:15:34 AM »
I could not help but think about this article, when I saw this picture.



I wonder if the good Dr. shaved that puppie?

I wonder if Jack had visited Friars Head, if he would've been so against the blindness?  ;) ;) ;) ;D
« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 10:23:59 AM by Adam Clayman »

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 19
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2005, 10:17:16 AM »
Tom:  That would be typecasting, and I'm sure that it's wrong, because the first one I can think of is another green which Jim Urbina built.

Mr. McCloskey:  I'm not going to start assigning credit now any more than I was before, but I still say this:  there are six different people who I would say were the primary "designers" of at least one green at Sebonack, those being Jack Nicklaus, myself, and four of our associates who built something without much instruction which stayed in something like its original form.

Cabell:  When Mr. Pascucci first suggested the par-5 finisher, Jack and I just said that it was 495 yards already, so he could call it a par five if he preferred, we didn't care.  But Michael didn't want the hole to be a pushover par 5, either ... he wanted it 550 yards so not every chump would knock it up there in two.

Paul T:  I learned client relations by watching Pete Dye at work.  He was just hilarious about it, but really stubborn at the same time.

RT

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #21 on: December 02, 2005, 10:48:52 AM »
Quote
I just thought of Pete Dye's book...in it he details some of the "discussions" he had with Herb Kohler....I remember the one about a certain tree he wanted taken down, which Herb INSISTED  he not touch...well, one day Pete had that rascal taken down, and then he left town IMMEDIATELY!!  of course was mad but all worked out in the end

Those of us who have worked with Pete know that 'immediate' condition quite well with Pete, plus that hilarious aspect to his way with clients, both spot on :)...

McCloskey

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #22 on: December 02, 2005, 10:49:39 AM »
Tom D

I don't think I was requesting that you assign any credit any more than you have already revealed.   You said that the 17th green was basically the result of a Nicklaus drawing and it was different than one that Urbina had built that you liked....apparently better, since you said you kept your mouth shut rather than debate the situation.   I am just asking you to describe what you had and liked that was different than what was finally the 17th green.

PThomas

  • Total Karma: -21
Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #23 on: December 02, 2005, 11:12:51 AM »
I gotta buy all you guys who have worked with Pete together some drinks some night so I can hear more good stories :D1
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonack is now online
« Reply #24 on: December 02, 2005, 11:17:51 AM »
"Tom:  That would be typecasting, and I'm sure that it's wrong, because the first one I can think of is another green which Jim Urbina built."

TomD:

Are you saying it's impossible to typecast many of Nicklaus & Co.'s greens?

Well, I'm glad to hear that's finally true.  ;)

I promise, I won't ask any more questions or try to pull info out of you that you'd prefer not to give.

« Last Edit: December 02, 2005, 11:20:57 AM by TEPaul »