Lake Merced 8th

[Mike Nuzzo]

The above picture of Lake Merced was posted by SPDB recently.  It looked familiar - but from somewhere else.  

From the Wexler book, Lost Links, it looks to be the old 17th.  Does anyone have any additional information or pictures?
Do any original holes remain?

Thank you.

[Sean_Tully]

Mike,
 
What is truly amazing is what Mackenzie was able to do with what was there before his version. The green in this picture was designed by Willie Lock he designed a number of courses and was the Pro at SFG and CC for a period of time as well.




R.M. Graves did a renovation in 1963-4 where he changed the routing thus abandoned the hole. Some of the holes do remain, but the routing was definately changed due to some encroachment from the freeway that necessitated the moving of the clubhouse.

The club has a nice collection of aerials that shows the evolution of the course, I for one would rather see the Mackenzie version.

The location of the hole today is near the fifth green, with the tee located near the current 4th tee.(as taken from LMGC book)

Tully

[Glenn Spencer]

I believe that Lake Merced is still responsible for the highest cut in US Junior History at 163, I think. Also, the site of Tiger's only loss in the event.

[Matt Kardash]

wow, the orignal version is way cooler.

[Jordan Wall]

How deep is that HUGE bunker??  30 feet!??

[Tommy_Naccarato]

It was actually the 8th hole, but was utilized as the 17th when they flipped the nines for the San Francisco Open Championship. It was a typical MacKenzie one-shotter that probably played longer then the yardage indicated. The tee was up on the hillside, right above the current 3rd green, which was actually a par 4 greensite that Geoff featured a picture of in The Golden Age of Golf Architecture. It played sort of downhil, but then sharply uphill as you see in the image, so essentially, you were on an elevated tee hitting downhill, but actually hitting uphill--if that makes sense!  

This course was the first in a long line of great courses destroyed at the hands of Robert Muir Graves. While Mr. Graves was the consumate professional and all-around great guy, I tend to feel that this was his Waterloo, as it was also his first course he worked on--or so I'm told. While the club and Cal Trans are as much to blame, I can't help to think of it as a perfect example of why we have very little great golf architecture left in California. Depression, War, Redevelopment, Green Committees. The greatest destructive force in Golf Architecture--Allies in All.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Also, Sean's picture is taken from above the tee on top of the hill. In the 75th anniversary book (courtesy of Mike Golden, Thanks Mike!) It has an image of Babe Didrickson teeing off that was snapped from up above and it shows how deceptive the hole must have been from the tee.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Sean,
Thank you for the picture and history.  That is quite the photograph.  Now I'm dying to see some others of the Mac hole.


Tommy,
Thank you for the description.  I could barely believe the hole played slightly uphill...  But looking at both photos, unless one plate was flipped, the green is in a different location judging by the location of the water container.  Although it still looks to play somewhat downhill.  Thanks for pointing out the pictures in Geoffs book.

Cheers

Mike

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike,
Well, that's the point--well sort of!

MacKenzie certainly seemed to be able to place golf holes in interesting spots. For example, Pasatiempo #3. It's also from a raised tee, yet it plays uphill. How else would he be able to make that hole play a club or two farther then it really looks? IFor me its about two and a half clubs more!)

Actually, this maybe the best example of camoflauge that the Good Doctor brought to golf design. (As well as setting-up deceptive bunkering patterns that catch the human eye and redirect it off the actual subject or target.)

[Tom Huckaby]

Tommy - you lost me re #3 Pasa.  I see no camoflauge or deception there - it's clear it's VERY uphill (yes, at least 2 clubs more than the distance) and you can't help but notice this as you walk so far DOWNHILL as you play #2... at one point you are level with 3 green, then you play way down to 2 green... walk back up a little to the slightly raised 3 tee, play up the mountain to 3 green.

Are you talking about the recently re-added bunker about 140 off the tee?  I don't see that as deception either... you can see a lot of fairway between it and the green....

I think I get the concept here - I'm just not seeing how 3 Pasa bears it out.  Enlighten me, oh master.

TH

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom,
Forget your knowledge of how far the hole goes downhill at the 2nd. Just concentrate on the first or second time you ever played Pasa #3 and see if you thought that the hole was shorter then it actually played and looked.

Now, does this look as uphill as it really is?

From the tee


Now look at this photo and tell if it reflects what you see from the tee.

From the side of the hole looking over towards #2. That's the right greenside bunker at the very left.


Does the view from the tee reflect the actual fall? For me, the view from the tee is not nearly as severe looking as it really is.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom,
Also, it really isn't the camoflauge per say as it is MacKenzie disguising the amount of climb the hole is actually making to the intended target.  That's the Camo! He's also taking your eye off of it with the bunkering, as human nature would have it, your eye is looking at the bunkering and not the actual uphill nature of the hole.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tommy:

Thanks.  It must be me.  I get what you are trying to say, I just still don't buy it in this example.  And do understand I'm not usually known for my perceptive powers.    But I'm hear to tell you that the FIRST time I played Pasa, I noticed 3 green as we walked down 2 fairway - you can't miss it - it's just over to the right.  Thus there was no deception for me as to how far it was back up to 3 green... remember I had just walked DOWN from it.

I also think there's little deception standing on the tee.  Man that looks VERY uphill and plays VERY uphill.  I'd buy what you're saying re the bunker also if one couldn't see all the grass in between... but one surely can, as your pic shows.  The right-hand bunker does draw the eye also, but man not THAT much for one to say anything but "this really plays uphill."

BUT... maybe this is our disconnect... I suppose from the UPPER tee, it might play longer than it looks, as from there it does look more level and is still uphill.  Are you talking that tee?  Your modern pic is from the front of the lower tee.  And from that tee, there's no deception, only a brutally long, hard shot.

TH

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom,
That's because you probably pushed your drive over there! (next to  #3)

My point is that MacKenzie sort of liked to play a plateau to a plateau, whether it be higher or lower or even the same height. Point in example, VCOM #8. Your playing slightly uphill to that one also, but it isn't nearly as severe. Redlands #5 is another, It's very much downhill, but its playing into the uphill nature of the site which can screw with perception.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tommy - right on re my drive on 2!

And OK, I get going from plateau to plateau, and the deception this can cause.  That's just not what's going on at Pasa #3, from the lower tee anyway.  That is from flat spot at base of mountain hitting up to the peak.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom, It's on a plateau, albeit a much lower one.

Here's what was going on at Lake Merced. I believe these topo lines are 20 foot intervals. (I'm guessing)

[Tom Huckaby]

Lake Merced - yes.  Amen.

Pasa from lower tees... well... it's a huge stretch to call that going from plateau to plateau.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Tommy,
You are correct they are usually 20' - you can zoom around to confirm.
That green site might not be a plateau, but looks like a trough... then again it is the new land not the old.  Maybe if you shift it a bit to the east...
The old green was further to the east - other side of the water tower - it could fit there...

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike,
I have an oblique of the course, showing exactly where the hole was. It's right where I have it. and if you look at the photo, it fits into that trough, although from the tee it did play somewhat uphill. The old water tower was moved up near the 14th/15th/16th hole some years ago.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom,
Looking at the topo it would seem that the tee does in fact fit on to a finger of higher ground. Now the tees there have been rebuilt several times and maybe Tom Doak can add something here, but the topo doesn't lie as far as high ground/low ground in realtion to where the tee is at today.

[Neil_Crafter]

Just thought I'd post these photos of the 17th/8th at Lake Merced, as this thread seemed the right spot for them. I know Mike asked for some more photos so I'm happy to oblige.

photo of the green from 1940



photo of the green from 1941, bunkers look more refined in this photo compared to 1940. Not sure how they took this photo, seems the photographer must have been able to levitate.


Another one from 1942


And finally an extract from a 1946 aerial that I found showing this hole and its incredible bunkering

[Mike Golden]

Even with having played Lake Merced at least 700 times, seeing this photo (which I've seen before) and trying to figure out the exact location of the green is really difficult, even with the aerial of the old routing in front of me.

The tee was, as Neil says, near the current 4th tee but it's obvious lots of dirt was moved during the 1964 renovation to build the current 5th hole because the approach shot would be to the left of that green (where that large hill resides in the old photo).

There were only 4 holes on the original layout affected by I-280:  #1 (completely lost), #2 (about 1/3 of the fairway), #10 (tee box only), and #9 (the current clubhouse and parking lot eliminated it).  The new #4 and #5 were built on property owned by the club adjacent to olde #17 and #18, it would not have been difficult to build those two new holes, slightly shorten #10 (it was a 505 yard par 5, instead it would have been about 480), and just convert #2 (which is where the current #10 is) to a par 3, making it a par 71 but keeping the MacKenzie course virtually intact.  I've had almost this exact conversation with Bo Links, who is probably the most knoweldgeable current member, and he was in complete agreement with me.

Add to that all the fill that was brought into the golf course from the highway construction and ruined the sandy nature of the soil permanently and this is clearly a case of a classic golf course turned into something much less although Lake Merced is still a really good, tough golf course.  Just not the artistic treasure of the past-what a pity.

[Bill_McBride]

Mike, I only played LM twice, both times in the early 1970's, and don't remember this great par 3.  I assume it was gone by then.

[Mike Golden]

Mike, I only played LM twice, both times in the early 1970's, and don't remember this great par 3.  I assume it was gone by then.

Bill, the course was changed in 1964 because of the I-280 construction through the property.  The 1964 redesign was Rees-ified in 1996 to the current golf course.  Rees mostly redid bunkering and the greens, moving the bunkers closer and making them more penal.  Some of the younger members played a role in toughening it up, particularly with some of the bunker lies, which can be severely downhill with almost no green to work with, in particular #4, #10, #12, #15, and the rear bunker on #18.  As a member you learn to avoid these locations but for a visitor it can be a really tough journey.  Even though most of the greens don't appear to have that much slope (with the exception of #4, #8, and #16) there are some incredibly difficult pin locations on the course, particularly when the greens are fast, as they are for the 2 Ball Championship in May (that's a national event that's been held for many years), the Club Championship, and the Toobajo Member-Guest in September.  A US Open Sectional is always held at Lake Merced and while the scores aren't that high the pin locations are always in a somewhat friendly spot because of the need to play 36 in the same day-if they were in the 'Sunday' positions you could probably add 5-6 shots to each score, maybe more.

[Neil_Crafter]

Mike
It really was a tragedy that this iconic hole was lost in the reshuffle as I understand it, it was in the opposite corner of the property to where the I-280 came through. You would have thought the club would have told the architect at the time to save this hole at all costs. Sadly that didn't happen.