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.


Patrick_Mucci_Jr

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #25 on: March 18, 2006, 11:41:27 AM »

I'd be curious to learn, from those in-the-know, what distinguishes a Macdonald Alps from a Raynor Alps from a Banks Alps.

The above statement implies that there is NO distinction in any of CBM's Alps holes, NO distinction in any of SR's Alps holes and NO distinction in any of CB's Alps holes.

But, that's not the case.

And since each of the above three architects DON'T have a singular template, the distinctions may be:
1.   Non-existent
2.   Subtle
3.   Terrain based only

It may be difficult, if not impossible to identify "absolute " distinctions.

On a broader note, it might be interesting to see IF there were any PATTERNED distinctions with respect to any of the template holes
[/COLOR]

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #26 on: March 18, 2006, 11:47:41 AM »
"Also, I presume you know the joke that ends in the punchline, "what you mean WE, Kemosabe?"."

You got that right, Chip. I never could figure out why the Lone Ranger trusted that Indian out there in that wild country filled with millions of other Tontos and Tontas.

I believe in the power of the uniquely American myths and American parables, particularly the ultra nuancy ones we all grew up imbued with (probably without even realizing it :) ).

The Lone Ranger was one of them. Big Strong guy in white with a big flashy gun on a white horse hiding his total identity from those who saw his "do-gooder" ways but in the finally analysis LR was one super naive dude to trust that Indian like that out there in that hostile territory. But because of that he is just about the perfect representation of the American ethos.

That's another reason I like my stab at the etymology of Kemosabe.  ;)

Paul Payne

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #27 on: March 18, 2006, 11:54:21 AM »
I have always wondered what the exact definition of an alps hole was as well. Is it simply defined as the mounding in front of the green creating a blind shot? or is there more to it?

Would # 13 at Tobacco Road qualify as an alps hole? It does have a low spot in the mound to provide an entry but otherwise pretty well obscures the green from the fairway.

By the way TE

Kemosabe....

It is a newly devised delivery system for medication used by cancer patients. It is to be consumed as a side garnish with their Sushi.


TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2006, 11:58:16 AM »
"I'd be curious to learn, from those in-the-know, what distinguishes a Macdonald Alps from a Raynor Alps from a Banks Alps."

That is just an incredible remark.

There is no question at all---none---zero, that if those three guys could appear right now and read that remark they would just fall all over each other laughing their asses off. And I really wish I could see what they'd say. You couldn't find a better way to see if any of the three really did have a straight face.  ;)

I think one of them could pull it off and then you'd have the likes of Tom MacWood offering his expert opinion or David Moriarty on here for seven pages arguing with everybody that the Alps on the old 10th at Merion was of the unique style of Wilson or Flynn and why.  ;)

T_MacWood

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2006, 12:01:43 PM »
TE
If you'll re-read my question you'll see I addressed my question to those in-the-know.

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #30 on: March 18, 2006, 01:04:08 PM »
"TE
If you'll re-read my question you'll see I addressed my question to those in-the-know."

That's scarier still, as it sort of underscores your question really was serious.  ;)

Patrick_Mucci_Jr

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #31 on: March 18, 2006, 11:47:52 PM »
The question remains, did the treatment of template holes vary with CBM, SR and CB ?  

Or, were the design of their template holes solely related to the terrain ?

It would seem that the answer might be more likely to be found in their template par 3's rather than in any of their par 4's and par 5's.

How do their Short's compare ?
How do their Eden's compare ?
How do their Redan's compare ?
How do their Biarritz's compare

Mike_Cirba

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2006, 12:11:20 AM »
One "Alps" feature that was unquestionably discussed and more than very likely planned was the intended "Alps" feature on the far right side of HHA at #7 at Pine Valley.

According to Crump's two best friends in their "Remembrances" that hole was being transitioned into a "double dogleg" par 5 and the "Alps" feature at the far end on the right of HHA was obviously going to be significant strategically, particularly as Crump apparently planned to transition the entire left half of the second half fairway all the way over to the right side of that second half fairway.

The green had already been altered for the "double dog-leg" alteration from what it once was to point directly out to the far right side which never got done and is today woods.

But a lot of all that plan for altering #7 clealy revolved around the "Alps" feature they mentioned at the far right side of HHA.

The documentation for that "double dogleg" transition with the Alps feature on #7 is so strong I think they should just go ahead and finish it now. Not to mention the fact that the green was already altered for this transition just before Crump passed on.

Tom,

Let me get this straight.

You "diss" the 11th hole at Reading as a "Pocono", not an "Alps", yet you flaunt the flattish 7th hole at Pine Valley as having been intended to have some sort of mysterious "Alps" quality that was never built.  

Exactly what did they intend to do there, Tom?  The land along that hole is almost the flattest on the property and unless Crump intended on building a Fazio-like Magic Mountain like he did at Emerald Dunes, I can't imagine anything resembling an Alps every being built there.  

If the 11th at Reading is a Pocono, then perhaps 7 at PV would have been merely a "Semi";  not quite large or impressive enough to penetrate the consciousness, yet somehow full of itself all the same. ;)  ;D

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #33 on: March 19, 2006, 07:12:37 AM »
"Tom,
Let me get this straight.
You "diss" the 11th hole at Reading as a "Pocono", not an "Alps",:

MikeC:

I dissed the 11th at Reading? How's that? I simply described it accurately. I believe it is you who have seriously dissed the glorious Poconos.  

Seriously, if you look on any very old photo of the 7th hole of PV you will see that there is an Alps feature on the right side of the end of HHA. I estimate it to be about ten feet in height. The purpose generally in golf and architecture of the "Alps" feature is not necessarily the extent of it height but the fact that it blinds a certain intended area. That feature did that on the 7th, Matter of fact it looks like there was a smaller one on the left that was essentially the enormous face of the sort of blow-out bunker in that area.  

In any case there is material in the archives that mentions the "Alps" on the 7th. Furthermore, there is no comparison with that magic mountain affair at Emerald Dunes.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 07:14:47 AM by TEPaul »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #34 on: March 19, 2006, 08:42:32 AM »
Here's a wonderful Alps or semi-Alps hole, the 6th at De Pan in Holland.  See the route around for the weaker player.  Perhaps this is even better than the full Alps as at Prestwick, NGLA and Piping Rock.

It's one of the world's great holes that virtually nobody knows about.

The green is lay of the land and runs away on a left to right diagonal.



can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #35 on: March 19, 2006, 08:50:11 AM »
Paul:

Talk to me about what you know about that huge feature in the lower photo. If we are to be totally honest in our analyses, I've got to admit that thing looks to me like an enourmous artificial Giant's earthen steeplechase jump.  ;)

It seemingly violates every single precept of "natural" architecture that I'm aware of.

Mind you, I'm not saying I hate it, because I am totally fascinated by the various types and styles in architecture throughout the entire evolution of golf course architecture but we do need to be prepared to call apples, apples, and oranges, oranges---or cumquats, cumquats.  ;)
« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 08:55:52 AM by TEPaul »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2006, 09:10:34 AM »
Tom

The bottom photo is the just looking back from the green, it's the same hole as the top photo.  It's purely natural!  You can see the ridge extending into the tree and it's a drving hazard on the next hole (albeit smaller).  

The course is lumpy.  Buried heffalumps everywhere  :)
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #37 on: March 19, 2006, 09:31:45 AM »
Paul:

I thought that's what it must be since obviously it's the same hole. Man, those two photos are deceptive against each other. In the first one can see the "Alp" feature comes into play for a ball on the left but in the bottom photo it appears  there's no room over there. Very deceptive.

Nevertheless we should write that golf club and tell them to go out there and rip some sod out of the back portion of that feature at least and create some of that cool little "river bunker" sand effect that is on the other side of that Alp feature.

I still speak a little Dutch---do you want me to tell them?

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #38 on: March 19, 2006, 09:41:05 AM »
Paul:

Actually with the "Alps" at Piping (or the one we used to call the Alps, although it might be a punchbowl) there is basically no way to avoid it. Sometimes we hit it way out to the right into the fairway of the 13th hole but that didn't do much good either. All you could see was a bit more of the pole behind the green.

I wouldn't even bother to analyze the strategy of that hole at Piping because all they did is just use the ground as it was given to them. There was no possiblilty of visibility, so they just went with it the way it was. That sort of thing was obviously more about "connecting the routing".

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #39 on: March 19, 2006, 09:52:55 AM »
Tom

What we need is more duffers like NAF to erode that knob by walking down the other side!




Again a different perspective with more knobs to the right of the green.  Where NAF is heading, naturally.
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #40 on: March 19, 2006, 10:20:06 AM »
Paul:

What is that reddish swath in the bottom photo?

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #41 on: March 19, 2006, 10:23:07 AM »
The red stuff is some kind of grass.  The brown is heather not in bloom...it's a heath course.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 10:23:23 AM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Mike_Cirba

Re:Alps hole
« Reply #42 on: March 19, 2006, 10:26:08 AM »
Paul:

What is that reddish swath in the bottom photo?

..and why does it identically match that thing hanging from Naffer's bag?  

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #43 on: March 19, 2006, 01:24:44 PM »
What importance is given to the individual elements of an "Alps" hole?
How many can you lose and still have an "Alps"?

- Blind approach
- Deep cross bunker/s in front
- Forward kick from barely carrying the fronting bunker/s
- Punchbowl green
- Ridges or spines in these greens
- Echelon bunkering in fairways
« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 01:25:30 PM by Jim_Kennedy »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #44 on: March 19, 2006, 02:00:17 PM »
What importance is given to the individual elements of an "Alps" hole?
How many can you lose and still have an "Alps"?

- Blind approach
- Deep cross bunker/s in front
- Forward kick from barely carrying the fronting bunker/s
- Punchbowl green
- Ridges or spines in these greens
- Echelon bunkering in fairways


Jim, are you actually allowed to ask such a specific, on topic question without flinging arrows at anyone? :)

As mentioned on another thread, I built an Alps inspired hole in Kansas, and considered the first three essential.  

I am not sure the real Alps has a punchbowl, and didn't build my green that way.  Also, I didnt' consider the spines in the green to be critical, and don't know the actual contours at NGLA, so that is less an effect. For that matter, I also extended my green so the modern golfer could see a sliver of it, as a concession.

I kept the fw bunkers pretty true to form, but split it into three for cart access.

John Fought has one at Windsong, and again, its the green end that is most closely copied.  His fw bunkers are similarly located but even less of an angled carry bunker than mine, again suggesting he figured the green end was most important to recapture.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #45 on: March 19, 2006, 02:55:59 PM »
I have a picture of my ownself in the front bunker of the original Alps at Prestwick.

I don't believe that you can bounce the ball onto that green a la #3 at National but must carry the approach onto the green in the air.

Jim Kennedy has raised, as usual, a good question.  What really is the essence of an Alps?

George Bahto set us straight on the real meaning of a Cape hole (the tee ball has nothing to do with it).

George, what is an Alps really all about?

Tom Paul:

My question is: does #9 at The Creek qualify as an Alps?

« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 02:57:26 PM by chipoat »

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2006, 03:16:44 PM »
9 at Creek its ON a hill, not beyond one.

following is the Madonald Alps article - this is HIS idea of an improved Alps for National. There are tons of Alps around but he was basing his idea of Alps on Preswick's.

I spoke with him a little while ago and he said, "listen George you're doing fine, just "cut and paste" our Alps article (1914) on GCA. It will answer allquestions about MY version of Alps."

soooooo:

The Alps Hole at the National Golf Links

Described by C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham


Six or seven years ago when the National Golf Links was first conceived, all the leading golfers of Great Britain were asked to name the best holes in the world.  They were almost unanimous in choosing the Alps at Prestwick as the best two-shot hole, just as most of them selected the Eden hole at St. Andrews as the best short hole.  And this is curious, because the second shot at the Alps is blind from every point of view.  Not only is the putting green invisible, but the very difficult cross bunker in front of the green is equally hidden from view.  Perhaps that is why the hole is so fascinating.  When the player hits his second shot across the summit of the saddle back hill called the Alps he is completely in doubt about the result.  His ball may be on the green close to the hole, or it may have fallen  just short of the green into a  serious hazard, or it may have run over the green into thick bent leaving a difficult down-hill approach.  The margin between the three results is so small that the player is frequently pleasantly or unpleasantly disappointed when he comes to the top of the hill and surveys the result beneath him.  The green lies in a hollow with the bunker in front and a high bank behind.  If the ball carries far enough to get over the bunker by only a foot it gets a running fall and may go right past the hole into the bent beyond.  Therefore the difference between being in the bunker short of the green or in the bent beyond the green is often the difference of two or three feet in the carry.  And so the hole is so blind that it is calculated to produce the acme of  uncertainty and anxiety in the heart of the player.  The popularity of  the Alps is a proof that not all blind holes are bad; also that if you must have a blind hole it should provide as much uncertainty as possible.  But there is also another reason why the second shot at the Alps is such a good one, and that is because to make sure of getting on to the green and staying there the player must make a high shot with a long carry and very little run which is perhaps the most golfer-like stroke in the game.  If he can make this stroke he can afford to carry well over the bunker, even past the flag, and still stay on the green within easy putting distance of  the hole.

The Alps at Prestwick is about 380 yards at its extreme length, and therefore is a far better hole for the "gutty" ball than for the rubber-cored.  In the old days it was a real achievement to carry the Alps in two shots; now the second shot is often a mashie pitch.  And at Prestwick the hole cannot be lengthened because the green of the sixteenth hole is right behind the tee.  In this respect the Alps at the National has an advantage because there is plenty of room for extension.  From the back tee the distance is actually 413 yards.  Moreover, the putting green at the National is on a higher level than the fair green in  front of the tee which makes the second shot longer.  Also the hill itself  which represents the Alps is higher than the Prestwick hill, so that the second shot is altogether  more formidable.

Another difference is the bunkering of the tee-shot.  At Prestwick there is a long diagonal bunker, really an extension of the famous Cardinal, in front of the tee.  The carry increases in distance from left to right.  At the National there is a similar bunker, but the carry is generally a good deal longer.  And the principle of the shot is different.  At Prestwick the best line to play is a little to the left of the direct line to the hole.  The reason  for  this is the existence of a steep grass mound right in the center of the course about 190 yards from the tee.  This mound is sure to interfere with the second shot if the tee-shot is played straight on the flag; consequently the best line is a little to the left where there is a narrow neck between the mound and a large bunker called Purgatory.  The tee-shot is interesting because it must be very straight through the neck if the second shot is to be made easy.  But since the best direction  is to the left there is no object in taking the long carry off  the tee; in fact the carry off  the tee becomes almost negligible.  At the National the conditions are almost opposite.  A long tee-shot played directly on the flag or anywhere to the left of the flag leaves the ball at the foot of the large hill called the Alps, and the second shot is then extremely difficult; for the ball must be raised abruptly and must still have a very long flight.  The best line is to the right where the hill slopes down to the level and where the ball will get a longer roll and the second shot is much easier.  But to get to the right the long carry must be taken off the tee, and when the tee is back the extreme carry is nearly yards.  Therefore although the Prestwick tee-shot has to be placed rather more exactly, the National tee-shot is more spectacular.  And at the National the second shot is more difficult on account of the extra length and the higher position of the green.  In other words the third hole at the National is an improved Alps, and as a test of golf it is beyond reproach.  It is impossible to reach the green in two unless both the tee-shot and the second are real big golfing strokes, hit in the middle of the club, and that can be said of very few holes with a maximum distance of only 413 yards.  

« Last Edit: March 19, 2006, 03:17:32 PM by George_Bahto »
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2006, 04:46:07 PM »
George,
   Thanks for the definition. Now get back to work, we are expecting a book from you. :)
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2006, 04:51:07 PM »
I will report back on the Brauer Alps in May. :)
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Alps hole
« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2006, 04:51:28 PM »
So basically, it doesn't matter whether one must carry onto the green or not?

It's just the hill, itself?

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back