[Bill Gayne]

Two of CB McDonald's most celebrated holes are the 14th hole at NGLA which was originally built as a 310 yard (now 360) and  the fifth at Mid Ocean Club. The fifth is also a cape hole of 433 yards.

NGLA

http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1914/gi5h.pdf



Mid Ocean



www.themidoceanclubbermuda.com

Which hole is the more potentially dangerous to your score? Is it counter intuitive that the better player be aggressive on the longer hole and conservative on the shorter hole?

[Forrest Richardson]

I think the better Cape is the par-5 — reachable. This places an option with the lower scoring golfer...and it does not take the stratagy away from the higher scoring golfer. Both will have fun.

At the short par-4 you are not taking advantage of the "cape" aspect...that is, playing with angles. Approaches might be only a few clubs apart. While at the lonfger hole, approaches can range from mid-irons to the longest club available.

[Andrew Balakshin]

It does seem kind of funny that the original cape hole would be a par 4. I wonder why it got so famous for its risk/reward strategy and was only a par 4 (and not 5).

[Andrew Balakshin]

Another thing,

My guess would be that a short cape hole (par 4) would be more difficult around the green than a long cape hole (which is also a par 4).

In all honesty though, I don’t think yardage has that much to do with the difficulty on a par 4 cape hole, I would think green slope, bunkers, and trees (along the cape) would have a much bigger effect on a player’s score.

I think a par 4 with a couple trees along the cape would actually work a lot like a par 5. This would have a huge effect on the difficulty of the second shot depending if the player tried to clear the trees or not (even if it was only a par 4).

[E. Jean-Marc Monrad]

I just played Mid ocean the other day and thought it was terrific.  I think that the cape element of "biting off as much as one can chew" is largely not relevent for many good players anymore.  My cousin who is long could have thrown it all the way into the neck if he had wanted.  Our caddy told him that this was not his prefered line though simply because of the weird fairway countours.

I think there are two great cape holes at Cuscowilla one of which is very hard and the other fairly easy.  Both great.

With 40-50 yards added to the mid ocean hole it would really be amazing especially to a back left pin position.  One must not only clear the lake but prefers to be on the far right side of the fairway to approach that pin.  Great deep bunker in front otherwise (I was in this bunker to that pin and it is not an easy shot).  Great Redan green as well...better for long irons in my opinion which right now few are forced to hit into this green.

[Bill_McBride]

Jean-Marc, have they cleared away the small trees/brush along the waters edge?  The hole would look so much better if they would do so at Mid-Ocean.

At Cuscowilla, are you talking about #4 and #10, both doglegs right with cape-style tee shots?  #10 is more of a true cape hole, with the peninsula green, at least the drop off on the right.  According to George Bhato, the true cape hole has a green which is peninsular in design and projects into trouble a la Mid-Ocean #5.

[E. Jean-Marc Monrad]

They have cleared it away to the extent that it looks slightly more open then what they have in the picture.  I agree though that it would be better if they cleared the entire coastline.

[E. Jean-Marc Monrad]

Oh, intersting...did not know about the peninsula aspect of the green on a cape hole.  One does not want to miss long though on number four though it not bordered by water.

[Bill_McBride]

A miss too long at #4 Cuscowilla is OB in that yard, right?

[Jim Johnson]

Scenes below are from a project which we continue to try to put together in western Canada, assuming that Whitman and Mingay have some time on their hands down the road  

Below are photos taken of an idea which I will throw out there, basically a "cape" hole; whether it would become a par-4 or a par-5 is another story. Personally, I like Forrest's idea of a "reachable" par-5 being the "best" type of cape hole.

The photo below is from a possible back tee location. In the center of the pic [shot in early Spring] are 4 trees in the wetlands area...a shot played directly over the tallest of those trees would require an estimated carry of 220-230 yards. Note how the landing zone slopes gradually upwards to help "receive" the tee shot...


Below is another view [shot last Summer] of "the hole", from higher to the right [possible forward tee locations perhaps?], giving you a better indication of what we're looking at...


And this last photo shows the view from the landing zone to one of several green sites...par-4?...par-5?...



Comments or thoughts are appreciated.

JJ

[TEPaul]

JJohnson:

In my view with a really fanastic landorm like the one in the photo it would be essential to get at least the back tee as far left as could reasonably be done for a tee shot of mximum risk and reward carry-wise.

Regarding the Macdonald cape holes of NGLA and Mid Ocean I feel the tee shot on Mid Ocean's is probably one of the most ideal in the world. NGLA's cape hole is actually a more complex tee shot than most realize due to danger on the right that cannot be seen well from the tee and the really undulating fairway. It's something, however, to contemplate the way NGLA's 14th once was with the hole shorter and the green basically placed well to the right of its present position out in the water. (The necessity of a new road to the clubhouse precipated moving the green to the left and more in-line with the general direction of the hole).

Speaking of cape holes----there was one designed as Pine Valley's #14 which both on paper and on the ground looked to be truly amazing. From the back tee it was probably a par 4 of around 310 yards around the fairway on the left but with a carry right at the green of around 250. In option and shot value it actually looked somewhat similar to Cypress Point's #16. So why wasn't it done? My guess is it was given up because it may've compromised #15 as a par 5. The fact was at that point Crump had only two holes left to do and he simply needed one to be a par 3 and the other a par 5.

[Phil_the_Author]

Forrest, you wrote, "I think the better Cape is the par-5 — reachable. This places an option with the lower scoring golfer...and it does not take the stratagy away from the higher scoring golfer. Both will have fun."

The 12th hole at WFW is a cape (its is even it's name!) and I'm surprised how no one has yet mentioned it.

I think this is a good example of how yechnology can greatly affect a golf hole for the worse. It was originally a 497-yard par-five from the championship tees and was reachable in 2. Both Jones & Espinoza went for it in 1929.

Now, even the "up tee" at 570+ used by the USGA made it very unlikely that anyone would give it a go & from the back tee 640+ meant no one would. The design of the hole then became destroyed.

Lest the USGA be blamed for this, the PGA pushed it back to 560 for 1997 & the membership purchased the land for the new tee & installed that in preparation for the Open.

[Jerry Kluger]

According to what I read in George Bahto's book, the "Cape" aspect of the hole has to do with the green looking suspended in a body of water or other hazard and not the angle of the tee shot over a hazard.  It seems that MacDonald did some revisions at the 14th at NGLA because of technology advances and never changed the name.  

[Hunt]

The Cape as a Par 4 in the way CBM intended is the better choice.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Forrest is probably right that the cape is great as a par 5.  I also prefer it as a long par 4 over a short par 4.  If the hole is too short, no smart player will risk going anywhere near the water, as long as the approach is still under 150 or so.  

On a 450 yard plus par 4, the Cape tee shot possibly makes the difference in approach length from over 170 to under 150, it has more meaning.

[Hunt]

Jeff,

I dunno 'bout that. Suppose that short Par 4 has a tight neck that opens up considerably if you hit a high fade so that the risk-reward is in the tee shot? The risk left is bunkers and the risk right is water.

Remember, the approach is a green surrounded by hazard so that a bunker shot or high rough from inside of 125-150 is not the desired play.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I didn't say it was impossible to do a good short cape hole.  Just that generally, I prefer the longer ones.  At Fortune Bay in MN, all we had room for on the shores of Lake Vermillion was a 340 yard Cape hole, and its fine.

I am not totally in sync with your desription, but if the high fade is a layup to avoid a short shot to the green, it seems incongruous on a Cape hole to have the reward come from a layup rather than a long carry.

Conservative play is exactly what a narrow neck with water right, bunker left would promote, when the Cape concept is to promote aggressive play, no?

[Andrew Balakshin]

Scenes below are from a project which we continue to try to put together in western Canada, assuming that Whitman and Mingay have some time on their hands down the road  

Below are photos taken of an idea which I will throw out there, basically a "cape" hole; whether it would become a par-4 or a par-5 is another story. Personally, I like Forrest's idea of a "reachable" par-5 being the "best" type of cape hole.

The photo below is from a possible back tee location. In the center of the pic [shot in early Spring] are 4 trees in the wetlands area...a shot played directly over the tallest of those trees would require an estimated carry of 220-230 yards. Note how the landing zone slopes gradually upwards to help "receive" the tee shot...


Below is another view [shot last Summer] of "the hole", from higher to the right [possible forward tee locations perhaps?], giving you a better indication of what we're looking at...


And this last photo shows the view from the landing zone to one of several green sites...par-4?...par-5?...



Comments or thoughts are appreciated.

JJ

Jjohnson:

Great pictures! Do you think you could post some more pictures of the site?

[Jim Johnson]

Jerry,
I always thought that a Cape hole was known for its angle of the tee shot over a hazard, moreso than the green site itself. Interesting. Maybe George could chime in here with some thoughts.

Andrew,
I could certainly post more pics of the site, I just don't want to bore you guys too much. I'll post one or two more in a few minutes.

JJ

[Jim Johnson]

Okay Andrew, you asked for it. Not one, but four pics, hope they aren't too much...

The photo below [taken Thanksgiving weekend last year, just before the snows came] is of an area which we all agree [including Jeff Mingay, currently working out in British Columbia on "Sagebrush" with Rod Whitman & ex-PGA'er Richard Zokol, and who popped by for a quick site visit in the Spring] could become a par-4 hole, approximately 425 yards, with the green site somewhere directly in front of the toe of the ridge coming down. The old fence is simply a quarter-section line, but the current owners own 10 quarter sections, including the two valleys which we are looking into, so that "fence" is a non-issue. And those aren't rocks in the foreground, they're cowpies, from a herd of about 150 which frequent these parts every summer for three months.



The image below is of an area which "could" produce a long par-5 hole, the landing zone anywhere in front of the "butte", with the approach shot skirting the left side of it, the greensite out of sight beyond. A definite 3-shot hole. Again, this photo is from Thanksgiving weekend last year.



The photo below is from last Winter, and shows the area of what we consider to be the second hole, a par-5 of some 550 yards [we are extremely limited in variety of routing possibilities for the 1st, 2nd, 17th, & 18th holes, owing to the fact that they will be in this smaller valley...separate from the other valley in previous photos]. The clubhouse will, in all likelihood, be sited way up top on the ridge in the far left of this photo, the first hole's teeboxes high on the slope of the ridge, the fairway off to the left in this photo, a par-4 of some 450 yards. Quite an opener, we think.
Anyway,the thought for this second hole [photo taken from probable back-tee location] is to imitate the opening hole of Hurdzan's "Devil's Pulpit" course in Ontario, basically a mirror image [flip-flopped] of that hole, to some degree anyway. The creekbed here will have to be relocated way over to the base of the ridge on the left, to get it out of play as much as possible. Then, one or two diagonal fairway bunkers would be placed into the far bank of the existing creekbed, giving golfers the choice of flying their tee shot over the bunkers to the "upper" part of the fairway, giving them a better angle to the green [somewhere just in front of the "cut" in the ridge in the distance for the railway line] and a shot at reaching the green in two. The risk of that choice of play comes from o.b. on the railway line. The option would be to play safe to the left of the bunkers, to the lower fairway, but would result in a longer angle to the green.



And this last photo [hope I haven't burdened you guys with too many] gives you an impression of the undulations in the bottom of this part of the valley. The photo was also taken last Winter. I "posed" for this shot [I'm standing about 125 yards away] to give a better perspective of the scale of the valley.


JJ  

[Andrew Balakshin]

Thanks again for the new pictures. The site really reminds me of a course north of LA called Rustic Canyon. The Rustic Canyon course had similar looking hills although the valley bottom was a little flatter, and more arid. That’s too bad the cape hole can’t be used as a finishing hole since you mentioned the opening and closing holes were pretty much preset. It looks like it could have made an awesome finisher.

I saw the Sagebrush site (that you were talking about) from the road a couple weeks ago and it looks like it will be an amazing course. They have apparently started construction since I saw it. I hope to get down there again one of these days and get a better look at the property.

Ps. I also didn't know about a peninsula green being one of the prerequisites for a “true” cape hole.

[Jim Johnson]

Sorry guys, two more pics...

Andrew, this would be the proposed 18th hole. If it is to be a par-4, this would be the view from the tee. The ridge in the distance is about 350 yards away, and the clubhouse would be sited on the top of that ridge, approximately in the upper center of the photograph [the first hole's teeboxes would be on the other side of that ridge]. The greensite for this 18th hole would be somewhere near the toe of the ridge, around past the dark brown grasses on the left, occupied by a meandering creek [and which would be made into a reservoir]. Options from here would include an attempt for the green on the teeshot...or a teeshot between the creek/reservoir on the left and a fairway bunker, placed into the depression in the middle of the photo [now occupied by a snowpatch], resulting in a wedge in to the green...or a "bailout" teeshot to the right of the snowpatch/fairway bunker, leaving one with a longer approach into the green.



Below is an image of the "hole" from behind the greensite area, looking back at "the shelf" which I was standing on [in right center] while taking the first photo. It gives you an idea of the natural slope of the valley down toward the creek/reservoir.


JJ

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()