[Patrick_Mucci]

No, I"m not talking about flying with TEPaul as your pilot.

I"m talking about greens that fall away from the fronting fairway WITH a substantive hazard behind them.

The 10th at GCGC would be a prime example.
The 13th at GCGC a lesser example.

In concept, the golfers approach is better off if it goes beyond the hole, allowing the golfer the prefered putt back up the incline, however, the risk of going too long is great.

The 10th at GCGC has a horseshoe shaped, deep, yet narrow bunker surrounding the back of the green.

Shots that go long pay a good price.
Shots that are short face a difficult downhill/sidehill chip or putt, usually requiring three (3) strokes.

While the terrain has to be favorable in order to create this configuration, with all of the earth moving equipment why don't we see more of these greens ?

The other neat feature with these greens is the lack of definition from the fairway, because the putting surface can't be observed, the approach presents uncertainty in the mind of the golfer, which is another reason why these greens are desirable.

What other holes have pronounced front to back slopes with a substantive hazard directly behind the green ?

And, why don't we see more of them.

Eliminate Redans for the purpose of discussion.

[Jason Blasberg]

Pat:

I've never found the 10th at GCGC that exacting.

Try the 13th at Engineers on for size, the front right pin is the most difficult pin placement to get close to that is used regularly.  A very good shot landing just 10-15 feet left of the pin will release down toward the left of the green about 40 feet.  Anything short will come back down the false front.  The play is long and to the right, but with the tree gate protecting the right half of the green from any approach that is not from the left half of the fairway a major cut (for righties) is required to get it close.  

13 is one of the reasons I find Engineers FAR more interesting to play on a daily basis than any other course that I've played in Nassau County.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

The 2nd hole at Myopia has a green that falls gently away from the approach shot. This is excellent as it's a short par 5. The 16th green at Myopia is a downhill par 3 whose green falls away from the golfer. Neither hole as that much in the way of penalty behind the green though. They added some tee length to the 16th at Myopia and even for very good golfers I think that was the wrong thing to do. It can make the hole perhaps ridiculously intense.

One of the best fall-away greens I've seen recently is Gil Hanse's par 5 15th at Inniscrone.

But to me the Mother of all fall-away greens are at Oakmont---eg #1, #10 and the ultra strategic #12.

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

We toured Sunnehanna pretty quickly that day we were heading west via Bedford Springs on our way to Oakmont and Columbus.  That was my only time at Sunnehanna, but Tillinghast did a wonderful job with many greens that sloped front to back.  I can't recall the backs of those holes very well.  I know you know the course pretty well and of course John Yerger really knows it.  Those fall away greens really seem to test the approaches and require precise ground or aerial shot options in many cases.

[TEPaul]

You're right, the 3rd at Sunnehanna is a really excellent front to back filtering green. Maybe filtering ain't the right word. TRUCKIN' would probably be more appropriate given some of the shots we saw coming in there.

[Bill_McBride]

But to me the Mother of all fall-away greens are at Oakmont---eg #1, #10 and the ultra strategic #12.

Tom, I thought immediately of the fall-away greens at Oakmont, all three you mention, but don't those each, particularly #1 and #10, have slight mounding at the rear which prevents long shots from getting into too much trouble?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul, et. al.,

The critical feature is the penal bunker behind the fall away green.

That's what creates the dilema.

What are some examples of other greens that present this configuration ?

Jason,

Next spring we'll do a home and home.

[ForkaB]

The 6th at Kingsbarns is cool and has that feature (think of a driveable par-4 with a DA-style bunker hidden at the back to catch the slightly overhit but overwise perfect drive).  That being said, it's a nice novelty, but not something I'd want to encounter more than once in a round.

[Jason Blasberg]

Jason,

Next spring we'll do a home and home.

Deal, but we have a no saws-all policy at Engineers!  

[Jason Blasberg]

Pat, the 10th does significantly run away from you but I've not found it that difficult to get up and down, but I've only had about 4 cracks at it.

[Jason Blasberg]

Then again your question was about the approach, not the 3rd.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Then again your question was about the approach, not the 3rd.

Jason,

But, the approach is intricately linked to the third.

The rear bunker is narrow and fairly deep and right behind the green by about 2-3 paces.

When the greens are firm and fast, getting the ball below the hole is a real challenge.

Being conservative and leaving the ball above the hole will ususally result in a bogey, or worse.

[M. Shea Sweeney]

I have always had trouble getting the distance correct on my second shot on the 10th. I always want to play less yardage.

Last time I played I had around 125-130 left, flag was in the back Left, wind was at the back and the course was playing pretty fast. Hit wedge pretty hard and was 10 yards short.

With the hole location where it was, it had me nervous about going long. I played conservative and it left me with a difficult up and down.
Good hole.


What seems like a easy approach turns into some hell if you fail to execute.

[Patrick_Mucci]

MShea Sweeney,

Most of the caddies advise that the hole plays 1/2 to 1 club shorter, however, that contemplates an approach to the center of the green, therefore, I like to play it to the yardage or 1/2 a club short.

As the greens get firmer, it will become a dicier and dicier shot.

[Glenn Spencer]

The first at NCR South- 458 par 4 has an elevated front part of the green that all flows to the center and the back of the green. If you fly a 6-iron or lower into a front pin and it hits the downslope or doesn't have enough spin on it and it makes its way into the back bunker. Well, you would be in a world of hurt. 6 would be very easy to make and 7 pretty possible.

[JESII]

Glenn,

Is that 6 or 7 potential due to the nature of the bunker?

[Glenn Spencer]

JES,

I would say no, unless you get into the downslope of it. If the pin is up front, you would have a very tough time keeping it up on the aforementioned ridge. It would be very difficult to get it up the ridge in the first place and have it stay there. If you were going to try and carry the bunker shot to the ridge, the risk of rolling of the front would bring all sorts of numbers into play. If it happened to me, I could very easily see just playing out short and hoping to 2-putt for my 5, although that wouldn't be simple as I would say there would be about a 20-30% chance of 3-jacking from 20 feet and the odds would get greater from further away quickly. If you try and make 4, you could make anything on this hole. Only with a front pin though, I have only seen the pin there about 1 out of 7-8 times that I play there. It really makes a hard hole, one of the hardest in the country, it can be absolutely BRUTAL.

[JESII]

Thanks Glenn, from your first post it sounded as though the bunker was extremely penal. It sounds like the green is just really intense, and coming at the end of a long difficult hole would sure make it one of the hardest in the country, especially as an opener.

[Glenn Spencer]

The first 30% of the green is very intense. I have always tried to think of a hole that I have played that reminds of #1 at NCR and I can't think of any at that length of the top of my head. I do remember from 94 that 10 at Oakmont is front to back like that, but not with the elevation and I don't remember about there being a bunker in back.

[Jay Flemma]

15 at Paa-ko Ridge is a good one too!

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

If you'll remember, the first and maybe the most important thing I did at Garden City was to get them to take out the flowering cherry tree behind the tenth green.  It gave the hole too much background, made the approach a bit less scary, and blocked a great long view.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

That one act probably did more and resulted in more positive, ongoing work at GCGC and other clubs than is imaginable

I never like that Cherry Tree behind the green, but, I know that many members did.  What was really startling was the dramatic effect its removal had upon that hole.

In addition, the effect rippled further down the golf course all the way to the 16th tee.

The views, or rather, vistas from the 10th tee, and forward, all the way to the 16th tee are stunning.

If anything, the removal of that lone tree demonstrated to golfers, the enormous benefit of returning the golf course to its natural state, without framing, decorative or random trees interfering with play and visuals.

The removal of that one tree so enhanced the look and play of the 10th hole that it's quite remarkable.

One has to wonder about the, who, when and why was a framing tree ever planted behind that green ?  And, why it survived as long as it did.

[Ted Kramer]

Here are some interesting thoughts on the topic by A.W. Tillinghast from the book, "The Course Beautiful" . . .

" . . .The best players will tell you that they like to play to a green that stands well up in the back. This is not a new observervation, and yet the country is fairly cluttered with symmetrical "pancakey" greens, which slope away from the line of play in a most brazen manner. They are utterly worthless and heartily cursed by every true golfer, and yet, strange to say, a great many similar putting greens are being built today. Such ignorance is inexcusable.

Naturally, those greens which are to be gained by lofted shots from iron clubs should slope more into shots than those which, under ordinary conditions, are reached by the finish of balls running from wood. The irons are designed to create underspin or "stop," and unless the green faces properly this spin cannot become effective. No matter how crisply played by master hands, a ball falling upon a receding green can get no bite. . ."

There are a number of other "interesting" opinions offered in chapter 22, Featuring Putting Greens, in The Course Beautiful. Here is a quick example:

" . . .What could be more unfair than the introduction of pronounced undulations in a green upon which the player is supposed to pitch? It is obvious that two balls, each receiving the same same amount of under-cut, might strike within a foot of each other, one on the ascending slope and the other just beyond, where the ground falls away. Every golfer knows the action of these two balls and appreciates how much the element of luck has figured. Consequently undulations should be reserved for greens other than those upon which we are to pitch . . ."

Pretty interesting, huh?

-Ted

[Ted Kramer]

I was really hoping that those AWT quotes mentioned above would drum up some conversation. . .

-Ted

[Tom_Doak]

Ted:

I didn't want to comment on your quotes because I didn't want to embarrass Mr. Tillinghast.  I don't agree with a lot of what he wrote, in addition to the fact that it's very formulaic.

I think he might look at the subject of back-to-front greens differently today, when every player can spin the ball on an approach shot.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()