[Jim Sweeney]

Been picking my way through Wind's "The Story of American Golf" recently. On page 514 of the USGA commemorative edition he discusses Dick Wilson's involvement with Toomey and Flynn in re-doing Shinnecock in 1928. He credits Wilson with the majority of the work. There is this passage:

"To me Shinnecock affords any golfer a most pleasant eighteen holes of golf," Ben Hogan once wrote his friend Paul Shields. "By this I mean each hole is different and requires a great amount of skill to play it properly. As I think back, each hole has complete definition."

As I go through Shinnecock's holes in my head (pun intended), I see many areas where there is not a lot of what I would call definition. On hole #10, for example, the landing area is blind, and on the approach the player cannot see the entire green and there is little in the way of trees or shrubbery to give any sense of depth perception. Is this hole well defined?

Many of the new courses favored by posters here are examples, in my opinion, of lack of definition. This is demonstrated by shoulder bunkers morphing into the surrounding terrain (Sand Hills, the Ocean COurse, We-Ko-Pa Suguaro), skyline greens, blind shots (Black Mesa), etc.

I would think Winged Foot West is well defined by trees, maintained rough, and sharp edged bunkers.

Will someone please tell me what the definition of definition is?

[TEPaul]

Jim:

On Shinnecock's #10 there are two bunkers on either side not far off the tee. They are probably there for a single reason---eg to create definition of where to drive the ball.

[JESII]

Here's a shot...some people define definition on the golf course as 'showing the player what to do the first time around'. Other people define definition as 'providing reminders as to the proper path on the second and subsequent trips around the course'.

Definitively!

[wsmorrison]

Jim,

Wind, like many others, was duped by misstatements by Wilson.  The design of Shinnecock Hills is completely Flynn's alone.  The 3rd green may not be Flynn, although billing records indicate it is.  Everything else on the course is provable to be Flynn except for the current tee on the 7th hole.  The 3rd green has always been problematic and seems to have a different soil structure.  Perhaps there is some remnants of Macdonald's green, though Flynn altered the shape (you can still make out some of the squared corners of the original green) or maybe this was poorly constructed.  This might have to do with an issue that Wilson brought upon himself.

Wilson worked on the construction crew, always under a foreman, usually William Gordon or Red Lawrence.  Gordon was the foreman for the job at Shinnecock Hills.  He was stricken by pleurisy for several weeks and Wilson was put in charge of constructing according to Flynn's detailed plans.  Well, Wilson took it upon himself to make alterations to the plans on a few greens.  When Gordon came back and found out what Wilson did, he immediately informed Flynn who came to the site enraged at Wilson's liberties.  Flynn wanted him fired on the spot but Gordon intervened and had Wilson remove all that he did while Gordon made sure the greens were constructed properly and precisely according to Flynn's highly detailed plans that left no room for interpretation.

[JESII]

I'm going to change my answer...

In the context of this discuaaion and golf, I think Hogan defines DEFINITION 100% completely opposite to how most on here define OPTIONS.

I think he's saying that each of the 18 holes at Shinnecock has one best way to be played for each player. What he does not say, so don't jump off the bridge Wayne, is that every type of player needs to be observant and patient and they may find the best way to play the course, hole-by-hole.

[Tom_Doak]

This is one of those terms which is just thrown around a lot because everyone takes it as a great compliment.  I don't think Mr. Hogan was above using it in that context.  He really liked courses where all the hazards were clearly visible, and though some are not at Shinnecock, they are clearly implied.

[JESII]

implied.

?

[Marty Bonnar]

Jim,
that is a brilliant QM - and one upon which I'd dearly like to hear TD expand.

Tom,
'implied hazards'. For 40% of the overall mark, discuss the meaning and interpretation of this phrase.
Note: Marks will be added for the use of examples.

FBD.

[Jim Sweeney]

So, in GCA context, does the word definintion have any meaning or appropriate use?

Does "definintion" mean few options, and "lack of definition: more options?

[Tom_Doak]

Martin:

I was just agreeing with what Tom Paul had said before.  You can't always see the landing areas clearly at Shinnecock, but where you can't, Flynn tended to put visible bunkers in the foreground or background by which you could line up the target zone.  (Examples:  the two fairway bunkers at the top of the hill on 10; the bunkers through the fairway on 14; the drive at the ninth is the only exception because I don't think Flynn visualized anyone would drive it where Tiger does, but the clubhouse provides a reference on that hole.)

My bad to say that the hazards were implied; I meant the safe landing area was implied by the positioning of visible hazards, and if you strayed from that, you could expect to find trouble.

Years ago (1981) I played with a member at St. Louis CC which has many blind driving hazards, and I asked him if that bothered him.  He replied not at all ... he knew that if he hit a bad drive he could expect to find his ball in one of them.

[TEPaul]

"I meant the safe landing area was implied by the positioning of visible hazards, and if you strayed from that, you could expect to find trouble."

I like that term "implled" a lot in this context.

If you think about it that's a great way to go if any kind of visual identification of where and where not to hit the ball is sought after on some landforms.

If that technique wasn't used and absolute visibiltly of all landing zones was some requiremnt or necessary standard (which is of course total bullshit) just think of all the cool landforms architects would have to bypass.

The trouble with a lot of golf architecture critics is they fail to recognize this or probably were never even aware of it.

Routing a course in some topography would probably become virtually impossible (unless huge areas of landscape were changed).

[JESII]

Guys, can we peal back a layer or two on this "implied" hazard or "implied" safe zone idea?

For starters, the left hand of those two fairway bunkers on #10 at Shinnecock does no such thing from the current tee. Is there reason to believe that tee has been moved right since originally built? Today, that bunker indicates that anything near that line is probably going to be lost 20 yards deep in the left fescue...assuming a 225 tee shot. The right hand bunker is probably 15 or 20 yards wide and is about halfway from the tee to the top of the hill. If my geometry lessons are remembered correctly, that would mean it "implies a 30 to 40 yard wide area out in the landing zone. Half of that area is fairway, half is rough. Clearly, I will learn over time which part of the bunker will get me into the best position but if its original intention was for it to imply either fairway or rough, I would say Flynn failed. Even if the fairway originally went over to the outer edge of the bunkers implied area, the player is not rewarded for being over there, it would be a false reward if you ask me.


Might we be falling into the trap of overanalysis?

Tom Doak,

Have you ever built a bunker that "implies" a fairway?

[TEPaul]

"Might we be falling into the trap of overanalysis?"

No, I don't think so. That certainly wasn't the only time Flynn did things like that. Same thing on the 2nd hole at CC of Cleveland. Just because he wasn't as fixated on geometry and precise straight lines as you seem to be doesn't mean he didn't imply this kind of thing with some of his bunkering.

Listen Sully, you have to realize what he was generally after here and not how mathematically accurate he did it. Don't forget both Toomey and Flynn were a couple of real drinkers. So what the F... if their architectural aim was off sometimes?

If they'd had breathilizer tests back in that day like they do today both those guys wouldn't have been able to do one quarter of the courses they did.

[TEPaul]

Furthermore, Sullivan, the bunkers Doak uses for this kind of thing don't actually "imply" precisely where the fairway is, they sort of vaguely "suggest" where it "might" be. Doak just has never been big into blatant architectural hand-holding with golfers. But Devie Emmet sure was and that's exactly why he has always been considered the best in history at gay golf course architecture.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom Doak,

Have you ever built a bunker that "implies" a fairway?

I won't speak for Doak, but Willie Park and Seth Raynor sure did.

Park uses a large bunker on the present 13th hole of the PSU White Course to "imply" that there is fairway behind it. The tee shot is blind to the landing zone from the tee and all the golfer sees is the massive fairway bunker with fairway left. The temptation lies in carrying the fairway bunker (approx. 210 to carry) and the tee points the golfer right at the left edge of the bunker.

Part of my restoration plan has this tee expanded and the new tee box built in 2004 to be brought back down to grade level to restore the doubt in regard to the carry.

[JESII]

Kyle,

If I went to the White Course and stood on the 13th tee, would I know there is fairway beyond that bunker? Seems to me that I would considering you say I could see fairway left of the bunker but nowhere else. If so, then the bunker would seem to be a risk/reward opportunity. If not, then what about its presence would tell me the fairway is beyond it?


I think the white rocks used in Ireland are the only "implied" markers we see on a golf course...I do not yet believe the old time architects were implying a fairway was somewhere through the use of a bunker.

[Kyle Harris]

Jim,

Sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying. There is no fairway beyond the bunker. The correct play is actually well to the left. The tee and the blind nature of the hole lead to the golfer thinking there might be fairway, or at least having to guess where the fairway ends over the bunker.

[JESII]

Well then, that fits into Tom Doak's "implied" hazard idea...unfortunately he backed off that position...

Which side is preferred for the approach?

[Kyle Harris]

Well then, that fits into Tom Doak's "implied" hazard idea...unfortunately he backed off that position...

Which side is preferred for the approach?

The right side.

This was the case with a lot of Park Par 5s, where hazards and green orientation forces the golfer to zigzag down the hole. While the hole plays downhill, the 540 yards plays like 540 on the level because the golfer has to zig zag down. Hazards are placed such that this zigzagging is not without danger, and especially on the second shot, where OB lurks. The other Park Par 5 at the White Course is a VERY short 450 yard uphill proposition, but again, the golfer must play to opposite edges on each ensuing shot making the hole play effectively longer.

Also nicely, golfers playing down the wrong side find their options to get back to the optimum position for the approach compromised by hazard placement and angles of attack into that position not as easy from the other side of the fairway. So the poor angles compound themselves unless an excellent "recovery" is made.

[JESII]

Kyle,

I appreciate your appreciation for the zig-zag demand Park places on the golfer, but tell me something if you know...was the area beyond the bunker on #13 fairway when originally built?

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

I appreciate your appreciation for the zig-zag demand Park places on the golfer, but tell me something if you know...was the area beyond the bunker on #13 fairway when originally built?

The million dollar question, and I suppose you've been looking at the diagram on the My Home Course (it's the long hole on the very top). Park's design drawing have the fairway edge about a quarter of the way over the bunker from the tee perspective, so there is some fairway over it, but the bunker masks the true edge of the fairway and I have photographic evidence that the edge of the fairway in FRONT of the bunker and in view from the tee is further right than the edge beyond.

At that distance, I think as designed in 1922 that bunker was very much in play for the tee shot and most of the play may have been directly in front. It's still the incorrect side from which to approach and the size and nature of the bunker in front of you on the second shot would be very intimidating, even today. The long hitters of the day may have been tempted to play over it since a 210 carry wasn't out of the question either, but that hitter would be served better by playing out left, getting a better angle and something of a turbo boost as well. If you look at the MHC diagram, note the tree line and how it sorta sneaks in later on down the hole on the right side.

Here it is lifted from my My Home Course, the hole starts on the top right, was the 11th back then.

[JESII]

Kyle,

As you know, I have never seen this hole and I am having a tough time getting my hands around the whole idea of that bunker "implying" anything. It looks like it might be the angle I would take today if the fairway were restored. In the time it was built, what percentage of golfers could carry it 210? 1% maybe?

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

As you know, I have never seen this hole and I am having a tough time getting my hands around the whole idea of that bunker "implying" anything. It looks like it might be the angle I would take today if the fairway were restored. In the time it was built, what percentage of golfers could carry it 210? 1% maybe?

Jim,

I question the accuracy of that diagram, I took it from a map of the whole campus. No photograph, Park drawing or recollection has the fairway ever being over that bunker, but it does in front.

The left side of the hole from about 180 in to the green falls sharply away and any ball down there is more likely to kick into a hazard or down the hill more. The angle into the green is coming over the deep bunker on the left side. The right side of the fairway from 200 or so is in near level or just above the green and has a more open look to all the hole locations.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()