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.


Ryan Farrow

Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #25 on: March 17, 2007, 01:41:19 PM »
Tom, is the reason more architecturally significant holes aren’t being built a direct result of modern shaping and the tendency to bulldoze natural features? Of course there are exceptions of great holes being built on flat land a la 10 at Riviera and as a modern example 2 at Talking Stick North. On the other hand many more truly great holes rely on unique natural contours and features like the hill and green site of 18 at Riviera and the use of the desert wash on 12 at TSN. I would imagine it is a lot harder to build a truly unique hole out of nothing than it is to capitalize on unique feature. Just another reason why minimalist do it better?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #26 on: March 17, 2007, 04:10:09 PM »
Ryan:

More like just another reason that courses on good sites tend to be better, regardless of what architect builds them or what style he professes to have.

Mike:

I like both holes you mentioned, I just don't think there is anything about them that's architecturally special ... perhaps the first with its green orientation does fall into that category, but it's still not a "9" for me.  To me, the ninth is the next best hole after the ones which we agreed on.  I love that green and don't remember seeing another quite like it.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2007, 04:11:50 PM by Tom_Doak »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #27 on: March 17, 2007, 04:18:46 PM »
I've never looked at the drawing of the Reef hole that closely before, I always wished I could have seen an example of the real thing.  But I have two observations about it:

1.  Tom Paul is right, the lay-up option is never going to be considered by most people on a par 3.  It would perhaps be a better green complex for a short par 5.

2.  What are all the options that are being talked about?  Basically Tillie just drew a bunch of different dashed lines here.  One is a lay-up.  One is playing straight at the hole.  On the third you try for the green and fall short and bounce off into a bunker, no one is trying to do that.  And the fourth (left-hand) route seems ridiculous -- to play toward the bunker and hope you land in just the right spot to kick right onto the green?  Who's going to try that?  I think the concept of a reef is excellent but surely someone could design a hole which presents better options than this.


Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #28 on: March 17, 2007, 06:17:48 PM »
Is 10 at Pebble somewhat like 9?  Never played or seen the course, basing this question on what I've seen from TV.  

Jim, Surprisingly enough the holes do not play anywhere near similar. Working from the green back, the two greens would never be considered  close to each other, either internally, or in their look on approach.

Someone will argue the tee shots are similar, but the reality is the only similarity is on strategy. Hugging the left. The fairway bunker on 10 has a much more menacing affect, than the drive on 9. While the green front bunker looms large on 9, while on 10 the bunkers are on the green's side.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Phil_the_Author

Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #29 on: March 17, 2007, 07:07:02 PM »
Tom, Tilly’s REEF Hole design is, in my opinion, misunderstood for what is rather than what it was intended to be. Consider what Tilly was trying to address with this design.

He wrote, “It is generally conceded that any course must stand or fall by reason of the character of its one-shot holes. Not that the others mat be weak and the one-shotters alone claim distinction, but certainly uninspiring par threes will never lift an otherwise fine course above mediocrity. It is the thought of some that that the one-shot hole needs only to provide a teeing ground and a green with immediately surrounding hazards. But as a matter of fact the approach is of incalculable value when constructed to lend finesse to the play.”

Basically, Tilly was stating that par-threes had become holes played through the air, yet it was his belief that there must be a way to design them so that the ground game could still be properly involved.

Actually, as what tilly would go on to write shows, this was a hole type that was specific to his day and would actually prove itself outdated almost at the same time as he was designing it.

He continued, “My sketch generally describes a length of approximately two hundred and twenty-five yards (or with this playing length under normal conditions). A similar hole was originated by me at Newport, and variations to suit conditions have been constructed by me on other courses with gratifying results…

“The outstanding feature of the type, is provided by a ridge, graded naturally in diagonal meandering across the fairway, dividing it into distinct areas. The way to the green on the left is only for the courageous with a long carry directly over the large pit. On the right, the less ambitious may find a comfortable route well satisfied if a careful 4 goes on the card.”

So Tilly is stating that this very long one-shotter may be attacked by utilizing a ground-game with a shot that would sling itself off the downslope left and short that would rollout onto the green. That is why this works better for you on a par-five Tom, and why so few of them were built, because the day of a par-three played on the ground was nearly over at the same time that Tilly conceived of this hole type.

As for the 4 lines of play that Tilly shows in the sketch, he writes, “Four tee shots are indicated by dotted lines. Two are quite obvious, I think – the raking shot home and the careful two-to-the-green on the right. Another shows the deflection into a pit from a long, off-line shot on the right. The other may need a bit of scrutiny for it represents a kick to the green from a slightly pulled shot into the throw on the extreme left of the fairway, a dangerous chance, however, if the distance is not gauged nicely, for pits fore and aft wait for erring. This hole places a premium on accurate placement from the tee, with interesting grading of play. I named the type “The Reef’ because of the diagonal spine which suggested treacherous reef water outside the harbor.”

The reason I consider this hole design significant is because it represents in real life how technology has completely changed the game. Par-threes will never again be designed with a ground game in mind and so a potentially interesting hole type designed by one of the games great designers has been rendered obsolete.

TEPaul

Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #30 on: March 17, 2007, 07:09:55 PM »
"And the fourth (left-hand) route seems ridiculous -- to play toward the bunker and hope you land in just the right spot to kick right onto the green?  Who's going to try that?"

TomD:

If the area on the left for that fourth option had the proper amount of cant, I'd try that option on a hole that long (or that long for that day).

Think the left to right cant on the left of the approach to Oakmont's #16. I tried that shot last time there with a low long iron and it worked great. Or even think the mirror image(right to left) of the kick onto the green of your 13th at Stonewall.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2007, 07:17:36 PM by TEPaul »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #31 on: March 17, 2007, 07:18:26 PM »
Tom:

I understand the idea, but in the diagram of the Reef hole you have to carry a bunker and land on the back side of the ridge ... with maybe 5-10 yards margin of error.  On either of your examples, there is no fronting bunker to penalize a short shot.  If you want to entice somebody to aim away from the flag to play a carom, I don't think you can make the carom shot as exacting as what's shown.

(Incidentally, that was one of the things Mr. Nicklaus and I disagreed about at Sebonack.)

Ryan Farrow

Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #32 on: March 17, 2007, 07:22:09 PM »
Paul it is nice to see that worked out for you on 16. I hit a perfect 4 iron but it was just too high to get the kick on the green that I wanted. Of course it would be almost impossible to roll one on to a back pin location but I guess it does work. I was actually thinking about that hole today when I was reading some of Thomas’s book and saw the sketch of #3 at Riviera, too bad I shanked one off the tee there.

TEPaul

Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #33 on: March 17, 2007, 07:37:26 PM »
TomD:

I agree with you if that option is that low margin for error. I wasn't thinking exactly of totally copying the Reef hole if "on the ground" that option was so high risk nobody would attempt it. To me the worst architecture is a designed option that nobody ever uses.

Ryan Farrow:

On shots like that bounce-in from the left approach on Oakmont's #16 the trick is to keep the ball low enough. It took me about two years to figure that out trying to bounce and run shots onto NGLA's #12. Eventually I learned to hit it real low and land it maybe 15 yards farther back then the higher shots I was trying to bounce and run in. Hang around some pretty good Euro players and you pick this kind of thing up pretty quick.  ;)

Michael Robin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #34 on: March 17, 2007, 10:55:22 PM »
Tom D. - I do love the 9th at Riviera and you're right about the green, even with the new changes. Aesthetically it's remarkable, as well as the shot values tee to green. Would it be a 9 on your scale?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #35 on: March 18, 2007, 07:34:42 AM »
Mike:

What did they change on 9?

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Courses with the most Architecturally Important holes
« Reply #36 on: March 18, 2007, 10:36:23 AM »
If memory serves me right they enlarged the green by extending it further down the hill.