Routing of Colonial - Different Take on The Horrible Horseshoe Thread

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

I am back after a self-imposed hiatus, and quite glad that no one missed me...

Here's a question for thse not too pre-occupied the markings on the golf ball (Hope you're striping them Scmhidty, off the tee and fairway that is):

Would the Crown Plaza Inviational at Colonial be a BETTER Tournament/Television Event if they started play on #7?

The Horseshoe of #3, 4, and 5 would now play as #15, 16 & 17, and still finish near the clubhouse.  As it is now, we don't see a whole lot of play on the weekends of this troika.

The Wall of Champions would on #1 would now great you on the 13th tee...#16 would be the other 1st hole on split tee Thurs. & Fri.  (Nobody's every complained about #1, member's 10th being at starting hole at Westchester).

My thought is that it would make for a much better finish than a lau-up on 17, and the water very rarely comes into play on #18 anyway.  16 is a great test, but the strength of the Horseshoe make the change very tempting...

I'll beg the question by killing the tradition of 61 years of doing things the same way (If it was good enough for Hogan...)

JWK

Nice to see the 1974 Champion, Rod Curl, giving it a go yesterday...

[Chris_Clouser]

I have often wondered why they didn't switch the nines for the tournament.  I would think a short par four like nine could provide some real excitement to end the round and having the horseshoe as kind of the Amen Corner on the back nine would be very cool.  

Plus much of the back nine at Colonial just bores me to sleep during the telecasts.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

I found it hard to follow your routing proposal, but like Chris think that reversing the nines, and possibly using 7 as 1 could work from some aspects.  History isn't one of them, and circulation may not be one of them.

Colonial's real problem seems to be loss of its long time prestige, given the light turnout of top players this year.  I am not sure that rearranging the deck chairs, as it were, is the solution.

[mike_beene]

If Colonial had been awarded the Ryder Cup the nines were going to reverse for crowd control issues due to 16,17 18 logjam.Talk about holes that put you to sleep:6 and 7 and 2 are flat drive and pitch par 4s,and many would say the flood control ruined 8.That fountain on 9 really looks traditional.

[Phil Benedict]

This is a bit off the topic but the pros really kick the hell out of Colonial nowadays don't they?  It used to be one of the toughest venues on Tour.  Frank Lickleiter is 8-under through 14.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phil,

You could make it On Topic by asking why that might be so?

I know they raised the rough this year.

The dog legs force you to work the ball.  Greens are smallish and hard to hit. Winds swirl and most holes play kind of cross wind.

The putting surfaces have been rebuilt and re-grassed (by Keith Foster) but I don't think they were signifigantly leveled, and they are probably faster, so I don't think its the greens.

I know that when we assisted them with drainage and converting the fw to 419 from long time common, roll outs got signifigantly longer, and they started mowing all fw back towards the tee to reduce roll.  I wonder if they should add little upslopes in the LA, as TPC did to limit roll a bit more?

That said, isn't almost 7054 yards the rough equivalent of 7200 Plus on a par 72? If not, those shortened dog legs take driver out of the hand often to sort of compensate, no?

So, what the heck is the difference from about 15 years ago?

[Phil Benedict]

Jeff,

I really don't know enough about Colonial to hazard a guess on why the pros beat it up so much.  There was a time when Colonial, along with Firestone, was one of less than a handful of 7000-yard par 70's that hosted Tour events annually.  It was considered a bear, although my sense of when the pros began to trivialize Colonial isn't very good.  Certainly in the 60's and '70's it was still considered a tough course.

When Sergio won a few years ago he was hitting an iron on most of the par 4's, so maybe it plays short.

[Jeff_Brauer]

For what its worth, from PGATour.com, in 1948 Clayton Heafner won with 272, which is not that dissmilar a score from the modern ones.  Trevino in 1978 was the first to win under 270, and it was  repeated twice in the 80's and 6 times in the 90's. In every year since 2000, the winner was below 270.

So, it seems that it has been a slow march, starting just before the ProvI came out.

1950 Sam Snead 277
1951 Cary Middlecoff 282
1952 Ben Hogan 279
1953 Ben Hogan 282
1953 Cary Middlecoff 287
1954 Johnny Palmer 280
1955 Chandler Harper 276
1956 Mike Souchak 280
1957 Roberto De Vicenzo 284
1958 Tommy Bolt 282
1959 Ben Hogan 285
1960 Julius Boros 280
1960 Kel Nagle 281
1961 Doug Sanders
1962 Arnold Palmer 281
1963 Julius Boros 279
1964 Billy Casper 279
1965 Bruce Crampton 276
1966 Bruce Devlin 280
1967 Dave Stockton 278
1968 Billy Casper 275
1969 Gardner Dickinson 278
1970 Homero Blancas 273
1970 Lee Trevino 274
1971 Gene Littler 283
1972 Jerry Heard 275
1973 Tom Weiskopf 276
1973  Jerry Heard 277
1974 Rod Curl 276
1976 Lee Trevino 273
1977 Ben Crenshaw 272
1978 Lee Trevino 268
1978  Jerry Pate 272
1979 Al Geiberger 274
1979 Gene Littler 275
1980 Bruce Lietzke 271
1981 Fuzzy Zoeller 274
1982 Jack Nicklaus 273
1983 Jim Colbert 278
1984 Peter Jacobsen 270
1985 Corey Pavin 266
1986 Dan Pohl 205  
1987 Keith Clearwater 266
1988 Lanny Wadkins 270
1989 Ian Baker-Finch 270
1990 Ben Crenshaw 272
1991 Tom Purtzer 267
1992 Bruce Lietzke 267
1993 Fulton Allem 264
1994 Nick Price 266
1995 Tom Lehman 271
1996 Corey Pavin 272
1997 David Frost 265
1998 Tom Watson 265
1999 Olin Browne 272
2000 Phil Mickelson 268
2001 Sergio Garcia 267
2002 Nick Price 267
2003 Kenny Perry 261
2004 Steve Flesch 269
2005 Kenny Perry 261
2006 Tim Herron 268
 

[Phil Benedict]

Pre-2000 8 winners broke 270.  Since then 7-straight and counting.  It's pretty easy to infer a causal relationship between the arrival of the ProV1 and the lower scores.  It's like Barry Bonds' home run totals and steroids.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

Phil -

I agree that the new ball & technology has had an impact upon scoring at Colonial C.C.

In regard to the quailty of the field, this tournament is one of the last PGA TOUR events to be run by the club membership.  It's is hard for them to keep up with theWachovia's and other events that offer a plethora of perks such as Mercedes courtesy cars and wives trips to Asheville to see the Vanderbilt estate.

That said, this tournament has always been about the golf, and it has relied heavily upon:

1)  Its tradition,
2)  The 2nd week of two weeks in the Metroplex (makes it easy to come out for two weeks without the 2nd week airfare), as well as,
3)  A strong, but dwindling group of local tour players to fill its field.  

Combine the three elements above with the fact that you'll spend all week trying to draw or fase tee shots at 280 yards, and this event is an easy miss without the EDS Byton Nelson to protect each other's events.

Personally, I really enjoyed this stop on the flea circus.  Downtown Ft. Worth always came on strong with its great restaurants and concerts, local house parties and country club feel to the event as opposed to another TPC at Real Estate Ridge event.  The members try hard, and are very proud of their tournament.  The Hogan Room with it's locker and all of the displays is even more impressive than his statue.

So what if -20 wins...

JWK

I'll copy some of this to the other Colonial thread...