2007 Lido Contest

[Kyle Henderson]

I mean no offense by this, but isn't a hole with this many options starting to take on the form of a driving range? Just add a couple more tees and greens and wa la. New dream backyard.

I tried to create a strong line of instinct that would be difficult to score low from. There is one bunker, a deep one, in front of the green right on the line of instinct, from which the green basically runs away from in all directions. The line of instinct is strong because it is the only route that does not have a blind drive or is not very circuitous. The lines of charm that would allow the player to get the ball closer have a blind drive, or both a blind drive and blind approach.

When I later looked back at the contest information, I saw the reprint of Alister's guidelines and noticed he did not like blindness. Oops. Since I was breaking up existing dunes to create the hole, I wanted to give the created dunes some similarity to what the rest of the site has so it would at least seem somewhat natural. Therefore, I did not put cuts in my dunes  to make landing areas visible.

The description I sent with the entry is as follows:

The motivation for this design came after first playing Astoria Country Club with its quirky minimalist design routing narrow holes between 30 ft. high parallel dunes. When the course was created designs preserving the dunes and designs cutting through the dunes were submitted, with the design preserving the dunes winning out. The one slight misfortune of this is that there are two pairs of holes that are essentially mirrors of each other, running in opposite directions between the same dunes. Therefore, the variety of holes on the course is reduced as you feel you are playing the same hole in each case, but in the opposite direction. A redesign of the course could keep one each of these pairs as they are quite distinct given the width between dunes. One of the pairs has fairways approximately 12 yards wide, while the other pair has fairways over 25 yards wide in the shallow between the dunes.
The hole design I have created could be used to replace one of the holes that has a 12 yard wide base between the dunes, with the green nestled into this narrow area and the dune in front leveled near the green, the dune in rear leveled later providing a ‘backstop’, and the material from the leveled dunes distributed to bring a series of smaller dunes that define the options on the hole.
The hole is 380 yards long in a direct line from the tee to the center of the green and measures 420 yards around the dogleg of approximately 60 degrees. Various routes can make the hole as much as 440 yards long. There are two routes that could be played without crossing any dunes. The far right route (F) which would be the 440 yard route could be played with low drawing shots to keep the ball below the wind since this is a coastal area with winds blowing in at right angles to the dunes. The far left route (A) would allow a shot of approximately 160 yards between the sets of dunes to the fairway fronting the green after a drive of approximately 230 yards. It is doubtful anyone would try to cross the large dune in front of the green from this position. Route B allow a person that can carry the ball near 300 yards to get in a position for a blind wedge over the fronting dune to the green. The short but straight hitter may choose route C playing through narrow slots between dunes with a drive of 180 yards and a second of 160 yards to get in position in front of the green to try to get up and down. Routes D and E would be require blind drives. Route D would require a carry of approximately 250 yards and would leave a short iron into the green. Route E would give the most generous landing area for the drive carrying 210 yards. From there the player could attempt what would be essentially a bank shot off of the back dune to get the ball on the green. After a 220 yard drive, route F would leave a 220 yard approach that would most likely use the dune to feed the ball onto the green.

The least successful approach to the green would be to come in over the bunker (dug by sheep of course) in a hollow on the left front of the green. There is a ridge between the bunker and the green that will help prevent shots running off of the back dune to run across the green into the bunker. Therefore, it would be extremely hard to get up and down out of the bunker. A hole location on the front ¼ of the green would utilize these features. There is a ridge running thru the back ¾ of the green that makes it advantageous but not required to approach the left rear ¼ of the green with a lob over the tall fronting dune. This would make a mini-Dell hole with a rock placed to designate where you must stay left of to keep out of the bunker. The ridge would also tend to shed balls coming in over the bunker to the wrong side for the current pin location. Two or three pinable areas would be placed in the remaining ½ of the green.

The hole is drawn with one tee. The options are so numerous that players of all abilities should find the hole interesting and challenging without additional tees.

[George Pazin]

I mean no offense by this, but isn't a hole with this many options starting to take on the form of a driving range? Just add a couple more tees and greens and wa la. New dream backyard.

Some might make that same observation of TOC.

[Garland Bayley]

I mean no offense by this, but isn't a hole with this many options starting to take on the form of a driving range? Just add a couple more tees and greens and wa la. New dream backyard.

Kyle,

The chief judge of the contest asked for design with multiple options. He said he would judge based on multiple options. He wanted to have designs with multiple options like Dr. MacKenzie's design that won the original Lido Competition. Who knew that he would choose a winner that had only three options, one of which was a farse, and another quite impractical.

When I looked at Dr. MacKenzie's winner, I think that's nice, but how are you going to find ground like that to build the hole on. Therefore, I took actual ground on an existing extremely minimalist course that is criticized for its redundancy. I designed  my hole to replace one of the redundant holes, but to try and keep some of the nature of the original golfing ground.

[Mike Golden]

I was looking at the Lake Merced yardage book today and I noticed the the photographer's name is...Bo Links. Not sure if this is news to anybody, but apparently he's the guy. That's all.

I was still on sabbatical when this thread was active so let me give you a personal perspective since Bo was a frequent playing partner of mine during my time at Lake Merced.

First of all, Bo is an attorney, not an artist, by trade.  He is a man of many hobbies, including photography and literature (he has written several fictional golf books that were published).  He is also an excellent golfer with a great sense of humor and someone who 'get's' golf architecture.  He would fit right in on this site.

He is a past president of Lake Merced, a member of the Green committee, and understands the meaning of fast and firm even if achieving that in San Francisco with a long time stubborn superintendent can be a daunting task.

I haven't taken the time to go through each of the entries in detail nor would I most likely have an opinion since I have a difficult time deciphering design until I am on the golf course but it sure seems like those of you who entered the contest and didn't win seem more intent on proving your submission is superior to the winning one than simply saying, 'Nice job, Bo, congratulations, maybe next year will be my turn.'

[George Pazin]

Thanks for adding some info on Mr. Links, Mike, it's always nice to have someone add personal perspective.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally am simply disappointed that the same overthought, overdrawn, overkill wins these contests all the time. I'd have gladly accepted any of the posters' entries over mine, just not yet another cliche multiple fairway entry.

I think these contests are potentially very interesting, providing a great deal of opportunity for actual architecture discussion, and the feedback that we actually receive on the site is a huge positive - even when it's negative! - and it would be nice to see someone with something interesting actually win one of these. I couldn't care less that it's never mine, I simply like to get feedback on thoughts and ideas from the participants of this site, particularly the architects and supers.

The other thing that is disappointing is the lack of interest on these threads, both from entries and comments. However, this year's thread did spark more entries and replies than just about all the others combined, so maybe we're on the upswing.

[Garland Bayley]

...it sure seems like those of you who entered the contest and didn't win seem more intent on proving your submission is superior to the winning one than simply saying, 'Nice job, Bo, congratulations, maybe next year will be my turn.'

I would like to see your evidence someone was trying to prove their submission is superior to the winning one. The evidence I saw was that we were trying to prove everyones submissions were superior to the winning one.  

I suppose some would consider me impolite, but I have trouble saying nice job for something I don't think is a nice job. Why don't you look at Bo's entry and tell me if my criticism is wrong. His middle route is marked 315/58 as if the carry over the "dunes" was 315. Put a ruler down on the drawing and work out a scale to see if his ratio is anywhere near correct. I forget exactly what it was, but is was much closer to 345/18 than the given figure. A real rookie mistake.  Another route includes an uphill carry over water to the green making it a far less attractive option since you have to lay back with your drive. For a design contest asking for multiple options, a single viable option IMHO doesn't cut it.

Tom Doak gave the best feedback by saying you guys don't get it, whereas Alister MacKenzie did. Here is why his design trumps you all.

[Kyle Harris]

Another doodle of mine from the other thread:

[Garland Bayley]

Kyle,

Are you channeling KBM?

[Mike Golden]

...it sure seems like those of you who entered the contest and didn't win seem more intent on proving your submission is superior to the winning one than simply saying, 'Nice job, Bo, congratulations, maybe next year will be my turn.'

I would like to see your evidence someone was trying to prove their submission is superior to the winning one. The evidence I saw was that we were trying to prove everyones submissions were superior to the winning one.  

I suppose some would consider me impolite, but I have trouble saying nice job for something I don't think is a nice job. Why don't you look at Bo's entry and tell me if my criticism is wrong. His middle route is marked 315/58 as if the carry over the "dunes" was 315. Put a ruler down on the drawing and work out a scale to see if his ratio is anywhere near correct. I forget exactly what it was, but is was much closer to 345/18 than the given figure. A real rookie mistake.  Another route includes an uphill carry over water to the green making it a far less attractive option since you have to lay back with your drive. For a design contest asking for multiple options, a single viable option IMHO doesn't cut it.

Tom Doak gave the best feedback by saying you guys don't get it, whereas Alister MacKenzie did. Here is why his design trumps you all.

It's called being a gracious loser, Garland, the same way you shake the opponent's hand after losing in match play.  And Bo would be the first person to congratulate you had your submission been selected.  Of course, given your cheap shots at him on this thead I'm guessing there is no chance of that ever happening.

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

Are you channeling KBM?

Those were off the wave of inspiration from the Castle Stuart videos... so I guess Jim Wagner and Gil Hanse...

Hope Kelly doesn't feel too insulted by your comment though.  

[TaylorA]

Mike, I can appreciate you defending your friend, but a comparison to a subjective contest of which the entrants have zero say in the outcome to a match play tournament doesn't jive.

It's a contest on design and by entering, each person has put their design open for comment. Mr. Links won the competition, so he doesn't have to say anything if he doesn't want to. However, the hole has several (fatal, IMO) flaws that neither the judge or the entrant has given an explanation for.

I guess I have the luxury of being an "outsider" since I didn't enter the event. I also have only seen a few of the holes that were entered too, but the winning entry isn't as good as few of the other ones I've seen and pointing that out shouldn't be taken personally.

[Garland Bayley]

I've got nothing against Bo Links. Bo, if you are reading, congratulations. My beef is with RON WHITTEN. He wrote that he was going to judge this thing himself and he wrote the criteria he would be judging by. If I came across Bo's hole on a golf course I would enjoy playing it, but I wouldn't mistake it for meeting the criteria given for judging the contest.