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.


Robert Mercer Deruntz

Creek #9
« on: October 25, 2007, 07:03:35 PM »
This is a wonderful green complex that is hard to film due to its being elevated a good 12-15 feet.  The front pins are absolutley evil in a great way.



TEPaul

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2007, 09:21:25 PM »
Architecture buffs who are really into original design and construction analysis would probably be interested in what a massive "fill" or pushup operation the 9th green is.

It's a good thing too because The Creek had an ongoing real problem with what was referred to as the "lower" or "water" holes" (probably 9-14 or at least 9, 12, 13 and 14) right from opening. Eventually around 1929 it had to be fixed and it cost over $100,000 which could've built a decent entire golf course back in that day.

The green that really fascinates me is the 12th. An original blueprint combined with a piece of an original topo shows that green may've had a pretty radical propped up surface originally quite different from what's there now.


Peter Pallotta

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2007, 09:50:05 PM »
Robert  - first, thanks for the series of pictures. Second, does the 9th at the Creek have a name? Would it happen to be the "Give Me A Sand Wedge In Or Give Me Death" hole there at the Creek? Wow. They didn't kid around back then in 1929, did they? Strategy? Naw - just hit the prefect shot.
Thanks again
Peter


wsmorrison

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2007, 10:00:23 PM »
Peter,  the hole is actually named Inferno

Peter Pallotta

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2007, 10:13:06 PM »
Thanks, Wayne.

That must be the little talked about 11th circle of hell, where the sandbaggers and those with distance control problems hang out.

Peter

Will E

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2007, 10:26:24 PM »
Tom-
I think I once read that Ben Crenshaw felt that the 12th at the Creek was one of his favorite holes.
That really puzzles me, as I find it to be a rather bland hole, especially compared to the next five. Any thoughts?

Rob-
Nice photos.

Robert Mercer Deruntz

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2007, 10:58:20 PM »
The 12th is most lacking because the tee is too far up--it should be about 425--better stated, part of the back of 11th green could serve as a tee.  Years ago when it played really firm, I played with a few other good players using the back right fringe as the teeing area--the green sits better when forced to hit a 7 or 8 instead of an L wedge.

Phil McDade

Re:Creek #9
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2007, 11:50:13 PM »
Architecture buffs who are really into original design and construction analysis would probably be interested in what a massive "fill" or pushup operation the 9th green is.


Or they could come to Wisconsin -- I know and have played at least a dozen greens that appear, compared to this photo, to have used significantly more fill, and are way more pushed up, than this one (all courtesy of Mssrs. Langford and Moreau).


Tags: