[Patrick_Mucci]

At what distance do lengthened "Short" and "Eden" holes begin to lose their inherent, distinctive character ?

And, as these holes get lengthened, are benign pin positions on an almost daily basis an admission that lengthening these holes was a mistake ?

[David Stamm]

Pat, your thread name reminds me of one of my fav movies.


I haven't played any true Edens. I have played some Shorts. To me, the concept of the Short loses interest roughly after 160-165 yds. The only reason I cite those distnces is because of the distance that we are able to hit the ball relative to what I believe CBM/Raynor had in mind, 150 yds max, no? I just think the hole loses what the intent was after say, a 7 iron, which is a precise high soft shot. Just MHO.

[Matt_Cohn]

Pat (or anyone else),

A long while back I casually mentioned the concept of the "Short" hole and was rebuffed by those who said that it had no defining characteristics; i.e. that "Short" isn't really a template hole.

So, what is "Short"?

[Mark_Fine]

To far for who?  It all depends on the player.  

[Bill Brightly]

Matt,

There are probably lots of guys who can answer this better than I can, but a"Short" is a template hole designed to test your short iron game. From the tee, the putting surface appears to be on an island, completely surrounded by a trap. (One continuous trap, not a group of traps.)

The green is elevated, and the walls of the trap drop off sharply. (To me, the depth of the traps is one of the neat variations in the MacRaynor templates.)

Lastly, the putting surface has a horeshoe shaped collar, a raised section in the back, and the lower section has some distinct sections.

Having played many, I think these are easy birdie holes when you hit the proper section, "get me off this green pars" when you hit the wrong section of the green, and maddening bogies (or worse) if you miss the green

[wsmorrison]

The Eden hole lost its distinctive character in all the pale imitations that I have seen.  None come close to the quality of the original.  I don't expect or desire exact duplicates, but they are not holes of quality as compared to the original.

The changes to the Short hole with some being level, and others with a thumbprint, horseshoe or whatever may be distinctive in character but hardly great golf holes.

The commonalities are generally in name only.

However, Bill Brightly's comments about the Eden hole at Saucon Valley's Grace Course sounds like it is worth checking out.

[Brad Klein]

Pat, Augusta National's 4th is (was designed as) an Eden hole and now it plays 240 yards in the Masters. My temptation to say, re: Eden, that about 175 is ideal, but maybe it's best defined as a shot, like short/middle iron trajectory, ideally 5-6-7 iron for an average player, though I can recall hitting 8-iron to the 11th at St. Andrews and also a rescue club, depending on the wind. All I know is that the green requires a certain degree of loft for the options to be most available -- though not as much loft as for a classic Short hole. Maybe it's best just to admire the genius of four successive par-3s that work best at increasing lengths for good to average players: Short (130-150), Eden (160-180), Redan (180-200), Biarritz (210-240).

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat (or anyone else),

A long while back I casually mentioned the concept of the "Short" hole and was rebuffed by those who said that it had no defining characteristics; i.e. that "Short" isn't really a template hole.

So, what is "Short"?

Matt,

Many "shorts" had their greens segmented by internal contours.

# 11 at Westhampton is a prime example.

It has at least 4 seperate areas seperated by substantive contouring.

Thus, the short retained its inherent challenge as it wasn't enough to hit the green, you had to hit the specific section where the pin was located or face a more difficult challenge.

Mark Fine,

For the broad spectrum of golfers who play the golf hole day in and day out.

Westhampton made a major mistake when they lengthened their short to ridiculous lengths.

With the winds that buffeted that green, landing on the correct area was pot luck, from the back tee, whereas, from the original tees, it was a precision short within the repetoire of many golfers.

It was a hole requiring finesse and not power.

At 180 yards into a good wind it became STRICTLY a power hole for EVERY golfer.

Brad Klein,

I agree, I love the balance and diversity offered by CBM-SR-CB's template variety.

# 4 at ANGC hasn't borne a resemblance to an EDEN hole in decades, and at 240, even from an elevated tee, it's a daunting challenge.  Even from the Member's tees, it's a bit too long.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David Stamm, et. al.,

Is a very short, short hole immune from the influences of modern technology and the distance issue ?

Wouldn't a short, short hole with substantive internal putting surface contours remain a difficult challenge no matter how far golfers are hitting the ball ?

Most short holes are well elvated above their surroundings with steep sides and surrounding bunkers, thus making golfers who fire at the pin pay a steep price for miscalculating or for failing to properly execute the shot.

For those golfers who play conservatively, the severely contoured putting surface presents a daunting putting challenge should they miss the area where the hole is located.

The other neat feature is that the hole plays the very similar for every level of golfer.

[RJ_Daley]

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&q=kansas+city&f=q&ll=41.540498,-71.303458&spn=0.001209,0.004174&t=k&z=18&om=0

I'm not sure if this will show up, but it should show the 12th at Waunetonomy in R.I.  One of my favorite memory golf rounds was with Tony Pioppi and the inimitable George Bahto.  George scouted out a probable place where old original tees had the hole playing about 165ish.  They have the tees on the wrong angle now, back at ~210 if memory serves...

The green is canted high left to low right with steep back to front.  The Strath bunker is more wrap-around.  There is steep abrupt back side straight bank across the back.  

It is a tough hole now with the length, but would be plenty tough enough if tees were up and to the left as originally built.

[Doug Siebert]

Maybe it's best just to admire the genius of four successive par-3s that work best at increasing lengths for good to average players: Short (130-150), Eden (160-180), Redan (180-200), Biarritz (210-240).

I never really thought about it like that before, but that's one hell of a good thought there.

Would it be a good idea to try to do all four on the same course someday, or would it just be overkill and allow the par 3s to overwhelm the rest of the course?

[Roger Tufts]

Maybe it's best just to admire the genius of four successive par-3s that work best at increasing lengths for good to average players: Short (130-150), Eden (160-180), Redan (180-200), Biarritz (210-240).

I never really thought about it like that before, but that's one hell of a good thought there.

Would it be a good idea to try to do all four on the same course someday, or would it just be overkill and allow the par 3s to overwhelm the rest of the course?

...Correct me if I am wrong here, but many Raynor/Macdonald courses DO have that...

Take Mid-Ocean for example: (Yardage will be based on PGA Grand Slam event)

Hole #3 is an "Eden" Hole, playing at 167.
Hole #7 is a "Short" Hole, playing at 164 (Probably should be shorter...).
Hole #13 is a Biarritz Hole, playing at 238.
Hole #17 is a Redan Hole, playing at 199.

No, they aren't in ascending order, but all four are there.

Unless I am being an idiot and completely missing the point of your post. Did you mean all in order? Like, consecutive holes? Or did you mean to recreate them in a new, modern course? Just trying to clarify.

[Doug Wright]

Pat (or anyone else),

A long while back I casually mentioned the concept of the "Short" hole and was rebuffed by those who said that it had no defining characteristics; i.e. that "Short" isn't really a template hole.

So, what is "Short"?

Matt,

Here is George Bahto's description of a "Short" hole from his excellent GCA.com Feature Interview in 1999:

"In the order of their length, we will start with the so-called 'Short', a fairly generic par-3 common to many courses in the British Isles long before Macdonald began his quest for the better holes in Europe. The 'Short' specifically tests the skills of the short-iron game. Macdonald always felt there was room for improvement in a golf hole, so he (and later Raynor) surrounded his versions of this genre' with a sea of sand - elevating the green to make the target more dramatic and intimidating. These Shorts were nearly always drawn as a squarish looking green with a larger surrounding enclosure indicating sand bunkering. The bunkering details would then be developed during the construction phase. Short hole putting surfaces were generally much wider than deep, containing strong undulations befitting a shorter hole. A horseshoe feature with the open end facing the tee or a rounded dished depression were mainstays of design. Two of their finest examples can be found at the wild 6th at National and 10th at Chicago Golf Club (where two depressions are separated by a ridge). The origin of the Macdonald/Raynor Short was the 5th at Brancaster. He favored this particular version over the 8th at St. Andrews because the tee-box was higher and afforded a clearer view of the green. Shorts were generally constructed 135 to 145 yards long but often clubs incorrectly added back tees in a pointless effort to gain yardage on the scorecard."

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/interviewbahto.html

[Doug Siebert]

Roger,

No, I certainly wasn't suggesting they be consecutive.  I was thinking more in terms of presenting them on the same course in a more modern design.  I didn't know of specific examples like the one you cited, but I assumed that some of the ODG courses would have done something similar to what I'm suggesting.

Thankfully today's way overused 'drop shot par 3 with the green on the other side of a pond' doesn't appear to have been invented yet in the Golden Age, or at least never gained much respect amongst the ODGs when they went looking for holes to copy

I wonder if the example you cited at Mid Ocean did indeed have the yardage separation that Brad suggests originally, but someone decided that the short hole was a bit too short and added some distance to it.  On the other hand, the yardages relative to each other are a function of terrain and prevailing wind, so if the short plays with the wind or is downhill perhaps it is at the "correct" yardage for a Short.

Of course there are reasons that the Redan and Biarritz might not work in a majority of modern designs.  Specifically because of the tendency for many courses to have rough surrounding the green which would limit the possibilities to run the ball on the green.  As would a lack of F&F conditions.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug Siebert,

I think Redans and Biarritzs work in the modern environment.

Par 3's are for the most part, target golf.

While having F&F conditions in front of those greens is desirable, their absence doesn't negate the merits of the hole,  nor does it negate the intrique and fun of playing the hole.

Let's not forget that the narrow approach to the Redan is no easy target and that many prefer to play a Redan with and aerial approach to the putting surface.

The same is true of a Biarritz, especially those where the tee is elevated above the green, or where the area between the tee and green dips below the putting surfaces.

In those cases the prefered if not the proper play is aerial.

Brad Klein cited one of the reasons I like the template par 3s.

They provide a distinct diversity and test for various facets of one's game.

All too often, especially on modern courses, the par 3's tend to be clones of one another, ranging from 190 to 230 yards.

There are reasons that the 8th at Troon, the 7lth at Pebble Beach and the 6th at NGLA will never go out of favor and never succumb to the distance issue.

I also love the 11th at Pacific Dunes.
No matter how short you play the hole, it presents a formidible target immune to the distance issue, even on calm days.

As Much as I love Seminole and Pine Valley, I have to wonder if lengthening some of the par 3's hasn't removed some of the sportiness from those holes and therefore the entire experience derived from playing all 18.

If Ardmore Avenue wasn't behind the 13th tee, would that wonderful little hole have been lengthened ?

The 11th at Westhampton, a terrific short, constantly buffeted by winds, was lengthened to the point that it almost became unplayable.  I believe the new back tee has been mostly abandoned.

There used to be an unwritten rule, if you're going to lengthen your golf course, lengthen the long holes, not the short holes.   Unfortunately, that rule seems to have been abandoned.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()