[Patrick_Mucci]

Templates.

Why have so few templates been modifed, disfigured or destroyed over the last hundred years ?

Is it a tribute to their enduring values ?

[Kyle Harris]

The Eden at Mountain Lake had its green moved about 50 yards left and back from its original location.

I think your analysis depends on what we consider to be modified and disfigured... if they hadn't been altered in some form, why else would they need restoration like NGLA and Yeaman's Hall...

...or Yale...

...or Mountain Lake...

The good part about templates is that they are fairly easy to restore, at least in terms of preserving shot values if not what was originally in the ground.

[TEPaul]

"Is it a tribute to their enduring values?"

Pat:

I know you and I just talked about this but for the record I don't think there's any doubt about it. And what are their enduring values? In my mind extremely enduring playability that means constant interest and challenge born on the wings of wonderful shot options and shot values.

In my golfing experiences there never has been anything quite so thrilling as envisioning a redan shot followed by the execution of that envisioned shot. In my experiences the two that did that best are Piping Rock and NGLA. Those shots envisioned and executed well I truly believe can rehook almost anyone on golf!

[Patrick_Mucci]

The Eden at Mountain Lake had its green moved about 50 yards left and back from its original location.

Where was the original 18th tee relative to today's configuration.

Why was the 17th hole moved ?
And when you say back, are you refering to closer or further away from the lake behind it ?[/color]

I think your analysis depends on what we consider to be modified and disfigured... if they hadn't been altered in some form, why else would they need restoration like NGLA and Yeaman's Hall...

Kyle,

What restoration took place at NGLA on any of the template holes ?

Or, any other holes ?[/color]

...or Yale...

What templates at Yale were altered, disfigured or destroyed ?[/color]

...or Mountain Lake...

Which holes at Mountain Lake were altered, disfigured or destroyed ?[/color]

The good part about templates is that they are fairly easy to restore, at least in terms of preserving shot values if not what was originally in the ground.

[John_Cullum]

I saw some photographs that showed the 18 tee hard left of where 17 green is now. I also noticed a stand of trees along side of the lake left of the driving area. I wondered why Raynor didn't go for a cape hole style driving area by taking out the trees.

Was he so wedded to the idea of a peninsular green on a cape hole that he just couldn't pull the trigger?

[Kyle Harris]

The original 18th tee was located on or near the present green site for the 17th hole, and the old 17th green was located under the ancient Live Oak just to the right of the hole. The green was moved for agronomic reasons and to provide a skyline/water backdrop for the Eden green. It was moved closer to the lake behind.

I'm awaiting your thread on that by the way, I love the 17th at Mountain Lake.

I am only aware of the Superintendent's in house restoration work at NGLA, and I believe tree removal and some bunker construction work, in addition to green expansion were done.

Yale's bunkers are currently a lightning rod of criticism for many on this site.

Mountain Lake's biarritz may never have existed. Aerial photos show a circular green that would have been only located behind today's swale. The bunkers also pinched the landing area.

The 12th green at Mountain Lake is not the Raynor green but was preserved because popularity. The large bunker on the left side of the hole near the green is also not a Raynor original. Mountain Lake has also gone through several routing iterations and the 9th hole was built well after the course opened and Raynor died. Coincidentally, the only certain and documented template that was built at Mountain Lake in 1916 was the Redan and perhaps a simplified Biarritz.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm curious as to what exactly constitutes disfiguring/destruction of a golf hole.

[TEPaul]

"Which holes at Mountain Lake were altered, disfigured or destroyed?"

Certainly the original Raynor #8 and #9 were.

[Kyle Harris]

I saw some photographs that showed the 18 tee hard left of where 17 green is now. I also noticed a stand of trees along side of the lake left of the driving area. I wondered why Raynor didn't go for a cape hole style driving area by taking out the trees.

Was he so wedded to the idea of a peninsular green on a cape hole that he just couldn't pull the trigger?

John,

It's possible that the 8th green at one point served as a Cape green before Charles Banks built the present 9th hole in the '20s after Raynor's death. It certainly fits the bill today and may have even played as a sharp dogleg. Some of the original routing iterations are published in the Mountain Lake history the corporation commissioned a few years ago.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Which holes at Mountain Lake were altered, disfigured or destroyed?"

Certainly the original Raynor #8 and #9 were.

Yes,

But neither one was a template

[Kyle Harris]

"Which holes at Mountain Lake were altered, disfigured or destroyed?"

Certainly the original Raynor #8 and #9 were.

Yes,

But neither one was a template

Pat, see above. You also asked which holes at Mountain Lake, not which templates.

[Patrick_Mucci]

The original 18th tee was located on or near the present green site for the 17th hole, and the old 17th green was located under the ancient Live Oak just to the right of the hole. The green was moved for agronomic reasons and to provide a skyline/water backdrop for the Eden green. It was moved closer to the lake behind.

Kyle,

Would it be safe to say that given the choice of cutting down those old trees and moving the green, that the trees won out ?[/color]

I'm awaiting your thread on that by the way, I love the 17th at Mountain Lake.

I am only aware of the Superintendent's in house restoration work at NGLA, and I believe tree removal and some bunker construction work, in addition to green expansion were done.


I'd consider that tweaking rather than restoring holes/greens/features that were altered/disfigured/destroyed.[/color]

Yale's bunkers are currently a lightning rod of criticism for many on this site.

They fell into disrepair and the initial attempt at reclaiming them was controversial.  The third green was lost for reasons I forget, but, the bones of Yale remained, it was another case of deterioration through neglect rather than destruction, save for the removal of contouring in the 2nd green.[/color]

Mountain Lake's biarritz may never have existed. Aerial photos show a circular green that would have been only located behind today's swale. The bunkers also pinched the landing area.

The 12th green at Mountain Lake is not the Raynor green but was preserved because popularity. The large bunker on the left side of the hole near the green is also not a Raynor original. Mountain Lake has also gone through several routing iterations and the 9th hole was built well after the course opened and Raynor died. Coincidentally, the only certain and documented template that was built at Mountain Lake in 1916 was the Redan and perhaps a simplified Biarritz.

I was told that Raynor only built 9 holes.

I liked the 12th hole.  I found it quite unique, however I felt that the green and large left side bunker weren't originals.
Nonetheless, I thought it was a terrific hole.

Fast & Firm conditions would make that golf course and holes like # 12 hum.  Mountain Lake was made for TEPaul's "ideal maintainance meld".[/color]

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm curious as to what exactly constitutes disfiguring/destruction of a golf hole.

For starters, when the evolving hole bears no resemblance to the original hole in flavor, character or play.

Obviously, it's not a set of fixed criteria, but, like obscenity, you know it when you see it.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Which holes at Mountain Lake were altered, disfigured or destroyed?"

Certainly the original Raynor #8 and #9 were.

Yes,

But neither one was a template

Pat, see above. You also asked which holes at Mountain Lake, not which templates.

Kyle,

With the title and gist of the thread being about templates, I thought that was the inherent theme.

How similar to the original Eden is the current version ?[/color]

[Kyle Harris]

Pat,

I think it's safe to say the trees won out over the green. The trees are really quite spectacular as well as the hole is now. I think that was a case of win-win for everything. I know nothing of the old hole, but the present hole is excellent.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kyle,

Those trees are quite spectacular, however, I think the hole is diminished, strategically, from moving the tees.

It's a terrific finishing hole, but, the drive isn't as critical as it was on the old hole.

Today, if you hit the drive straight, push or pull it, very little in the way of adverse consequences occurs, especially with such a wide fairway, but, with the old tee, a push/fade/slice would leave the golfer much further away from the green than a straight shot. And, a draw would be rewarded by being much closer to the green.

So, while it's a very good finishing hole, it would appear that the dogleg nature of the old hole placed a much higher premium on driving accuracy.

Are there a prevailing winds at Mountain Lake ?

If so, from what directions ?

[Tom Roewer]

Raynor's original 18 hole layout had #6 a dogleg right where #16 now is, #7 a left dogleg going east to mountain lake and #8 a right dogleg with #9 a straight 4 par south.  #10 went east to #11 (same position as today)#s 12 and 13 went back west utside to the railroad/road #14 went north along the road and #15 was a 3 par over the neck of the small lake#16 went north straight and #17 was in line with the play off the tee of #18.  When the plan changed to opening only nine holes, Raynor sent a new plan converting #16,#17 and #18 into #7,#8 and #9.  So I think it's difficult to really know if any or how many (from original plan anyway) were templates.

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

Those trees are quite spectacular, however, I think the hole is diminished, strategically, from moving the tees.

It's a terrific finishing hole, but, the drive isn't as critical as it was on the old hole.

Today, if you hit the drive straight, push or pull it, very little in the way of adverse consequences occurs, especially with such a wide fairway, but, with the old tee, a push/fade/slice would leave the golfer much further away from the green than a straight shot. And, a draw would be rewarded by being much closer to the green.

So, while it's a very good finishing hole, it would appear that the dogleg nature of the old hole placed a much higher premium on driving accuracy.

Are there a prevailing winds at Mountain Lake ?

If so, from what directions ?

Pat,

The original tees on 18 were moved long ago, not as a result of Silva's work. When those tees were in play, the 18th was also played as a Par 5 and the lake was a bit larger.

From Mike Sweeney's IMO piece you can compare the size of the lake, and also note the original location of 17 in both aerials. The latter aerial is from the 1990s and is pre-Silva:




Here's a picture of the original tee:


Prevailing winds at Mountain Lake change through the day. Mornings tend to have the wind from the North and depending on the weather it can shift to being from the West.

[TEPaul]

"Then I definitely need to sneak out to the 4th tee at NGLA with a small bucket on a Monday at twilight sometime soon!  I'm still haunted by that shot - the supreme irony of hitting the perfect low draw, exactly the way it's supposed to be done, and having it kick dead right on me was probably the beginning of my golf-enthusiasm downward spiral.  The world will not be right again until that wrong is righted once and for all."


Shivas:

I'm glad you mentioned that!

That is part of the real subtelty of that "redan" shot at NGLA.

If you get that low running drawn "redan" shot just a little too far right on that "kicker" there is a slight inline roll that will take the ball right and away from the green. Counter-balancing that if you get that "redan" shot just a little short and left on that kicker the ball gets taken right into the bunker at the apex at the top right of that big redan bunker. And not just that if you're a little strong or long with that "redan" shot even in the exact right direction on that kicker the ball will get right past the green and into the back bunker.

Piping Rock's Redan is a wonderful one too but it doesn't have the same amount of "kicker" subtlety NGLA's "kicker" does.

But if you get the distance, the weight and the direction just right on that NGLA "kicker" and the ground is of appropriate firmness it really is one of the coolest shots in all of golf to observe. You watch the ball slowly trickle onto the right side of the green surface and then trickle down and away and out of sight down to the pin. A little too much "weight" and you know you'll find it off the back of the green which is actually not a bad play at all.

Too bad, pal, you came all the way from Chicago to NGLA and you were close but no cigar---faked out again by architectural subtelty that was just too much for you!  

[Kyle Harris]

Raynor's original 18 hole layout had #6 a dogleg right where #16 now is, #7 a left dogleg going east to mountain lake and #8 a right dogleg with #9 a straight 4 par south.  #10 went east to #11 (same position as today)#s 12 and 13 went back west utside to the railroad/road #14 went north along the road and #15 was a 3 par over the neck of the small lake#16 went north straight and #17 was in line with the play off the tee of #18.  When the plan changed to opening only nine holes, Raynor sent a new plan converting #16,#17 and #18 into #7,#8 and #9.  So I think it's difficult to really know if any or how many (from original plan anyway) were templates.

Thanks Tom, I was hoping you would chime in the with the definite iteration.

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

"Why have so few templates been modifed, disfigured or destroyed over the last hundred years?"

I don't think I would be so quick to accept this premise. WHICH templates are you refering to?

For example, A Tillinghast template, the double-dogleg par-five, is an example where many have been lengthened, bunkers moved and entire holes altered. On a number of them were "great bunkers" that the memberships found too difficult a feature years later and either greatly reduced or completely removed.

Yet it is a wonderful design template for a par-five hole.

Even if you want to only consider "classic" template holes, hasn't the "cape" hole, #12 at WFW, been altered by both lengthening it on at least three occasions (twice since the mid-90's) so that it no longer is a risk/reward go for it in 2 par-five as Tilly designed of 487 yards to what it has become at more than 660 yards?

I think that a better look at small changes made to template holes and how they have effected their design over the years need a a greater scrutiny before you can consider your above conclusion to be conclusive...

I am certain there are numerous other examples  

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

I'm sorry for you and that the redan shot you hit that was so close to great got screwed. That's just in the realm of the Golf God's I guess.

Let me tell you how unfair the Golf Gods really are.

There you hit something so close to perfect and got screwed.

On the other hand, the first time I went back there after forty years was to play in the National Singles tournament. On the 3rd hole I was down under the hill and my caddy told me what to do and which direction to hit it.

I guess I must have misunderstood what he told me to aim at because I thought I pulled a 6 iron about 30 yards left of where I was supposed to go. He said; "Perfect" and I said, "What, I pulled that thing about 30 yards left of where I thought you told me to hit it and it has to be way left of the green."

We got up there and we were about a foot.

On the redan it was howling downwind and I hit a 7 iron from about 195 (and I'm pretty short) way up in the air with a draw, it hit that kicker perfect and trickled on and down and away and out of sight. When we got up there we were about a foot.

So you hit it almost perfect and got screwed and on #3 I obviously completely misunderstood my caddie and then compensated for it by commensurately missing my shot and I got rewarded bigtime---a matter of how two wrongs make a right in the eyes of the Golf Gods.

It's probably just because I think a lot purer about that architecture than you do and good things happen to me because of that while you have impure thoughts about great architecture and you of necessity must be punished for it.

[TEPaul]

Kyle:

What year are those aerials you just hung up?

Damnit. The bottom of the first one gets cut off sooo close to that 15th green. I was hoping to get a look at what was that original punchbowl green which I have heretofore never seen.

[TEPaul]

"I think that a better look at small changes made to template holes and how they have effected their design over the years need a a greater scrutiny before you can consider your above conclusion to be conclusive..."

Phil:

I think you're exactly right about that. There is a lot of documentary evidence available on this board from some of the contributors.

We should supply it on these template holes to see to what degree Pat's premise holds up.

I can supply some stuff on The Creek and maybe Piping Rock too.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Accepting the premise of the initial question for a moment:

Is it "enduring values" or "obvious values" (to green committees and non-architecturally inclined golfers)?

Do templates incorporate into their designs the idea of TOC 14th as MacKenzie described it, with four golfers playing the hole differently, and three of whom likely being correct?  Compared to "naturalist" holes, do they break up the line of instinct as often or as opaquely?

Do "naturalist" golf courses shield their values or is this designation purely aesthetic / construction oriented?

Thanks,
Mark

[TEPaul]

"Do "naturalist" golf courses shield their values or is this designation purely aesthetic / construction oriented?"

Mark:

That's a good question particularly when they're compared to those famous template holes of Macdonald's. The fact is the shot values and the over-all strategic concepts of those template holes of his were known and recognized and obviously respected long before Macdonald ever reused them at NGLA. In that sense it would be pretty true to say those template holes didn't need a "learning curve" which can take a lot of time in some cases with original holes.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Is it a tribute to their enduring values?"


In my golfing experiences there never has been anything quite so thrilling as envisioning a redan shot followed by the execution of that envisioned shot. In my experiences the two that did that best are Piping Rock and NGLA. Those shots envisioned and executed well I truly believe can rehook almost anyone on golf!

Then I definitely need to sneak out to the 4th tee at NGLA with a small bucket on a Monday at twilight sometime soon!  I'm still haunted by that shot - the supreme irony of hitting the perfect low draw, exactly the way it's supposed to be done, and having it kick dead right on me was probably the beginning of my golf-enthusiasm downward spiral.  The world will not be right again until that wrong is righted once and for all.

But it wasn't the perfect shot.
You hit short, into the hill, which will bounce a ball to the right.   Had you had a little more carry, I'm sure the result would have been to your satisfaction.

While the short, running approach is a viable alternative, you have to land it far enough up the hill to take the intended bounce.

Shots hit short usually bounce straight or to the right.

Or, maybe you're just really, really unlucky [/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()