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.


Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Can members know better than consulting architects?
« on: June 12, 2008, 03:11:04 PM »
I just played Springfield CC outside Springfield, OR for the third time. The first time I played it was three years ago just after they put a new #8 and #9 into play.

#8 is a par 5, I believe the scorecard has it at 534 yards from the average player tees. A little over 200 yards out a stream crosses the fairway perpendicular to the line of play. Immediately after that the fairway narrows to at most 15 yards running through a (what looks to me man-made) narrow slot between two hills. From the bottom of the steep slope in front of the green for over 100 yards back was all hazard in an area where two very small seasonal streams ran diagonally across the fairway. Any ball hit into this area was essentially unplayable.

Hitting the ball across the first stream chanced lying on a very steep slope just off the fairway, or in the woods beyond that. Short of the stream gave you one option, lay up to a blind landing area perhaps 125-150 yards short of the green. I hit 5 wood, gap wedge, 5 iron and got a par.

The next year I noted that they had done some mowing in the area short of the green so at least you might find your ball and have a chance of hitting it.

This year I proceeded to play the hole as I remembered it, and was greatly surprised to find that the portion of the hole revealed after the blind second shot had been significantly changed. You could see the newly planted and maintained fairway that had been created through the area short of the green, with only the two small streams remaining as hazard. Since they are close to each other there is area in front of the green to play to as well as much new area short of the first stream to play to.

I know the members had a lot of disagreement about the hole, and I believe they took it upon themselves to make the changes.


« Last Edit: June 20, 2008, 03:52:30 PM by Garland Bayley »
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can members know better than consulting architects?
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2008, 03:52:52 PM »
Did the members know better?
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can members know better than consulting architects?
« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2008, 12:09:25 PM »
I guess the biggest question I would have is what did the original holes look like.

I think this topic generally is pretty interesting - I'm surprised none of our board architects have chimed in. And I'm sure many private club members have stories of changes they feel didn't work; I'd like to hear some, even if you don't care to name names specifically (in fact, that might be wise).
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can members know better than consulting architects?
« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2008, 12:14:44 PM »
It seems they knew the hole sucked having to look for balls, constantly.

"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can members know better than consulting architects?
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2008, 12:21:33 PM »
I guess the biggest question I would have is what did the original holes look like.

...

That's a good question. Since I only saw it after the changes, I can at best guess by what I have seen. After the first stream on 8 through the middle of the 9th is all clearly new terrain cut out of pre-existing forest. The 8th green is new, but the 9th green is original. I suspect there was a vanilla par 3 8th, and the 9th doglegged around the forest that the first part of the new hole is cut out of. That would make par 35. The front is now par 37 to go with the par 35 on the back for par 72 overall.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Can members know better than consulting architects?
« Reply #5 on: June 23, 2008, 12:22:52 PM »
 8) Yes.

Hey George.. you mean stories like :

- placing an open diagonal ditch in the 230-250 yd landing zone, forcing 90% of folks to hit 175 yd approach shots, instead of fixing the underground culverts?

or

- filling in bunkers to their brims with sand to eliminate almost any penalty?
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back