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.


david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Thoughts on Yeaman's
« on: October 06, 2008, 11:05:21 AM »
just returned from a fantastic weekend in Charleston, filled with 4 rounds at Yeaman's.  A few thoughts:

1.  The double plateau at #1 and the principal's nose there are phenomenal.

2. Throughout the back nine, it feels as though the scale of the bunkering gets bigger and the elevation changes are greater.

3.  I found that green countours and specifically the great frequency of "spine"  and "thumbprint" greens is a bit redundant at times and I wondered how many of those Raynor actually had there

4. Fast and firm is the word!!  lots of wedges hit into greens and no ball marks....tons o fun!!

5. #10 rivals #8 at PVGC for best short par four around

6. it looked as though the club is still enlarging/reclaiming some greens....rear of 4, 7, 10, 18 for example.

7. and finally a point of personal preference, I like the biarritz fully mowed at green height throught the swale and Yeaman's 16th is not.

JNC Lyon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2008, 11:18:36 AM »
Glad to hear you loved Yeamans Hall.  I've only played it once but that and Garden City are my all-time favorites.  #1 is easily my favorite starting hole anywhere.  That green has to be seen to be believed, and the tee shot is great too--it's a tough hole, but generous enough so that one can start with a par.  It's bold right out of the gates.

The spine green seems to be a theme of Raynor/Banks greens.  There were four or five at Hackensack Golf Club in NJ.  However, it generally creates great interest and variety on potentially uninteresting holes like number 9.

Not only does the scale of the course get larger throughout the back nine (though I believe the biggest elevation change is on 8 ), the holes get better and better as you go along.  The final six are all fantastic, especially 14 (probably the most dramatic greensite anywhere) 17 and 18.  I can't say I'm as big a fan of ten as you are.  The tee shot just isn't as engaging as it could be.  I believe there used to be left fairway bunkering that may get restored, but there isn't a great deal of decision-making off that tee.  The green site is unbelievable--one of the best on a course filled with wild greens, but I certainly like holes like 1 and 9 at Garden City, 4 at the Country Club, and 14 at Oak Hill East better as short fours.

I generally agree with you about the Biarritz green, but I found the scale and terrain of 16 at Yeamans Hall wouldn't allow green in front of the swale.  I would consider moving green into the swale, but as I remember the current green is already massive and filled with interest.

Also, you forgot to mention the very unique Alps Hole!
« Last Edit: October 06, 2008, 11:39:09 AM by JNC_Lyon »
"That's why Oscar can't see that!" - Philip E. "Timmy" Thomas

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2008, 11:25:28 AM »
I am a member of a Raynor club and have played multiple other Raynor's and I have not seen as many of the spines and thumbprints as I  saw at Yeaman's.  Perhaps it's because of the syle of the restoring architecht (Doak as opposed to Silva)  Totally disagree about engagement of #10 tee shot....you gotta get your yardage just right and then be sure you're coming in from the right angle to be able to score.  There's a ton of room at 16 in front of the swale...easily 30+ yared and it is flat and the right and left biarritz bunkereing starts well before the swale.  Of note also, since you mentioned the Alps, is the fact that there are two Raod holes at Yeaman's...one pretty short, one pretty long.

Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2008, 11:34:49 AM »
For me:
1.  The tee ball at #10 is not that appealing.  Trees are a factor and I never am comfortable with that aspect.
2.  More ground undulations on the back 9 for sure and that is good.
3.  #1 is one of golf's great beginnings.  Super second shot, road through it, etc.
4.  The river running along side the course, and the change of the direction during the round due to the tides is something this SoCal boy loves.
5. In match play the 16 and 17 are probably the pivotal holes.  18 is always just a hole that gets you back to the clubhouse.  It often seems a bit disappointing despite the well placed bunkers in the fairway.  I think the green is just a bit too different from the others and too much like silly modern courses today.
6.  The redan is wonderful and well placed in the routing of the holes.
7.  I love the tees right behind some of the greens.
8.  Maybe too many par 4's but one of golf's delightful experiences.

It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

JNC Lyon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2008, 11:38:39 AM »
You probably have more Raynor experience than me, but it seems Doak's restoration has been pretty thorough, especially around the greens.

You definitely have to get the right angle on ten into the green, but there are no hazards down the left that make this particularly difficult, which is why the cross bunkers need to be restored to make this hole truly great.

16 is a tough one on the green size, but I remember it being fairly steep in front of the green.  I must have a poor recollection there.  Expanding the green into the swale certainly wouldn't hurt, but moving it beyond the swale might be difficult to accomplish.

Which is the other Road hole besides 7?

I also love the 18th.  It is a very fun finishing hole where, if you hit two very solid shots, it can leave you a straightforward pitch for birdie.  However, if shots are not well-executed, you can run into trouble very quickly.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2008, 11:41:43 AM by JNC_Lyon »
"That's why Oscar can't see that!" - Philip E. "Timmy" Thomas

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2008, 11:50:34 AM »
#12 seems to be another Road green complex...also I really really like the home hole....bunkering and options abound for wild swings in scoring and match play.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2008, 01:59:33 PM »
David:

I think the reason our "restored" greens are different than some of Brian Silva's you might have seen is that the greens were our primary mission at Yeamans Hall.  Most of Brian's restorations (that I know of, anyway) were overall work at clubs that didn't want to tear up their greens.

All we had to work from at Yeamans was an old map that showed hash-marks for undulation in the greens ... what had been built in the 1920's had been long since buried by topdressing.  We had no elevations to work from, so we just had to make an educated guess as to the size of the undulations, but I did send Jim Urbina to Chicago Golf Club and Shoreacres just before we started so he would have a feel for the scale.

Brian Cenci

Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2008, 07:51:30 AM »
I remember walking away from Yeamans thinking that there would be very few architectual design styles that would fit that landscape and I think that Raynor pulled it off with such a flat piece of property.

John Shimp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2008, 10:12:56 AM »
Brian,
I never thought of Yeamans being flat?  Definetely some flat holes but for a coastal piece of property it is really undulating in my mind.  I agree Raynor definetely pulled it off though!

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Yeaman's
« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2008, 05:21:02 PM »
Tom--at least at Elkridge, the major task for Brian was the greens and they are vastly different from the previous iteration of RTJ flat circles.

I also had the chance to hang out with a couple of local geologists in charleston that knew the land at yeamans fairly well and they pointed out that that land is some of the only undulating topo in the area due to the clay under the sand there...they pointed to fact that the goose river does not and has not eroded the property at all and the fact that so much of it was high ground.  Perhaps, it's just a really cool geographic and geologic anomoly for the area....

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back