[Mike_Cirba]

Jim Sullivan,

I wholeheartedly agree.

[JESII]

How about those old Gorse bushes.

I stuck one in the bush in the right bunker the first time I played there and Kittleman gave me a drop under the rule of hazards not extending vertically (ball was about waist high) and I went back to the 15th tee and got up and down...have to say I am glad they are gone now too...

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim,

Can't say I agree with you on the removal of the old gorse bushes.   

[JESII]

Look at that one in the right greenside bunker...if a guy had a putt from the apron there to a back left pin on a day with slow greens he might get a piece of the bush in his backswing...

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim,

There's a great photo in Jim Finegan's GAP history book of David Graham entagled in that right-hand bunker gorse.   Perhaps someone has it available?

[David_Elvins]

With regard the mound on 14 at Merion, will a ball that hits the wrong side of the mound on the approach shot ever bounce out of bounds when conditions are firm?

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Unfortunately no.

[David_Elvins]

David,

Unfortunately no.

Why unfortunately, Mike?

[James Bennett]

How about those old Gorse bushes.

I stuck one in the bush in the right bunker the first time I played there and Kittleman gave me a drop under the rule of hazards not extending vertically (ball was about waist high) and I went back to the 15th tee and got up and down...have to say I am glad they are gone now too...

Sulli

They might have been gone, but according to Sean Arble's post above - THEY'RE BACK!!

James B

[TEPaul]

This thread just reminds me that if this website wants to do itself any kind of accurate historical informational justice we all better find a way to see to it that Merion's Wayne Morrison gets back onto this Discussion Group!!

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Unfortunately no.

Why unfortunately, Mike?

David,

Because more than probably any great course in the world, with the possible exception of Hoylake, Merion uses the threat of OB as a strategic tactic.

On several holes, including 2, 7, 8, 14, & 15, the best angle for approach shots only is garnered by flirting dangerously with OB.   Other greens, such as 1, 7, 10, 12, & 15 are only footsteps away from OB with a serious miscue, a bladed wedge, a flier from the rough, etc.

So, the idea of a hot running approach into #14 hitting that mound and cascading OB would at least be consistent with a running theme one experiences time and again.   Other than that, I believe it's out of place.

[Chris Cupit]

I'm a little scared about this post but here it goes:

I loved the course but the area left of 14 green looked to me like there used to be a bunker there and it was removed and filled in with a big hump.  It was interesting but just seemed "odd" and a little out of place.  Every other approach seemed pretty hemmed in and lo and behold here is this hole with this "emptiness" on the left side.

I am perfectly willing to be persuaded that that type of quirk--not having a deep bunker where my eye was assuming one would be is a small part of the brilliance of this hole and Merion itself.  No real complaint, I just wonder if it visually surprised anyone else?

[Mike_Cirba]

Chris,

Don't be afraid.   

Some of us have actually said honestly what we think about architecture and Merion and have lived to tell about it.

Others, sadly...

[TEPaul]

Some architectural history probably needs to be included in the evolution of that 14th hole and the mound there rather than the bunker that used to be there at one point. Again, another reason Wayne Morrison needs to be back on here (he knows the accurate evolutionary history of that course better than anyone on here by probably a factor of about TEN).

Despite the architectural evolution of that hole, in my opinion, that mound there just too the left of #14 green really does have an important psychological influence on golfers, and particularly good ones. They know, and certainly under firm and fast conditions "through the green" that they cannot err left on that approach shot (the same way they once could) because if they do and their ball hits on the left side of that mound the chances of it bounding out of bounds is far greater than the way it used to be with a bunker where that mound was and basically rough rather than fairway grass to the left of it. Psychologically and strategically that brings the right side green-end bunkering on that hole into far greater effectiveness!

Nevertheless, since that mound/chipping area left was done a few years ago it has been pretty controversial with the membership and certainly one reason is there isn't much else on the golf course like it. That's certainly true, but, again, in my opinion, it works strategically and pychologically a lot better than the way the hole used to be with the bunker where the mound was.

The basic working idea behind that short grass mound and fairway area to the left of it is the idea of "short grass area as a form of HAZARD".

[Chip Gaskins]

David,

Unfortunately no.

Why unfortunately, Mike?

David,

Because more than probably any great course in the world, with the possible exception of Hoylake, Merion uses the threat of OB as a strategic tactic.

On several holes, including 2, 7, 8, 14, & 15, the best angle for approach shots only is garnered by flirting dangerously with OB.   Other greens, such as 1, 7, 10, 12, & 15 are only footsteps away from OB with a serious miscue, a bladed wedge, a flier from the rough, etc.

So, the idea of a hot running approach into #14 hitting that mound and cascading OB would at least be consistent with a running theme one experiences time and again.   Other than that, I believe it's out of place.

Tom-

Do you believe the "threat of OB" is a good psychological hazard for golfers?  And if you do, do you think it being used, as you state, 10 times on one course appropriate?

I love the #14 green!

Chip

[Mike_Cirba]

Chip/Tom,

On most any other course, I'd likely answer in the negative.

It's just that like all uniquely great courses, Merion has a sense of "place".

In this case, it's interwoven and blended uniquely into a pocket of the Philadelphia suburbs so tightly that the homes and roadways adjoining the property along the perimeters are almost part and parcel of the course themselves, much like the town of St. Andrews is indistinguishable from the golf experience.

You can't stand on the second tee and not feel the presence of a busy roadway encroaching just one slight push or slice away on the right, any more than you can stand on the 7th tee and not instinctively and visually realize that if you just push your tee shot slightly and cozy it up into that nook near the fence and homes on the right that you'll be shooting down the big length of that green for your second, but if you overdo it slightly....

How can one stand on the 15th tee and again not see the road snaking in on the left, just where you'd like to be to avoid the direct line, oblique approach over the fronting right bunker?

Probably unlike most any course I've ever played, the unnatural elements surrounding the Merion course are part and parcel of the golf.

However, unlike Tom's opinion, I'd be surprised in any conditions to see a ball cascade off the mound left of 14 and reach OB.   And even if it would, the fact that the shot needed artificial assistance to be penalized would discount it as inconsistent with the overall strangely seamless integration between golf and typical upscale Main-Line suburban life that is so much a part of the Merion experience.

Still, Tom certainly knows the course much better than I do, so if he says a ball could deflect OB off of that mound, it must be based on direct  knowledge.

[TEPaul]

"Tom-

Do you believe the "threat of OB" is a good psychological hazard for golfers?  And if you do, do you think it being used, as you state, 10 times on one course appropriate?"

Chip:

The psychological threat of OB on a lot of shots at Merion is certainly there but I wouldn't call it the result of a hot running shot or whatever. I think Mike Cirba was making the point about that. #14 is an example of a shot bounding OB straight off short grass with little to impede it. But it certainly isn't the only one. The tee shot on #15 is one of the scariest that way in all of golf.

[Sean_A]

I am more and more convinced that architectural worthiness has little or nothing to do with whether folks like a feature.  Instead, I believe it has much more to do with change.  Folks generally don't like change, especially older folks and we all know the average age of golf clubs can be quite high.  And all of this is regardless of the architectural history which I don't believe makes a hill of beans of difference in these discussions so long as the changes are sympathetic with the present design.  Golf courses change, sometimes for the better, sometimes not for the better and sometimes out of necessity.  If it weren't for change many of the great courses of GB&I would be good courses, but not the famed ones they have become. I am not at all sure why folks feel they have a personal right to like all changes made to all the great courses and if they don't like them there is a fall back to architectural history or some other such dodge. 

I like the idea of a hump kicking balls oob, but if rough holds up the roll out, there isn't much point in the feature because one is likely to end up with yet another shot from the rough.  So to make the feature really shine fairway well out left of the hump needs to be created.  If this is not on the cards then there may as well be yet another bunker (ho hum, I am getting bored) stuck in there. 

Mike C

I agree that like Hoylake, oob has a pride of place at Merion and it should be encouraged rather than eliminated.  Though, these days safety is a big concern and it can't be ignored.

The strategy of the oob has been eliminated on #2 because of the width of the fairway.  There is nothing to aim for except a strip of short grass.  If they push the fairway out to the left bunker then I would agree with you.  Additionally, the tree on the left may be more of a nuisance if the fairway rolled out left.  My immediate thought upon standing on the tee was that I would like the fairway short of the tree to extend all the way to #5 fairway - which may mean extending the 5th fairway back toward the tee (I don't recall how far back it goes).  That bank to the left is fairly steep and balls would roll down there quite easily.  All that said, I wonder how that impacts the safety of the road right.  I don't know how often guys sail one out now or if extending the fairway could in any way encourage more of that.

Ciao

[JESII]

Sean,

A wider fairway on the tee shot would help the second shot more than the first...assuming we utilize the *newly created* area of fairway 20 yards left of the current left edge, and we want an ideal angle to look into the green for our third (very, very few can reach the green in two), we are going to have to aim at the road almost directly. The visual difference is really something.

[TEPaul]

I think we can safely say that we have looked into it as best we could and the area to the left of the 2nd fairway over that bunkering was never fairway----not ever! We also feel the same was probably true on the left of #10.

I've always felt that too many on here get sort of carried away with this idea of constant mutiple options and different lines of play everywhere. It seems to fit in with their basic idea of what ideal "strategic" architecture is supposed to be in their minds.

Unfortunately, it seems that a number of the holes on some of these famous old courses were just not meant to be that way from their designers. Occasionally, they threw in some holes that were basically just one dimensional shot demand! I believe they even had a term for it which was "shot testing".

[Sean_A]

Sean,

A wider fairway on the tee shot would help the second shot more than the first...assuming we utilize the *newly created* area of fairway 20 yards left of the current left edge, and we want an ideal angle to look into the green for our third (very, very few can reach the green in two), we are going to have to aim at the road almost directly. The visual difference is really something.

Jim

Yours was exactly my point.  One can bail left off the tee, but either have a tree in the way or be looking at the road for the second shot.  TomP applauds the current setup because apparently that is the way it has always been.  Maybe this is the right attitude and maybe it isn't.  What I do know is that hacking from the rough (actually, I was so far left on this hole that I played from the 5th fairway anyway!) isn't fun and lord knows I don't try to make a living playing golf so what other reason is there to play golf other than for fun?  But I do know what Tom is talking about concerning design sometimes being about one having to hit a certain shot and if he doesn't - say good night and I agree to a certain extent depending on what the circumstances are.  I spose at the end of the day I don't like being hemmed in by roads because I don't want to see anybody get hurt with a sprayed drive.  I have seen way more of cars and people being hit than I care to.

Ciao

[JESII]

I guess there are larger issues than simply the architectural strategy of a hole so that's fine.

As to the mound on #14, the area left of it is mown as short grass I believe, and if it were firm, I do believe a ball bounding up there could get out of bounds without too much bad luck...I think that is good, but I still preferred the whole package when the bunker was there...

Adam Clayman would like me to better articulate that opinion and it's just that, an opinion...not looking for votes.

A great part of the genius (via interest and challenge) at Merion is visual intimidation by partial or total blindness. On #1, the hole bends just a bit to the right and is fairay short. If you take a safe club and favor the right center of the fairway you are left with a short iron to a target that is at least partially obscured because you are at a slightly lower elevation with some bunkering between you and the green, and while the green is generous, you're at the wrong angle. If you hit a longer shot and favor the left you will have a clear view of what you're trying to do. This type of challenge repeats itself on almost every hole.

#14 is a long par 4 that bends to the left a little. Most players intuitively try to take the shortest possible route on most holes, here it would be the left edge of the fairway. The really long players can get up to the top of the rise, but almost all are left on the upslope with a long iron or wood to the green. From here the green is almost totally obscured by the crest of the rise immediately in front of you and all you can see are the tops of the pin and surrounding bunkers. The "ideal" approach angle to a green should be dictated by the green. The best greens dictate multiple approach angles with different hole locations. The right half of #14 green is best approached from the left side of the fairway. The back left pin used to be best approached from the right, as dictated by the large, intimidating, visually obstructing left bunker that is now gone. Today, if the pin is in the back left corner you can do just as well from any position in the fairway.

[TEPaul]

"TomP applauds the current setup because apparently that is the way it has always been.  Maybe this is the right attitude and maybe it isn't."


Wait a minute, Sean, I never said I applaud the current setup of the way that 2nd fairway is. All I said is after a considerable amount of research on that point over the last few years it looks to us like that's the way that hole has ALWAYS been. And I offered what I believe is a logical reason why it was that way even in the beginning but I never said I applaud it or applaud it for that reason.

Frankly, if one was just doing a conceptual workup on a hole identical to that one and one identical to the one next to it (#5) I'd probably suggest almost melding the two fairways together. But this discussion is not about some conceptual workup of identical holes; this is about MERION, and Merion's #2 and I'm simply mentioning the way we think it has always been and probably why. For that reason I doubt I'd suggest they change it at this point. I sure wouldn't object though if they restored all the original fairway width on that golf course but taking fairway left of where it is now on #2 would not be a restoration, it would be a first time redesign.

[Kyle Harris]

Chris,

Don't be afraid.   

Some of us have actually said honestly what we think about architecture and Merion and have lived to tell about it.

Others, sadly...

Are those others perhaps... connected... with the mound?

[Kyle Harris]

Mike's point about the intimacy of the place, and the closeness of the OB is furthered by the story of the tee shot he hit on 15 the last time he played....

Care to share, Mike?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()