[David_Elvins]

Patrick,

This is a great series of posts.

Where are the traditional tournament pin positions?  How far right can they put the pin?

[TEPaul]

David Elvins:

That particular pin showing in that photo just above is a particularly challenging pin, particularly with some good firmness and speed on those greens. Looking at that green can you imagine why? 

Bryon:

Of course to the first time player at NGLA playing an approach shot to that green is going to be hard to figure out where to go or how far to go. One can't see a thing of the green or what it's like before they get up on the hill and within less than a hundred yards of it. I don't believe Macdonald had the slightest concern about designing that course for people who had never seen anything of it before.

However, as mentioned earlier that enormous flag pole behind the green is adjustable with its placement across that berm in the back so a first time golfers can see that from below and have a good idea what side of the green the day's pin is on. Incidentally, those enormous poles behind greens like on this one were something of a signature of some Macdonald courses. I grew up at Piping Rock and that course has always had two holes with those enormous poles. Those holes also have bells the players are expected to ring as they exit the green. Maybe the 12th at Piping no longer has one because some of the new back tees are high enough where the oncoming players can see the group in front of them climb up to it.

[TEPaul]

David Elvins:

I see you're the president of the Mike Young Society. What does one need to do to become a member of the Mike Young Society? I have eaten grits with Mike Young----does that get me in? If it doesn't, it should because it's asking a lot of a Northerner to eat grits!!

From the Alabama hash-slinger to Cousin Vinnie:
"Haven't you ever seen grits before?"

Cousin Vinnie:
"Yeah, I saw a grit once."

[Charlie Goerges]

In pulling together the composite images that make up aerials that I'm posting, I've spent a lot of time looking at the course from that perspective. What I've noticed it that it looks different than pretty much any course I've ever looked at from an aerial perspective. What's more, most other courses resemble each other far more than any of them resemble NGLA.

Why is this? I speculated that perhaps it was due to the relative lack of aerial photos from the time when it was built and hence, the designer's then didn't know or care what their courses might look like from overhead. But if that was true, other courses from the time would exhibit the same traits. So I'm back to square one. Any ideas on this?

A while back I looked at NGLA and Shinnie on Google Earth.  Shinnie looked pretty much like other golf courses.  NGLA looked like a Salvador Dali painting.  I thought it was due to the bunkers' shapes and placements, plus the fairway configurations.  No mostly-straight ribbons there.  Just the opposite.  

Would be interesting to look at aerials of other CBM courses, and see if any of them look like NGLA does from the air.  The few I checked out don't.  

Why then NGLA?  Some off-the-cuff guesses:  1)  The land.  NGLA's topography led CBM to create these shapes.  Perhaps if he'd had similar land elsewhere he would have made a golf course with similar formations.    

2) Seth Raynor.  After NGLA, didn't Raynor do the legwork on all other courses CBM worked on?  Perhaps we see SR's greater influence on other CBM courses.  

3)  His baby.  More than any other course, this was CBM's true love.  He searched for and bought the land.  Was a founding member.  The designer.  He poured his heart and soul into NGLA.  Maybe that's what we're getting a glimpse of at NGLA.      

4.  CBM's time.  He spent more time on NGLA than any other.  Fine tuned and changed it for years.  Had he given that much time to some other courses, maybe they too would have looked different from the sky.  

My guesses lay all the credit at CBM's feet.  I wonder if any Desmond Muirhead courses might look like this, too?  

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed this aerial differentiation. Any one of your explanations would make sense Jim. Now it's just a matter of figuring out which one(s) represents the truth!


P.S. Tom Paul, how do YOU know CBM didn't see an aerial when he designed NGLA?!?!? They had Hot-Air balloons back then!

[TEPaul]

"P.S. Tom Paul, how do YOU know CBM didn't see an aerial when he designed NGLA?!?!? They had Hot-Air balloons back then!  "


Charlie:

Good point and interesting point and one could probably fairly say that Charlie Macdonald was the biggest Hot Air balloon extant in America at the time he routed and designed NGLA. I've even heard some say that C.B. was so creative he actually had a jet helicopter and a digital camera about 5-7 decades before such things were invented.

As to why NGLA and many of its holes look different on an aerial than most other American courses, I think it might have a lot to do with the fact it is essentially an old-style out and back routing which tend towards sites that are VERY NARROW throughout and a number of its holes are replicas of those holes over there back then in the early days.

It's incredibly ironic really as their sites are generally so narrow and probably BECAUSE of that many of their holes aren't narrow at all (which seems highly counterintuitive, Im sure) BECAUSE they are often melded together such as many of the fairways (and greens) of TOC. From the air that kind of thing can make holes appear wide and amorphous.

The fact is I don't believe any other course Macdonald/Raynor ever did has a site that is overall as narrow from beginning to end as is NGLA's, and that is probably very important to note and perhaps the answer to this riddle of the look of its holes from the air. If Macdonald had never done template holes from abroad this narrow site's holes may not look as they do from the air.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I hope this does not sound negative at all because I am so excited about this great golf course, but is it as "blind" to the first time golfer as it seems on these photos?  It appears that it is almost too hard unless you either 1) have a caddy or 2) really know key locations on the golf course.  I love the bunkering, but I am struggling that the holes require so much local knowledge that they can be "unfair" to the virgin NGLA adventurer.

Bryon,

You do sound like a wimp with that remark.

Do you think your negative perspective about blindness jives with the almost universal acclaim and accolades the course receives ?  Do you see the disconnect in your position versus a broad spectrum of opinion ?

CBM ingeniously crafted several routes from each tee to each green.
Each golfer selects the route he feels comfortable with.
On # 1 if you take the safer, less challenging route, you'll face a blind approach, albeit a short one.
# 3 offers a different challenge.   Essentially, you take the safer route and yield a shot to the hole, or take the blind, bold route and gain the potential reward of gaining a shot or staying even on the hole.

In terms of blindness, you can encounter degrees of it on 8 or the first 9 holes, depending upon your play.
Only # 6, one of my favorite par 3's in the world, gets an exemption.

What's been lost on/by/in modern golf in America is blindness,  it doesn't TELEVISE well.
Hence, it's avoided and generally categorized as a no-no.

Yet, to the golfer, there's nothing that contains more suspense and anticipation than climbing the hill on # 3 to see where your ball has ended up.

There have been occassions when I felt that I drilled an approach shot right on line, only to find my ball off the green or far from the hole.  Other times, when I mishit an approach I was surprised to find my ball two feet from the hole.  Since, unlike TEPaul, my memory remains sharp, these events, etched in the recesses of your memory banks, come to the fore as you climb that hill.  There's a palbable excitement as one ascends and nears the crest.  

Will I be exhilarated or will I be disappointed ?  
Will I have a makeable birdie putt or will I have to scramble for a par.  
Will I have a relaxed putt or will I have to work my ass off just to two putt ?

THIS HOLE IS EXCITING, FROM START TO FINISH.

[TEPaul]

Bryon:

I'm sure you fully expected to be pummeled by Pat Mucci with the remarks you made about the extreme blindness of the green of #3 and of course you were pummeled by him this morning as a whimp and so forth.

However, Patrick does have a valid point (which is actually extremely rare with him on here) about how blindness was once perceived for a time, particularly abroad, until, curiously, almost the entire opinion in the world of golf architecture began to turn hard against blindness in architecture in any form (except for a brave few who continued to defend the interest in it, such as Max Behr).

It is also really ironic how this shifting of opinion towards blindness generally even as early as the first decade of the 20th century, created some really paradoxical opinions and statements from some of the world's seemingly top architectural analysts and critics.

What I'm particularly refering to is the review of Horace Hutchinson of at least two courses over here in his visit to America in 1910. He praised his friend Macdonald's course as the finest in America but he criticized Leed's Myopia for having too many blind shots when in fact NGLA has more of them than Myopia does or ever did.   

And furthermore, it really tickles me when some of the ultra Macdonald defenders on this website today take great umbrage at what I just said and even claim that is in no way true. All one has to do is just go out on either of those courses and use their own eyes to tell how true it is. 

Apparently some of those great and respected critics from the past were every bit as fallable with what they said about courses and architecture as some of us are today. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

This is a great series of posts.

Where are the traditional tournament pin positions? 


By luck, I retained a pin sheet from one of the rounds in 2007's tournament.
I can email it to someone who knows how to post those things on GCA.com.
If that person/s would email me their email address, I'll send it out today.

In the qualifying rounds, over the years, I've found the hole locations to be deliciously diabolical, especially under firm and fast conditions, with # 12 being amongst the best hole locations I've ever encountered...... anywhere.  
They place the hole behind a spine/ridge, near the back of the green.
Those who know the hole and green well, know that it was on this hole that Yogi Berra coined his famous phrase, "you can't get here from there"  He was talking about the hole location on the 12th green and anywhere else on the golf course, including the 12th fairway.
 
How far right can they put the pin?

As far right as you can imagine.



Now, here's the beauty of that location, which is up on a plateau with a steep fall off to the immediate right.  Armed with a pin sheet, if it's there, the incentive on the tee is to challenge the far right corner of the diagonal bunker, for if you do so, you'll get an additional turbo boost which not only gets you closer to the green, but, it gives you an unobstructed view of the plateau and the flag.
A well executed tee shot gives you a clear view of the green, your target and the right side surrounds.  Risk/reward at its best.



Please notice the flag on the flagstaff, it's pretty much at attention, and, out of the west.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Charlie Georges,

Had you done your due diligence and read "Scotland's Gift" by Charles Blair Macdonald, you would have known the answer to that question.

CBM did NOT have the benefit of aerial information/photos.

The only hot air balloon he came close to were TEPaul's relatives.

[Patrick_Mucci]

The plaque on the bell tower is dedictated to Joe McBride.
Joe was a great guy and a terrific golfer.
He donated the bell/tower to NGLA.

The bell is rung when golfers leave the 3rd green, signaling golfers in the fairway that they can hit away.

Joe taught me a myriad of unusual golf shots that he inventoried over his many years of playing NGLA.  Shots that provided the golfer with a wide selection of clubs and trajectories.  Joe had an incredible short game, and was willing to share his playing methods with others.

He showed me dozens of shots from 100 to 5 yards out at # 7 green and at # 12 green from 200  to 5 yards.   He did the same on hole after hole at NGLA.

He was a tenacious competitor and a great guy.

His family and friends miss him.

[BVince]

Pat and Tom,

The hole is gorgeous and I know that it is great fun for all players.  I agree that blind shots are a lost art of golf architecture and I do not remember ever playing a great blind hole in my golfing career.  That is probably why I am surprised to see blind shots on two of the first three holes of one of America's great golf courses.  I must educate myself more on this subject of golf architecture.

When I played college golf at West Point G.C., it had three holes with blind shots.  Two of them were drives on holes 4 and 7 and then a semi-blind par 3 16th.  They just were not great shots.  The blind shots at that course lacked both a target and emotional appeal.

When I look at the pictures of NGLA, I know that is not the case.  I know they are great holes and I appreciate the bold design.  I guess I was thinking a little selfishly that if I ever got the chance to play the course, I may feel a bit vulnerable when selecting an approach on the first few holes.  But hey, that’s a great feeling and something I have rarely experienced on any golf course, much less a great one!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryon,

Just because a hole presents a blind shot doesn't mean that the golfer doesn't understand, or have a feel for, the position he's in relative to the primary features on the golf course.

[Tom_Doak]

So, I don't want to hijack this thread, but I might as well just go ahead and ask the question:

Is everybody going to go apoplectic if our Alps at Old Macdonald doesn't have a cross-bunker all the way across at at National?

Because right now it doesn't, on my orders.  There is a pretty sharp downslope from the top of the hill toward the green, but right now I am pinching it with bunkers instead of cutting it off ... partly because I don't like the idea of so much drainage running down into the bunker, but also because if players successfully go left off the tee and up over the hill with their seconds I wanted to give them a chance of getting home without having to carry all the way to the green in two.

[Patrick_Mucci]

So, I don't want to hijack this thread, but I might as well just go ahead and ask the question:

Is everybody going to go apoplectic if our Alps at Old Macdonald doesn't have a cross-bunker all the way across at at National?

I won't.

But, I think I understand the distinction between the retail golfer, Mike Keiser's target market, and the market at NGLA, along with CBM's intent, which was far more reaching.

However, I think some purists may assess demerits when evaluating the hole.

Did you ever consider having a faux cross bunker ?

Because right now it doesn't, on my orders.  There is a pretty sharp downslope from the top of the hill toward the green, but right now I am pinching it with bunkers instead of cutting it off ... partly because I don't like the idea of so much drainage running down into the bunker, but also because if players successfully go left off the tee and up over the hill with their seconds I wanted to give them a chance of getting home without having to carry all the way to the green in two.

Tom, you have to decide what works best, given the topography, weather, etc., etc..

However, I would offer another suggestion.

When the George Washington Bridge was originally built, it had one level.
But, the genius of the architecture was that it allowed for another level to be added.
Might that not be a considered design option for you ?

[TEPaul]

Tom Doak:

I completely buy your logic with no total crossbunker on your Alps hole at Old Macdonald. Why should you be an automatic slave to some feature just because it was once abroad and Macdonald decided to copy it a century ago? I am surprised however that George Bahto didn't get apoplectic as he really is a true Macdonald purist for sure.

Do you believe Mucci's suggestion? A "faux" crossbunker???!!??

What in the hell is a "faux" crossbunker? Probably the same thing as a "faux" golf course architectural analyst which is precisely what Pat Mucci is! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

I can't wait to see a two level cross bunker....

Basically, I agree with Tom Doak. What good is the alternate route if there is no way on earth to use the acceratror ramp to reach the green?  Pinched bunkers is perfect - you avoided risk on the tee shot (although you might have shortened the hole) so you need some risk, but not a penalty for trying to go for the green over the hill.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I can't wait to see a two level cross bunker....

Basically, I agree with Tom Doak.

What good is the alternate route if there is no way on earth to use the acceratror ramp to reach the green? 

Jeff, I look at it a little differently.

I view that alternate route as a default route if the golfer feels he CAN'T make the heroic carries required, and, there are two of them.  The first is the hill, being able to get sufficient trajectory to traverse it on the fly.  That's also a function of lie and distance, ... and wind.

The second is contingent upon being able to meet task # 1 and then being able to hit the ball a distance sufficient to carry the cross bunker.

They are two distinctly different tasks.

If the golf feels that he'll fail at either attempt, then, the alternate route is THE prudent path to follow.
It allows the lesser golfer, or the unlucky golfer to lick their wounds, and take a more gentle path to the green.

I view that gentle path as an architectural requirement on a true Alps hole.

Pinched bunkers is perfect - you avoided risk on the tee shot (although you might have shortened the hole) so you need some risk, but not a penalty for trying to go for the green over the hill.

But, that's a critical design element and playing factor (mental & physical) on the hole.

To ignore it is to create a mutant or hybrid, not a true Alps

[TEPaul]

Mr. Brauer, Sir:

I just hate it when you try to use architectural terms and concepts I don't understand! I just hate it. What in the hell is an acceratror ramp anyway??  

Not to play the Devil's Advocate, particularly after what I just said about that Alps crossbunker, but judging from the way both you and Tom Doak seem to want to completely coddle the little guy and weak players by making everything easier for them in architecture, I have to ask if both you guys are secretly like a couple of Ultra liberal New York pinko limo-liberals who think it's right and cool and justifiable to do anything and everything for the weak and unqualified in society and golf even though there's no way in hell they deserve it?

You two guys certainly act like a couple of pinko New York limo-liberals with that suggestion of giving the weak golfer an option to redeem himself just after he screwed up off the tee by sneaking their damn puny golf ball onto the green via some liberal democratic acceratror ramp which noone even knows the meaning of anyway. This is just typical of you left wing liberal types who try to confuse (with terms like acceratror ramps) and conquer people who are good and pure and stand for something important in life.

I bet you two know some communists too, don't you?? Huh? HUH??

C.B. Macdonald would never stand for such a thing, that's for sure. He didn't even want clubs that had people like that in them to be members of the USGA.  He relented some and admitted that he would not be totally opposed to clubs like that if they were what they called back then  "Allied" members but they had to pay the freight anyway and they were only allowed to eat outside the kitchen door.

You two are something else. You probably think it was OK to allow women to play golf too, and be allowed to sneak through gaps in crossbunkers over Alps holes via pinko acceratror ramps, right? RIGHT?? Huh? HUH?? WELL?

[TEPaul]

You see that----Patrick looks at an acceratror ramp through the middle of an Alps crossbunker differently too, like I do. Who says Patrick and I don't agree on anything? He doesn't believe in New York pinko limousine liberal golf architecture that coddles stumble-bums, crumb-blondes and undeserving golfers either. As horrible as it is to say, much less think, I bet you two guys voted for Barrack Obama too, didn't you? Huh? WELL??

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

We do agree on this.

It seems to me that the contemplated design is a concession to the retail golfer.

I view it as a dumbing down of the "sharp/unique" critical architectural features of an Alps hole.

I don't want to spend Mike Keiser's money or Tom Doak's intellectual capital, but, I'd insert a cross bunker on the theory that I could always fill it in.  (Insert the word "heresy")

P.S.  We should return to the discussion of # 3 at NGLA

P.S.S.  TE, tell Jeff that the term "accelerator ramp" is just another word for "turbo boost"

[Charlie Goerges]

I think George mentioned that the cross bunker was not a difficult one from which to extricate oneself. If that's the case, why wouldn't it be better to hit the third shot from there than the alternate route?

[TEPaul]

"It seems to me that the contemplated design is a concession to the retail golfer."


Retail golfer? That's kind of you? Do you think C.B. would phrase it that way or more like they don't deserve to breath the same air as people like us who can hit a golf ball over a big hill and past a crossbunker on an Alps hole?



"P.S.S.  TE, tell Jeff that the term "accelerator ramp" is just another word for "turbo boost""


Patrick, you are totally hopeless and apparently you don't know how to read either. Jeff Brauer didn't say an accelerator ramp which anyone know is another word for a "turbo boost." He said an acceratror ramp which is some kind of New York pinko limousine liberal golf architecture feature to help out totally undeserving golfers.

If he meant an accelerator ramp instead of an acceratror ramp don't you think he's smart enough and capable enough to have said so?

OR, you're trying to call Mr Jeffrey Brauer an idiot who's not capable of writing what he means, aren't you Patrick? Well aren't you? Huh? HUH? WELL??

I think you are. No, I amend that---I know you are!

Mr. Brauer, beat him up, would you please?!


"P.S.  We should return to the discussion of # 3 at NGLA."


Well then go ahead and return to the discussion of #3 at NGLA; who the hell is trying to stop you? Maybe you've become too preoccupied by something really dumb like your suggestion that Pine Valley should be returned to the look of a 1925 aerial.

[jkinney]

John's pictures are much better than mine.  But here is a slightly zoomed view from the tee:
  


Notice the directional flag above the hill in line with the center bunker.  Even though you know the green is over the hill to the left it is hard to commit yourself to that line.  The wandering path of the fairway to the right seems to have a gravitational pull on the mind in that direction.  Did CBM intentionally use the rightward flow of fairway to lure the less resolute astray?

More than any other hole at NGLA, #3 is etched in my memory.  I'd love to see it again.

Ed

Ed - Your photo is shows "Alps" as the naked eye does (all my golf photos are taken with a 135mm lens, which give +/-1.1x what the naked eye takes in). Thank you for posting it.

I'm late to this thread and glad to be so, as many interesting posts have been written deserving of commentary. Kudos to Pat Mucci for his elegant opening analysis. His love of The National is as genuine as can be. I would only add to it the element of the SW trade wind, which quarters against and which is nearly impossible to estimate from the fairway in the valley. I can't tell you how many times I've hit my approach into the cross bunker after misjudging the wind.

The cross bunker is a marvelous feature for this particular "Alps". Without it, the hole would lose a lot of its teeth, IMO.
This is not to suggest that Tom Doak needs one on his own version, and I very much look forward to seeing the Pacific Alps.

With today's drivers and balls, it's easy to reach the upslope in the fairway with a well struck drive. But it wasn't always so. Going for the green from the downhill lies near the start of the fairway was dicey at best, as was the decision to carry or stay short of the mini cross bunker going up the right side when laying up. In the persimmon & steel shaft days, taking the aggressive line down the right side with the driver involved a long carry against the trade wind.

One way CBM ameliorated the severity of the greenside cross bunker was to locate it a good 20 yds. short of the front of the green itself and then to shave down that last 20 yds. of fairway to frogs hair level, so that the actual area in which to land an approach was easily deep enough for the distance and trajectory required. CBM's genius was in realizing that it would take a golfer hundreds of approaches into "Alps" to figure this out and not fret over the cross bunker itself.

The putting green is one of the most interesting in the world of golf, IMO. But that's also the case with nearly all of The National's greens. If one isn't a really good long lag putter, one has a hard time scoring well at The National.
 
Now that The National is five seasons into the healing process after the wholesale tree removal, the domed feature of
"Alps" and "Redan" falling off it are daunting features indeed visible to the golfer exiting the second "Sahara" green... It's kinda like that great BMW add with Joe Pesci as the voice over for the Brooklyn Bridge: "I'm da Brooklyn Bridge. You wanna piece 'a me... Come 'ere.....Come on".

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jkinney,

I was playing at Point Judith with Terry McBride and Tom Gilbane when Terry unveiled his newest, or should I say, his weekly, acquisition, The Biggest Big Bertha.

After he let me and Tom hit it a few times, my thought immediately went to NGLA.

In particular, the 8th hole and the 3rd hole.

With steel shafted persimmon drivers the centerline bunker complex on # 8 and the diagonal bunker on # 3 had always been a serious challenge.

All too often I was faced with a downhill/sidehill lie on # 3, which made the approach shot exceedingly difficult.  Even from the valley floor, with a flat lie, the approach was demanding.

While I like my Taylor 580 with a UST shaft, even though Terry says I'm playing with ancient equipment, I recognize that getting comfortably close to the rough on the uphill slope has become far easier with new equipment.

To a degree, the Alps hole has lost some of the challenge, in the tee shot and in the second shot.

It was a far more ferocious hole 20-30 years ago than it is today.

However, the brilliant design, with the upslope turning from fairway to deep fescue rough has protected the integrity of the hole, effectively reigning in distance off the tee.  While it's easier for the big hitter to throttle down off the tee and still reach the upslope, that second shot remains a beauty, and the element of chance still play an important role in determining outcome.

The hole certainly plays different into the heavy damp air then it does on a 90 degree day with no wind.

It's a hole for the ages and they did it with mules and men.

[George_Bahto]

(overlapping threat with Pat's)

jkinney you said: ”going for the green from the downhill lies near the start of the fairway was dicey at best, as was the decision to carry or stay short of the mini cross bunker going up the right side when laying up”

That’s what Macdonald actually intended when he built the hole - having that downhill lie and having to hit over the mountain.  Good call   -   yes, it’s meaningless today.

Also on the same fairway - given the distances they hit the ball in the early days, there are areas in the landing zone where he felt, if the play called for a draw, he left you with a hook lie and vista versa - again, no longer a factor.

Also notice when you take the right fairway option how the fairway narrows dramatically the farther you hit the ball.

Imagine this hole in 1911!!


Alps at Old Macdonald:       TEP: I don’t have to convey my thoughts very often to Tom Doak  - he most always knows exactly what my thoughts are.  

I know it would probably not feasible I’d love to see a bunker like the one at Prestwick guarding the green. That one blew my mind when I saw it.


Sorry   ................    back to the subject at hand: #3 NGLA  


There are a lot of features I like about that green that really don’t show up in pictures and are often overlooked when playing the hole (probably because the green is so wide)

*   the tilt of the green is severely right to left and there is some interesting falloffs left front

*   hardly anyone ever talks about the large shelf on the left side of the green -a great feature that hardly influences putting unless you are unfortunate enuf to hit your approach up there

*   obviously those two “non-parallel” ridges running side to side across the green, a feature they nearly always originally built on an Alps green. There is a great picture of Bobby Jones putting on NGLA-3 green that shows it very clearly.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()