Post Round Thoughts on Bel-Air, LACC, and Riviera

[Jim Thornton]

I had the great fortune to play Bel-Air, LACC and Riviera last week.  Following are my impressions of the 3 courses after some reflection.  One man's opinion, for what it's worth:

Bel-Air CC
1.  The best greens of the 3 courses...excellent internal green contours, fast and very firm conditioning, difficult to read with subtle breaks.  Lots of great hole locations.

2.  Great movement in the land...again, best of the 3 courses in my view.  A wonderful piece of property with beautiful vistas of the Hollywood hills and downtown LA.

3.  I know many of the bunkers have been changed, but I didn't find them so much out of character as others have suggested.  Let me be clear...the bunkers are not nearly as impressive as Riviera, but they're not horrible either (or even the slightest bit offensive for that matter).

4.  The water features that have been introduced throughout the course are totally contrived and detract from the course.   The water features are not unattractive per se, it's just that they are totally out of character...it feels a little bit like Shadow Creek in parts.  The water features just don't come across as natural.

5.  Tree clearing would do the course a world of good.  Several of the tee shots are quite narrow.

6.  The history and ambiance of the club are world-class.  Very friendly membership, great service, great clubhouse and setting.

7.  Extraordinary displays with golf memorabilia adjacent to the locker room.

8.  In total, I would rank it the 3rd best of the 3 courses, but frankly it is a wonderful course in it's own right.

LACC North
1.  Another amazing piece of property with great movement in the land.

2.  Great par 3's.

3.  Course absolutely screams championship layout..what a shame that the club hasn't wanted to host a USGA championship.  The USGA recently approached the club about hosting the Walker Cup and the request has been put put to a vote by the membership.  Speculation at the club is that the members will decline to host the tournament.

4.  A complete examination...long, strong, challenging greens, well-bunkered, strategically challenging.

5.  Course is in the midst of a bunker restoration by Gil Hanse and they will close the North course for 9 months starting in June for a complete regrassing of all fairways, tees, and greens.

6.  Very private ambiance.

7.  An amazing display of golf memorabilia in the lobby.

8.  In terms of course layout and architecture, my 2nd favorite of the 3 courses but behind Riviera by a slim margin.  Once the bunker restoration and regrassing projects are completed, it might nudge ahead of Riviera in my book.

Riviera
1.  The championship history makes it a very special place. The clubhouse setting overlooking the course is majestic.

2.   Overall, the best conditioned of the 3 courses...reminded me of Oakmont in terms of being in championship conditioning routinely.

3.  The bunkering was my favorite by far of the 3 courses...incredible.

4.  The land has far less movement than Bel-Air or LACC since it sits in the floor of the canyon.  With that said, Thomas' use of the barrancas is pure genius.

5.  Great strategy in the layout that forces you to really think your way around the course.

6.  The best set of par 3's among the 3 courses...great variety.

7.  A world-class finishing stretch of holes in 15-18.  Strong par 4 15th, great par 3 16th, strong par 5 17th, and classic par 4 finishing 18th hole.

8.  My favorite of the 3 courses.  I'm a sucker for history and in the end that puts it ahead for me.

There you have it....comments, questions, and challenges are welcome.


Jim

[David Stamm]

Jim, I have to disagree about Bel Air's bunkers. To quote Jon Spaulding, they are an abortion and not the least bit complimentary to the legacy of the course. I agree with the Shadow Creek comment and the tree removal. In all fairness, Fazio isn't the only one that has defaced that wonderful place, but he had the chance to restore the look of the original course recently and has screwed it all up.

[Jim Thornton]

David-

That's a pretty strong statement.  What specifically about the bunkers do you think make them "an abortion"?  The style, the location, the shape?

Jim

[David Stamm]

David-

That's a pretty strong statement.  What specifically about the bunkers do you think make them "an abortion"?  The style, the location, the shape?

Jim

A picture is worth a thousand words. The first hole (compliments of Spaulding). Compare this to the photos I posted in the LACC Bunker Renov thread. The style and shape are awful for a Thomas/Bell golden age course.

[Lou_Duran]

"To quote Jon Spaulding, they are an abortion and not the least bit complimentary to the legacy of the course."

It is a dangerous world when Jon Spaulding is cited as an authority on bunker design and a George Thomas historian.   

We have had this discussion before, but ragged edged bunkers often "evolve" into cleaner, curvi-linear/straighter versions.  Look at how CPC has evolved through the years.  Personally, I thought he Bel-Air bunkers were less impressive that those of the other two, but they hardly detract from the wonderful setting.  The water features and heavy tree coverage can be done without.

As to the par 3s at Riviera being the "best set of par 3's among the 3 courses...great variety", I must have played a different Riviera.  #4 is a very long Redan that doesn't play like one because the kikuyu.  #6 is "great" only because the unique pot-like in the left center of the green.  #14 and #16 are very similar holes, no more than a half to a club difference, and along with #4 run in the same direction.

I give LACC-north a good edge over Riviera, and both are a step above Bel-Air.  I could be happy being a member at any of them.

[Bob_Huntley]

Lou,

I agree with you. As a former member at Riviera, I think the 4th, the 6th and 16th are very good, the 14th is just blah. At LACC the 4th is good, the 9th and 11th are superb and the 7th is mundane. Bel Air has the 10th which is the best of the lot.


Bob

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm sorry, but that's just fawful.   

Nice report, though Jim.   Some very fine courses indeed, all at various stages somewhat removed from their prime.

[Jon Spaulding]

Thanks Lou....my opinion has been stated numerous times, and I stand by it. The more work that is done at Bel Air, the less of a Thomas course it becomes. Simple equation, really.  I think that to be a bad thing.

How does Lou feel about what Dick Wilson and Fabio have done with 11 and 12 at Bel Air?...and what adjective is appropriate.

[Ryan Farrow]

Lou, I don't know what Riviera you played but all things considered Riviera has a world class set of 1 shotters. And your description of one of the best par 3's out there was a total buzz kill. I just don't think you will find many par 3's that play as different + how much does direction really matter at Riviera? Is there a consistent, noticeable wind direction? I felt pretty sheltered from the elements when I was there, but it was only once. Plus 90% of the course is as flat as a pancake.

[Sean_A]

For my part, I would like to hear from those who know the courses well enough to discuss whats really important about the bunkers - how do they impact play?  Far too much time is wasted arguing about the style of bunkers.  Its neither here nor there in the big scheme of things.  While I may agree that a certain style is nicer than another or that trying to keep the look in keeping with the original look is pretty cool, its just fluff when we get into the heart of any course.   

Ciao 

[David Stamm]

For my part, I would like to hear from those who know the courses well enough to discuss whats really important about the bunkers - how do they impact play?  Far too much time is wasted arguing about the style of bunkers.  Its neither here nor there in the big scheme of things.  While I may agree that a certain style is nicer than another or that trying to keep the look in keeping with the original look is pretty cool, its just fluff when we get into the heart of any course.   

Ciao 

So the nature of the bunkers is fluff as long as the location is the same?

[Jim Nugent]

Lou, I don't know what Riviera you played but all things considered Riviera has a world class set of 1 shotters. And your description of one of the best par 3's out there was a total buzz kill. I just don't think you will find many par 3's that play as different + how much does direction really matter at Riviera?

Yet former Riviera member Bob Huntley agreed with Lou.

[Steve Burrows]

Lou, I don't know what Riviera you played but all things considered Riviera has a world class set of 1 shotters. And your description of one of the best par 3's out there was a total buzz kill. I just don't think you will find many par 3's that play as different + how much does direction really matter at Riviera? Is there a consistent, noticeable wind direction? I felt pretty sheltered from the elements when I was there, but it was only once. Plus 90% of the course is as flat as a pancake.

Ryan,

The wind is constantly a factor at Riviera; remember, you are only about a mile from the ocean.  On a "normal" day, the wind, even if only a few miles-per-hour, has a tendency to knock down weakly struck approach shots, particularly on holes 12-16, which brings fronting bunkers very much into play on these holes.  This impact right handed players the most, in my opinion, as a weakly struck shot, particularly one that is hit "thin," has a tendency to come up short and right, which is right where bunkers are on these holes, particularly 12 and 15.

This all changes, of course, when the Santa Ana winds come from the east in the Fall.

[Sean_A]

For my part, I would like to hear from those who know the courses well enough to discuss whats really important about the bunkers - how do they impact play?  Far too much time is wasted arguing about the style of bunkers.  Its neither here nor there in the big scheme of things.  While I may agree that a certain style is nicer than another or that trying to keep the look in keeping with the original look is pretty cool, its just fluff when we get into the heart of any course.   

Ciao 

So the nature of the bunkers is fluff as long as the location is the same?

David

"Nature" is a pretty esoteric way to describe appearance.  In any case, when folks are arguing between this



and



then yes, its fluff.  I am sure there are more pressing matters concerning a course that could be attended to.

Ciao

[rjsimper]

For my part, I would like to hear from those who know the courses well enough to discuss whats really important about the bunkers - how do they impact play?  Far too much time is wasted arguing about the style of bunkers.  Its neither here nor there in the big scheme of things.  While I may agree that a certain style is nicer than another or that trying to keep the look in keeping with the original look is pretty cool, its just fluff when we get into the heart of any course.   

Ciao 

So the nature of the bunkers is fluff as long as the location is the same?

To an extent I think this is absolutely true.

Sure, all things equal, if I could have aesthetically pleasing bunkers versus less-so types I would choose the former, but it's like talking about ocean views to some extent.  Does it really change the playing characteristics of a hole to have frilly bunkers versus sharp-edged ones?  Yes, for the 0.1% of shots that hit the edge and carom one way or another, it's a consideration....but for say, the 6th at Riviera.  Does it really make a difference in that hole's playing characteristics whether the bunker is what's there today or a Bell circa 1938 version other than the look?

I never understand the sycophantic fascination with bunkering.  It's a hazard.  I wish to avoid it.  If I am in it I wish to extricate myself.  If the shape, etc is the same I care little, as a player, whether the lip over which I intend to golf my ball is hairy and frilly or sharp and manicured.

[Lou_Duran]

Mr. Spaulding, you did notice a  , right?  Your opinions are valid.  If I was the decision maker at any of the three wonderful L.A. courses, the style I would likely choose is probably very close to yours.  I do object to your unfortunate choice of adjectives, but that's okay if you want to be one of the boys.  I suspect that "Fabio" can do Thomas as good as Gil and Geoff if that is the marching orders, though he and the client may not deem it desirable.  I don't remember 11 and 12 well enough to render an opinion.

As to the bunkering on Bel-Air's #1, I seem to remember it was that way back in 2004 when I played the three courses featured on this thread.  I didn't find it jarring to my eye.  I will say that of the three par 5 starting holes, Bel-Air's and LACC's are superior to Riviera's.

Regarding a more varied set of par 3s than Riviera's, I am sure that I can think of many at far less illustrious golf courses; Scarlet's prior to the renovation just from the top of my head.  Riviera's flat terrain is what it is.  If one wishes to discuss whether Thomas did a better job architecturally at Riviera vs. LACC, that's another completely different topic, isn't it?       

[Jon Spaulding]

Yeah, I saw the winky guy. It is bothersome to me when I get quoted and become the poster child for flavorful language regarding what has happened there.

You know me well enough that being one of the boys is not something I long for....I do happen to agree with them on a certain things. The desecration of BACC being one of them; Fabio IS the client. What kicks me out of their high-society club is a true liking of Fazio's original designs that I have played, and an unwavering committment to hit sand wedges with the sole hope of ignoring any and all architecture

I agree that Riviera vs. LA vs. BACC is a separate topic altogether.

[Jim Thornton]

Jon-

By the way, how good is the par 3 10th at Bel-Air, huh?

Of the 3 courses, the best par 3 I played, with the 11th at LACC a close second.

Jim

[rjsimper]

Jon-

By the way, how good is the par 3 10th at Bel-Air, huh?

Of the 3 courses, the best par 3 I played, with the 11th at LACC a close second.

Jim

I believe 4 at Riviera to be better than 11 at LACC.  Both suffer from the lack of the ground game abilities.  11 at LACC is more scenic.

[Jim Thornton]

Ryan-

I would disagree on the lack of a ground option on Riviera 4 and LACC 11.  They both play as quasi-Redan holes.  The 4th at Riviera sets up for a draw down the right side that will bounce onto the green and the 11th at LACC North sets up for a fade that will bounce onto the green from the left.

Although both holes are quite long - 235 yards for the 4th at Riviera and 240 yards for the 11th at LACC North - they both provide a ground option in my view.


Jim

[rjsimper]

Ryan-

I would disagree on the lack of a ground option on Riviera 4 and LACC 11.  They both play as quasi-Redan holes.  The 4th at Riviera sets up for a draw down the right side that will bounce onto the green and the 11th at LACC North sets up for a fade that will bounce onto the green from the left.

Although both holes are quite long - 235 yards for the 4th at Riviera and 240 yards for the 11th at LACC North - they both provide a ground option in my view.


Jim

Not the intended ground option.  In both cases, kikuyu grass prevents a truly predictable (inasmuch as a ground shot can be) option.  Sure, you can run the ball onto the green, but you can also run the ball onto the 18th green at Olympic if you hit it just right.

The ability to run the ball on is greater at Riviera than it is at LACC, given the current turf at both.

I also think referring to the 11th at LACC as a reverse-redan, as many do, is a farce.

[Jim Thornton]

Ryan-

Why do you say it's a farce to call 11 at LACC a reverse redan?  The ground slopes left to right, allowing the shot to run/kick onto the green, and there's a fronting bunker on the right side that's quite penal.  In my mind, that constitutes a redan.

Interested in your thoughts.

Jim

[rjsimper]

Ryan-

Why do you say it's a farce to call 11 at LACC a reverse redan?  The ground slopes left to right, allowing the shot to run/kick onto the green, and there's a fronting bunker on the right side that's quite penal.  In my mind, that constitutes a redan.

Interested in your thoughts.

Jim

This discussion (not specifically about 11 at LACC, but rather "what is a redan?") has been discussed many times, kind of like the "what is a cape hole" discussion, and many have different definitions.

My opinion:

1) The hole is severely downhill.  A true redan should be uphill, or at a minimum level with a green someone obscured from the tee.  It should be intimidating to look at, not inviting as is the 11th at LACC.

2) A redan to me has a pronounced slope from front corner to back corner.  As I recall (only played there twice) the 11th at LA is a mainly gentle slope from left to right, and not so much from front to back.  Sure, you can play a hill shot and run it up onto the green, but this doesn't make it a redan.  That green is more subtle than anything else, and a redan's green should be anything but.

[Jim Thornton]

Ryan-

Your points are well taken - both the downhill nature of the hole and the lack of dramatic front left to back right green movement.  Most of all, you're right that the hole has an inviting appeal from the tee.  For all of those reasons, and after further reflection, I agree with your assessment.

Jim

[Jim Thornton]

One thing I forgot to mention about Riviera is that they had a design blueprint hanging in the men's locker room that details the revisions to the par 4 8th hole (alternate fairways with a barranca in the middle).  It said the project was scheduled for summer 2009.