[Bradley Anderson]

http://turf.lib.msu.edu/1920s/1925/2511246.pdf

The 1925 USGA article above provides a very good description of how this hole works and how it was perceived when it was new.

I am especially intrigued by the narrowness of the green. You take a short hole and place the green to lay long and perpendicularly sideways to the tee, but with a fairly generous opening to those who hit to the right of the green, and you have now turned a short piece of ground, that is lacking in length, into a great challenging hole. Especially with the bunkering that runs along the front and back of the green. How cool is that?

If this was just a short hole with tough bunkering to clear in the front, and penal bunkering in the back, it would be not so great. But with the generous fairway landing area way off to the right of the green, it is a work of genius.

Two questions:

1) Would this concept work as well on a dogleg right as it does on this dogleg left?

2) Could they have fit a better hole in to this part of the property?

[Mike_Cirba]

Bradley,

That's a great hole and a great article.

Some months ago I believe it was Joe Bausch who found an article where it's mentioned that they tried to pattern it a bit after the 12th at Pine Valley.

I wish I had kept track of which article it was...perhaps Joe can locate it, although he's dug up so much stuff that hasn't even been posted here I'm beginning to get concerned that he'll need a Cray SuperComputer just to house them all. 

[Kyle Harris]

Bradley,

That's a great hole and a great article.

Some months ago I believe it was Joe Bausch who found an article where it's mentioned that they tried to pattern it a bit after the 12th at Pine Valley.

I wish I had kept track of which article it was...perhaps Joe can locate it, although he's dug up so much stuff that hasn't even been posted here I'm beginning to get concerned that he'll need a Cray SuperComputer just to house them all. 

He'll just fire up the old DEC Alpha

Bradley,

This hole is actually repeated in concept a few times around the Philadelphia area. The 1st at Philly Country and 4th at Huntingdon Valley spring to mind.

[Ben Sims]

Great hole.  Reminds me--sort of--of the 10th at Riviera.  Truly two of the best short two shotters around.  To answer your questions.

1) I think better player would be more apt to try to get home. Hackers that have the distance generally provide a left to right ball flight.  So will it work as a right dogleg.  IMHO it would actually be better.

2) Methinks no.  The routing dictated this hole.  I would be less inclined to make anything shorter out of it.  I think it's pretty good where it is.

[Mike Sweeney]

I think it is the weak sister of the 10, 11, 12 stretch:

Drives:

10 - The Tom Fazio tee shot of Merion. Climb from green to a elevated tee where the fairway is in plain view and the fairway bunkers are barely in play with a hybrid. How many players actually go for the green today? How many in 1930? Play is right center with a 3 wood and maybe 5% will use driver to go for the front edge. Maybe 50 golfers in the world can go for the middle part of that green from the tee with a draw.

11 - Yes a layup off the tee, but landing area is blind and you MUST hit the fairway to have any chance of hitting 11 green.

12 - Cut driver around the mystery of the corner or a 3 wood left to have a good shot into the green. Too far left and ball is below your feet.

2nd Shot:

10 - Plop a wedge into the green. Yes green is narrow and well protected but if you are a decent sand wedge player, not a big deal. Most players will make 3, 4 or 5 on this hole.

11 - One of the great second shots in golf on a short 4. Scores can range from 3 to X.

12. Due to slant of fairway, this is a tough shot. Easy shot is above the hole but that is automatic 3 putt.

Green:

10 - very good green, two tiers.

11 - good but not great green.

12 - Similar to the 5th, you either love it or hate it and you never want to be above it.

[ChipOat]

#10 @ Riviera much harder than #10 at Merion IMO (it's all in the approach shot).

Caveat: only played Riviera once; Merion more often.

[DMoriarty]

Bradley Anderson,

-While the article has been extensively discussed on here before, it is nonetheless very interesting for a number of reasons, including Hugh Wilson's connection to the Bulletin, and the publication of the article about 10 month's after his death.   I haven't looked at the series in a long time, but wasn't this the last or one of the last?    Given that the articles were unattributed to a specific author, and given the end shortly thereafter of a fascinating series, I've often wondered if Hugh Wilson had a hand in putting these together this interested series of articles.   It was a great series and wish it would have continued.

- Another interesting tidbit is that the article describes the hole a "so called cape type of hole."    While we now [incorrectly] use "cape" hole to identify a hole with a risk reward diagonal carry off the tee, the article's usage is consistent with what may have been the first usage, describing the 296 yard 14th at NGLA before the changed the location of the green.   As Macdonald and Whigham wrote in Golf Illustrated in 1914; "The  fourteenth hole at the National Golf Links is called the Cape Hole, because the green extends out into the sea with which it is surrounded upon three sides."  Merion has no sea but used bunkers instead.  Merion's 10th also differs from Macdonald's version at NGLA in that Merion's does not feature a diagonal carry off the tee.  [After the green was changed at NGLA the name "cape hole" must have become associated with the hole's diagonal carry off the tee over water, and I've read that this diagonal carry is present on most of Macdonald's cape holes, along with the green jutting into trouble on three sides.   I guess Mid-Ocean's is Macdonald's most famous.]   

- I also find the inflexibility of the following text to be fascinating;  "Between these two lengths, namely 240 to 330 yards, the only desirable plan for utilizing the space is the adoption of a so-called cape type of hole. The principle involved in such a hole is a sharp elbow to the fairway at about the 225-yard point, a rather narrow putting sward, a large bunker in the elbow, and some sort of a hazard on the far side of the green."   A cape hole is the only hole that works between 240 and 330 yards??  Wow, talk about a formulaic approach to golf design.  What about letting the natural features dictate the hole?   

- That being said, I do agree that cape greens on holes of this length can really be great holes   Someone mentioned Riviera No. 10, which is a cape with sort of an angled carry off the tee.    The 12 hole at Rustic Canyon shares cape characteristics, although part of the green is protected by slope, instead of bunker,  According to Flynn, he liked to incorporate the cape holes into his designs.  Mike mentions Pine Valley's 12th, which I hear is great.   

- The last point I find interesting is that the distance marked on this hole was not even close  to the real yardage.   The diagram shows 325 yards in a direct line to the middle of the green!  I don't even think the hole from the current tee is listed as that long.  Check it on Google Earth if you are curious how long the hole really was.     I bring this up because when we read the old magazines we sometimes read about professionals hitting it extraordinary distances.  One reason may be that they were not very good at measuring.   As some know, Alan Wilson wrote a couple of pieces in the Bulletin on how to calculate hole distances, and he thought that holes should generally be measured on the ground, as opposed to straight line.  I don't know if this counts for this entire discrepancy but given the terrain it might account for some.

Not trying to re-open any old fights about any of this stuff.  I find this article fascinating and wanted to share the information with some who had the good fortune to have not read threads gone by.


Mike.  I'd love to see that article about how Pine Valley 12 influenced this hole.   

[Tom_Doak]

Another similar hole (dogleg right version) is the 3rd at Kingston Heath which Mark Ferguson profiled a few days ago.  The green is not quite as exaggerated [it's not as skinny because it's not as long], but the idea is the same ... stray too far inside the dogleg and the second shot gets really hard.

[Bradley Anderson]

I think it is the weak sister of the 10, 11, 12 stretch:

Drives:

10 - The Tom Fazio tee shot of Merion. Climb from green to a elevated tee where the fairway is in plain view and the fairway bunkers are barely in play with a hybrid. How many players actually go for the green today? How many in 1930? Play is right center with a 3 wood and maybe 5% will use driver to go for the front edge. Maybe 50 golfers in the world can go for the middle part of that green from the tee with a draw.

Second shot:

10 - Plop a wedge into the green. Yes green is narrow and well protected but if you are a decent sand wedge player, not a big deal. Most players will make 3, 4 or 5 on this hole.

Green:

10 - very good green, two tiers.

Mike,

Your analysis is really good here. With today's equipment this hole is a cautious 3 wood and a not too difficult wedge. However that does not reduce it's genius. Most every hole concept has been compromised by new equipment on some level. But in this location, where seemingly there were no other alternatives but to build a short par four, or a suceeding par 3, would you not agree that they did a pretty good job of keeping par honest?

Mike, can you comment also on what you may know of how this hole is played by the best golfers in tounament play?

[mike_malone]

 It's a lame hole. The "goforit" strategy is out of the question. Missing left is silly. So, the only shot is to hit it anywhere right/center which leaves a straightforward pitch.

[Ben Sims]

Mike,

The 10th at Merion is of great strategic value in tournament play just like another good short par 4, the 3rd at Augusta. The 330-350 range doesn't tempt you and I.  But make no mistake, Phil and Tiger might give it go depending on tee and pin placement.  It can be seen as an easy bogey, even par, but a tough birdie considering the green size.  I haven't been to Merion, but where that hole fits specifically in the layout works.  Mostly because that part of the property dicates its placement.  Again, this based off reading and pictures, but thats what i gathered from study.

I agree with most of your points when you and I stand on the tee.  The hole, IMHO, play much differently depending on handicap.  Maybe that why you think so little of it?

[Mike_Cirba]

It's a lame hole. The "goforit" strategy is out of the question. Missing left is silly. So, the only shot is to hit it anywhere right/center which leaves a straightforward pitch.

Mike,

I'm thinking Jack Nicklaus might not agree. 

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

You make a good observation in how the term "Cape" for a hole description was used quite differently in the early part of the 20th century.

In his advertising booklet "Planning a Golf Course," Tilly referred to three types of holes that had fairways that turned. The "dog-leg," the "elbow" and the "cape." This is how he defined it:

"There is still a third variation, where a corner is formed close by the green itself, usually by the encroachment of a hillside or a sandy waste, and this type is known as a Cape hole."

Note how Tilly defined the fairway turn to be "close by the green" and not associated with the tee shot. Two examples of Tilly Cape holes can be found on the 3rd hole at Brook Hollow (Tilly wrote of this hole in a "Green Committee" article he wrote for Golf Illustrated in 1921 and the 12th hole on Winged Foot West. Tilley even gave that hole its name... "Cape."

Both of these holes shared a common feature at the green, a stand of trees just short of it where the green hides behind in relation to the second shot in. Both have left side bunkers, but it is the trees that are the encroachment that creates the "Cape" effect on them.

It appears that the original idea for the "Cape" feature then was at the green complex rather than simply something that would require a long-drive played over  an obstruction to an angular fairway.

What is also interesting in Tilly's definition & brochure, is the hole that he chose to illustrate the three hole types mentioned above. It is the 6th hole at Wernersville. There is large obstruction in front of the tee that he labels "Barren Area Shale aand Sand" which must be carried to reach the fairway that runs at a nearly 90 degree angle to the tee. Fronting the fairway further right is another obstruction which the first one ends at labeled "swamp." This too could be carried. Yet Tilly didn't consider this a cape hole based upon the drive carried over an obstruction to an angular fairway. We know this because he has clearly written on the drawing the phrase, "dog-leg."

[DMoriarty]

Phillip,

That is very interesting. 

In Flynn's articles on architecture in the Turf Bulletin he breaks it down quite similarly, if not the same.  Have you read those?   I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts sometime on differences and similarities of approach between Flynn and Tillinghast.   Also, what was the relationship between the two, if any?   Friends?  Friendly competitors?  Competitors? 

Did Tillinghast favor using the "Cape Hole" concept for short par 4's, or did he build them in a variety of lengths?

[David_Elvins]

Although I don't agree with Mayday Malone's general ambivalence towards Merion, I must agree with him on this hole. 

The fairway is way way too narrow for me.  Most (all?) of the world's great short par 4s share wide options off the tee.  There is less decision making off the tee at Merion as there is at holes such as the 10th at Riviera or Royal Melbourne.

The 10th at Merion could have width.  If i owned Merion the first thing I would do is cut down the silly trees that provide a shoot off the tee and extend the fariway way to the left, making more of a feature of the two very good bunkers on the left of the fairway and sucking people into aiming straghter towards the flag and/or skirting the left bunekrs for a shorter shot.  Of course ths probably doesnt ft in with the general NE America school of design.

[TEPaul]

David Elvins:

I've always felt as you just mentioned that the hole would be just as interesting if fairway was taken way to the left as well. My thinking has always been that many good players would therefore try to drive it closer to the green over there only to be left with a very short lofted shot over that huge left bunker to a shallow orientation. That might have worked better in the old days and may've created a very challenging shot but probably not today with these really lofted wedges.

I've looked into this with that hole and I don't believe there never was fairway over there---it was always rough and that's how it was designed.

Someone mentioned the Bulletin articles describing a series of good holes that included drawings. Hugh Wilson did not have much of anything to do with the lead-up to that but Alan Wilson did in conjunction with Charles Piper. Actually Alan didn't think it was a great idea to do at first because he believed the USGA with their arrangement with the US Dept of Agriculture should basically stick to their knitting, so to speak, which was the development of golf agronomy. It made Wilson a bit nervous that the USGA Green Section would get into golf architectural subjects but they did it anyway with things like those hole articles as well as asking a number of architects to write about their ideas on the subject of architecture. Alan even mentioned to Piper that if they had a Harry Colt as part of their group then perhaps they should write about architecture because someone like that had recognized general credibility but that they didn't have man like that who was a professional. There was a very strong "amateur" or even "non professional" aura or ethos to this early USGA green section effort, at least from the likes of Alan Wilson  because their major concern was that the professional seed merchants and other commercial interests in golf were driving up the over-all cost of golf.

Believe it or not, I think Charles Piper wrote most of those significant hole articles in the Bulletin; at least according to the "Agronomy Letters" that is what he was intending to do. 

[Bradley Anderson]

Although I don't agree with Mayday Malone's general ambivalence towards Merion, I must agree with him on this hole. 

The fairway is way way too narrow for me.  Most (all?) of the world's great short par 4s share wide options off the tee.  There is less decision making off the tee at Merion as there is at holes such as the 10th at Riviera or Royal Melbourne.

The 10th at Merion could have width.  If i owned Merion the first thing I would do is cut down the silly trees that provide a shoot off the tee and extend the fariway way to the left, making more of a feature of the two very good bunkers on the left of the fairway and sucking people into aiming straghter towards the flag and/or skirting the left bunekrs for a shorter shot.  Of course ths probably doesnt ft in with the general NE America school of design.

David,

In this USGA article the photos look like there was at least one tree that formed a shoot off the tee shot on #10. Maybe I am not looking at it right, but it looks like the go-for-it option was intended to be a shaped shot, and not one where you line your feet up straight at the hole. It looks like there was a tree to block that. But if the trees that are there today completely block any go-for-it attempt, even a shaped shot, I would think that those should be looked at for cutting back.

If the fairway is narrowed down to where you can't place the ball at the 90 degree turn for a strait approach, that too I think would need to be expanded.

But all this is easier said than done. Clubs get real concerned about people driving their par four greens. But I would wager that when that option is open, the scores on that hole will go up in day to day member play. Most guys who try that shot will pay for it. In tournament play that might not hold up though.

I still think that if you're forced to work within a short corridor, but you have width at your disposal, this hole concept is ingenious.

[Bradley Anderson]

Tom,

I think I have read all of those Bulletin architectural articles now and I may say that they do seem out of place with the rest of the Bulletin.

But there really aren't any better articles that I have found from that period which describe, diagram, and picture the great golf holes.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,

I think I have read all of those Bulletin architectural articles now and I may say that they do seem out of place with the rest of the Bulletin.

But there really aren't any better articles that I have found from that period which describe, diagram, and picture the great golf holes."





Brad:

I agree with you and I wished they'd continued with them. All I was mentioning was some of Alan Wilson's concerns when they were setting up the USGA Green Section and developing the Bulletin. Obvously Piper was looking for content and writing on architecture occured to him as good content.

I guess some today might question who exactly was Charles Piper to be writing articles about good holes or good examples of holes and golf architecture and such since he was basically a botanist/agronomist with the US Dept of Agriculture but he certainly was asking for input on good holes from the likes of the Wilson brothers and Flynn from Philadelphia and apparently others from other regions of the country who were also involved in setting up the USGA Green Section.

By the way, it was W.C. Fownes of Oakmont as the president of the USGA who formally created the USGA Green Section. For a number of years Merion's Alan Wilson had been the chairman of the USGA Green Committee that was charged with setting up the USGA Green Section. He resigned from the position shortly after the death of his brother much to the sorrow of the USGA and Piper and Oakley. Alan Wilson had done a helluva job for the USGA with agronomy. Perhaps not quite to the extent Hugh had but close.

[DMoriarty]

Although I don't agree with Mayday Malone's general ambivalence towards Merion, I must agree with him on this hole. 

The fairway is way way too narrow for me.  Most (all?) of the world's great short par 4s share wide options off the tee.  There is less decision making off the tee at Merion as there is at holes such as the 10th at Riviera or Royal Melbourne.

The 10th at Merion could have width.  If i owned Merion the first thing I would do is cut down the silly trees that provide a shoot off the tee and extend the fariway way to the left, making more of a feature of the two very good bunkers on the left of the fairway and sucking people into aiming straghter towards the flag and/or skirting the left bunekrs for a shorter shot.  Of course ths probably doesnt ft in with the general NE America school of design.

I'm not sure I'd call the narrow fairway lines part of any sort of general NE school of design.  Maybe a general NE school of set-up and maintenance, but I think the design itself not only allowed for width, it relied on it to make the hole work.    As far as I can see, the photos with the article don't indicate a tight fairway line,  I don't really see any rough.

The tree next to the tee, though, does cut against this, at least a little bit.  Maybe the hole wasn't long enough from that tee so they were trying to protect it with the tree.

---------------------

TEPaul

I think you are mistaken about the equipment back then.  Many of the niblicks had plenty of loft.  I haven't had the loft checked but I have a Forgan niblick with so much loft and so little bounce that it looks like a spatula.

[Ronald Montesano]

no one mentions the "putting sward?"  I can't wait to roll a few along my local sward tomorrow.  In fact, I may never use another noun to describe the old "putting sward" again!

[ChipOat]

David Elvins and Bradley Anderson:

What is a "shoot"?  Do you mean a "chute"?

[Bradley Anderson]

David Elvins and Bradley Anderson:

What is a "shoot"?  Do you mean a "chute"?

I meant chute sward.

 

[David_Elvins]

David,

In this USGA article the photos look like there was at least one tree that formed a shoot off the tee shot on #10. Maybe I am not looking at it right, but it looks like the go-for-it option was intended to be a shaped shot, and not one where you line your feet up straight at the hole. It looks like there was a tree to block that. But if the trees that are there today completely block any go-for-it attempt, even a shaped shot, I would think that those should be looked at for cutting back.

Bradley,

I think on any hole where there is an option to "go for it" the target should be visible.  Partly because it helps draw players to play a shot that they can't and secondly because half the thrill of 'going for it' is wathching your ball land.  With good contouring and firm condtions the design of a hole should be enough to encourage a certain shot shape without the use of trees.  The greenside bunker at Merion is a great feature.  IMO it is a pity its view is hidden.

I still think that if you're forced to work within a short corridor, but you have width at your disposal, this hole concept is ingenious.

I one hundred percent agree but I think there are better examples out there.  I might be showing some hometown bias here but I thought the 10th at Merion would be better if it came closer to replicating the principles of the 10th at Royal Melbourne West (below).  Obviosly RMW has a better green site but the terrain is not dissimilar.





chipoat,
Thanks!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()