[Kevin_Reilly]

I look forward to comments from those who have played the course since the re-opening.

OK, I qualify. 

Here are some up-to-date pictures of 7 and 8 (battery on my camera ran out after I took the pictures on #8 tee so no pictures of the green surrounds or the new green on #15.  I also wanted to take some pictures of the sod around all the bunkers on the course...it has been cut much shorter and the turf isn't the tough grass that was previously around all the bunkers and was very difficult to play from.

Click here for the Picasa album of pics from 7 and 8...hit "slideshow" or "fullscreen" to see them...sorry for the poor pics...lousy camera and late in the day

On some previous questions - the two minute average given for the walk from 7 to 8 must have been timed by a lawyer or auto mechanic...it was closer to one minute.  Not sure how it would be possible to take much longer than that, unless you decide to take the walk along the cartpaths.  Speaking of the cartpaths, as Simon Cowell would say, they are absolutely dreadful.  Something needs to be done to mitigate the aesthetic disaster that exists there right now.  I agree with Wayne Wiggins above.  He can't keep time, but he knows cartpaths. 

The tee boxes on #8 aren't as bothersome as the boxes on #5 and #12.  As Gib knows, forward tees were put in place all around the course for the benefit of older members, and in the case of #8 it is difficult to have a hole that varies from the short distance of the forward tee to the 200 yd marker on the back back tee.  On #5, at least one tee box could be eliminated, and all of the boxes are too big.  No one is taking divots off that tee so there is no need for those giant boxes.  On #12 they put the "b" back in "subtle" with those tee boxes...subtle they ain't.

#8 is a very difficult hole.  I played from the 169 tee (blue marker) and hit a 5 iron reasonably well and it came up short as the wind was right in my face.  The hole will play into the wind quite a bit, and is probably the most exposed hole on the course to the offshore breeze.

I liked the 7th green.   If you look closely at the pictures of #7 I took, my drive ended up on the old temporary green, and I hit a 45 yd wedge to the green that only went 40 and didn't make it to the back tier.  The green has a lot of movement, but not in a manner like the old Weiskopf monstrosity on #15...the movement is very subtle except for the very front edge where under fast greenspeeds a ball could come back off the green.  The front tier appears smaller and has more movement than the back tier.  There is no fall-off to the back right...there was some mention of a fall-off above I think.

The swale between the front and the back is very big...the greens are uniformly slow throughout the course as the bent is not cut short, but I really had to hit my putt hard to get to the pin from where I was.

As the greenspeeds increase in the months to come the contours of #7 (and the slope of #18) will really be something to make up for the fact that the green might be a bit bigger than some might have liked.

The tee shot on #7 is still missing something in terms of challenge/interest.  The grass bunkers/mounds on the right have been removed, and there are some small trees planted there, but there is something missing on the right...maybe the tree that used to be there ages ago or a sand bunker.  Right now the tee shot is pretty wide open.   A bunker on the left short of the green is new, but won't be something to think about off the tee.

Someone mentioned a new tee for #7 off to the left that would make the hole a dogleg left...that is just a place where they grew sod for tees....that is NOT a tee-to-be.

#15 looked and played terrific.  Gone are the horrific mounds on the green that were the doing of Weiskopf back in the mid-90's.  I still think the hole would be better if the small trees behind the green were taken out...it would make depth perception off the tee more difficult.  Wind still a big factor on the tee.  The fronting bunker is wide...not as deep as pre-Weiskopf, though.

#16 has benefited from tree thinning all along the fairway.

That's all folks...

[Bob Jenkins]

Looking at the postings on this thread to date, I ask myself, "what is it, from my recollection, that makes the Lake Course at Olympic so special?" I was there for the 1986 Open and played the course about 15 years ago. Hardly an authority. However, the course left a definite impression with me I will never forget. I do not know the details of the original course or how what I saw differs from the original.

What matters to me in my recollection is just what makes the course special, how is it unique, what is it I enjoy about the place?
My recollection is of the following:
 
   -  "what you see is what you get". It is all laid out in front of you in amazing variety from the par 3s with huge gaping bunkers in front (8, 13 and 15 if I recall correctly), big fairways lined by massive eucalyptus and other species which alone are unique, no water hazards anywhere, one fairway bunker on the entire course, the sidehill nature of a lot of the layout and more make it unique.

   -  The 18th. That is a fabulous short par 4. Maybe not in the category of Riviera's 10th but still a great finishing hole. We all recall what happened to Payne Stewart in 1998 but that was more US Open conditions. I love the idea of a short par 4 finishing hole. Just get your drive into a decent position, then get a wedge up where you want it and have a chance for a birdie. Great way to wrap up a round.

   -  I see the comments on 7 and cannot comment on the old green as it has been too long. In 1986 many of the pros were going for the green and I assume that with current distances, it would be a pushover for many current pros to drive the green. It was just a great short, uphill par 4. Whether or not the new green makes it a lot different, I do not know but I cannot see how it would take away from the character of a fine, uphill par 4.

In conclusion, if the renos take away from the character as I and others recall it, that is unfortunate. If they do not, great. Loved the course as it has always been among my favourite memories.

Bob Jenkins

[Tom_Doak]

I have never been much of a fan of the Lake course and I have not seen the latest renovations.

However I did build the three-tiered #2 green at High Pointe the week after watching the 1987 U.S. Open at Olympic and being impressed by the play on the just-remodeled seventh green.

In more recent trips to the course, it's been apparent that there is a huge clash between doing the right thing with that sloping property, and trying to keep the course Open-worthy.  It's one thing to lengthen a course on flat ground, like The Old Course at St. Andrews; it's another when you've got to build the tee twenty feet in the air to do it, and you've got to stare at all that fill from adjacent holes.  So I understand what Gib is saying in that regard.  You can "fix" a hole and still take a step backwards in the overall scheme.

I also nearly choked on Bob Jenkins' heartfelt memories of the 18th green.  After Payne Stewart lost the Open on #18 green, they flattened out the back half to make it a rote two-tiered green where you're not afraid of being above the hole on the back tier.  That's like going in for a vasectomy and getting castrated instead.

[Kevin_Reilly]

After Payne Stewart lost the Open on #18 green, they flattened out the back half to make it a rote two-tiered green where you're not afraid of being above the hole on the back tier. 

That's been undone, if it wasn't mentioned above.

[Jed Peters]

Kevin:

I looked at your pictures, and it doesn't look that bad! In fact, I kind of like the new holes.

I'll wait to pass judgement until I see it in person, though.

Jed

[Joel_Stewart]

Here's the 18th taken yesterday.



This an old photo, don't know when.

[Mike Benham]

Here's the 18th taken yesterday.

Kevin -

I do have to admit, from the unretouched photos, taken with an 800 millimeter paparazzi lens, I had the impression that 7 green looked much wider then the previous 3-tiered version.  Looking at Kevin's photos, the head on shot shows the same relative narrowness.

Those same unretouched photos implied that 18 was also wider.  Perhaps it is the style of bunkering ... so how was 18?

- Mike

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

I look forward to comments from those who have played the course since the re-opening.

OK, I qualify. 

Here are some up-to-date pictures of 7 and 8 (battery on my camera ran out after I took the pictures on #8 tee so no pictures of the green surrounds or the new green on #15.  I also wanted to take some pictures of the sod around all the bunkers on the course...it has been cut much shorter and the turf isn't the tough grass that was previously around all the bunkers and was very difficult to play from.

Click here for the Picasa album of pics from 7 and 8...hit "slideshow" or "fullscreen" to see them...sorry for the poor pics...lousy camera and late in the day

On some previous questions - the two minute average given for the walk from 7 to 8 must have been timed by a lawyer or auto mechanic...it was closer to one minute.  Not sure how it would be possible to take much longer than that, unless you decide to take the walk along the cartpaths.  Speaking of the cartpaths, as Simon Cowell would say, they are absolutely dreadful.  Something needs to be done to mitigate the aesthetic disaster that exists there right now.  I agree with Wayne Wiggins above.  He can't keep time, but he knows cartpaths. 

I knoew I shoulda went to law school.... seriously.  I just timed two groups - in carts - and it took each of them to DRIVE there in over a minute.   

I liked the 7th green.   If you look closely at the pictures of #7 I took, my drive ended up on the old temporary green, and I hit a 45 yd wedge to the green that only went 40 and didn't make it to the back tier.  The green has a lot of movement, but not in a manner like the old Weiskopf monstrosity on #15...the movement is very subtle except for the very front edge where under fast greenspeeds a ball could come back off the green.  The front tier appears smaller and has more movement than the back tier.  There is no fall-off to the back right...there was some mention of a fall-off above I think.

The swale between the front and the back is very big...the greens are uniformly slow throughout the course as the bent is not cut short, but I really had to hit my putt hard to get to the pin from where I was.

As the greenspeeds increase in the months to come the contours of #7 (and the slope of #18) will really be something to make up for the fact that the green might be a bit bigger than some might have liked.

The tee shot on #7 is still missing something in terms of challenge/interest.  The grass bunkers/mounds on the right have been removed, and there are some small trees planted there, but there is something missing on the right...maybe the tree that used to be there ages ago or a sand bunker.  Right now the tee shot is pretty wide open.   A bunker on the left short of the green is new, but won't be something to think about off the tee.

Someone mentioned a new tee for #7 off to the left that would make the hole a dogleg left...that is just a place where they grew sod for tees....that is NOT a tee-to-be.

Wheew... that's good to hear.

[Joel_Stewart]

In more recent trips to the course, it's been apparent that there is a huge clash between doing the right thing with that sloping property, and trying to keep the course Open-worthy.  It's one thing to lengthen a course on flat ground, like The Old Course at St. Andrews; it's another when you've got to build the tee twenty feet in the air to do it, and you've got to stare at all that fill from adjacent holes.  So I understand what Gib is saying in that regard.  You can "fix" a hole and still take a step backwards in the overall scheme.

Yes and No.   Here is a photo of the multi tee 12th hole which is on flat ground.  Finlen and Love still built 4 or 5 sets of tees that stretch over 100 yards long.   Sadly no one in management at Olympic ever asks how much does it cost to maintain these tees and the constructions costs are buried.  The back tees are used by maybe 2 or 3 percent of the players yet they require enormous amounts of water and usual maintence practices.   Multiply all of the tees that this dynamic duo have done to scar the landscape and you'll see a course that is disfigured.

Try teeing it up on the far right of the back tee.  There is no place to hit it except directly into the trees.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()