[Phil McDade]

University Ridge, owned and operated by the University of Wisconsin, has recently undergone a significant overhaul to lengthen the course, for reasons described in this thread that I posted about a year ago:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,38431.0/

Overall, URidge has added nearly 400 yards to the course, largely by building a number of new back tees. Revisting the course this week, I thought it might be worthwhile to capture the lengthening effort on one of the course's best holes (and my personal favorite there) -- the par 4 10th. The hole is carved out of native woodlands, and runs downhill from an elevated tee.

The hole plays 483 yds from the tips, 424 from the blues, 375 from the whites, and 342 from the women's tees.

Here's the new back tee -- 483 yards:




The view from what I belive is also a newer tee -- you can play this at about 450 yards:




This is, I believe, the original tee -- a classic RTJ Jr. (or maybe his father's) runway tee that is 30 yards in length; this is the view from the middle of the tee box, which puts the hole at around 425 yards. Notice the diminishment of the elevated tee compared to the very back tee.



This is the tee for the whites, where many players will tee off. It's 375 yards. The women's red tees can be seen in front of this tee:




Here's the greensite, with bunkers and mound right and bunkers left; the green here is pretty deep.




Thoughts? Does lengthening this hole diminish it? Perhaps it enhances it?

[Brad Swanson]

Didn't there use to be a tree on the right edge of the fairway that came into play a bit if you pushed your tee shot?

[Jim Colton]

Brad,

  That tree's probably been gone for 7-8 years.  I agree w/ Phil that this is probably the best hole on the course and probably didn't need to be lengthened.  It was always a brute.  But I guess when you have college players that can bomb it 340+, this is the net impact.

[Phil McDade]

Brad/Jim:

Yep -- that tree's been gone for a while now, which is too bad, as it added some strategic element to the hole. But maybe similar to the 13th at Lawsonia? There was some GCA debate recently about keeping/re-planting that old fairway tree there.

Jim, in talking to a friend this week while out at URidge (he plays there a lot and knows most of those connected with the course), the UW is hoping to land some big-name tournaments, perhaps even the NCAA Div. 1 championship. His view is that the longest players today are collegiate players, who just bomb it all over the place (whereas the demands of the pro game and pro set-ups result of some throttling back by most Tour players). Given the elevated nature of the new back tee at #10, I still can see top collegiate players with short irons into this green -- the fairway is a bit wider than it appears on the tee. The interesting thing to me is the slight dogleg that results from the new way-back tee -- looks like you have to work something of a draw from back there, whereas previously it was pretty straightforward.

[Jason Topp]

Why is it a good hole?  Does the hill short right allow for some interesting approaches by allowing one to bounce it off the hill?  If so, why is it rough?

If not, it looks like you slug it down the middle and then slug it on the green.  Perhaps there is an advantage in hitting it to the right side of the fairway but that is unclear.

Lengthening it appears necessary if you still want it to be a long hole.  

[Rob Rigg]

The elevation adds some interest to the hole - I think it would be more fun to play it that way than the original.

I agree with Jason though - this does not look like a very interesting hole to me - from the pictures - long tree lined hole with bunker short left and long right with a hill that doesn't seem in play.

Try and hit it deep into the fairway and then knock it up to the green - point A, point B - kind of zzzz.

[Sean_A]

The hole doesn't look particularly special so I guess adding yardage isn't a bother, but I don't see the extra yards adding anything to the hole.  One thing I would have looked to do is build a back tee which concentrates on creating more of angle (dogleg) for the tee shot rather than added yards.  Perhaps it isn't possible, but I like the idea of coming from the tee to the right over the ridge to the fairway which may even have blind spots.  Of course, it would mean that fairway would have to be widened, but there could be a lower fairway to the left. 

Ciao

[Phil McDade]

The merits of this hole:

-- It's nice looking! (especially in the fall). That counts for me. It's nicely framed -- visually pleasing to the eye.

-- The fairway has some interesting contours, and there is a depression -- with thick rough -- just to the left of the fairway near the typical LZ for most players. And deep woods lurk not that far right from the fairway. The fairway is fairly generous, but like a lot of holes with woods on both sides, it looks tighter than it is -- the player on the tee feels as if it's a tighter tee shot than it is.

-- The green complex is pretty good -- a deep green with a below-grade bunker left and mounds and bunkering right. It accepts a running shot, sort of, although the UW doesn't keep this all that fast-firm by intention; F/F conditions result more from dry periods than deliberate attempts by the grounds staff. But the green tilts from back to front, and from back-left to front-right. There are a number of very good pin positions, and the green contouring is subtle, making for tough reads.

It's probably not the most strategically difficult or interesting hole at URidge, but it's the best-looking (!!), and a birdie requires three solid shots.

[Adam Clayman]

This appears to be playing into the hands of those who look at yardages versus the finer points that make for compelling GCA. The added length appears to be negated by the increase in elevation.

Phil, Would you agree? BTW, They are not called Ladies tees anymore. They are forward tees.

[JC Jones]

Did this used to be #1?

I played the course about 11 years ago but I remember this hole as being our first and the 10th as relatively open on the right side and visible from the clubhouse.  Maybe we played the backside first...

[Phil McDade]

Adam:

I stand corrected!

It's a good point above elevation negating added distance. To me, I like the back-back tee, better than the one at 450 yds, because it creates a slight dogleg to the hole, and forces the player to move the ball a bit off the tee. But the terrain in that particular area of the course essentially forced the new back tee to be built benched into a hillside -- as the 10th hole, it opens the back nine, and the course clubhouse sits at the highest point of the course, and it's something of a long walk downhill from the clubhouse to the 10th tee.

Interesting, to me, is that URidge in lengthening several holes has put some of the new back tees at lower levels than the original tees. They have also created some interesting angles -- particularly with the par 3s -- that are different than the original tees.

[Phil McDade]

Did this used to be #1?

I played the course about 11 years ago but I remember this hole as being our first and the 10th as relatively open on the right side and visible from the clubhouse.  Maybe we played the backside first...

JC:

There was a brief period when URidge switched nines, but it never took hold as the regular routing of the course. I actually think they ought to consider it permanently, as the current front nine has some routing issues that often lead to long delays getting into the round (see thread link in my first post here -- it goes into some detail as to why specific holes and the initial routing cause some delays).

Oddly, the two opening par 4s at Uridge are both mid-range par 4s in which one (the 10th) looks tight but really isn't, and the other (the 1st) looks benign and wide open, but is actually quite penal (lost ball stuff) very close to the fairway. I just spent a couple of days watching the state high school girls tournament there, and players struggled much more on #1 than #10.

#1:

[Jim Colton]

JC,

They used to send people off on the front and back.

I just remembered that I did play UniRidge this summer for a late afternoon round. I played the new back tees but I playe the front twice since the front was wide open when I made the turn. I didn't find the added yardage to be too dificult, except for that 4th hole over the swamp, about 480 with a forced carry to a tight sloping fairway. I made a mess of that hole both times.

They should try to do something else with the 2nd hole, because the added length is not doing much to that awkward par 5. I still reached it driver-6-iron, so I imagine the collegians have a field day. Maybe move the tee up and make it a dogleg left par 4?

[Brad Swanson]

Brad,

  That tree's probably been gone for 7-8 years. 

Wow, I need to get out more often.

[JC Jones]

Phil,

I must have played it when they switched the nines because the hole you pictured as #1 now, was definitely our #10 in 1998.

[Phil McDade]

Jim:

The 4th has always been a b.... All of the coaches at the high school state tournament say it's the one hole that the golfers have to get through without a blowup to have a successful round. It can really wreck a card, and it's one of the holes where the new back tee is as low or slightly lower than the original tees.

The 2nd has always been a problematic hole. It's a good hole for most players, from the proper tees, because it does really leave a go/no go decision as to whether to hit the green in two, because there is lots of trouble around the green if it's missed. But, I think you have a good idea -- maybe for the big tourneys the course hopes to draw, it makes sense to play that as a par 4 (which would lower the overall par to an acceptable 71; right now, the front nine hole arrangement is kind of quirky with three par 3s, 4s, and 5s.) The new back tee puts the 2nd at 555 from the tips, but it's a downhill tee shot, and I've heard reports of high school boys in the state tourney going at that green with mid-irons. For the high school girls, it's a pretty good risk/reward par 5 -- I saw a few go at in two with a hybrid.

[Phil McDade]

Phil,

I must have played it when they switched the nines because the hole you pictured as #1 now, was definitely our #10 in 1998.

JC:

I think the current routing has as much to do with aesthetics as anything else. When URidge first opened, the course opened before they had a clubhouse. Now the clubhouse sits atop the highest point out there, with a nice porch that looks out over the first tee and -- to the left of the 1st hole picture -- the 9th green. The back nine is off the backside of the clubhouse, past the parking lot, and largely winds around woods well north of the clubhouse. It's a pretty long walk from the back door of the clubhouse, through the parking lot, and down a path before you even reach the new back tee on #10, and then it's another 100 yards to play the normal tees at #10. At URidge, the two nines are really two separate entities entirely.

[Jason Topp]

The merits of this hole:

-- It's nice looking! (especially in the fall). That counts for me. It's nicely framed -- visually pleasing to the eye.

-- The fairway has some interesting contours, and there is a depression -- with thick rough -- just to the left of the fairway near the typical LZ for most players. And deep woods lurk not that far right from the fairway. The fairway is fairly generous, but like a lot of holes with woods on both sides, it looks tighter than it is -- the player on the tee feels as if it's a tighter tee shot than it is.

-- The green complex is pretty good -- a deep green with a below-grade bunker left and mounds and bunkering right. It accepts a running shot, sort of, although the UW doesn't keep this all that fast-firm by intention; F/F conditions result more from dry periods than deliberate attempts by the grounds staff. But the green tilts from back to front, and from back-left to front-right. There are a number of very good pin positions, and the green contouring is subtle, making for tough reads.

It's probably not the most strategically difficult or interesting hole at URidge, but it's the best-looking (!!), and a birdie requires three solid shots.

Thanks Phil.  My comments come off as brusque in reading them this morning but I truly meant to ask a question rather than pronounce a judgement.  Pictures always do a poor job of conveying contour and if a hole is beautiful and has a terrific green then I can certainly understand why it is a good hole.

[Phil McDade]

Jason:

Brusque comments are the hallmark of GCA! I wouldn't say the green is brutal -- URidge actually has a few that are tougher -- but it's a good green, tough to read, with a nice tilt.

One of the things I wanted to explore in the thread is the notion, often expressed as conventional wisdom on the Discussion Board, that lengthening is inherently bad or detracts from the hole.  I think the new way-back tee on this hole adds to it, and will give the big boomers something to think about. It's a hole that safely played is not that hard to par -- but wayward tee shots bring bogeys or worse into play quickly, given the possibility of woods or thick rough (if you're in that depression left of the fairway, it can hard to hold the green, because the green is more accepting of shots from the right side of the fairway given how it's aligned to the fairway.) Thus I can see a golfer on the way back tee having to hit a solid tee shot with driver, or risk a much longer approach with something less than driver off the tee.

[Will Peterson]

JC-

The nines have never changed, but the course has always used a double tee system so half the players each day start on the back.

Phil-

The long runway tee you describe was not the original back tee.  The original back tee was around 440-450 and was a very small circular tee.  There was a tree that overhung the runway tee.  It was not really in play, but the combination if its branches and the tree on the right of the fairway made more than a few drives to left.

The loss of the tree on the right does make the drive much easier.  You now have a much wider target, but if you are too far right the shot to the green is made much more difficult.  You will have to carry the ridge short of the green, and if you do not it will send the ball rocketing towards the left bunker (I know this one from experience).  There is also a small ridge through the fairway at about the 160-180 yard marker that takes away a good amount of roll on the tee shot.  The fairway narrows at the same area, so big hitters must be accurate.  If you miss to the left, which was much more common with the tree on the right, the lie will usually be very difficult.  The fairway is raised on the left side, so the left rough is mostly a significant side hill.

When the course is playing firm, the approach to the green can be bounced off the right side.  This will get you onto the front right or center.  The green is shaped like an hour glass that narrows in the back.  The bunker on the left is a routine shot, except for some back pins, but the right bunker is very difficult for those that try to get to the back portion of the green.  The back portion of the green is much higer than the front, so a back pin is very difficult to get to.  For any major event played there, I imagine that they would use a back pin on most of the days.

I always found this one of the toughest par 4's on the course.  I think the additional tee was one of the better ones added in the lenghtening.   The last time I played it, I had to hit the same clubs in that I did in high school when I played it all the time and was 40 yards shorter off the tee.

[Phil McDade]

Will:

Thanks for adding those insights -- that tee at 450 yds (second photo) is quite small, and I wasn't sure whether it was original or added. I've got a real old URidge scorecard floating around the house somewhere, but posted my recollections of the hole without it. It's notable how high up that new back tee is, however. And I agree about a back pin there -- a lot of players I saw this weekend just couldn't bring themselves to take enough club to get back to the pin when it was placed in the back on the first day. But, on the other hand, the coach and player (and her dad, who plays there a lot) I followed all thought it was OK to leave an approach there on the front half with a longish putt, because it's not a terribly difficult putt. I think the middle pin positions on that hole are the toughest to putt, because the breaks there are tough to read.

[Chuck Brown]

From experience, I'll say that even from well into the tree-lined left rough on #10, it is still possible to make par.

I don't think it is a particularly interesting hole, but it is a beauty in the fall.  The collegiate women were there just a couple of weeks ago for the Northern Women's Invitational.  I happened to be on the plane to Madison with the Michigan women's team.

Honestly, I think the one reason for the lengthened tees at University Ridge is just because they are blessed with enough land to do it.  Period.  And there is scarcely a single course that I can think of, that hosts NCAA men's tournament play, that doesn't need lengthening to keep up with them.  I expect that the Ohio State "Nickenzie" Scarlet Course would add length if they could.  Michigan's Alister Mackenzie course needs lengthening, by comparison with today's collegians.  I was at the NCAA championships at Inverness, a honest-to-God U.S. Open golf course, and it could have done with some lengthening for those guys.  (i.e., Bronson Burgoon hitting drive+8-iron to some of the Par 5's.)

[Phil McDade]

Chuck:

They do have a lot of land out there -- although it's one of those egg and chicken things. The course opened about 20 years ago at @ 6,800 yards+, and they were smart to leave themselves some room behind most if not all the tees to provide some lengthening options. They really have enough land out there for two 18 hole courses, and had plans for another one, but the demographics of the game have led to the UW backing off those plans. Part of the extra land has been turned into a first-rate cross country course, with the goal that the NCAAs will be held on the course some day (UW has a long and storied tradition in cross country.)

[Matthew Rose]

I don't believe the nines have ever been flipped, but I did start on #10 the first three or four times I played the course. Only later on did I play it in the "proper" order, and after doing so that way, I actually liked playing the back nine first.

I always kinda felt like they could have routed it backwards and it would have been more interesting.

[Adam Clayman]

These are interesting comments about the config and nature of the nines.

As I recall (One play Many Many Moons ago) the course clearly climaxed with the diagonal cross carry bunkers on the 18th.

What hole is that now?

UR is a fine course for what it is.

but wayward tee shots bring bogeys or worse into play quickly, given the possibility of woods or thick rough

 But lets be honest, it's nothing but... hit it where Mr. Jones tells you, or, suffer. (Save for Chuck's type of infrequent recovery)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()