Interested in opinions on The Biarritz style at Yale and Fishers

« **Reply #225 on:** December 13, 2009, 01:29:54 PM »

George Bahto & Jim Sullivan,

I have a hard time accepting the notion that "ONLY" the better or championship golfer was considered and that there were no tee accomodations for the mediocre to poor player.

In "Scotland's Gift" by Charles Blair Macdonald, National's scorecard is reproduced.
It clearly shows three (3) sets of tees.
The "Championship" tees, the "Regular" tees and the "Short" tees.

In addition, a read of Chapter IX in "Scotland's Gift" gives one a feel for CBM's argument against too much length and his penchant for three sets of tee markers.

CBM references distances from the MIDDLE of his tees to the MIDDLE of the green.
From this, I infered that the MIDDLE distance was his "Regular" tee and that there was a "championship" tee at the back of the tee and a "short" tee at the front of his tee.

A review of the schematic of National, which appears at the back of "Scotland's Gift" clearly shows multiple tees and multiple tee locations ON EVERY HOLE.

If we accept that NGLA was THE template for all subsequent CBM/SR/CB courses, is it not logical to conclude that mulitple tees
and multiple tee locations were common fare ?

Hence, I don't buy into the premise

If CBM designed and constructed three sets of tees, to accomodate the wide range of golfers, I'm sure that Seth Raynor and Charles Banks followed suit.

« **Reply #226 on:** December 13, 2009, 01:30:15 PM »

Marion Hollins had this to say when planning the Women's National Golf and Tennis Club, circa 1923:

"To get a course on the lines I have outlined it was necessary to agree on a standardization which would permit a good average woman player to get home in two shots on most holes. I held a conference with several persons who were vitally interested and we all agreed that if an average carry for Miss Alexa Stirling's shots could be arrived at a good working basis as to this distance would be arrived at. It turned out that Miss Stirling's drives, over a series of tests, averaged about one hundred and seventy-five yards carry and so this has been struck as the mean average in laying the hazards in front of tecs. By that I do not mean that all carries on the direct line to the green are of that length. That would be poor judgment. Mr. Emmet has just taken that yardage as the point in the fairway where a ball would drop if the tee shot was hit properly. Of course, in many instances generous leeway has been made for the slightly shorter hitters or for shots which were just a little off. Also on every hole there are one or more alternate lines of play besides that of the direct line to the green. This permits the shorter or cannier player to attempt a safer line of direction, although usually it costs an extra stroke to do so."

Harold Hilton explained her game/distance like this:
"There are not a few women players who outdrive her by yards. There are some few who play longer brassies.There are still fewer who play longer iron shots."

I take that to mean she wasn't a slouch, but not the longest, which is why Hollins used her as model.

In the article below there is a quote on the second page saying that "Miss Vare's drives went 220 yards" which seems to include roll. I included it because of the wonderful photo of the 'Short', replete w/the horseshoe still intact.

http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1922/gi176i.pdf

« **Reply #227 on:** December 13, 2009, 01:53:19 PM »

Patrick,

The biarritz is maybe the most egalitarian golf hole by design because the trough allows the low running shot for the player who isn't long. In fact one might argue that it plays more to the mid-distance hitter than it does to the long-distance hitter.

I really think that putting forward tees on a biarritz hole is missing the entire concept of the design. It is the one hole of it's length where brain and braun are on equal footing from 220 yards.

But you make a good point with repsect to the issue of women golfers. That does indeed present a problem.

In either respect, this is why I felt that the Lido biarritz must have been a failure - when they reduced the yardage there to 160, that says to me that they chose a poor location for the hole - probably too windy for that site, and they had to allow for playing the ball out over the ocean and having the wind bring it back on line.

« **Reply #228 on:** December 13, 2009, 02:41:24 PM »

Bradley: Lido's 8th, the Biarritz green was moved because they couldn't maintain it along the beachfront because of the green kept washing away during stormy weather.

I'll check but I think it was moved once more to accomodate expansions of nearby buildings

« **Reply #229 on:** December 13, 2009, 02:55:50 PM »

Pat: your 3-tee reference by CB was about his way (he thought) of equalizing play between different skills of golfers. (apparently, that scheme of his didn't work out because he (Mac) did not carry that over into later courses he was involved with

as I said I have early scorecards for about 80% of their courses showing Biarritz holes with a single tee, including The Knoll (by Banks)

actually, hardly any scorecards of Macdonald Raynor courses show multiple tees

Occasionally Raynor would put in an optional tee on very long par-4 (like Raynor's Dogleg) or becasue of a long-ish forced carry

« **Reply #230 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:00:03 PM »

Jim Kennedy,

I'm always suspicious of distances cited by golfers and the size of fish cited by fishermen.

In 1923, a drive with a CARRY of 175 had to be prodigious, and for a women, extremely doubtful.

When you think of the manufacture of balls and equipment in terms of quality control in 1923, the claim becomes even more doubtful.

At a club I'm very familiar with, there's a stream that cuts across the fairway on a hole.
To carry that stream requires a carry of 234 yards.
If the wind is crossing or in your face, or the air is heavier/wetter, it plays well beyond its 234 yards.

In the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's carrying that stream was almost impossible, except for some very, very long drivers.
Hence, I have a hard time accepting that a woman or decent male golfer could CARRY a ball 175 yards with the ball and equipment circa 1923.

Brad,

Macdonald was quite clear in his writings and drawings, multiple tee markers and multiple tees to accomodate the Championship player, the Regular player and the Short player were an integral part of his designs.

Why would he abandon that design philosophy on just one hole ?

« **Reply #231 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:11:54 PM »

Pat,
The quote was from an article Hollins wrote for GI. These were the very best women player's of the day, and Hollins did prove how long she was at Cypress #17.
I don't see why MH would exaggerate Sterling's carry distance in this instance. Even if they measured by pacing out the 175 they'd probably be within 10 yards of that distance.

« **Reply #232 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:13:14 PM »

Quote from: George_Bahto on December 13, 2009, 02:55:50 PM

Pat: your 3-tee reference by CB was about his way (he thought) of equalizing play between different skills of golfers. (apparently, that scheme of his didn't work out because he (Mac) did not carry that over into later courses he was involved with

I'm not so sure about that.
I'd like to measure the footpads before drawing any conclusions.

as I said I have early scorecards for about 80% of their courses showing Biarritz holes with a single tee, including The Knoll (by Banks)

George, a scorecard does not represent a comprehensive view or analysis of a golf course.
Many courses had multiple scorecards, one for each set of tees.

The Knoll scorecard you reference lists the 13th hole at 235 yards.
While the hole is slightly downhill, par is a difficult score for a scratch golfer, let alone higher handicaps.
I'm trying to remember the dimensions of the original footpad at # 13 and whether it could accomodate multiple tee markers

actually, hardly any scorecards of Macdonald Raynor courses show multiple tees

That doesn't mean that they didn't exist.
I'd like to examine the old aerials to get a sense of the size of the footpads on those tees

Occasionally Raynor would put in an optional tee on very long par-4 (like Raynor's Dogleg) or becasue of a long-ish forced carry

« **Reply #233 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:33:05 PM »

Pat,
Yale's looks to be two, one in front of the other but very close together.
Tamarack's is one box, about half as long as the back section of the Biarritz green.
CC of Fairfield's is one box, about 3/4 as long as the back section of the Biarritz green.

How deep is the usual back section of green, 35/40 yards?

« **Reply #234 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:38:38 PM »

...and Grenwich CC's has one tee box about 1/3 as long as the back green section.

« **Reply #235 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:46:59 PM »

Jim Kennedy,

Which hole is a Biarritz at CC of Fairfield ?
I'm drawing a blank.

« **Reply #236 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:53:46 PM »

Pat,
It's gone now. The did leave the old greenside bunkering in what is now fairway, but on a much longer hole. Here's the Biarritz in 1934.

« **Reply #237 on:** December 13, 2009, 03:59:32 PM »

Here's a link to mapquest for a modern look:
http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Fairfield&state=CT&address=936+Sasco+Hill+Road&zipcode=06824

« **Reply #238 on:** December 13, 2009, 04:15:35 PM »

Quote from: George_Bahto on December 13, 2009, 02:41:24 PM

Bradley: Lido's 8th, the Biarritz green was moved because they couldn't maintain it along the beachfront because of the green kept washing away during stormy weather.

I'll check but I think it was moved once more to accomodate expansions of nearby buildings

George,

I had assumed the tee was moved forward from 220 to 160 because the low running shot was impossible in the wind. But you think the yardage changed on account of the green being moved closer to the tee?

« **Reply #239 on:** December 13, 2009, 04:21:00 PM »

Jim Kennedy,

Was this one of the holes altered when they changed the configuration of the 9th, 18th and some other holes ?

Is there a history book on CC of Fairfield ?

As you know, I love that golf course and would like to know more about the architectural history.

« **Reply #240 on:** December 13, 2009, 04:52:18 PM »

Pat,
Sorry, nothing further from me outside of what I've read about it on this site. I don't know if it was the 30s or the 50s when that hole went bye-bye. The profile does say they are having a club history written.

You picked a winner to love

« **Reply #241 on:** December 13, 2009, 05:01:01 PM »

Pat,
I was lookng at the 1965 aerial and the green is still in use, although it looks like it was turned into a longer hole at that time before being lost as seen in the modern aerial. Here's is 1965:

« **Reply #242 on:** December 13, 2009, 05:44:30 PM »

Jim,

That's the 10th hole.

It must have been revised subsequent to 1965 as the green looks nothing like that today.

Today, there's water surrounding that green on three sides.

Today's green is very interesting, with plenty of contour and slope, but, it's not remotely similar to a biarritz green.

« **Reply #243 on:** December 13, 2009, 06:00:13 PM »

Pat,
Here is the same green back in 1934. This isn't a Biarritz?

« **Reply #244 on:** December 13, 2009, 06:03:43 PM »

Same green, 1965. In the new aerial (mapquest) the bunkers that once flanked this green are still visible right by the pond, but the green is no longer there.

« **Reply #245 on:** December 13, 2009, 06:13:32 PM »

Jim,

That's now a part of the 10th fairway, the green has been moved, back, way back.

Go to "Google Earth" and you'll see the area.

The next time I play there I'll examine the 10th fairway carefully.

« **Reply #246 on:** December 13, 2009, 06:37:10 PM »

Pat,
It sure looks like a par 3 Biarritz in 1934. By 1965 it looks to have become a par 4, and in a modern aerial the green is no longer there, and a new hole was created in that corridor with its green placed 130 yards or so west of the 1934/1965 greensite. Some of the old greenside bunkering still remains.

Wonder how they resolved this?
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/05/nyregion/our-towns-tug-of-war-over-a-golf-course-for-a-select-few.html?scp=21&sq=country+club+of+fairfield&st=nyt

« **Reply #247 on:** December 13, 2009, 07:40:34 PM »

Pat and Jim: a number of years ago I was pretty involved with CCF hoping to be involved in the restoration.

I have all the old material now but at that time, one day walking the course with then superintendent Pat Sisk (now at Milwaukee), we were going down the 10th fairway and I saw the remnants of a full blow Biarritz hole right in the middle of the fairway - even some of the "dent" of those multiple bunkers were visible. Looking at the old green, I lined up and said to Pat - "two hundred and twenty yards or so behind me, you'll find the tee. Sure enuf back there was the original tee.

Yes this was a Biarritz - it went down the tube when they re-routed some of the holes so the course would begin and end where they had moved the clubhouse

I have the RTJ suggested plans - most of the work was done in house by a very talented super at the time

G Cornish did one hole - I think. I spoke to him about it a long time ago.

RTJ turned the old Alps hole (back in the bushes) into dog-leg right Cape hole over water.

The original Raynor plan was so difficult, Oliver Gould Jennings (Standard Oil exec and founder) rejected the plan and had Seth draw up another version

Good Story - Huge Landfill Operation - Great Course - Interesting Evolution - it’ll be in the "Next Book"

« **Reply #248 on:** December 13, 2009, 07:42:46 PM »

You guys have me Biarritz'd out

how to play a Biarritz:

Hit a big dog club to the green - hope for the best, stay out of the bunkering, pray for a 3 and move on to the next hole!!

« **Reply #249 on:** December 13, 2009, 08:01:47 PM »

George,

You can see the remnants of the Biarritz in the fairway contours.

It's too bad that they felt the need to reroute and redesign some of the holes.

There's nothing wrong with a little walk to the 1st tee and from the 18th green.

News:

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Bradley Anderson

George_Bahto

George_Bahto

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Jim_Kennedy

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Jim_Kennedy

Bradley Anderson

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Jim_Kennedy

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

Jim_Kennedy

Patrick_Mucci

Jim_Kennedy

George_Bahto

George_Bahto

Patrick_Mucci

An Error Has Occurred!