[Andrew Mitchell]

Kelly
I enjoyed our game together at Muirfield back in 2007.  I think you had just come from St Andrews.  What inspiration have you drawn from the classic courses of Scotland and how have you managed to apply that subsequently?

I enjoyed it as well Andrew. Actually that day I awoke in plenty of time and enjoyed my breakfast thinking I had plenty of time but somehow miscalculated. In a frenzy I grab my gear raced to the course, ran to the gate, hailed you at the tee as all of you were ready to play, ran inside the locker room and changed, and hurried back to the tee. It was absolutely one of my worst nightmares, it literally felt like a bad dream…here I was enjoying breakfast while nearly missing my tee time at Muirfield.

I think the main lesson I drew from being there was the confidence to employ features I liked into my own designs. There are so many features on golf courses there that are astounding if you compare with all of the conventional, safe, mundane features you encounter on most golf courses. As Tom Paul has reminded us: Max Behr’s contention is that if you can make the design feature appear naturally occurring you will receive little criticism. I believe that is the jest of it. Well on the land I have to work with the features I liked would be hard to make appear natural but I did it any way because I loved the strategic value of the feature, and, alas, I have received some harsh criticism.

Here are some things I have done subsequent to my visit to your home:

Mound in front of left portion of green


Same feature taken from left side of hole.


Similar feature in front of a green


Same feature to the right, there is an angle to approach green and avoid mound.

And then some features in driving areas to contend with; neccesarily copies of what I saw, but I do believe it camefrom experiences I had overseas:

Kelly
Thanks for the reply.  I love the look of Lederach and your use of mounding, particularly in the 3rd & 4th photos.

Please let me know if you are ever back in the UK.

[Sean_A]

How bout the 16th?  That is a hole with a really wild green.  Where did the idea for this come from?  Also, why is there no apron for the kick up tee shot?  If memory serves, the hole slides away from the tee, but rough comes almost right against the green.  I was surprised you didn't leave an apron to bounce tee shots in for the front hole locations.

Ciao
Sean

The 16th originally was located at the left side of the present green where the mound is in front. This happened mostly on paper. Once I walked the routing I wanted the big tree in the background to be there behind the green so it evolved into its shape because of that. It is a good location for a very large green but there are budget constraints. There is a small apron in front, I appreciate your point, and you are probably right, but I felt the narrow apron was enough because most times you are hitting a wedge so you should be able to gauge a wedge to the front of the green to feed it to the left behind the mound or to the right beyond the bunker. The best pin positions are beyond the front, more to the back left and back right. I did design the green while in the field prior to construction and massaged in the field but it does have a similar shape to other greens I have done, although each is different around the periphery and internally, similar to the 6th and 13th at Hawk Point, the 15th at Hideout, the 1st and 12th at Laurel.

Kelly

Cheers.  It is interesting that you believe the best hole locations are to the rear of the green and not up front.  Is this just the case with this hole or all front to back running holes?  Is there a difference in these matters if the hole is a par 3, 4 or 5?

Ciao

[Steve_ Shaffer]

KBM,

It seems that every time that I've played Lederach in the past 2 years, the pin on 16 has been right front. I'd prefer it to be on the back left. Does this green need more pin positions or is the super lazy?

[Sean_A]

How bout the 16th?  That is a hole with a really wild green.  Where did the idea for this come from?  Also, why is there no apron for the kick up tee shot?  If memory serves, the hole slides away from the tee, but rough comes almost right against the green.  I was surprised you didn't leave an apron to bounce tee shots in for the front hole locations.

Ciao
Sean

The 16th originally was located at the left side of the present green where the mound is in front. This happened mostly on paper. Once I walked the routing I wanted the big tree in the background to be there behind the green so it evolved into its shape because of that. It is a good location for a very large green but there are budget constraints. There is a small apron in front, I appreciate your point, and you are probably right, but I felt the narrow apron was enough because most times you are hitting a wedge so you should be able to gauge a wedge to the front of the green to feed it to the left behind the mound or to the right beyond the bunker. The best pin positions are beyond the front, more to the back left and back right. I did design the green while in the field prior to construction and massaged in the field but it does have a similar shape to other greens I have done, although each is different around the periphery and internally, similar to the 6th and 13th at Hawk Point, the 15th at Hideout, the 1st and 12th at Laurel.

Kelly

Cheers.  It is interesting that you believe the best hole locations are to the rear of the green and not up front.  Is this just the case with this hole or all front to back running holes?  Is there a difference in these matters if the hole is a par 3, 4 or 5?

Ciao

Sean,

Just in this instance do I feel the best pin areas are in the back, largely because it is a wedge shot many times. I like the notion of hitting a low, punched, whistling wedge shot, but more likely a player will get the full loft of the club into the shot, particularly if you take advantage of the unfortunate rule that you can tee your ball on a par 3. I would rather the requirement be that balls can not be teed on par threes, and that architects take advantage of this requirement to make teeing areas on par threes resemble the pitch and roll of a fairway. This would make par three holes far more interesting in my view, the possibilities for creating another varied, and strategically intriguing approach to a green, like on par 4 and par 5 holes, would be a great improvement to the play of a course. Any way, back to Lederach, once the ball hits the front, left portion of the green, just to the right of the mound, the ball will feed back to the left toward middle, to back pin positions. If they hit toward the right, front portion of the green they can feed back to the right. The right has more interesting back pin positions because of the sharp slope along the right edge that feeds the ball to the bunker. Further, the angle of the green brings this slope more into play and requires you to judge the proper distance of your shot since the green is very long along this angle. Any kind of wind can make the shot very tricky. It seems there are more elements in play the farther back the pin position.

Now on hole 12, a par 5, and another green that falls away the pin areas up front are interesting because you have a longer club to play and the ground in front allows you to hit short of the green and roll it onto the front part. This requires some skill with trajectory and placement in order to get close. I like the front to back because of these challenges, but if you fail the consequences are measured by just how much you failed. If by just a little it actually is not too bad because you have an up hill putt, if it is by a lot then there are circumstances where your return putt may have some downhill to traverse but ultimately must travel back up hill to the hole, plus the putt is a long distance. On the opposite side of the hole I think there is nothing more satisfying then playing the bump and run just right to the pin and nothing more disappointing then seeing your ball still on the approach, not quite to the green.

I think the challenges of this type of green are more interesting as a par 4 or par 5 because the approach shot is played from a variety of lies and in order to set your self up properly for a bump and run approach you have to play the preceding shot with thought and skill. I am not a big fan of par three holes in general because of the artificial nature of determining your lie for the approach shot. This is especially true on a bump and run shot to a green that falls away, it just does not feel the same teeing your ball to play the shot, and I have always respected the admonition to tee the ball when given the opportunity.

Kelly

Cheers and wow!  I never thought I would read that an archie isn't fond of par 3s.  I would have thought many would like them because they get to control the circumstances much more than on 4s and 5s.  In other words, archies can create shots on par 3s which may be lacking in the remainder of the course, but I guess the reverse of this also true except that as you suggest, the par 3 is more contrived.  

You seemed to mix up the 3s quite a bit with two flat ones, one severely downhill and one severely uphill.  I liked the uphill one best because of the deception of the green - it is far larger than it looks from the tee - sort of like the 9th is MUCH larger than it appears from the fairway.  Plus, I think it rolls well with 13th - a good one-two punch.  A question concerning the 7th is it - the flat par 3 on the front 9?  I recall there being a funky feeder section to the back left of the green.  Why didn't you incorporate that as part of the green?

Yes, I do recall losing a ball over the back of #12.  I had to hit three woods to get home and I thought the punishment of a lost ball was rather severe given the distance, uphill and blind nature of the approach.  Mind you, I wasn't sure how the ball could disappear, but it did.  I think my problem was that I was playing the wrong tees, but I didn't go back for this hole - it was just long!  That centreline bunker also made matters more difficult.  

Ciao

[Steve_ Shaffer]

KBM,

I guess I've had bad luck with the pin positions on 16. 

I've played the open 6 holes at Heritage Creek. I noticed that the fairway bunker on the left side of 6 was originally planned as a center line bunker. What prompted the change? Also, it appears the the greens are not as undulating as at Lederach. Am I wrong in this observation? Is it wishful thinking that 3 more holes at HC will open next summer?

[Sean_A]

How bout the 16th?  That is a hole with a really wild green.  Where did the idea for this come from?  Also, why is there no apron for the kick up tee shot?  If memory serves, the hole slides away from the tee, but rough comes almost right against the green.  I was surprised you didn't leave an apron to bounce tee shots in for the front hole locations.

Ciao
Sean

The 16th originally was located at the left side of the present green where the mound is in front. This happened mostly on paper. Once I walked the routing I wanted the big tree in the background to be there behind the green so it evolved into its shape because of that. It is a good location for a very large green but there are budget constraints. There is a small apron in front, I appreciate your point, and you are probably right, but I felt the narrow apron was enough because most times you are hitting a wedge so you should be able to gauge a wedge to the front of the green to feed it to the left behind the mound or to the right beyond the bunker. The best pin positions are beyond the front, more to the back left and back right. I did design the green while in the field prior to construction and massaged in the field but it does have a similar shape to other greens I have done, although each is different around the periphery and internally, similar to the 6th and 13th at Hawk Point, the 15th at Hideout, the 1st and 12th at Laurel.

Kelly

Cheers.  It is interesting that you believe the best hole locations are to the rear of the green and not up front.  Is this just the case with this hole or all front to back running holes?  Is there a difference in these matters if the hole is a par 3, 4 or 5?

Ciao

Sean,

Just in this instance do I feel the best pin areas are in the back, largely because it is a wedge shot many times. I like the notion of hitting a low, punched, whistling wedge shot, but more likely a player will get the full loft of the club into the shot, particularly if you take advantage of the unfortunate rule that you can tee your ball on a par 3. I would rather the requirement be that balls can not be teed on par threes, and that architects take advantage of this requirement to make teeing areas on par threes resemble the pitch and roll of a fairway. This would make par three holes far more interesting in my view, the possibilities for creating another varied, and strategically intriguing approach to a green, like on par 4 and par 5 holes, would be a great improvement to the play of a course. Any way, back to Lederach, once the ball hits the front, left portion of the green, just to the right of the mound, the ball will feed back to the left toward middle, to back pin positions. If they hit toward the right, front portion of the green they can feed back to the right. The right has more interesting back pin positions because of the sharp slope along the right edge that feeds the ball to the bunker. Further, the angle of the green brings this slope more into play and requires you to judge the proper distance of your shot since the green is very long along this angle. Any kind of wind can make the shot very tricky. It seems there are more elements in play the farther back the pin position.

Now on hole 12, a par 5, and another green that falls away the pin areas up front are interesting because you have a longer club to play and the ground in front allows you to hit short of the green and roll it onto the front part. This requires some skill with trajectory and placement in order to get close. I like the front to back because of these challenges, but if you fail the consequences are measured by just how much you failed. If by just a little it actually is not too bad because you have an up hill putt, if it is by a lot then there are circumstances where your return putt may have some downhill to traverse but ultimately must travel back up hill to the hole, plus the putt is a long distance. On the opposite side of the hole I think there is nothing more satisfying then playing the bump and run just right to the pin and nothing more disappointing then seeing your ball still on the approach, not quite to the green.

I think the challenges of this type of green are more interesting as a par 4 or par 5 because the approach shot is played from a variety of lies and in order to set your self up properly for a bump and run approach you have to play the preceding shot with thought and skill. I am not a big fan of par three holes in general because of the artificial nature of determining your lie for the approach shot. This is especially true on a bump and run shot to a green that falls away, it just does not feel the same teeing your ball to play the shot, and I have always respected the admonition to tee the ball when given the opportunity.

Kelly

Cheers and wow!  I never thought I would read that an archie isn't fond of par 3s.  I would have thought many would like them because they get to control the circumstances much more than on 4s and 5s.  In other words, archies can create shots on par 3s which may be lacking in the remainder of the course, but I guess the reverse of this also true except that as you suggest, the par 3 is more contrived.  

You seemed to mix up the 3s quite a bit with two flat ones, one severely downhill and one severely uphill.  I liked the uphill one best because of the deception of the green - it is far larger than it looks from the tee - sort of like the 9th is MUCH larger than it appears from the fairway.  Plus, I think it rolls well with 13th - a good one-two punch.  A question concerning the 7th is it - the flat par 3 on the front 9?  I recall there being a funky feeder section to the back left of the green.  Why didn't you incorporate that as part of the green?

Yes, I do recall losing a ball over the back of #12.  I had to hit three woods to get home and I thought the punishment of a lost ball was rather severe given the distance, uphill and blind nature of the approach.  Mind you, I wasn't sure how the ball could disappear, but it did.  I think my problem was that I was playing the wrong tees, but I didn't go back for this hole - it was just long!  That centreline bunker also made matters more difficult.  

Ciao

Steve,

The superintendent is anything but lazy. Given the green speeds there are plenty of pin areas on hole 16, and there is a lot of variations in the shot requirements when comparing the pin areas. I am in email communication with him right this moment regarding an irrigation product issue, can I right click a picture of you from this site and paste it and your comment in an email to him? I am certain he will take it well…the whole murder rap thing he faced at his last superintendent position was a whole misunderstanding.

Sean,

The uphill par three you refer to is hole 14. Hole 7 does have a portion of the back, left green that breaks down and feeds to a fairway area behind the green. It is even possible that the ball could feed down behind the left bunker and you face a pitch back to the green that must carry the bunker. I did walk down there and talk about making it green at one time, and I do think it should be green down there, but that is a lot of area, and there was no way I could do that within the budgets we were committed to, it would have far exceeded the amount of green area, and green construction is expensive. It sounds bad not taking advantage of such an opportunity, and in hindsight maybe I should have just taken the hit for going over budget in exchange for doing something like that that would have been pretty outstanding, but there are so many other interesting features at the other greens I felt we were not lacking anything that required such a bold gesture at hole 7.  Your recognition of this the first time you played it is very commendable!  Even still, I was at a spaghetti fundraiser for my son’s HS basketball team the other night and their was a friend of a friend there who played Lederach. Shot 75 his first time, and he was very cool to me and finally said he did not appreciate that he hit a good shot into 7 only to see it catch that slope and slide off the back left of the green. At once he reminded me of everything that is bad about golf. So much of that green is pinnable and here he could not accept his fate. I just suggested to him that next time he may want to hit a little less club.

I am not sure why you lost a ball behind hole 12 green, but I agree that certainly is not fair and not the intention.

hole 7 lederach


hole 12 lederach

Kelly

Give me a break!  One would have to be blind not to see that area on the 7th. 

I am not learning much about you, but I am about Lederach! 

I figured you were on a budget which precluded incorporating that funky area as part of the 7th green.  Lord knows, Lederach's greens are not in need of any added twists of interest.  I was just thinkin...

Now then, about the 2nd, was there meant to be something, perhaps a bunker, on the corner of the leg?  If so, what happened?

Ciao

[Lou_Duran]

No, I have not been to Bandon. I hope someday to have the opportunity. No opportunities to design such a course, although we were close to the ocean at a course Randy Thompson and I designed in La Serena, Chile.

I have not given consideration to priorities in designing such a course since there never has been a real opportunity to put golf on such a site. My initial thoughts are that the three main priorities would be as follows: 1) Rout, design, and construct the course based upon my personal involvement with the site. In other words, see how I can maximize my face-to-face involvement which would include moving to the site or blocking out large portions of time to be on site each day; 2) maintain and, where appropriate mimic, the site’s natural systems and features with special consideration for avoiding any portion of the site that could compromise the existing natural system, such as breaching the primary dune line; and, 3) make it walkable. Keep the green to tee travel short.

KBM,

Are "natural systems" found everywhere, or are they primarily where the wind, sea, and earth interact with some energy?  Some folks talk poetically of nature's randomness and serendipity.  Yet when you speak of systems you are implying order, purpose.  One doesn't sense much of that laying tile in flat Ohio farm fields other than gravity acting on water.

Doesn't doing 2) present problems in accomplishing 3)?

On more important matters, my kids were relieved with that there was one second left and what could be achieved in so short a time.  They each had some $500 "invested" in their flights and ticket options.  We're hoping that the 'Horns just had an off game, and will be back to normal against AL.    

[Garland Bayley]

"if you take advantage of the unfortunate rule that you can tee your ball on a par 3. I would rather the requirement be that balls can not be teed on par threes, and that architects take advantage of this requirement to make teeing areas on par threes resemble the pitch and roll of a fairway. This would make par three holes far more interesting in my view, the possibilities for creating another varied, and strategically intriguing approach to a green, like on par 4 and par 5 holes, would be a great improvement to the play of a course."

Thanks for that bit of analysis.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

KBM,

That bunker on the right side of 11(now6) at HC is one large bunker. The multi level green there is quite large and the back upper right pin location is is a killer.

[Matt_Ward]

Kelly:

Be curious to know if routing Morgan Hill required plenty of different potential routings.

Did you have to make major allowances or compromises given the housing needs and the severe nature of the property ?

Were any holes that you envisioned need to be scaled back or simply abandoned because of in-house limitations.

[Sean_A]

Kelly

Give me a break!  One would have to be blind not to see that area on the 7th. 

I am not learning much about you, but I am about Lederach! 

I figured you were on a budget which precluded incorporating that funky area as part of the 7th green.  Lord knows, Lederach's greens are not in need of any added twists of interest.  I was just thinkin...

Now then, about the 2nd, was there meant to be something, perhaps a bunker, on the corner of the leg?  If so, what happened?

Ciao

Sean,

There was a bunker in the corner of the dogleg at hole 2. I am not aware it has been removed. It has been made substantially smaller. In the initial shaping surface drainage from above the fairway was directed through the bunker. The bunker is in a natural low area, but it was not necessary to run the water shed through its location. The contractor tried to address it several times but I don’t think we were ever total satisfied with the results. One must take on this bunker if they want to hit a big drive toward the green and substantially reduce the length of the approach shot. A play down the center of the fairway is safer, the fairway is visible, but you can drive it through the fairway into the rough. You can shape the tee shot right to left to avoid the bunker but it ahs to be a strong draw to withstand the sloping fairway which wants to kick the ball into the right rough. If the pin is front, right then a safe play to the middle of the fairway makes sense. If it is any where else then you may want to be more aggressive with the tee shot so you can play a high pitch into the pin. Being farther back means you must play a bump and run to have any chance of getting the ball on the green. The problem with taking a direct line over the bunker is that a slight draw usually results in your tee shot staying in the rough which makes it difficult to approach the green, particularly when the pin is back, left.




This is the tee shot taken during grow-in. You can see a portion of the fairway, but the direct line over the bunker to the green is more toward the left edge of the picture frame.


Here's the bunker in the left corner.


The green. The right portion of the green is visible. The left portion has fairway in front, but it is more crumpled, the green narrow, so you have to bump and run it through the crumpled fairway to have a chance of getting the ball on the green if you are anymore than a wedge away. That is why you might want to challenge the bunker to get close to the green for your approach to this area.

Kelly

Cheers.  I am sorry, I meant to say a left bunker further left than the current bunker, but perhaps a house or something is going in there at some point - I don't recall if something was there already, but if there was - it was quite a ways back.  I know that is rough ground over there, but if I recall correctly, its wide open and I assume the rough will eventually become better as it was a bit stoney in several places.  Yes, its better to go right and then approach the green back up the incline, but judging that drive is a bit awkward.  Unless the greens are hard and fast (they weren't when I played) approaching from that left side to a right pin didn't seem a bad deal.  Any thoughts?

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()