[Bob Jenkins]

I am surprised Jordan Wall has not posted on this thread. We were lucky enough to be able to play Riviera for the first time last April.

Having seen pics of the 6th hole, I too thought it must be silly, people must be trying to pitch balls over the bunker and taking gouges out of the green. It looked in photos, as though it was impossible to get a putt around the bunker to a pin position opposite you in relation to the bunker. That is not so, at least in many cases and that is because of the elevation change from front to back which is much greater than it appears in photos or on TV.

On our day, the pin was on the front center and Jordan's tee shot was directly above the bunker. Having been given a line by our host, Jordan tapped his approach putt out and down the slope and it curled right around to about 2-3 feet from the hole. From photos or TV, I would never have thought that could be done. Of course, it would likely be another thing putting from the lower level to a pin on top, although there would be some movement towards the hole in some cases, or so I recall.

In conclusion, it is not as goofy as one would imagine from seeing photos. At least not to me.

[Sam Morrow]

Mike,
Is this the hole?
 

That's it! This hole is in all the advertising material I have seen for the property.

[Kalen Braley]

Here is the hole at The Ranch in San Jose, CA

[Mike Nuzzo]

Mike,
Is this the hole?

No
It is the other green with a bunker in it...
Just kidding

If having 2 of something is completely hokey, maybe they should reconsider having the one

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Is this the hole?

No
It is the other green with a bunker in it...
Just kidding

If having 2 of something is completely hokey, maybe they should reconsider having the one

Very good. 

[Pete Lavallee]

I would agree with Bob that from my one and only play back in 1985, it is very possible to putt around the bunker. In fact, this past weekend someone attempted putting around it from front right to the back left location. The anouncer imeadiately stated that the player will probably not hit the putt hard enough, as it is a very severe upslope. Sure enough the player picked the right line but left the putt woefully short. Back in those days is clearly said on the back of the scorecard "Putters only on #6 green".

[Steve Strasheim]

Adam,

I played Bayside a few times last year and found the seventeenth to be a nice hole. Green was so big with that bunker in the middle that it was like playing 3 different greens, depending on pin placement. There was a very steep backboard behind the green as well. This in my opinion rewarded bad shots like the one I bladed about 25 yards too far and still almost made an ace. As a short par 3 with a sweet view on a fun course, I think the 17th green at Bayside fits well.

Not sure this photo will show the green very well, but I'll try:

[Richard Hetzel]

Patrick,

Forest Dunes Golf Club in Roscommon, Michigan comes to mind. An NO, I did not enjoy the hole in the least bit.

[Rob Rigg]

TPC San Antonio is a Norman design right?

Dude, he's totally plagiarizing that concept so much that he's owning it now.

JC,

Hilarious.

The Reserve Fought course in Aloha, OR has a bunker in the middle of the green - on a double green - it sucks twice as bad.

[Mike Benham]

Because it is a dumb hole.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I see absolutely no strategy or genius in that green.

Why is it dumb? 

Because the position of the bunker makes the green (target) smaller? 

Or partitions the green into different pinnable segments?

Perhaps your opinion of the hole is clouded by the fact that you don't have the game to manufacture a tee shot to try to obtain par ...

What I think is a crime with the hole is the fact that they have pushed the length back to over 200 yards, which limits the hole locations they can use on the green.  A shorter distance would allow the hole to be placed in front of or behind the bunker without the Professionals crying that it is unfair ...

[JC Jones]

Because it is a dumb hole.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I see absolutely no strategy or genius in that green.

Why is it dumb? 

Because the position of the bunker makes the green (target) smaller? 

Or partitions the green into different pinnable segments?

Exactly.  When the pin is front left, the green is effectively, what, 20' by 20'?  Just because there is area mowed at green height elsewhere doesn't change the effective size of the green.  Would you feel it was a great hole if it was a 20' by 20' green with a giant bunker to the left of it and rough every where else?

Perhaps your opinion of the hole is clouded by the fact that you don't have the game to manufacture a tee shot to try to obtain par ...

Interesting that the hole is so good your only argument is to attack my golfing abilities.

[Duncan Betts]

Pacific Harbour in Brisbane down here has a double green shared by the 11th and 14th with a big bunker in the middle of it.

They didn't think much about the contouring though

[Anthony Gray]

  Why not? Have some fun. Give me SOMETHING. It is all golf. Great for afterround discussion. Not boreing for sure.

  I think I played a Jerry Pate course that had this years before my GCA days. Don't remember much more from the other holes. Memorable.

  Anthony

  t

[Adam Clayman]

This in my opinion rewarded bad shots like the one I bladed about 25 yards too far and still almost made an ace.

Steve, I now always try to play the back board. Especially to that pin. A skulled wedge is exactly what's called for, well done. If one tries to hit a skulled wedge and makes an ace, is that rewarding a bad shot? Besides, It's just way more fun to play the back board, than trying to plop the perfect yardage right at the pin. Which BTW, is as about as cool a spot on that green for the pin. Two feet to the left and you are down the hill. Putting from above the hole is fairly scary, even if Elton doesn't roll them over 10 very often.

[Peter Ferlicca]

Adams Mountain Country Club
Hole 3, a 560 yard Par 5

This was a HORRIBLE use of it because the bunker is too far back on the green, you NEVER had to putt around it.  Either your ball rolled up and came back down to the flat area or it stayed up in the rough behind the green.  I played probably 50 times and I never had to putt or chip it around the bunker.  Weiskopf really likes doing this, on his practice hole at PGA West there is a bunker in the middle of the green.

[Kevin Pallier]

I liked it.

It's different - so what ? The contouring supporting the bunker placement is brilliant.

[Alex Miller]

The green contours at 6 really make the hole, and they're harder to see from T.V.


I do think it would be an even better hole if the size of the lower and upper tears were switched, effectively calling for more accuracy on the shorter shot with the backboard and a wider margin of error for the longer shot to the back pin.

I think 6 at Riv becomes  a better hole if the front left is narrowed, but one is still able to putt around the bunker, and the back right expanded.

[John Mayhugh]

The bunker in the center of the green is, as others have said, an effective way to create greens within the green.  The 6th green (including bunker) is over 7,000 square feet.  If you just split the green on the left and right side of the bunker, you have around 3,000 square feet for each of the "sub-greens."  Each of those is about the same size as the neighboring 16th green, and the 6th is no more than one club longer.

Even if the bunker separates you from the hole, thanks to the green contours there's still a reasonable chance to putt and get close.  I like the idea of having a large green that effectively plays smaller. Is it a concept that needs to be copied?  I don't mind it, so long as the copiers understand why Riviera's 6th hole works.  It's just a bit more of a challenge than severe green contours.

How do you feel about the boomerang 7th at Crystal Downs? 

[JC Jones]

The bunker in the center of the green is, as others have said, an effective way to create greens within the green.  The 6th green (including bunker) is over 7,000 square feet.  If you just split the green on the left and right side of the bunker, you have around 3,000 square feet for each of the "sub-greens."  Each of those is about the same size as the neighboring 16th green, and the 6th is no more than one club longer.

Even if the bunker separates you from the hole, thanks to the green contours there's still a reasonable chance to putt and get close.  I like the idea of having a large green that effectively plays smaller. Is it a concept that needs to be copied?  I don't mind it, so long as the copiers understand why Riviera's 6th hole works.  It's just a bit more of a challenge than severe green contours.

How do you feel about the boomerang 7th at Crystal Downs? 

I also enjoy the idea of sub-greens within greens, in fact, I love them.  I really like the 7th at Crystal Downs and was waiting for someone to bring that hole up.  I see very little similarity between the two holes.  From the front right of the green at Crystal Downs, one can putt it to within a few feet of the back right hole location.  Can someone putt the ball from directly in front of the bunker, all the way around the bunker to a pin directly behind the bunker?

[Alex Miller]

The bunker in the center of the green is, as others have said, an effective way to create greens within the green.  The 6th green (including bunker) is over 7,000 square feet.  If you just split the green on the left and right side of the bunker, you have around 3,000 square feet for each of the "sub-greens."  Each of those is about the same size as the neighboring 16th green, and the 6th is no more than one club longer.

Even if the bunker separates you from the hole, thanks to the green contours there's still a reasonable chance to putt and get close.  I like the idea of having a large green that effectively plays smaller. Is it a concept that needs to be copied?  I don't mind it, so long as the copiers understand why Riviera's 6th hole works.  It's just a bit more of a challenge than severe green contours.

How do you feel about the boomerang 7th at Crystal Downs? 

6 is actually longer, especially from where the pros play it, about 205. From the member's tee it's about 20 yards longer than 16.

BUT, you bring up a crucial point which is when this hole is copied, other donut holes do not create large enough green outlines, they often just throw a bunker into the middle of the green.

[John Mayhugh]

6 is actually longer, especially from where the pros play it, about 205. From the member's tee it's about 20 yards longer than 16.

BUT, you bring up a crucial point which is when this hole is copied, other donut holes do not create large enough green outlines, they often just throw a bunker into the middle of the green.

I said that the 6th was longer than the 16th, but I sure as hell wouldn't play the hole from 205.  The pro setup screws up everything, including my score. 

Scorecard yardage from the blues is 175 for the 6th and 166 for the 16th.  Played from the yardage I belong at (6532), the yardages are 144 & 148 - with the 16th being longer.

[John Mayhugh]

I also enjoy the idea of sub-greens within greens, in fact, I love them.  I really like the 7th at Crystal Downs and was waiting for someone to bring that hole up.  I see very little similarity between the two holes.  From the front right of the green at Crystal Downs, one can putt it to within a few feet of the back right hole location.  Can someone putt the ball from directly in front of the bunker, all the way around the bunker to a pin directly behind the bunker?

Doubtful.  But there is only 5 or so yards between the back of the bunker and the back edge of the green, so it seems unlikely that the hole would be located there anyway.

[JC Jones]

I also enjoy the idea of sub-greens within greens, in fact, I love them.  I really like the 7th at Crystal Downs and was waiting for someone to bring that hole up.  I see very little similarity between the two holes.  From the front right of the green at Crystal Downs, one can putt it to within a few feet of the back right hole location.  Can someone putt the ball from directly in front of the bunker, all the way around the bunker to a pin directly behind the bunker?

Doubtful.  But there is only 5 or so yards between the back of the bunker and the back edge of the green, so it seems unlikely that the hole would be located there anyway.

With those dimensions, what is the added strategy of mowing the area behind the bunker at green height?

[Steve Strasheim]

This in my opinion rewarded bad shots like the one I bladed about 25 yards too far and still almost made an ace.

Steve, I now always try to play the back board. Especially to that pin. A skulled wedge is exactly what's called for, well done. If one tries to hit a skulled wedge and makes an ace, is that rewarding a bad shot? Besides, It's just way more fun to play the back board, than trying to plop the perfect yardage right at the pin. Which BTW, is as about as cool a spot on that green for the pin. Two feet to the left and you are down the hill. Putting from above the hole is fairly scary, even if Elton doesn't roll them over 10 very often.

Thanks, I like the way you think!

Your comment reminds me of that cool thread I saw the other day about how a golf shot is more exciting after it hits the ground. Certainly true on this hole. You think your gonna be about a 50 yards long only to watch it roll away up the hill and then back down to the flagstick. This pic from the forward tees doesn't really show the right angle with the mens tees being so much to the left.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Many claim that the green on # 6 at Riviera as one of the most strategic, unusual greens in golf.

If that's the case, why hasn't that green been duplicated more often.

It's true that it's unique and beguiling.

Plenty of strategy, a greens within green concept.

Why haven't more architects crafted duplicates ?

Or, is that green/hole deemed unfair by today's golfers

Patrick:

I don't see anything silly about this. You have greens on a golf course, you also have greenside bunkers, so what wrong with extending a green around a bunker. I'm not saying that's how it was done at Riveria, but that's one way to understand how it could be done, and what it basically is. It's totally natural and blends in with the surroundings (as opposed to those silly "eyebrow" sleepers at Rye ).

The only issue I see with it is drainage.

I suppose the reason why we don't have more of them is simple because some people think it's silly. There's a fear that any course that incorporates this feature will be regarded as a Mickey Mouse course, and nobody (architect or owner) wants to take that risk with a new course. The other reason is that perhaps we are not as open to bold design concepts as they were in the past.

Before you posted this topic, I had been thinking about what type of reaction there was, when it was first constructed. Was there a backlash, or was it accepted without fuss? If there was no adverse reaction to this, does it mean that golfers in the 1920s were more accepting and open to innovative features like this? It would be interesting to read early articles on the 6th at Riveria.

Dónal.
 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()