PENNARD – a sketch design proposal to improve the course layout

[Ben Stephens]

PENNARD – a sketch design proposal to improve the course layout for the 21st century.

I admit the more I think about Pennard I get to like it even more due to it most wonderful moon like wavy landscape. But the stumbling block is the weak holes, due to my back injury it gave me a great opportunity to talk to Mike Bennett, one of the best old fashioned golf pros who has been at Pennard for the best part of the last 50 years. We went through the history of the club and the course. A couple of Braid’s original work has been removed notably on the opening 3 holes.  The newer greens are flattish. I would love to create more new greens like the original ones which fit in the landscape effortlessly. Being at BUDA gave me a wonderful opportunity to see this rare landscape.

I have produced a quick sketch for a proposal that I feel that would take Pennard into the 21st century and elevate it status from a good links course to a world class golf facility without losing its quirkiness.



Hole 1 – tee relocated to blue front tee and green relocated 150 yards away creating a new par 5 opening hole like RCD. This helps to move the line of the tee shot further away from the 9th green and the 10th tee.

Hole 2 – new long par 3 hole using the natural shaped bunker that exists on the current dunes land like a reverse version of the 4th at Riviera but a larger buffer zone between the green and the bunker.

Hole 3 – I thought this was one of the flattest fairways unlike the other holes at Pennard so I have realigned the fairway to the right using the rumpled nature of the existing landscape so that it matches the other fairways.

Hole 4 – I felt the par 5 was a bit dangerous a bit too squeezed in, it was a alright hole not a spectacular hole. I have created a new short par 3 about 135 to 150 yards .

Hole  5 – New hole, the walk between the current 5th and 6th was very long. I thought why they create a downhill short/medium par 4? which could be reachable which I have done here. By doing this I have created more area between the new 5th, existing 7th and 9th tees rather than have them squeezed in.

Hole 6 – as existing apart from moving the two hidden bunkers on the left further up to a more visibile position and in current landing areas

Hole 7 and 8 – UNTOUCHED – great holes I really enjoyed playing both of them.

Hole 9 – 2 new bunkers added otherwise untouched

Hole 10 and 11 – UNTOUCHED

Hole 12 – New short par 4 created along the ridge – this would be a spectacular hole to play. The current 12 is an awkward short par 4 where the green is awkward to get to.

Hole 13 – New medium par 4 using the land of the current 12th and 13th holes bringing in the large sand dune mound into play. The current 13th green looked artificial to me and I proposed a new green to the right of the current 13th green against the dune ridge this would be much more visible to the eye.

Hole 14 – by eliminating the current 13th green allows for a new tee to create a tighter dogleg angle and a chance to drive the green. The club’s new championship tee makes this hole very hard as the green is not really designed to be a long par 4.

Hole 15 – the best part of the current hole is the green but the whole hole is not Pennard. I have proposed a new downhill par 3 beyond the existing 15th green and a new green over the existing 17th green. This would be a stunning Pennard like par 3.

Hole 16 – used the current 17th fairway down toward the current 16th green which is reconfigured to be more visible and better green for a par 5.  Having the fairway by the edge of the course makes the hole more interesting and creating a much better 17th hole as well as the 16th.

Hole 17 – new medium/long par 4 hole from the current 14th championship tee to the 16th ladies tee area which makes the green visible from the tee and uses the rumpled fairways of Pennard.

Hole 18 – New championship tee otherwise UNTOUCHED.

I have created a nine hole par three course using the practice chipping green and the current 2 green. This would be an awesome short course an absolute extra bonus for the club.

Your comments would be welcome

Cheers
Ben

[Sean_A]

Ben

I would take a completely different tack and create a par 3 course on the land behind the 2nd/3rd and trying to work back to the current practice hole for easy acccess to the house. 

1. Moving the tee forward actually makes the hole more dangerous as those on the practice hole can be unwitting victims.  As it is now, everything is in plain sight.  You also bring the road more in play.

2. The new hole is a shocker and I would be all for a change.  Except I would head toward Swansea in same direction of #1 trying to find a site near the rear of #3 tee.  Plus, your hole has guys banging into what can be a horrible head wind as a long par 3. 

3. Good hole, no change needed - waste of money.  Flat doesn't equal bad. 

4. Great hole.  No change needed - waste of money.  Wide open drive which confuses golfers - design at its best.

5. I suspect your fifth is far too close to the public path with walkers appearing blindly into play - bad news.  Safety relies on vision.

6. Just get rid of two bunkers, not needed as the left side of the fairway is a poor angle.

9. Don't need bunkering left.  The two current bunkers are mainy for safety issues for walkers on the path.  Best line of approach is out right so more bunkering is a road map of where to avoid - bad design.

12. Not an ideal hole, but it leads to the 13 which is a great hole.  The 12th should be better but the club have stopped shaving the bank to the Pill.  Now, there are tees further back. 

13. Great hole, only change would be to make high dune area short of green a sandy waste as previously.

14. Great hole, no change.

15. Good hole, its alrught for a course to have a few flat holes.  In fact, I think Pennard could benefit from a few more flat holes.

16. Great hole no change - waste of money.

17. Crazy hole, but many like it.  I am inclined to keep it for the views alone. 

Pennard is holiday golf and that thought should always be in the fore when thinking of the course.  As a member, I would not be in favour of nearly all the changes for the cost factor alone. 

Ciao

[Ben Stephens]

Sean ,

Thanks for your reply and views. I have added comments below to your views.


1. Moving the tee forward actually makes the hole more dangerous as those on the practice hole can be unwitting victims.  As it is now, everything is in plain sight.  You also bring the road more in play.
I have moved it onto the existing blue tee – which changes the angle of play and takes it further away from the road according to the 15 deg rule either side of the centre line. The current tee lines up closer against the road. The practice hole is removed and parts of it is used on the new par 3 course.


2. The new hole is a shocker and I would be all for a change.  Except I would head toward Swansea in same direction of #1 trying to find a site near the rear of #3 tee.  Plus, your hole has guys banging into what can be a horrible head wind as a long par 3.
There is one of the most natural sandy waste in the dunes it would be a shame not to used it. I don’t mind a medium/long par 3 with a green of sensible size. The current one is far too small to be a 209 yard par 3. The members would be playing off 140 yard tees on the new par 3.


3. Good hole, no change needed - waste of money.  Flat doesn't equal bad.
This fairway was moved due to the area required to make the proposed par 3 course and the new tee avoids hitting another tee shot into the wind. There is some nice land available to create a new fairway. By ‘straightening it up’ I believe it would create a better hole than the current one.
  

4. Great hole.  No change needed - waste of money.  Wide open drive which confuses golfers - design at its best.
Great hole??? – I didn’t think so and the fairway chokes in the area for the long hitters. Thought the green was mundane the only interesting bit was that it was front to back slope. If it was downwind it would be impossible to stop the ball. I have created a par 3 which takes the public path out of direct play


5. I suspect your fifth is far too close to the public path with walkers appearing blindly into play - bad news.  Safety relies on vision.
The proposed fifth tee is in front of the public path and if the fourth and fifth greens were removed and reshaped the new green would then be visible from the tee – its more like a 330 yard downhill hole.


6. Just get rid of two bunkers, not needed as the left side of the fairway is a poor angle.
Agreed in some respects I would prefer if it had more bunkers as the wayward shot shot be punished.


9. Don't need bunkering left.  The two current bunkers are mainy for safety issues for walkers on the path.  Best line of approach is out right so more bunkering is a road map of where to avoid - bad design.
As the long hitters are now bombing over the current bunkers downwind I added a few more to retain the hole’s defence by trying to force everyone the hit right hand side.


12. Not an ideal hole, but it leads to the 13 which is a great hole.  The 12th should be better but the club have stopped shaving the bank to the Pill.  Now, there are tees further back.  
I thought 12 was a weak hole and the green did not fit into the landscape it looked artificially added onto it. Being blind and the fairway landing area perilously close to the 15th tee is a serious injury waiting to happen. There is even better landscape that has been untouched for the proposed new 12th about 300 yards against the ridge and a green below the existing 8th tee would give great background views of the beach.


13. Great hole, only change would be to make high dune area short of green a sandy waste as previously.
Great hole??? I thought it was a joke, an artificially shaped punchbowl green which juts out of a duneline. The green surface was blind. The right position for a green on that hole is on the piece of land right of the current green against the dune ridge. It would be a natural back to front gentle slope like the ones at Porthcawl. The proposed new par 4 would bring the big dune mound into play and make the tee shot more visible as opposed to the current 12th hole’s blind shot.


14. Great hole, no change.
Agreed I would prefer to keep it as a medium par 4 rather than a long one. By elimating the current 13th green creates a new angle for the 14th giving longer hitters more of a go at the green. I would create a tongue at the front to make the green more visible from below


15. Good hole, its alright for a course to have a few flat holes.  In fact, I think Pennard could benefit from a few more flat holes.
Thought this hole was a bit dull apart from the green which was a wonderful shaped green. The proposed 15th would give wonderful views and its downhill. Pennard having more flat holes?? It would certainly make it more boring.


16. Great hole no change - waste of money.
Have to disagree with it being a great hole – I thought the green was the wrong shape and a bit unfair thats why I have rotated the green by 90 degrees to be more visible. By moving it onto the 17th fairway and playing it in the opposite direction would not change how the hole is currently played.


17. Crazy hole, but many like it.  I am inclined to keep it for the views alone.  
It is definitely a crazy hole, firstly for its blind shot and secondly the way it squeezes up in the 250 to 300 yard area. As I have played it I would now used a 4 iron off the tee to be safe. The proposed 17th by playing it up the 16th from the current 14th championship tee would make it much more visble and a marker post would not really be needed.


Pennard is holiday golf and that thought should always be in the fore when thinking of the course.  As a member, I would not be in favour of nearly all the changes for the cost factor alone.  

Sean this was a hypothetical exercise of what could be done on this amazing expanse of wonderful and unusal linksland I understand it is totally unlikely that members and the club changing the course - 'it is what it is'. I would call the current course ‘Marmite’ (or as the Aussies call it Vegemite) as some love it and some hate it and would not return. In some ways I have made it fairer and not losing too much what Pennard is all about - which will attract more customers from all over. As a designer I am just seeing what potential it has and filling in the gaps in the land. A par 3 course would definitely bring in more revenue to the club and make it even more ‘holiday golf’. The proposed layout has created a few more driveable par 4’s like at Elie and more longer holes to balance it out a bit more.

Pennard has probably one of the best stretch of 5 holes I have played on a golf course from Holes 7 to 11. I would definitely be back to play mainly due to this amazing stretch of holes, the club's most welcoming atmosphere and of course the views. Its a pity it is one of those golf courses which really polarizes opinions on GCA and I can now see why.

Cheers
Ben

[Sean_A]

Ben

Give a few minutes thought to the par 3s and 5s.  As sets, they are more diverse than just about any course I know especially as there are four of each.  This is a truly remarkable feat when we consider there isn't a bad hole in the bunch. 

We will have to agree to disagree.  I like a few of the holes you want to eliminate.  In the main, I think Pennard's biggest issue is conditioning and the 2nd hole.  I don't know how conditioning is solved without spending lots of money on water and feed.  Of course there are inherent risks when doing this sort of thing so it may not be wise.  Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  My dues haven't gone up a penny in three years - thats partly what I'm talking about when I mention holiday golf.  If Pennard cost me £500 a year I would resign my membership and I am sure the threshold is lower for many folks.

Ciao

[Ben Stephens]

Ben

We will have to agree to disagree.  I like a few of the holes you want to eliminate.  In the main, I think Pennard's biggest issue is conditioning and the 2nd hole.  I don't know how conditioning is solved without spending lots of money on water and feed.  Of course there are inherent risks when doing this sort of thing so it may not be wise.  Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  My dues haven't gone up a penny in three years - thats partly what I'm talking about when I mention holiday golf.  If Pennard cost me £500 a year I would resign my membership and I am sure the threshold is lower for many folks.

Ciao

Sean,

Realistically, I would definitiely suggest to design + build a new second hole while keeping the other in play and a few subtle changes nothing drastic for the rest of the course. I thought the condition was great for a golf course on a common grazing land. We have had a period of dry weather this year which has killed some of the grass surely the greenkeeper should have hand watered the bad areas during the dry period to keep the grass alive. I would suggest a top dressing and overseeding programme, probably once every 5 to 7 years, for the fairways if members want to improve the conditions.

Sometimes to improve the overall golf course layout some holes whether they are good or bad will have to make way. I thought the 4th was a bit dangerous. I took a line that went close to the 7th and 9th tees and it crossed over a public footpath I can see a few players reaching the public footpath airborne what happens if a public walker was seriously injured would the club be liable?.

I love Pennard's quirkiness but with the revised layout I can see more customers coming back as it is fairer and would appeal to more Americans. A few of them who I played with thought it was unfair and penalised what they felt was a great shot I agree with them in that respect but hey ho sometimes you have to take the bad bounces on the chin.

Cheers
Ben

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ben,

I don't know Pennard...

But can I just say that I love the fact that you are willing to throw up hypothetical ideas and sketches for discussion on this site...

You have done this before (Prestwick & Cypress Point come to mind) and it always makes for a great thread...

Bravo!

[Sean_A]

Ben

We will have to agree to disagree.  I like a few of the holes you want to eliminate.  In the main, I think Pennard's biggest issue is conditioning and the 2nd hole.  I don't know how conditioning is solved without spending lots of money on water and feed.  Of course there are inherent risks when doing this sort of thing so it may not be wise.  Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  My dues haven't gone up a penny in three years - thats partly what I'm talking about when I mention holiday golf.  If Pennard cost me £500 a year I would resign my membership and I am sure the threshold is lower for many folks.

Ciao

Sean,

Realistically, I would definitiely suggest to design + build a new second hole while keeping the other in play and a few subtle changes nothing drastic for the rest of the course. I thought the condition was great for a golf course on a common grazing land. We have had a period of dry weather this year which has killed some of the grass surely the greenkeeper should have hand watered the bad areas during the dry period to keep the grass alive. I would suggest a top dressing and overseeding programme, probably once every 5 to 7 years, for the fairways if members want to improve the conditions.

Sometimes to improve the overall golf course layout some holes whether they are good or bad will have to make way. I thought the 4th was a bit dangerous. I took a line that went close to the 7th and 9th tees and it crossed over a public footpath I can see a few players reaching the public footpath airborne what happens if a public walker was seriously injured would the club be liable?.

I love Pennard's quirkiness but with the revised layout I can see more customers coming back as it is fairer and would appeal to more Americans. A few of them who I played with thought it was unfair and penalised what they felt was a great shot I agree with them in that respect but hey ho sometimes you have to take the bad bounces on the chin.

Cheers
Ben

Ben

Saftey will always be at the fore of archies' thoughts on architecture - its built in thinking.  I say pay attention to your surroundings and there should be very few problems.  Its a fact of Pennard that there are mnay walkers heading to/from the beach or just out with the dog.  The course is littered with paths.  The important thing is to keep sight lines open in these instances - this is why altering #5 is a mistake despite the inconvenient walk to the 6th tee.  Two holes were changed not all that long ago by Steel.  #s 4 and 5.  Both had greens too close to the boundary line with houses in danger.  So #4 green was moved to its present position and a totally new 5th was built further left and a bit short of the old hole - hence the reason for the walk to #6 tee.   

I would love to see the club hire a proper archie to rebuild the 2nd heading in the same direction as #1 and to design a par 3 course of however many holes so long as the current practice hole was kept and a further hole to its lleft was built to keep access somewhat reasonable from the house.  That unused land is incredible and I would think a great many archies would jump at the opportunity.

You will never get me to agree #s 4, 13 and 16 aren't holes which add to Pennard's own greatness and that they would be sorely missed if eliminated.  They are all quite unusual holes and wonderful.  I would also say #3 is very good because one has to find the flat area off the tee - it isn't there for the taking.  I guess we just have different outlooks on architecture and thats fine.  Again, this was essentially where I was coming from kin my conversation with Ian.  Modern design ideals shouldn't really apply to Pennard and that the last thing Pennard needs (needed) was an archie like Colt to make changes.  I know Colt was paid for suggestions when Braid was retained, but I don't know if Braid actually pinched any of the ideas. 

Ciao

[Ben Stephens]

Ben,

I don't know Pennard...

But can I just say that I love the fact that you are willing to throw up hypothetical ideas and sketches for discussion on this site...

You have done this before (Prestwick & Cypress Point come to mind) and it always makes for a great thread...

Bravo!

Thanks Ally!

I look forward to others putting up their ideas for discussion on GCA

Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

Ben

We will have to agree to disagree.  I like a few of the holes you want to eliminate.  In the main, I think Pennard's biggest issue is conditioning and the 2nd hole.  I don't know how conditioning is solved without spending lots of money on water and feed.  Of course there are inherent risks when doing this sort of thing so it may not be wise.  Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  My dues haven't gone up a penny in three years - thats partly what I'm talking about when I mention holiday golf.  If Pennard cost me £500 a year I would resign my membership and I am sure the threshold is lower for many folks.

Ciao

Sean,

Realistically, I would definitiely suggest to design + build a new second hole while keeping the other in play and a few subtle changes nothing drastic for the rest of the course. I thought the condition was great for a golf course on a common grazing land. We have had a period of dry weather this year which has killed some of the grass surely the greenkeeper should have hand watered the bad areas during the dry period to keep the grass alive. I would suggest a top dressing and overseeding programme, probably once every 5 to 7 years, for the fairways if members want to improve the conditions.

Sometimes to improve the overall golf course layout some holes whether they are good or bad will have to make way. I thought the 4th was a bit dangerous. I took a line that went close to the 7th and 9th tees and it crossed over a public footpath I can see a few players reaching the public footpath airborne what happens if a public walker was seriously injured would the club be liable?.

I love Pennard's quirkiness but with the revised layout I can see more customers coming back as it is fairer and would appeal to more Americans. A few of them who I played with thought it was unfair and penalised what they felt was a great shot I agree with them in that respect but hey ho sometimes you have to take the bad bounces on the chin.

Cheers
Ben

Ben

Saftey will always be at the fore of archies' thoughts on architecture - its built in thinking.  I say pay attention to your surroundings and there should be very few problems.  Its a fact of Pennard that there are mnay walkers heading to/from the beach or just out with the dog.  The course is littered with paths.  The important thing is to keep sight lines open in these instances - this is why altering #5 is a mistake despite the inconvenient walk to the 6th tee.  Two holes were changed not all that long ago by Steel.  #s 4 and 5.  Both had greens too close to the boundary line with houses in danger.  So #4 green was moved to its present position and a totally new 5th was built further left and a bit short of the old hole - hence the reason for the walk to #6 tee.  

I would love to see the club hire a proper archie to rebuild the 2nd heading in the same direction as #1 and to design a par 3 course of however many holes so long as the current practice hole was kept and a further hole to its lleft was built to keep access somewhat reasonable from the house.  That unused land is incredible and I would think a great many archies would jump at the opportunity.

You will never get me to agree #s 4, 13 and 16 aren't holes which add to Pennard's own greatness and that they would be sorely missed if eliminated.  They are all quite unusual holes and wonderful.  I would also say #3 is very good because one has to find the flat area off the tee - it isn't there for the taking.  I guess we just have different outlooks on architecture and thats fine.  Again, this was essentially where I was coming from kin my conversation with Ian.  Modern design ideals shouldn't really apply to Pennard and that the last thing Pennard needs (needed) was an archie like Colt to make changes.  I know Colt was paid for suggestions when Braid was retained, but I don't know if Braid actually pinched any of the ideas.  

Ciao

Sean

Thats interesting that you said Donald Steel was involved - doesn't he have a tendency of building flattish greens on Links courses? The long walk from the 5th green to the 6th tee did bother me as there was some great landscape there for a potential smallish green for a great downhill short/medium par 4 which I think is wasted.

I found out while discussing with Mike Bennett that the 1st and 9th greens were built ‘really’ flat and it has changed shape naturally over the years. I had read paper excerpts belonging to Mike Bennett re: a report about the course in 1964. The second was originally to the third green from a tee left of the current first green. Then a par 4 third in a similar direction to the first. It was on part of the current 3rd fairway.  A short part 3 4th was in the opposite direction then the 5th was a dogleg right to the old 4th green right of the current 4th green.

I seem to find there is a lot of reluctance in changing established golf courses which is the norm for many golf clubs compared to the past where the course was constantly developed and update  to its present state.

As for the par 3 course – I would definitely come and play it – it would be a coup for the club to have it as they have the land available.

Cheers
Ben

[Eric Smith]

The long walk from the 5th green to the 6th tee did bother me as there was some great landscape there for a potential smallish green for a great downhill short/medium par 4 which I think is wasted.

It is longer if you go round the right side of the 5th green like Andy and I did.  Bill and Peter knew better and were able to leave their bags up on the hill of 6 fairway and walk down to the tee with only their drivers.  I watched Sean in the next group do the same.  

Kudos to you, Ben, for putting this up for discussion.  I can't imagine wanting to change a thing, but I went round only once.  I will try to study your drawing over the weekend when I get more time.

To me, it is such a fantastic place.  The golf is truly unique to anything I have ever played [or could even imagine!] and that makes it extra special in my book.  Sean is a very lucky guy!

[Jason Topp]

Ben:

Interesting thoughts.  The current 12th is actually one of my favorite holes on the course.  It rewarded a drive to the far right hand side of the fairway.

My biggest problem with the course had to do with 17 and 18.  18 seems to basically require a tee shot into the heather and hope it bounces into the fairway.  I think 17 would be a better hole if it were lengthened 50 yards or so.  I'm still not sure about the 2nd shot but that is due more to my incompetence than anything.  I would need to play it a few times hitting the ball well to form an opinion.

[Sean_A]

Ben:

Interesting thoughts.  The current 12th is actually one of my favorite holes on the course.  It rewarded a drive to the far right hand side of the fairway.

My biggest problem with the course had to do with 17 and 18.  18 seems to basically require a tee shot into the heather and hope it bounces into the fairway.  I think 17 would be a better hole if it were lengthened 50 yards or so.  I'm still not sure about the 2nd shot but that is due more to my incompetence than anything.  I would need to play it a few times hitting the ball well to form an opinion.

Jason

You gotta rip a wee low cutty sark into the hill on 18 - no problem.  I have said it before that I don't mind these suddenly demanding tee shots on 17 & 18 because none of the others on the course are terribly demanding. 

Ciao 

[Mark Pearce]

Ben,

4 is one of the best holes on the course.  All the reasons you give for not liking it (aside from the safety one) seem like reasons to like it.  Not clear where to hit the tee shot?  Great.  Fairway narrows down where the long guys drive it?  Don't like having to think?

As to the safety question, if there are people on the path, however annoying it is, don't drive.  I must admit to being very annoyed on the Sunday when we realised that the family taking for ever to walk that path were a fmily who had just had lunch at the golf club.