[Ryan Taylor]

Josh: Geoff Shackelford had a couple Instagram posts earlier this week with "then & now" comparisons. Most noteworthy to me was that apparently the 10th green was bunkerless originally.

Correct. It was said on the broadcast today the bunkers were put in for the 1929 LA Open.

The Fried Egg has a great write up on the 10th. I would love to see it restored back to its original design.



http://www.friedegg.co/golf-courses/riviera-10th-hole?utm_source=Subscribers&utm_campaign=d65b254d1a-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_19&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_28a08c87c2-d65b254d1a-140235669

[Mike Bodo]

The person who can address what has been lost at Riviera over the years and what's in store for the redesign is GCA's own Tom Doak. Jim Nanz mentioned on yesterday's broadcast that the course would be undergoing changes immediately following the tournament and that Tom Doak would be overseeing the redesign. I suspect things may not yet be 100% finalized, thus Tom may not be at liberty to speak on it, but once work is underway I would hope that he would be so kind to inform us of the changes the course will undergo under his stead.

I think you're confused. Doak and team are currently restoring Bel-Air CC down the street.

Thanks for clarifying. Nanz must have associated Doak with Riveria's remod instead of Bel-Air's, as I see no reason for him to bring Doak's name up during the broadcast otherwise.

[Mark Kiely]

Thanks for clarifying. Nanz must have associated Doak with Riveria's remod instead of Bel-Air's, as I see no reason for him to bring Doak's name up during the broadcast otherwise.

They were showing progress of the Bel-Air redesign while talking about golf/Tour-related social events that took place over at BACC during the week. That's why they brought up Doak's name. CBS almost always shows and mentions Bel-Air at some point during the L.A. Open telecast.

[Jeff Fortson]

Outside of softening some of the sand build-up from the green-side bunkers on #10, I think it would be a mistake to restore it to its first incarnation.  Main reason being that Thomas is the one who put the bunkers in and felt the hole was better off with them. #10 in its current state is the pinnacle of course architecture IMO.

[Colin Shellard]

Many Thanks for posting all the original photos and images - always great to compare how things have changed of over time.


Also interesting piece on the 10th Hole by the fried egg. Was commenting on Twitter at the weekend what a great hole the 10th was, and how short par 4s can be a lot more interesting (which I think everyone on here probably agrees with) than long 450yards ones. Amazing that the hole average is over 4, and yet almost all of the players were hitting a driver or wood at the green rather than lay back to a comfortable wedge or pitching distance and trying to get up and down...


Certainly if I was a member I think I would prefer the original hole without the bunkers - would be a lot more fun and have more options as TFE point out.

[Ryan Taylor]

Outside of softening some of the sand build-up from the green-side bunkers on #10, I think it would be a mistake to restore it to its first incarnation.  Main reason being that Thomas is the one who put the bunkers in and felt the hole was better off with them. #10 in its current state is the pinnacle of course architecture IMO.

Pinnacle of course architecture? Really? I think the hole is one dimensional in its current state. Nearly every pro going for the green hit away from the flag and toward the same spot short left of the green. Read the fried egg content. He does a great job comparing the 1928 vs. 2018 versions.

[Jeff Fortson]

Outside of softening some of the sand build-up from the green-side bunkers on #10, I think it would be a mistake to restore it to its first incarnation.  Main reason being that Thomas is the one who put the bunkers in and felt the hole was better off with them. #10 in its current state is the pinnacle of course architecture IMO.

Pinnacle of course architecture? Really? I think the hole is one dimensional in its current state. Nearly every pro going for the green hit away from the flag and toward the same spot short left of the green. Read the fried egg content. He does a great job comparing the 1928 vs. 2018 versions.

I read the Fried Egg piece prior to my original post.  I absolutely think it is the pinnacle of course architecture.  When you consider that the ground the hole sits on was absolutely nothing and dead flat (a blank canvas if you will), what Thomas created is at the top of design, IMO.  I have nothing against Andy, you, or anyone that disagrees with me, but his article leaves out a major detail and I think it doesn't accurately depict a key fact.


1) George Thomas wanted the green side bunkers put in.  Architects often tinker with holes shortly after opening to improve them. Thomas did just that.  If you really want one-dimensional, remove the green side bunker and laying up will NEVER happen. It would be driver all day, every day.


2) In the Fried Egg piece it is put forth that there is no good angle when laying up.  I 1000% disagree with that.  When layed up properly there isn't an inch of green that is hidden from the player. 




I would agree that #10 could use a little touch up around the green edges from bunker build-up and maybe would do well from reduced green speeds, but messing with it would be a massive mistake IMO.

[Ryan Taylor]

George Thomas wanted the green side bunkers put in.  Architects often tinker with holes shortly after opening to improve them. Thomas did just that.  If you really want one-dimensional, remove the green side bunker and laying up will NEVER happen. It would be driver all day, every day.

Driver all day every day but we would see a lot more variety of shots around the green. Green speed to a certain degree has altered the strategic intent of the hole. 

[Jeff Fortson]

George Thomas wanted the green side bunkers put in.  Architects often tinker with holes shortly after opening to improve them. Thomas did just that.  If you really want one-dimensional, remove the green side bunker and laying up will NEVER happen. It would be driver all day, every day.

Driver all day every day but we would see a lot more variety of shots around the green. Green speed to a certain degree has altered the strategic intent of the hole.

I'd argue that driver off the tee currently does produce a variety of different shots to play.  I agree green speeds have altered the strategic intent of the hole a bit, but that could be said of most holes on most courses. 


I've had a lot of experience playing the hole and when I hit driver (or go for the green) I've had every different type of short game shot imaginable left for my 2nd. It's just my opinion, and anyone is welcome to disagree.  Removing the bunkers green-side would make the tee option one-dimensional IMO.

[Pete Lavallee]

The real question is did the Captain alter the shape of the green when he added the bunkers? Today's shape is nothing like the original. Or has the green just shrunk over time? Certainly sand splash has altered the elevations. I can't remember seeing a picture of the hole just after the bunkers had been added; that would be very enlightening.

[Jeff Fortson]

The real question is did the Captain alter the shape of the green when he added the bunkers? Today's shape is nothing like the original. Or has the green just shrunk over time? Certainly sand splash has altered the elevations. I can't remember seeing a picture of the hole just after the bunkers had been added; that would be very enlightening.

That's a good question Pete. I'd be willing to bet that Shackelford or Naccarato might know the answer to that.

[Mike Bodo]

Thanks for clarifying. Nanz must have associated Doak with Riveria's remod instead of Bel-Air's, as I see no reason for him to bring Doak's name up during the broadcast otherwise.

They were showing progress of the Bel-Air redesign while talking about golf/Tour-related social events that took place over at BACC during the week. That's why they brought up Doak's name. CBS almost always shows and mentions Bel-Air at some point during the L.A. Open telecast.

Thanks, Mark. I must have missed that part of the conversation while unpacking from my Hawaii trip. Makes total sense now.

[Sam Kestin]

I know there have been a lot of gripes among the TOUR pros about how severe the 10th green has gotten--but I have to be honest--I absolutely love it. I like that the guys have to think and I like that the guys have to have a pair to hit a quality short game shot around that green in order to net a birdie. I like watching to see who chickens out from the area long-left and pitches sideways into the front half of the green because they are too afraid to take on the back hole locations. If you went for the green to a back hole location--and missed it left where everyone does--and then pitch into the middle of the green (away from the flag) it is still a two-putt par without having to hit much by way of a high-quality golf shot.


I don't know why the idea of risk/reward around the greens is any more offensive than the idea of risk/reward into the greens...but it seems like it is when they've been talking about the 10th. I think McCord said on the telecast that 90% of the tour pros think the green is too severe.


I feel like if you bet a tour pro $1,000,000 that he couldn't play the hole four times at a cumulative total of even par (or better) that there would be like maybe 5% of them who wouldn't be able to do it. It's the reach for that extra shot that gets you into trouble there--and I don't have ANY problem with that.

[Mark McKeever]

It would be great to see the greens expanded to their original footprints.  As for the rest, let #thefaz pretend he's doing a good job on the bunkering. 

[Conley Hurst]

With all the talk about Riviera recently, it's got me thinking: what actually is the likelihood of the U.S. Open or PGA returning there ever again? They obviously hold a fantastic tour event each year, and the 2028 Olympics is in the works. But could the course handle the logistics of a modern major?


From a purely architectural perspective, a U.S. Open there would be a dream. 

[Pete Lavallee]

I recall Mike Davis saying they would not hold a US Open on a course with Kikuyu grass fronting the greens. I suspect his line of thinking was that it would be near impossible to “bounce one on” from thick Kikuyu rough.


Although Torrey Pines is primarily Kikuyu the fronts of all the South Courses greens were hydoseeded with rye grass to tie in the new greens to the existing fairways during the 2002 redesign.

[Geoff_Shackelford]

I know there are a lot of internet bloggers and golf channel talking heads that wish Riviera looked more like LACC, but I think the current iteration of Riviera looks incredible. I saw a few pictures of some expanded short grass around greens that is new this year and is probably a good addition. Otherwise, I don't understand the obsession of what was lost or what should be restored at Riviera.

I'm curious, where does such a disrespectful, dishonest and rude tone come from? I don't know who you are and see no discernible contribution to this forum or golf architecture in general other than rage against people simply because they're on television.

The obsession with what is lost may come from a place of knowledge that many people have, or a sense others have from looking at photos, from reading George Thomas's words, from understanding the evolution of his and Billy Bell's approach, and possibly surmising that things have gone astray.

[Jeff Schley]

With all the talk and debate on #10, remember it was the first and only playoff hole needed in this past year's US Amateur.  First guy hit safe short of the green, the other left and then had bunker problems.  That is a tricky hole to decide the US Amateur championship on for sure.

[PCCraig]

I know there are a lot of internet bloggers and golf channel talking heads that wish Riviera looked more like LACC, but I think the current iteration of Riviera looks incredible. I saw a few pictures of some expanded short grass around greens that is new this year and is probably a good addition. Otherwise, I don't understand the obsession of what was lost or what should be restored at Riviera.

I'm curious, where does such a disrespectful, dishonest and rude tone come from? I don't know who you are and see no discernible contribution to this forum or golf architecture in general other than rage against people simply because they're on television.

The obsession with what is lost may come from a place of knowledge that many people have, or a sense others have from looking at photos, from reading George Thomas's words, from understanding the evolution of his and Billy Bell's approach, and possibly surmising that things have gone astray.

"rage against people simply because they're on television"


Ha!


You don't see any of my discernible contributions to this forum because the only time you join in a thread is to throw in a quick cheap shot before retreating to your blog.


I get it, you won't be happy until anyone but Tom Doak Gil Hanse is hired to "restore" Riveria and he can hire you to regurgitate some George Thomas quotes to help sell the plan to the membership.

[Geoff_Shackelford]

I presume by discernible those are the posts that spell Riviera correctly and aren't full of rage, envy and hate? 

[PCCraig]

I presume by discernible those are the posts that spell Riviera correctly and aren't full of rage, envy and hate?

You can continue to paint me as "full of rage, envy, and hate" all you want but that is hardly the tone or angle of my initial post on this thread.


My point was/is that I do not understand the obsession of what has been lost at RivIera as compared to what can be appreciated. You have not been shy in the past with your views on RivIera's ownership and their architectural decisions. Your adgenda is clear.


This website's mission is for frank discussion of golf course architecture. If you don't agree with my viewpoint then by all means contribute a meaningful post. Yet your insecurity is evident when your only response is a condiscending attack.


My appologies for my misspelling of RivIera. I don't have the benefit of an editor as you did when you were a respected author. It is a shame that an author I respected enough to have all of his past works currently sitting on my book shelf has devolved into self promoting blogger who needs to skype into the Golf Channel in order to compare Top 10 lists with Matty G. I understand the golf business is a tough one and everyone needs to make a living, it's just a shame you have to be such an asshole while doing it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()