Merion - where's the strategy off the tee for the pro?

[Mike Cirba]

That area behind the old 2nd green might not be a picnic area, but that would certainly be a better use for it than a tee area!    
 
Unless Hugh Wilson was perhaps prophetically envisioning the building of the Old Course Hotel in 1968 and trying to emulate that edifice, I can't imagine any reason why he'd build a tee that forced one to drive directly into a large, mature tree about 40 yards ahead.  

There have been a lot of ludicrous claims made about Wilson here over the years, but to date I can't recall anyone claiming he was clarivoyant.  

Perhaps Tom Fazio can bring this challenging, if unorthodox "strategy" on the 6th back for the pros in an effort to protect par in the 2013 US Open.   He can even claim that he stole the idea directly from CB Macdonald!   

[JESII]

I think the hole offers some of the strategic features of The Road Hole such as a reason to drive over the corner and hug the right and a green perched up on a plateau. What's missing though is the improved angle of attack if you go to the right...you do get a reduced distance in, but it's going to be minimal compared to the risk of OB. The lack of an improved angle of attack is due to the configuration of the green and surrounding hazards, at least in the images we've seen so far. How is it that there are no original pictures or drawing available? The good player has every reason to challenge the boundary line on #17 at TOC, but #6 at Merion does no such thing, even the 1924 drawing doesn't hint that way.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

If we had the pre-1916 Merion drawings we could probably have avoided about six-zillion posts on GCA over the past few years.   

[JESII]

You're probably right.

I've been hoping the Merion conversations would eventually shift to some of those original hole designs but if we really don't have any evidence of what they looked like it could get ugly, huh?

[Tom_Doak]

David and others:

There is a drawing in George Thomas' book of a nameless hole which has a corner of OB jutting into the hole from the right, in a discussion of holes utilizing out-of-bounds as a hazard.  At some point years ago it occurred to me that his drawing was probably the sixth hole (original third hole) at Merion.  See if you think it's the same hole.

[DMoriarty]

Jim

1.  As for the area at the back left of the 2nd green I see what you are saying, but am not sure (as I have said from the beginning.)  I am glad we both see three tees to the left of the 2nd green.  I would suggest to you that at least one of these was to the right of the current tee.  I'll try to do an overlay if I get some time, but it really doesn't matter.  Either way the corner is still very much in play and was moreso before the corner was reconfigured.   

2.  As usual Cirba is spewing lots of information without providing any backup or basis whatsoever, so I think I'll just ignore it.  He is obviously just parroting others with whom I have no interest in conversing anyway.  If they ever start trying to back up their claims maybe I'll address it, but I won't hold my breath for that.

3.  You wrote:

I think the hole offers some of the strategic features of The Road Hole such as a reason to drive over the corner and hug the right and a green perched up on a plateau. What's missing though is the improved angle of attack if you go to the right...you do get a reduced distance in, but it's going to be minimal compared to the risk of OB. The lack of an improved angle of attack is due to the configuration of the green and surrounding hazards, at least in the images we've seen so far. How is it that there are no original pictures or drawing available? The good player has every reason to challenge the boundary line on #17 at TOC, but #6 at Merion does no such thing, even the 1924 drawing doesn't hint that way.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but I am sure you will understand if I continue to defer to those who were actually there and familiar with what was on the ground. From the New York Times in 1916:

The 3rd hole is 427 yards, par 4, and the best way to play it is to "cross a fence before you come to it."  In other words the shortest route to the green is across the corner of somebody's corn lot, with an open shot to the green if the carry is made, and a half dozen assorted shots back to the fairway if the ball falls short.  The golfer who plays safe by taking the dog-leg journey to the right toward the green will hardly reach his destination in two strokes, as there is a pit just short of the green directly in his path, and placed there for the express purpose of thwarting his intentions. 

It sure sounds to me like playing for the angle of the second was not only imperative, it was very much dictated by the "pit" directly in the line of play from the right side.  There is a similar description indicating how difficult it was to hold a ball on the green with a long shot over this bunker, but I don't have it handy. 

[If I recall correctly this green was originally entirely on the plateau, but was expanded in front down off the plateau.  I don't remember the year off hand.]

_______________________________

Tom Doak,

I think I see the drawing(s) to which you refer (pge 280) and while they are similar to Merion neither are quite the same.    The first differs in that the tee is along the out of bounds, and then the hole widens (instead of a tee tucked behind an out of bounds jutting into play like the shed at St. Andrews.)  The second differs in that the out of bounds doesn't jut into the fairway until about 1/2 way to the green.   Merion almost seems more of a hybrid of the two drawings.   

[DMoriarty]

Here is the green in 1916.  Note the "pit" in the front left corner and the skewed alignment of the plateau green toward the OB.

[JESII]

David,

That picture makes it pretty clear to me, I'd bet the edge of that "pit" is at least a few yards right of the edge of the current bunker which obviously has the effect of forcing the tee shot to the right for the best angle in. Good find, thanks.

Regarding the green cut falling down the rise in the front, I'd bet it's mowed like that simply to ensure balls don't stop on it on wet or longer grass days...a minor issue IMO.

[DMoriarty]

David,

That picture makes it pretty clear to me, I'd bet the edge of that "pit" is at least a few yards right of the edge of the current bunker which obviously has the effect of forcing the tee shot to the right for the best angle in. Good find, thanks.

Great.  So then are we in agreement that the key strategic characteristics of a Road Hole were incorporated into Merion's 6th?   (But with no road, of course.)

Regarding the green cut falling down the rise in the front, I'd bet it's mowed like that simply to ensure balls don't stop on it on wet or longer grass days...a minor issue IMO.

I agree and see what you mean, but when one simply looks at an aerial or map one might not realize that (despite this front mowed area)  the green is essentially plateaued and the left front bunker is built into that plateau.  Much like a road hole.  

In an earlier exchange on a different thread, Chip Gaskins commented that this green had always reminded him of a road hole green.   Here is the exchange with a couple of photos he posted:

Chip: Wow, OK, so this makes sense.  Macdonald was there at some point.  Now I realize that the green at #6 is really a Road Hole rendition.  Cool!

Me:  Chip I am not sure if you are joking or not, but either way here is a description of the 6th (then the 3rd) from the New York Times in 1916:
. . .

Chip:   David-

I wasn't joking.  The current #6 green reminds me of a Road Hole (minus the US Open rough around the bunker).  Not so much the tee shot, though maybe what it used to look like did...

See for yourself:




___________________________________

The green photo looks fairly similar to the one above from 1916, doesn't it?   With the exception that the pit may have been moved as you mentioned?  

[Mike Cirba]

When was the bunkering scheme on the 6th first conceived and built?

[Chris Cupit]

David and others:

There is a drawing in George Thomas' book of a nameless hole which has a corner of OB jutting into the hole from the right, in a discussion of holes utilizing out-of-bounds as a hazard.  At some point years ago it occurred to me that his drawing was probably the sixth hole (original third hole) at Merion.  See if you think it's the same hole.

This may be it:

[JESII]

Great.  So then are we in agreement that the key strategic characteristics of a Road Hole were incorporated into Merion's 6th?   (But with no road, of course.)

Absolutely. With that green oriented to the right like that and the bunker looking less on the side.


Mike,

Do you agree? Your question seems to imply that you agree that in 1916 the hole had those characteristics but that the concept would not have been developed until sometime after opening...

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Correct, and nobody really knows.

When Merion opened it had very few bunkers and even three years later in 1915 it was stated that it had less bunkers than a short nine hole course.

Since many of the template holes such as road are defined by their proscriptive bunkering patterns, we don't know when it was done.

[JESII]

OK Mike, but would you disagree that this hole, in 1916, has an awful lot of the features and characteristics of a Road Hole?

[Kalen Braley]

That green looks far too large to be considered a "road hole" in my mind.

Unless we're calling every green that has a left side bunker a "road hole"

[RSLivingston_III]

That green looks far too large to be considered a "road hole" in my mind.

Unless we're calling every green that has a left side bunker a "road hole"

+1

I agree, where is the hourglass-like shape and whats up with the bunker being in the front left.
Isn't the road and wall and what replicates it's 'hazard' characteristics kind of important?

Somebodies getting a little loose in the details when comparing, or describing, the green characteristics.

It seems like the thread is actually touching on the tee shot comparisons, not the approach shot. The only problem there being that the trajectory of the tee shot isn't being discussed.

[DMoriarty]

Jim,

Apparently even Mike now agrees that this hole was Merion's version of a road hole. (How could he deny it given it was reported as such?) Yet he claims that this might only be the case because maybe the bunkers were added later.  This seems specious to me, especially given that Merion placed the tee directly behind an OB, with the OB directly between the tee and the green.  

Here is a photo from the 1916 Amateur taken from the left of the fairway looking across, with the OB corner in plain site.  The tee is back behind the corner to the right of the photo and the green to the left.  Notice the mounds and features apparently built into the corner. And comparing Guilford's position to that to that of the other figure gives one an idea of the width of the fairway and the importance of the angle of the drive.   Guilford would have been facing long shot directly over the pit, would not he have?



Recall also that, according to contemporaneous reports written both before and after the opening, many of Merion’s holes and features were modeled after great holes and features on overseas courses.    Is it at all reasonable to assume that this was not one of them?  
___________________________________________

Ralph,

I agree that this thread is supposed to be about whether there is strategy off the tee,  and I was trying to discuss the merits of the strategy off the tee.  Then Jim asked for a picture of the green to help him understand the strategy off the tee because Merion was a very sophisticated course strategically, and it is impossible to understand the strategy off the tee unless one considers the approach shot and that means at least giving some consideration to the green.  The two go hand-in-hand.  As was described in the NYTimes excerpt above, risky drive over the corner sets up the shorter and easier shot to the green while the safer drive leaves the longer and more demanding approach over a nasty pit.  (If I recall correctly, one of the finalists (Chick Evans or Bob Gardner) failed to extricate themselves from the bunker on the final day.)

Anyway, that is why I find it strange that you and Kalen want to come to conclusions about the hole based on the shape of the green.  There is a heck of a lot more to the hole concept and and how it plays than that!  I'll stick with the opinions of those who were there at the time. The contemporaneous descriptions of the playing characteristics of the hole match that of the road hole.   And it would have been pretty bizarre to build a tee directly behind a corner of an out of bounds if they were not building a road hole, don't you think?    
_________________________________________

Kalen,

Who knew you were an expert on road hole greens?  What was the maximum size to qualify in 1912?    I would think one would need to consider 1) the rest of the hole, and 2) how the hole actually played, 3) what the people who were there thought of the hole.    But then maybe you have considered these things but are not letting on . . .
_________________________________________

From the Philadelphia Evening Ledger, July 6, 1915:

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Do any of the Opening day articles mention a Road Hole?  Any from the first year?

Do you know when the bunker was built?

What about the tee?  Any idea?

[Mike Cirba]

The reason i ask is that it appears from all evidence that the "template" hole features, such as the proscriptive bunkers that define many of them, seem to have been added after Wilson returnewd from abroad.

For instance, Richard Francis tells us that one hole that benefitted from Wilson's travels was the redan, which he told us was ano idea suggested by the location of the hole.  Note he doesnt say they were looking for a place to put a redan hole but instead the location of the hole with a hilltop green suggested the theme, a bunker was built in the front corner where a old barn had been, and voila! Instant redan!

Similarly, Alex Findlay told us the after Wilson's return from abroad he "thought it would take a lot of making" to emulate the Alps hole after having seen the original.   

Far and Sure and Tillinghast's articles also refer to the template features being added after Wilson returned from abroad.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

To suggest that there was NO routing or individual hole designs until AFTER Wilson returned from abroad is a distortion of the facts for the sole purpose of furthering your agenda

[Mike Cirba]

Pat,

If you guys ever find any facts or evidence to the contrary, please just produce it and we'll be haPpy to consider it.

Thanks.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,  I have no idea why you want to turn yet another thread into another idiotic Merion thread.   

There is ample evidence about what specific changes to the course took place between the opening and the U.S. Amateur only four years later!   

If YOU have any evidence that the particular holes in question had undergone substantial redesigns between the opening and the Amateur (or in this case the opening and July of 1915) bring it forward.  If not then stop with this nonsense.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Surely you jest!

Youre the one who has been trying to advance your CBM template agenda here from the get-go, referring to the Lbiarritz" 2nd green and the "bottle" of the 7th hole, although no one ever called either hole those things in 100 years.

The 6th hole had the green completely reconstructed. A greenside bunker (left) enlargesd, and a fairway bunker placed on the driving zone on the left for the 1916 US Amateur.

Any new tees were also added.

What evidence or facts do you have?   m

[DMoriarty]

Mike,  The bottle neck description of the 7th wasn't my description, it was Robert Lesley's from 1914 and it helps describes the strategic choices the golfer faces off the tee.  Are you going to tell us that Merion re-contoured the entire landscape after 1913?    As for the biarritz-like swale running through the second green, I referenced it to distinguish between the green and what may have been a tee behind.  Are you suggesting that the swale running across the green wasn't there at the time the course opened?  That seems a bit silly, don't you think?  (For what its worth, I personally would distinquish between such a swale and a true biarritz hole - they were both CBM concepts but sometimes used on distinct holes - but use the term because this is what is now commonly referred to as a biarritz swale.)

As for the sixth hole, I fail to understand your point.   In July of 1915 it was reported that the hole was a reproduction of the road hole.  At the time of the 1916 Amateur, the descriptions of the playability and strategies of the hole match that of the road hole.    Are you arguing that between July 1915 and September 1916, the hole was remodeled to be LESS like a road hole?   If so that would cut directly against the points you were trying to make yesterday!   If the opposite, it would reaffirm that the was intended to be a road hole from the beginning.  Either way, I fail to understand your point.  

You keep speaking of the complete redesign of this hole prior to the 1916 Amateur but you have produced NOTHING to support such a claim.

[DMoriarty]

For what it is worth, my understanding is that at some point prior to the Amateur the 8th green was rebuilt to the right of the original green.  In addition the 17th was re-grassed, and the 9th was rebuilt and/or regrassed and expanded in he same location.  I don't think that the 6th was remodeled prior to this tournament-- no new green, no new tees, no new greenside bunker.  Changes may have been made after, but I am unaware of changes made before.   I suspect that is why Mike hasn't supported his claims.  I suspect Mike has his dates wrong or is simply making things up to fit his argument.   But I could be wrong and am awaiting proof backing up his claims about the remodel before the Amateur.
______________________________________

Back to the topic at hand, the picture looking across the fairway, above, goes directly to the question at the start of the thread.  Merion's 6th was designed with substantial strategic options off the tee, and the nature of the green reinforced those options.  

Others familiar with the course indicate that these options still somewhat exist, but it seems that they do not exist to the extent they once did.  

Query which would be more interesting in a USOpen, the configuration as it is now, or something more like the original, with a drive to the left side leaving a longer and more difficult shot over a nasty pit to a difficult to hold green.  It may be that technology has rendered such a hole meaningless, but I am not so sure.