News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Congressional Changes and Setup
« on: June 07, 2011, 05:14:50 PM »
I played Congressional late last week, and although I didn't take any pictures, I thought I would pass along a few of the setup and design changes that were most noticeable to me.

1.  In most places, the first cut of rough now extends to (and often around) the sand traps.  It's now much easier to have a drive scoot into one.  Consistent with other recent setups, there is also an intermediate cut (in between the first cut and the longer rough) of about 7-10 yards wide.

2.  On a couple of holes, the fairway has been shifted to one side or the other, so that it's closer to the fairway bunkers.  This is particularly noticeable on #3.  They've eliminated some lame mounds in between #3 and #4.  They yanked the fairway bunkers on #11 that were in between the fairway and the hazard.  And they've cut a narrow swath of first cut down the hill on #16 [which used to be all rough], perhaps leading some players to try to bomb it down the hill.

3.  In what I think will be the change most criticized by the players, the entire right and back side of the par five 16th green is now mowed to fairway height, as a result of which misses will roll down into pine straw, under trees with some relatively low branches, well below the green.  The green site is nowhere near as severe as #14 at Pebble, but I predict that some guys will criticize the change as unfair.   

4.  When they redid the greens, they grassed them with (I'm told) a creeping bentgrass hybrid called C-19.  Apparently this grass is somewhat more resistant to the heat, but it has a decent amount of grain.  I got completely fooled on a long downhill putt on the 3rd hole, which I left about 15 feet short because it was into the grain.  I don't think the greens were rolled the day I played, but there's still the chance of their getting a little bumpy.  They were, however, quite firm. 

5.  I can't prove this, but some of the greenside traps seemed deeper than before, and the sand also seemed softer. 

6.  Some of the new tees seem like they're in another universe.  We played it from 6800 and there are tees you can barely see from there.  They're also contemplating having #12 play from one of the tees on #15.

I probably noticed a few other things, but can't recall them now. 

Sean Remington (SBR)

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2011, 10:47:58 AM »
    The greens were seeded with A1 - A4 bentgrass.   It's not a big secret that they used these grasses but some of the press coverage makes it sound like they used some mystical new greass.   Not the case.    C-19 is a very old and vegetative (no seed) variety. 

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2011, 12:08:12 PM »
Carl: Is it my imagination or do you find that on bent grass greens that do have grain, it runs away from the setting sun?

Sean Remington (SBR)

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2011, 01:03:57 PM »
Found this on the GCSAA website:


http://www.gcsaa.tv/view.php?id=422

John Shimony

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2011, 09:32:14 AM »
Geoff Shackelford has a good post today that links to Mike Davis's hole-by-hole comments about the setup.  Geoff suggests Davis reveal less about the possible day-by-day variations and make it more incumbent upon the players to do their homework before the start of play.   Davis mentions a few instances where tee angles have been changed to orient the player toward a fairway bunker rather that down the middle of the fairway.  Also, fairways were widened and shifted toward fairway bunkers. 
John Shimony
Philadelphia, PA

Jay Flemma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2011, 07:45:27 AM »
Shifting the tee box so it points you at a hazard?  I thought Doak wrote in Anatomy of a Golf Course that architect's shouldn't do that because it's unfair?
Mackenzie, MacRayBanks, Maxwell, Doak, Dye, Strantz. @JayGolfUSA, GNN Radio Host of Jay's Plays www.cybergolf.com/writerscorner

Matt MacIver

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2011, 08:39:08 AM »
I read that there may not be any drivable par 4s this week.  I love #18 as a brawny par 4.5 to decide the Championship, but does the downhill right-to-left topography allow for a slinging draw/hook to drive the green?  Instead of playing it 530 yards they could play it 350?  Eagle to win?  Or maybe a par 3.5 on Saturday, par 4.5 on Sunday? 

John Shimony

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2011, 10:27:42 AM »
The Washington Post has a neat graphic that shows the before and after of each hole.  And I was incorrect in my last post, the fairways were not widened but narrowed.  They were shifted right up to the bunkers on a given side of the fairway though.
John Shimony
Philadelphia, PA

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Congressional Changes and Setup
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2011, 02:29:34 PM »
I read that there may not be any drivable par 4s this week.  I love #18 as a brawny par 4.5 to decide the Championship, but does the downhill right-to-left topography allow for a slinging draw/hook to drive the green?  Instead of playing it 530 yards they could play it 350?  Eagle to win?  Or maybe a par 3.5 on Saturday, par 4.5 on Sunday? 

I would just like 18 playing at 400-450 yards. Yes, the way it plays downhill that would mean a lot of guys would be hitting wedges or short irons in ... but given the perilous nature of the green I'd much rather see a guy go for a back left pin since he has a wedge in his hand as opposed to the hole it is now, where everyone will just play safe and try to 2-putt.