Bay Area Mini-Event - Sharp Park - Sat. Sept. 3 WITH COURSE PHOTOS, 1-17 posted

[David_Tepper]

Mike -

I am going to try to get teetimes in the 7:45am - 8:300am window. Looks like we will need two of them.

DT

[Patrick Kiser]

In...

"Business" plans for NYC have fallen through 

[JLahrman]

LAST CALL

Looks like we are headed for two tee times, but may still have a couple of openings.

[Kyle Henderson]

I should be able to play if needed to fill out a foursome.

[Dave Herrick]

David, please add me to the group if there is still room.

[Keith Doleshel]

I am available if there is still room.  Not sure what the number is at, but would love to play if possible.

[Patrick Kiser]

I should be able to play if needed to fill out a foursome.

Out...

[JLahrman]

Updating our participants, and also considering Evite for future outings!

Confirmed in:
Joel Lahrman
David Tepper
Ted Cahill
Patrick Kiser
Keith Doleshel
Alex S (barring last minute work travel)
Dave Herrick

Confirmed out:
Mike Benham
Kyle Henderson

Unconfirmed in:
Bill Ward

[JLahrman]

Gentlemen,

Well there has been a communication snag in this process.

As it turns out, Sharp Park has a shotgun event on the morning of Sunday, August 28.  I usually ask about these things, and I'm racking my brain trying to remember if I forgot to ask when I originally called Sharp Park last month, or if I asked and they didn't notice.

Anyhow, I'd like to reschedule the outing for the morning of Saturday, September 3.

Please reply below to let me know if you can attend.

Also, some of us may be interested in seeking an alternate venue for this Sunday since we've already cleared our schedules.  I'm on the fence so if someone else wants to take the lead on finding a time that would be great, and those replies can go here as well.

Apologies, and thanks for putting up with the operational challenges - which are not uncommon in year one of a startup nonprofit such as the BAGCAT.

[JLahrman]

Gentlemen,

We've got two tee times for Saturday, September 3 at Sharp Park.

The times are a bit staggered, 8:15 and 9:07.  Hopefully we can fill them both out, if not we can cancel one tee time.

Who will be in?  Please reply to thread.  Hope to see you there.

[astavrides]

I'm in.  Especially for the 907 one.

[JLahrman]

Ted Cahill is in as well, so we are up to 3 for sure now.

[Patrick Kiser]

In...

[Keith Doleshel]

Hey guys this Saturday is not going to work for me.  Sorry to miss it, will be down in San Diego.  Thanks for trying to organize it, hope to play in one in the near future.

[JLahrman]

Gentlemen,

It turned into a smaller outing than I originally had hoped, thanks to my bumbling of the original tee time.  But three hardy GCAers played the historic Sharp Park golf course yesterday.  Dr. Patrick Kiser, noted Sharp Park amateur historian and enthusiast, led the way.  Myself and Ted Cahill, eager Sharp Park newbies, also attended.  We were joined by a single who seemed to have a bit of an eye for GCA himself.

Given the lineage of the course, I felt a photo tour was appopriate.  I can only hope to someday exhibit the skills of Kyle Henderson, but in the meantime hopefully the following will do.  White tee yardages will be given, although the difference between the white and blue tees is fairly negligible on most holes.

Dr. Kiser can provide better commentary than me.

HOLE 1 (original 16th), 361 yards, par 4:

Dr. Kiser plants his peg on the first of three MacKenzie holes to start the round (though Dr. Kiser will need to provide their locations in the original routing).



Mounding provides a minor split fairway effect in a very wide landing area.  



A countoured green awaits.  In a continuing theme, both green and bunker sizes have been reduced in size from their heyday.




HOLE 2 (original 15th), 322 yards, par 4:

Hole 2 runs directly back to the clubhouse.  The trees should not affect play; again, the landing area is very generous.



Two mounds short of the green provide some visual deception to what should be a very short approach.  



The second green is also contoured but runs very slow.



HOLE 3 (original 13th), 353 yards, par 4:

The third runs parallel to the first and second.  The hole is again fairly short and fairly straight.  The construction of the road on the left side has likely narrowed the playing corridor from MacKenzie's original design, but there is still plenty of room for the tee shot.



Three greenside bunkers are visible from the fairway, though the center bunker is actually well short of the green.



The third green is flatter than the first two, but does have bunkers left and right for protection.

[Patrick Kiser]

Dr. Kiser now...  

Well ... I'm in no way the historian, but I've always had an interest in this original MacKenzie.  How could one not with its grand plans for being the West Coast's Lido!  With its own island split fairway "Channel" hole.

Without question though, our own Sean Tully and Neil Crafter will certainly do a much better job than myself in spilling the beans on this old gem.  I learned just about everything from Sean's and David Wexler's help anyway.  So credit where it's due.

That aside, I have to say the course is in better shape these days (at least compared to last year), but unfortunately that doesn't say much at all.  The greens have seen better days I think or ... maybe not.  The current former super from Harding (yes, the same super that over fertilized the Harding greens before the President's Cup) is doing a decent job considering ... fertilizing isn't allowed at Sharp Park for environmental reasons.  Something about frogs ans snakes...  Another story there...


Routing:

The original routing took the player immediately down to the beach in a west-north-south-east loop to the clubhouse.  The player would have been exposed to the ocean AND the lagoon at all times from left or right.  Very few trees.  There was a lovely natural creek that was effectively integrated into the design as a hazard on the south-eastern most stretch of the original back nine.

The second nine would have done a not too dissimilar loop to the front nine on the east side of the lagoon with an interesting short loop to the most south eastern portion of the property with the aforementioned creek.

Once the ocean holes were gone (4th and 8th are still there but abandoned), the routing completely changed and the sequence became a front nine that borrows a portion of the original second half of the back nine going south-east then west with holes 4-7 being the new Fleming additions across Hwy 1.  Then the back nine pretty much borrows portions of the original front nine (1st, 2nd, and 9th) and good portions of the original back nine (10th, 11th, 12th, and 18th).  What you don't see on the aerial is how today's 16th is basically sitting side by side to the current 17th.  They basically divided the original 5th into two to make the 16th and 17th running parallel.

Here's one of the early aerials (earliest?) with a routing  for Old/New.  I have no clue how to do an overlay, but it would be interesting to see the old aerial vs. today's.

A very interesting tidbit I recently found out with the help of a good friend is the 8th didn't disappear at the same time as the original 3rd, 4th, 6th or 7th.  I would have disappeared some time later.  Yes, the 8th was still in play...  Most likely the 8th had to go due to yet another storm or the burm taking more reinforcing.  Not sure.

Not ten years ago, jumping off the burm would have meant a pretty good drop.  Now ... you take a rather short step down and you're right onto the beach.  It's just a matter of time in my opinion before the burm becomes an issue again.  All it would take would be a few storms and the the current 12th, 16th, and 17th would take a pretty good beating.

As a reference, I did a piece on the original 4th and 8th some time back:
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46657.5
 

1941 Aerial With Map/Routing Overlay (Photo courtesy of Daniel Wexler)
 

[Patrick Kiser]

One thing I tried to point out during the round was where many elements of the original design could be recovered.  Many of the current bunkers blatantly show the old bunker outlines.  As an example, I pointed this out on reply #21.  It's basically a maintenance issue plus perhaps a drainage problem.

Many of the mounds do not look original (e.g. 2nd approach into the green being obvious I feel), but the old Doc was known to use some subtle mounds as a form of camouflage and deflection hazard.  In fact, Sean Tully shared with me a map/drawing/routing that illustrates the various hazards on the course and when you compare them to the 41 aerial ... spot on match for the hazards (including mound like shapes).

I've seen a few recent restorations elsewhere and what's pretty clear is when you 1) recover playing surfaces, and 2) implement a sensible tree management program alone ... you'll go a very long way towards making a course ten times more playable.  Add in a sand dressing program like the Olympic and Cal Club have and we'd possibly get some fast and firm conditions.  There's a LOT of sand on the opposite side of the burm could be dredged.  Could help preserve the burm AND help the course at the same time...  Just saying...  Prior to Sharp Park being a course, the area was basically farmland for growing artichokes and the beach area was all dunes land.  The sand is relatively dark to black and we see some of it on the current 16th and 17th holes.  But it's been compacted so much over the years that it can't be draining all that great I would think.

Where it seems to get really involved fast and runs up the budget is when bunker restoration work and new irrigation comes into play.  Unfortunately, that's what Sharp Park could really use.

Tree management seems to be in the works ... a little.  Trees are apparently being managed more, but I would not say that with any certainty.  The trees could be old and/or diseased.  But it was noticed.  However, I wonder if that means they'll have to replant.  I'm not too up and up on the environmental restrictions and requirements, but I seem to recall for any removed tree another has to go in ... somewhere.  Maybe someone knows more about this.  Makes me wonder how the Olympic Club and the Cal Club are able to do it.

[JLahrman]

When it comes to Sharp Park, you are the good Doctor.

Nice writeup, and I will post more pics.

If the 8th hole disappeared after the other lost holes, how did the routing work when it was still in play but the others weren't?

[JLahrman]

Holes 4-7 were added by Jack Fleming in 1941 ro replace MacKenzie's original oceanside holes.  These "new" holes play inland, and are the only hilly holes on the property.

HOLE 4, 454 yards, par 5:

The 4th plays gently uphill and left to right.  The fairway is wide but shots to the right will require either a punch out or a shorter lofted shot over the trees.



The approach, from 200 yards out.



The green is accessible by a runup shot, though the uphill nature of the shot and the damp conditions require a lot of mustard.



HOLE 5, 182 yards, par 3:

The fifth is the first par 3 on the course, and plays a good two clubs longer than the yardage.  Seen from behind the green, this is the most uphill shot on the course.



HOLE 6, 403 yards, par 4:

Steamed after missing a three-foot putt on the fifth green, I neglected to take a picture of the tee shot on the sixth.  The sixth tee occupies the highest point on the property, and the drive is downhill on a dogleg left.  The approach flattens out to a rather narrow green bunkered on both sides.



HOLE 7, 382 yards, par 4:

I liked the look of the tee shot on the seventh, another shortish par 4.  The hole can play essentially straight, although if the tee shot drifts right the second shot might be affected by trees.  There is plenty of room left, which slightly lengthens the hole but gives the best angle for an approach into a green that slopes back to front.

[Patrick Kiser]

If the 8th hole disappeared after the other lost holes, how did the routing work when it was still in play but the others weren't?

It's a good question and the only thing I can think of is the current makeshift 16th would NOT have been in place, but I clearly see it already in place in '46.  In fact it had left and right greenside bunkers showing.  Those aren't there today...

It could very well be the 8th is simply not being used.  However one would think between '41 and '46 that if the hole was not maintained ... it would look kind of abandoned from the lack of maintenance, but from the aerial it looks about as maintained as the other holes in play.

Very tough to say from the aerial.

Regarding the Fleming holes themselves, I think Fleming did a reasonable job to get 4 holes back there.

[Kalen Braley]

I hate to say it, but the course looks like an utter dog track!   

In all seriousness, those do look like some interesting playing corridors.  It certainly would have been good to see some pics of the course in its original condition.  I envision massive blowout bunkers ala Cypress in many spots out there.

[JLahrman]

Regarding the Fleming holes themselves, I think Fleming did a reasonable job to get 4 holes back there.

I liked the Fleming holes just fine.  I don't know how they originally looked or played compared to the MacKenzie holes, but the biggest difference in the current state is the type of land the holes are built on.

[JLahrman]

I hate to say it, but the course looks like an utter dog track!   

In all seriousness, those do look like some interesting playing corridors.  It certainly would have been good to see some pics of the course in its original condition.  I envision massive blowout bunkers ala Cypress in many spots out there.

Sir, it is a frog track.

There certainly are many spots where it is easy to picture much larger bunkers and greens than what we currently see.

[Patrick Kiser]

In all seriousness, those do look like some interesting playing corridors.  It certainly would have been good to see some pics of the course in its original condition.  I envision massive blowout bunkers ala Cypress in many spots out there.

Pics of the original 4th in my old thread.  They look awesome!!! 

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46657.5

[JLahrman]

Holes 8-10 return to the MacKenzie course.

HOLE 8 (original 14th), 91 yards, par 3:

A very short par 3.  We played it from the far left tee box.  I'd love to be able to tell you if that tree encroaches on the line of play, but I chunked my tee shot halfway to the green.  There are tees to the right that are definitely not affected by the tree.  Given the short length of the hole, the back bunker likely gets more play than most traps behind greens.



HOLE 9 (original 17th), 463 yards, par 5:

The ninth is a reachable par 5.  Back in the day, the trees on the right were likely not a factor (they do not appear to be visible on the aerial photo).  While they narrow the tee shot today, the left side of the fairway is the line of play to shorten the hole.



The approach shot (here from about 220 yards out) opens up a bit.  This shot would be a lot of fun if the green could be extended back and right so that the pin could be hidden behind that bunker.
 


HOLE 10 (original 18th), 415 yards, par 4:

The tenth hole is a dogleg left that will play longer than its length if the player cannot draw the ball to follow the shape of the hole.  What was MacKenzie thinking when he laid out the cart path right across the fairway?  Blech.



The approach, seen from the location of my poor, popped-up tee shot.  I still had about 220 yards into the hole.



Per usual, the green and bunker would both likely need to expand to match MacKenzie's original design.