[Craig Van Egmond]

One of my favorite opening holes of all time.  Positively breath taking.   Played it with  Mr. Daley and afterwards we got to discuss our round at dinner with the head pro (Mueller?)  and Mike Devries. 

September at Crystal Downs can't be beat.

[Brett_Morrissy]

Thanks Mark, really good start to the thread, the pics look great, Crystal Downs is a course I am looking forward to seeing one day, hopefully sooner rather than later.

The card says established in 1927, was this the start of construction, or was that the opening?  Without throwing this thread off track, where do the greens designed fit into the Mackenzie time line?

[Mark Saltzman]

Hole 2: Par 4, 425 Yards




The second hole at Crystal Downs plays parallel to the first.  The first plays downhill and into the wind, the second uphill and downwind.

The tee shot is fairly straightforward with slightly staggered bunkers left and right.  In my one play I could not discern an obvious preferred side of the fairway.




The approach plays uphill as well.  The green is open in front and protected by bunkering left and right.




Approaching the green there is some obvious ground movement that was not so easily discernible from the fairway.  Short-right of the green there is a large mound that will kick the ball left and forward.  This will help keep the ball away from the right rough/bunkers, which helps, but may also send the ball sailing to the back of the green.  Putts from above the hole are trouble.





A look at the ground movement short of the green and another very interesting bunker.  I had a front pin the day I played.  Mr. Muller says "golfers have putted off every green at Crystal Downs, and the front pin here is one where it happens often."  I putted off the green.




A look at the green from the left shows the significant back-to-front tilt of the second green.  No doubt the front of the green is several feet below the back.




A couple of looks back at the second hole.

[David_Elvins]

Everybody here says to widen the fairways, but if we widened the fairways I'd be paying more dues. 

Would fairway grass really cost more to maintain than manicured rough? 

I have seen some atleast one course where they reduced their maintenance budget by widening the fairways. 

[Tom_Doak]

The card says established in 1927, was this the start of construction, or was that the opening?  Without throwing this thread off track, where do the greens designed fit into the Mackenzie time line?

Brett:

Come on up!  [It's been gorgeous the last few days, but the season will be over soon.]

The club was founded in 1927 with a nine-hole course that was built on the site of much of the front nine, plus holes 10 & 18.  MacKenzie came to look at expanding it in 1928 ... Maxwell was in residence for the summer of 1929 (front nine) and 1930 (back nine).  The current course opened in 1931 or '32 depending on the definition of "open".


David E: 

The incremental cost of maintaining fairway vs. rough depends on the grass type.  On bermuda (couch grass for you) or paspalum, it's not much different.  But on bentgrass / poa annua, it's a lot different.  I'd hazard a guess that another 10 acres of fairways maintained to high standard would cost another $50,000 over ten acres of bluegrass rough, but I'm happy to hear from superintendents on whether my guess is over the top.

[Brett_Morrissy]

Thanks Tom,
Am hoping to get up that way next July. Want to do another small tour around.

[Brett_Morrissy]

Mark,
The aerial shot shows what looks to be up to 5 tees, is that the case? Are the majority of the tees separated, or joined?

Mackenzie:
So, CD was after Australia and CPC, but before Augusta and Pasatiempo?
...after the fascinating greens at RMGC & Cypress, are these greens toned down a little, some structured with plateaus, etc. After the comments so far as to the green surrounds and putting surfaces, were his camouflage techniques more subtle or more strongly implemented?  How do they compare to previous work and then that of Maxwell's later work on his own?

[Mark Saltzman]

Mark,
The aerial shot shows what looks to be up to 5 tees, is that the case? Are the majority of the tees separated, or joined?

Brett,

I believe there are three tee boxes on 2.  The two tee boxes on the bottom-left of the aerial are the tees on 7.

[Brian_Sleeman]

The tee shot is fairly straightforward with slightly staggered bunkers left and right.  In my one play I could not discern an obvious preferred side of the fairway.

The green opens up a bit better from the left side of the fairway than it does the right, and from the left your approach into the green is more uphill and less uphill/sidehill.  

That hole cut in the front is one of the most difficult and does indeed lead to several putts off the green.  It's more deceptive than some of the other dangerous pins and you don't have to hit that bad a putt to end up back in the fairway.

The green is fairly large and has some incredible pin placements, encouraging players to hit a wide variety of approaches to get the ball close.  If it's in the left bowl, you can hit almost anything into the green and so long as it's the right distance, it can get very close.  If it's back-left, you can hold a fade against the slope, run a draw in if you're from a longer distance, or play conservatively to the left-center bowl to leave yourself an uphill putt.  If they put it back-right, say a prayer and hit a high, soft cut if you feel like being aggressive.  And if it's in the front - as it is in these images - you may be best off just short of the green.

People often overlook the 2nd because they're still reeling from the 1st, but it's a solid golf hole from start to finish.

[Mac Plumart]

Mark...

I am beyond excited to see this thread develop.  You do fantastic work on this site.  Keep doing things the best way you think they should be done.

[Mark Saltzman]

That hole cut in the front is one of the most difficult and does indeed lead to several putts off the green.  It's more deceptive than some of the other dangerous pins and you don't have to hit that bad a putt to end up back in the fairway.

People often overlook the 2nd because they're still reeling from the 1st, but it's a solid golf hole from start to finish.

Brian, these two statements are exactly what I think about the 2nd hole.

The green on one had such obvious tilt, but somehow the green on two doesn't - and that is probably why I putted it off the green from 20 feet behind the hole.

You used the right word, two is "solid".  It is unlikely that it will be the hole that anyone will discuss after the round (unless they putted off the green), and maybe that is because it has to follow such a phenomenal golf hole, but there is certainly nothing wrong with 2.

[Tom_Doak]

The green on one had such obvious tilt, but somehow the green on two doesn't - and that is probably why I putted it off the green from 20 feet behind the hole.

Mark:  On the first hole, you're playing downhill to a green pitched back toward you, while the ground to the left is still falling away -- so it looks even steeper than it is.  On the second hole, the green is just laid into the natural tilt of the ground, so you tend not to notice how much tilt there is.

I was very surprised to find, when I surveyed the greens in 1986, that the second green had more than five feet of elevation change from the back right backstop down to the front left corner.  That makes it the third steepest green on the golf course, after #1 and #11.

[David_Elvins]

Tom D,

Thanks for the reply.

Mark S,

Thanks so much for putting this thread together.  Really great reading. 

[Chip Gaskins]

i putted the first green for about 15 minutes.  what looks fairly benign, is astonishing hard to putt.  after four or five (i forget) putts i put it in my pocket.

let the bashing begin, but the first three holes at crystal downs are pretty weak in my opinion, especially for the #12 course in America and #20 in the World.  hey, just my opinion.

[Mark Saltzman]

 That makes it the third steepest green on the golf course, after #1 and #11.

Tom,

I am really surprised to hear that one of the two steepest greens is #11.  Ahead of 11, I would have definitely 14, but also possibly 9, 13 and 16.

[Mark Saltzman]

let the bashing begin, but the first three holes at crystal downs are pretty weak in my opinion, especially for the #12 course in America and #20 in the World.  hey, just my opinion.

Chip,

I thought the first first hole at CD was (and is) exceptional.  No argument about 2 and 3.  Brian used the word "solid" to describe 2, and I think that says it right.  3 also seems very ordinary, though the back bunkers being 'absorbed' into the woods is a really cool visual.

One of the biggest reasons for doing this photo tour was to hear discussion of these 'lesser' holes at CD.  Any golfer with half-an interest in GCA (and probably even those with no interest in it) will tell you that holes like 5, 7, 8 and 17 are world-class.  I want to know about everything else.

[kwl]

Nice photos and discussion. Keep it up!

A wonderful course...hard as h&!! first time out!

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

First posting on this thread, but being as I love Crystal Downs sure it wont be my last.
Great opening hole, with the specatcular vista of the property and the wonderful first green complex.
I agree coming in from the right side, would not be my first choice, but whatever floats your boat.:}

I love the second hole, generous fairway and then the deceptive appoach...it is almost as though the fairway acts as a false front, the shot plays considerable more uphill than the player thinks, which is all well considering you DONT want to be past this pin!!!!
The green from front to back is deceptively brutal as Tom D has explained..a simple ten foot downhill putt just keeps on going and going....
The subtlety of the putting surface is marvelous, it makes you think and think very hard before any putt, and once you have made your attempt, makes you realise you did not think enough ...first time playing on these greens can be a very humbling experience.

[JC Jones]

The irony is that but for the current, over-the-top green speeds, #2 has no interest.  It is an uphill, slightly right moving par 4 with a back-to-front sloping green.

Next.

[Mark Saltzman]

The irony is that but for the current, over-the-top green speeds, #2 has no interest.  It is an uphill, slightly right moving par 4 with a back-to-front sloping green.

Next.

Jason,

this is a really interesting point and certainly goes against the grain of much of what is written on GCA re modern green speeds.

As I think about it, I can think of many classic golf courses whose greens are far more interesting with modern greens speeds.  Generally those that rely mostly on tilt. What was once a fairly straightforward green can become frightening.

[Ben Sims]

The irony is that but for the current, over-the-top green speeds, #2 has no interest.  It is an uphill, slightly right moving par 4 with a back-to-front sloping green.

Next.

And after you drawing and quartering my home club for uphill holes, we all know your affinity for them whether they be a good hole or not!

[Ben Sims]

In my one viewing--I say viewing due to an unfortunate and ill-timed muscle pull left me worthless--I didn't find much fault with the golf course.  The green speeds were fast, no doubt.  But no faster than I have subsequently played on other "top XX" golf courses since then.  No one ever says that Oakmont would be nothing without its green speeds.  Crystal Downs would still be wonderful without 12-13 ft stimps as well. 

I enjoyed the maintenance meld in summer '09, and think that most mature courses look alright with definition.  Lots of great older courses have some straight lines here and there.  I love how the native backs up to the non-playing side of the bunkers in most places.  This is a concept that works well on open sites.  RGD, Hanse, Devries, C&C all use the concept on many of their courses to great affect. 

At any rate, I write those last two paragraphs to say that some places are just really good and too much critique leads to conclusions that are so far outside what is reasonable for the current membership, that it's just not worth wasting bandwidth to discuss.  I've had some spirited debates about the "modern throwback" maintenance melds that we love so much on this site with some "regular golfers."  Most were effectually devoid of anything resembling a valid thought.  But those guys pay greens fees just like me and they want defined mowing lines, green rough, fluffy bunkers and long views. 

--BREAK--

On an unrelated line of thinking, I think it would be interesting to take The Old Course and Crystal Downs and scour Tom's portfolio for the concepts in those two courses.  I would assume--I could be wrong--that most of Renaissance's inspiration comes from those two places based on Tom's love of both. 

[michael damico]

First posting on this thread, but being as I love Crystal Downs sure it wont be my last.
Great opening hole, with the specatcular vista of the property and the wonderful first green complex.

Michael, I could only imagine what that vista would have looked like 50 years ago without all the trees being mature and obstructing the view of both lakes. Although if memory serves me correctly, you still can see a good deal of Crystal Lake, not so much Lake Michigan.

[JC Jones]

In my one viewing--I say viewing due to an unfortunate and ill-timed muscle pull left me worthless--I didn't find much fault with the golf course.  The green speeds were fast, no doubt.  But no faster than I have subsequently played on other "top XX" golf courses since then.  No one ever says that Oakmont would be nothing without its green speeds.  Crystal Downs would still be wonderful without 12-13 ft stimps as well. 

I enjoyed the maintenance meld in summer '09, and think that most mature courses look alright with definition.  Lots of great older courses have some straight lines here and there.  I love how the native backs up to the non-playing side of the bunkers in most places.  This is a concept that works well on open sites.  RGD, Hanse, Devries, C&C all use the concept on many of their courses to great affect. 

At any rate, I write those last two paragraphs to say that some places are just really good and too much critique leads to conclusions that are so far outside what is reasonable for the current membership, that it's just not worth wasting bandwidth to discuss.  I've had some spirited debates about the "modern throwback" maintenance melds that we love so much on this site with some "regular golfers."  Most were effectually devoid of anything resembling a valid thought.  But those guys pay greens fees just like me and they want defined mowing lines, green rough, fluffy bunkers and long views. 

--BREAK--

On an unrelated line of thinking, I think it would be interesting to take The Old Course and Crystal Downs and scour Tom's portfolio for the concepts in those two courses.  I would assume--I could be wrong--that most of Renaissance's inspiration comes from those two places based on Tom's love of both. 

I agree with Ben and the few times I've been fortunate to play Crystal Downs I have not found the greens to be anything but fantastic.  In fact, this last go around, I had expected/hoped the greens to be a bit faster.

Let's also keep in mind as we discuss architecture on this thread (and other threads when dealing with courses of this level) that the criticism is very nit-picky.  Crystal Downs is a fantastic golf course worthy of every bit of acclaim it gets.  To me, being from Michigan and spending my summers in northern Michigan, Crystal Downs is as close to perfection as it gets and as Tom Doak has always said, it is one of those places where the sum is greater than the parts.

[JC Jones]

The irony is that but for the current, over-the-top green speeds, #2 has no interest.  It is an uphill, slightly right moving par 4 with a back-to-front sloping green.

Next.

And after you drawing and quartering my home club for uphill holes, we all know your affinity for them whether they be a good hole or not!

I actually like up hill holes.  One of my favorite holes of all time comes later in the front 9 at Crystal Downs, #8.  What I don't care for is monotony   

One day I'll play your club again and maybe a return visit will yield some different thoughts.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()