What do Pasatiempo and The Valley Club have in common? How are they different?

[Scott Warren]

I played The Valley Club in 2010 when I first visited the USA and loved the green complexes and width on fairly flat ground, with more dramatic land at 10, 11 and 14; the clever and varied set of one-shotters (the first three utilising the same small hill) and the beauty of the setting.

It also -- in a select group that also includes Walton Heath and Kingston Heath (perhaps coincidentally also flatter courses like The Valley Club) -- seemed to be realizing almost all of its potential by way of its conditioning, tree management, vegetation management etc., which a surprising amount of very good courses fail to do.

As for the MacKenzie design, I don't see enormous obvious hole-to-hole similarities between The Valley Club, Alwoodley and Royal Melbourne (West), but they each have commonality in the strength of the green complexes (with fairly subtle internal contour) in creating interest, the ample width, playability for all and non-returning "looped" routings.

It seems the way of great designers that the similarities course to course are more present in the principles that underpin the holes than in the holes themselves.

With that in mind, I am really curious to see Pasatiempo when I return to the US in August. Not least of all because it appears to sit on bolder ground than the other MacKenzie courses I have played and appears to be equipped with bolder greens to suit that wilder land.

For their proximity to one another and other geographical similarities, it seems the very different land may have led to very different uses of the above-mentioned MacKenzie principles (greens, width, playability, routing) at Pasatiempo and The Valley Club.

I'm interested to hear from those who have played both what they think of the DNA similarities between the courses.

[Tom_Doak]

Scott:

I've had ample experience at both courses, having seen both of them thirty years ago, and consulting at both for the past 10-15 years.

Mainly, they are very different pieces of ground.  At Pasatiempo, every design decision revolves around FIGHTING elevation changes.  There are several greens which have 5 to 6 FEET of elevation change from front to back ... all because of the natural tilt of the ground.

They were also built by two different guys.  Dr. MacKenzie did not spend much time at The Valley Club ... he left the work of building the course to Robert Hunter, who lived nearby.  Whereas at Pasatiempo, Dr. MacKenzie himself was in residence through most of the construction process, so his bold ideas for greens were not softened by his associate.

[Scott Warren]

Tom,

Thanks for that. Given your ongoing involvement and familiarity with both going back 30 years, there may not be anyone on earth who knows the two as well as you do.

Thinking about it more it seems to me that both courses use par threes to cross their more dramatic land/landforms: 8, 11 and 14 at TWC and by the looks of it and 5, 15 and 18 at Pasa.

Clearly I am hamstrung (until August) by having played only one and being left to rely on pictures for the other, but I guess what I am trying to explore is why the two courses feel to me as though they have a significant amount in common despite those major differences you note up above.

[Bill_McBride]

I have played both many times and agree Pasa is on more convoluted terrain with resulting wilder greens.

However, don't underestimate the slopes at the Valley Club.  Mackenzie picked most green sites where there are strong slopes, and Hunter did little to mitigate the degree of these slopes.  #2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 18 all have sloping greens, mostly in one direction, back to front, that can cause heartburn all day.   Think about #8 at Pasatiempo; most of the ones listed above are in the same degree of difficulty.

[Scott Warren]

Bill,

One of the greatest challenges for me at The Valley Club was that the slope in many of the greens was significant enough to have a real effect on the ball when approaching, but you couldn't see those slopes and identify them from 100m+ away as the type that would channel the ball towards or away from the flag.

In that respect it, I am sure it very much rewards repeat play by an observant golfer and leads to great challenge that in its length, width and flatness appears to be somewhat absent.

And you're right that among that set are some greens -- 2, 9, 12, 15 and 18 notably -- that move a lot and can absolutely dominate you.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

architect in common but not much else to me.  Tom spelled it out the right way.

[Tom_Doak]

I have played both many times and agree Pasa is on more convoluted terrain with resulting wilder greens.

However, don't underestimate the slopes at the Valley Club.  Mackenzie picked most green sites where there are strong slopes, and Hunter did little to mitigate the degree of these slopes.  #2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 18 all have sloping greens, mostly in one direction, back to front, that can cause heartburn all day.   Think about #8 at Pasatiempo; most of the ones listed above are in the same degree of difficulty.

This is true.  Most of the property at The Valley Club [especially the holes across the road, nos. 3-12] sit on a pretty consistent 3-4% grade, and the greens flow out of that ... which means that you do NOT want to be above the hole at #3 or #5 or #18, among others.

But none of them are as severe as #8 or #16 at Pasatiempo!

[Bill_McBride]

I have played both many times and agree Pasa is on more convoluted terrain with resulting wilder greens.

However, don't underestimate the slopes at the Valley Club.  Mackenzie picked most green sites where there are strong slopes, and Hunter did little to mitigate the degree of these slopes.  #2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 18 all have sloping greens, mostly in one direction, back to front, that can cause heartburn all day.   Think about #8 at Pasatiempo; most of the ones listed above are in the same degree of difficulty.

This is true.  Most of the property at The Valley Club [especially the holes across the road, nos. 3-12] sit on a pretty consistent 3-4% grade, and the greens flow out of that ... which means that you do NOT want to be above the hole at #3 or #5 or #18, among others.

But none of them are as severe as #8 or #16 at Pasatiempo!

Agreed.  That front area of #8 is 6%!   And isn't #16 just a freak?

[Padraig Dooley]

One of the great things they have in common is given only one course to play for the rest of my life, I would gladly choose either!!

The big difference which has been alluded to already is Pasatiempo feels undulating whereas The Valley Club doesn't, despite having a lot of movement. I wonder what's the drop in elevation from the 1st tees to the 2nd greens in both? Obviously with the elevated 1st tee in Pasa it gives the impression that there's a bigger change there but there's quite a drop in the Valley Club as well.

Two of the things they have in common is great restorations and both feel longer than the yardage on the card especially Pasatiempo.

[JC Urbina]

Scott
I am still alive and I am on Earth and I know a little about both courses.

[Scott Warren]

Hi Jim,

I did think of you immediately, honestly, but then thought you were about a good bit younger than Tom, and that he may have had you covered for duration of experience if not for overall familiarity! (can I weasel my way out of this with a compliment?! )

I know you have been intimately involved in recent work, so I'd love to hear your thoughts on the above.

[Tom_Doak]

Hi Jim,

I did think of you immediately, honestly, but then thought you were about a good bit younger than Tom, and that he may have had you covered for duration of experience if not for overall familiarity! (can I weasel my way out of this with a compliment?! )

I know you have been intimately involved in recent work, so I'd love to hear your thoughts on the above.

Nice try, but Jim's older than I am. 

[Scott Warren]

I'm just bombing out completely here. I've overlooked his insight into the courses and then doubled down and called you old!

I think maybe I might put my cue in the rack, now!

[Bill_McBride]

One of the great things they have in common is given only one course to play for the rest of my life, I would gladly choose either!!

The big difference which has been alluded to already is Pasatiempo feels undulating whereas The Valley Club doesn't, despite having a lot of movement. I wonder what's the drop in elevation from the 1st tees to the 2nd greens in both? Obviously with the elevated 1st tee in Pasa it gives the impression that there's a bigger change there but there's quite a drop in the Valley Club as well.

Two of the things they have in common is great restorations and both feel longer than the yardage on the card especially Pasatiempo.

Dooles, I'm not sure there is much elevation change from 1st tee to 2nd green.   Obviously 1 is downhill, but the tee shot on 2 is uphill and the green is a bit uphill.  I'm thinking it's about zero.

[Tom_Doak]

One of the great things they have in common is given only one course to play for the rest of my life, I would gladly choose either!!

The big difference which has been alluded to already is Pasatiempo feels undulating whereas The Valley Club doesn't, despite having a lot of movement. I wonder what's the drop in elevation from the 1st tees to the 2nd greens in both? Obviously with the elevated 1st tee in Pasa it gives the impression that there's a bigger change there but there's quite a drop in the Valley Club as well.

Two of the things they have in common is great restorations and both feel longer than the yardage on the card especially Pasatiempo.

Dooles, I'm not sure there is much elevation change from 1st tee to 2nd green.   Obviously 1 is downhill, but the tee shot on 2 is uphill and the green is a bit uphill.  I'm thinking it's about zero.

Dr. MacKenzie was great at making courses play longer than what they are on the scorecard.  Crystal Downs is another great example.

As for elevation change, it's not even close.  The elevation change from 1 tee to 2 green at Pasatiempo is 180 feet.  [#11 is another 90 feet uphill from 1 tee.]  As Bill suggests, The Valley Club is much less ... don't have the map handy but I would guess #1 is 30-40 feet downhill and #2 is 10-20 feet back up.  I have never thought to look at it, but the highest point at The Valley Club might be #6 green instead of #1 tee.

[Scott Warren]

Tom,

Dr. MacKenzie was great at making courses play longer than what they are on the scorecard.  Crystal Downs is another great example.

I'd love for you to elaborate on the above. How did he go about achieving that?

[Padraig Dooley]

One of the great things they have in common is given only one course to play for the rest of my life, I would gladly choose either!!

The big difference which has been alluded to already is Pasatiempo feels undulating whereas The Valley Club doesn't, despite having a lot of movement. I wonder what's the drop in elevation from the 1st tees to the 2nd greens in both? Obviously with the elevated 1st tee in Pasa it gives the impression that there's a bigger change there but there's quite a drop in the Valley Club as well.

Two of the things they have in common is great restorations and both feel longer than the yardage on the card especially Pasatiempo.

Dooles, I'm not sure there is much elevation change from 1st tee to 2nd green.   Obviously 1 is downhill, but the tee shot on 2 is uphill and the green is a bit uphill.  I'm thinking it's about zero.

Dr. MacKenzie was great at making courses play longer than what they are on the scorecard.  Crystal Downs is another great example.

As for elevation change, it's not even close.  The elevation change from 1 tee to 2 green at Pasatiempo is 180 feet.  [#11 is another 90 feet uphill from 1 tee.]  As Bill suggests, The Valley Club is much less ... don't have the map handy but I would guess #1 is 30-40 feet downhill and #2 is 10-20 feet back up.  I have never thought to look at it, but the highest point at The Valley Club might be #6 green instead of #1 tee.

It would be interesting to find out the elevation change on the 2nd hole, the tee shot does play slightly uphill, but the second shot seems a bit downhill. Could you say the second shot is similar to the elevation change on the 13th hole and the tee shot is similar to the change on the 14th? Is there more of a rise from tee to green on 13 than a fall from tee to green on 14?

Interesting as well is the elevation changes across the road, you wouldn't think there's that much of a rise from the 3rd tee to the 6th green. It is quite gradual.

Tom, I would have thought that the 8th green/9th tee and the 10th tee would be higher than the 6th green, especially the two new tees on the 10th?

One other comparison between the two courses is any climbing to be done is earlier in the rounds rather than towards the end. MacKenzie mustn't have wanted golfers to have to do some climbing when they were tired playing the last couple of holes. There are more hikes in Pasa than the Valley, 3,9 and 11 come to mind, slight rise on 17 but nothing like the earlier ones. There is a good rise on the 15th in the Valley, it could easily have been the finishing hole, indeed many start on 16 and finish there but MacKenzie had three flatter holes to finish.

[Padraig Dooley]

Tom,

Dr. MacKenzie was great at making courses play longer than what they are on the scorecard.  Crystal Downs is another great example.

I'd love for you to elaborate on the above. How did he go about achieving that?

Claremont is another good example of this, only about 5800 on the card. MacKenzie inherited the routing and only made a couple of modifications to it but it's very apparent there.

Scott, it seems that the mixture of short par 3s, driveable par 4s and then some long 3s and 4s that does it, especially when the long holes are grouped together. In Claremont the start feels short enough and then from 8-12 is long or middle irons followed by a 3 wood or even driver on the par 3 13th. 

[Sean_A]

One of the great things they have in common is given only one course to play for the rest of my life, I would gladly choose either!!

The big difference which has been alluded to already is Pasatiempo feels undulating whereas The Valley Club doesn't, despite having a lot of movement. I wonder what's the drop in elevation from the 1st tees to the 2nd greens in both? Obviously with the elevated 1st tee in Pasa it gives the impression that there's a bigger change there but there's quite a drop in the Valley Club as well.

Two of the things they have in common is great restorations and both feel longer than the yardage on the card especially Pasatiempo.

Dooles, I'm not sure there is much elevation change from 1st tee to 2nd green.   Obviously 1 is downhill, but the tee shot on 2 is uphill and the green is a bit uphill.  I'm thinking it's about zero.

Dr. MacKenzie was great at making courses play longer than what they are on the scorecard.  Crystal Downs is another great example.

As for elevation change, it's not even close.  The elevation change from 1 tee to 2 green at Pasatiempo is 180 feet.  [#11 is another 90 feet uphill from 1 tee.]  As Bill suggests, The Valley Club is much less ... don't have the map handy but I would guess #1 is 30-40 feet downhill and #2 is 10-20 feet back up.  I have never thought to look at it, but the highest point at The Valley Club might be #6 green instead of #1 tee.

Tom

I would go even further and say the classic British archies were brilliant at creating short courses (not even long for their day) which play far longer.  As has been suggested many times, much of this illusion is due to folks falling for a yardage (and sometimes par) on a card without close inspection or without knowledge of the terrain.  Often times five par 3 are used and less than four par 5s.  Much of the time there is a gaggle of long par fours, one or two which play just as tough as the par 5s.  Of course, one, two and even three or more short par 4s are slipped in.  The result can easily be a 6000 yarder with a par of 69/70 that feels much more like 6500 yards, but uses just over 100 acres.  If the golf community is ever going to grasp sustainability these are the sort of courses I think should be built.   

Ciao

[Bill_McBride]

A member friend at the Valley Club has access to elevation data and sent me the following notes.

#1 falls 10 meters and #2 gains it back with the green perched on the base of a hill.  The change is zero.

The overall fall from #7 tee to #1 green is 30 meters, 100 feet.  That confirms the steep pitch of 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 greens.

The club seems to keep the stimp at 10-11, so those slopes are very dangerous.

Other slopes result from greens that are benched into the two hills that anchor the routing, 8 and 10.

[Tyler Kearns]

A member friend at the Valley Club has access to elevation data and sent me the following notes.

#1 falls 10 meters and #2 gains it back with the green perched on the base of a hill.  The change is zero.

The overall fall from #7 tee to #1 green is 30 meters, 10 feet.  That confirms the steep pitch of 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 greens.

The club seems to keep the stimp at 10-11, so those slopes are very dangerous.

Other slopes result from greens that are benched into the two hills that anchor the routing, 8 and 10.

Bill,

You may want to modify the above post, I think you mean the fall from #7 tee to #1 green is 10 meters (30 feet), or 30 meters (100 feet).

TK

[Bill_McBride]

A member friend at the Valley Club has access to elevation data and sent me the following notes.

#1 falls 10 meters and #2 gains it back with the green perched on the base of a hill.  The change is zero.

The overall fall from #7 tee to #1 green is 30 meters, 10 feet.  That confirms the steep pitch of 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 greens.

The club seems to keep the stimp at 10-11, so those slopes are very dangerous.

Other slopes result from greens that are benched into the two hills that anchor the routing, 8 and 10.

Bill,

You may want to modify the above post, I think you mean the fall from #7 tee to #1 green is 10 meters (30 feet), or 30 meters (100 feet).

TK

Thanks, 30m = 100'.