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.


Rory Connaughton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2013, 11:40:25 AM »
Both are great holes.

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2013, 11:49:48 AM »

 I think the #10 at riveria is a great hole with a middle or front pin position.    The back pin position, on shaved greens, doesnt always reward good shots or in many cases a good layup.

From many layup spots, the play to to try to hit the ball to the back left part of the green/fringe in hopes you can have something uphill.   Ideally, there would be a low option to get the ball back towards the pin, but the bunkering makes this impossible

I mostly agree with this. Even with a perfectly struck wedge shot that back pin is near impossible to get to. It's not completely broken now, but it would probably be a better hole with a very small expansion of that section of green (on the order of 2-3 ft). It could make all the difference. Isn't a hole where you can realistically make 3-7 better than one where you can make 4-7?

Cameron DeVries

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #27 on: February 18, 2013, 04:16:47 PM »
I really like the 10th, but it's current design is not exactly what Thomas intended, is it?  He writes that the green has no bunker near it and old photographs seem to show a much larger green, although the slope on the right side is still significant.  Would having a chipping area behind the green instead of bunkers allow for easier recovery and better scoring?  I love watching the play here and overall it seems to have evolved into a really neat hole, if slightly different from the original.
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their mind cannot change anything."  -George Bernard Shaw

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2013, 06:12:25 PM »
Was the 10th always considered drivable?
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2013, 06:40:47 PM »
What's the better comparison to Riviera #10 -- BT #14 or PD #6?

Actually, it was the 16th at Pacific Dunes that I thought of from the beginning as a bit like the 10th at Riviera.  If you tried to get close to the green and got sucked down in the hollow on the right, you were screwed ... you have to keep left unless you are sure you are going to get "up" to the front of the green.

The 16th at Pacific Dunes is a VERY difficult hole ... much more difficult than I expected, because it's downwind and so hard to hold.  Which is pretty much exactly the same problem as the 14th at Bandon Trails, and why both of them are so much harder than the 10th at Riviera.  I think the saving grace of the 16th at Pacific Dunes is that YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY where you have to land the ball if you're going to stay on the green ... whereas at Bandon Trails, the target is not much bigger or smaller, but it's above you so you can't see it, and you always think you got screwed when really your ball landed twenty feet past where it needed to land.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2013, 07:00:08 PM »
I wonder if the angulation of the green at Riv's  10th has changed over the years. I imagine a large number of players splashing out of the fronting bunker could gradually increase the rearward slope and overpower a delicately constructed aspect of the original design.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2013, 07:08:40 PM »
Seems to me the issue here is that many feel since it is a short hole you should automatically be able to get the second shot close if the tee shot is struck properly.  It's not hard to put the second shot on the green but trying to get close to specific pins makes some think its unfair...
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2013, 07:10:44 PM »

Why is #10 at Riviera considered a "great hole" -  and yet my beloved #14 at Bandon Trails has been earmarked for yet another rebuild?




Is there any doubt that merely surviving 90 years gives a hole (or a course) more weight?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2013, 07:12:33 PM »
The 10th at Riv has not always been considered the holiest of holies.  I still have a copy of the USGA Green Section report from the 1960's or 70's in my file, where Bill Bengeyfield recommended they change the hole because it was too easy and not in keeping with the rest of the course.  Why he was making architectural recommendations, I'm not sure, but thank God they didn't listen to him.

Guy Nicholson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2013, 07:18:10 PM »
What's the better comparison to Riviera #10 -- BT #14 or PD #6?

Actually, it was the 16th at Pacific Dunes that I thought of from the beginning as a bit like the 10th at Riviera.  If you tried to get close to the green and got sucked down in the hollow on the right, you were screwed ... you have to keep left unless you are sure you are going to get "up" to the front of the green.

The 16th at Pacific Dunes is a VERY difficult hole ... much more difficult than I expected, because it's downwind and so hard to hold.  Which is pretty much exactly the same problem as the 14th at Bandon Trails, and why both of them are so much harder than the 10th at Riviera.  I think the saving grace of the 16th at Pacific Dunes is that YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY where you have to land the ball if you're going to stay on the green ... whereas at Bandon Trails, the target is not much bigger or smaller, but it's above you so you can't see it, and you always think you got screwed when really your ball landed twenty feet past where it needed to land.

Thank you Tom, I was hoping you would offer your thoughts on this.

Peter Pallotta

Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2013, 07:24:42 PM »
Tom, Gib - that was the point I was trying to make earlier, i.e. nothing -- and certainly no golf hole - will be considered the holy of holies until we ourselves IMPUTE that holiness onto it...a process that starts with paying it simple attention for what it IS and not for what it's NOT (or for what we WISHED it had been) and moves onto appreciation and then affection and then love until we can't imagine it any other way (a holy of holies). And that process can't be rushed, it takes TIME...the very commodity no one seems eager to grant anymore. This thread could go one for 40 pages, and posters much more astute than I could give hundreds of pros/cons/opinions about the relative merits of those golf holes; and that is precisely the problem, i.e. we now give absolute priority to the 'rational' judgements of today over the heart-driven process of the ages.  We gain something, and we lose a lot...

Peter

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #36 on: February 19, 2013, 09:07:16 AM »
What's this about BT #14 having more work done?  Has this been determined?  What is known at this point?  Details please--thanks.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 11:32:17 AM by Tim Pitner »

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #37 on: February 19, 2013, 11:43:24 AM »
Deleted
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 11:45:37 AM by Alex Miller »

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2013, 12:15:25 PM »
I have never played Riveria, so I can't say for sure, but I watched the tournament and wondered why every pro just did not lay up on the left and trust their wedge and putter. As a rule, pros are so amazingly accurate with their wedges. I don't see why they would invite bogey or worse on such a hole, but maybe that is my conservative bias.

BD 14, and PD 16, are two of my least favorite holes on the property. I've struggled with myself as to why I feel this way. Am I just a whiney single-digit player who hates the idea of making a bogey on such a short hole? Or is it a logical reaction to the THIRD shot that is required when you miss the green. I know when I played "safe" off the tee at PD 16 and hit a wedge (from rock hard fairway) that failed to hold I ended up DEAD in the back left bunker, I whined like a baby... My best result on the hole was when I bombed and gouged it from the right rough below the hole.  I just think the hole demands too much from average golfers.

Same thing at BD 14. I played safe 5-woods three times, hit the green once. On one of my misses left I made a ridiculous up and down par by hitting the precise spot I needed to on the upslope and the ball rolled near the pin. But I remember thinking that is too much for recreational players, especially higher handicaps who play ping pong over the green until they finally give up. I think there is a fine line between maddenly hard short holes, and ones that lead to frequent X's on the card.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #39 on: February 19, 2013, 12:20:51 PM »
Bill,

Havbe you played BT 14 since the first renovation?  I agree with you on the initial version, but I thought that risk was properly addressed.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #40 on: February 19, 2013, 12:42:05 PM »
Was the 10th always in the 300 yard range?

If so, it wasn't a drivable hole when it was built, and thus what we see happening today doesn't reflect the full intention of the architect (or perhaps it does, if Thomas was truly a visionary regarding the changes to the game that would come).  What is amazing to me is that the addition of the technology-created-ability to get the tee ball up by the green adds another element of strategy, and makes the hole even better.
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #41 on: February 19, 2013, 12:47:21 PM »
Bill,

Havbe you played BT 14 since the first renovation?  I agree with you on the initial version, but I thought that risk was properly addressed.

Jud,

I played it the week of the CGA event for the opening of Old Macdonald. Was the first renovation after that?

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #42 on: February 19, 2013, 01:54:54 PM »
No I think you saw it.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #43 on: February 19, 2013, 02:16:25 PM »
Bill,

Havbe you played BT 14 since the first renovation?  I agree with you on the initial version, but I thought that risk was properly addressed.

Jud,

I played it the week of the CGA event for the opening of Old Macdonald. Was the first renovation after that?

no the renovation was done prior to that by softening the left side approach of the green and clearing the left scrub some.

the recent changes have occurred to change the left bunker and widen the approach on the left as well as stretch the front of the green

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,54302.0.html

I think all courses are tinkered with regardless of whether the original designers are around

I love both #10 Riv and #14 Trails, and fun to see PGA pro's strategy at #10
It's all about the golf!

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #44 on: February 19, 2013, 02:19:07 PM »
Softening a 315 yard par 4... brought to you by the "everybody deserves a trophy" crowd.

Amazing.

V. Kmetz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #45 on: February 19, 2013, 02:46:50 PM »
I want to pick up on what Sven said a few posts back..."if the hole wasn't drivable in Thomas' day..."

(BTW it's STILL not drivable by me or 999% of this board I assume)

This IS indeed a part of the elasticity that great designers somehow intuit, but it takes me back to the REST of the hole (which nobody talks about) the visual and carry intimidation of the beautiful fairway bunkers right center and longer left.

We're so inured to watching the pros play that all we think about is "short Distance" and "orientation of ever-more severe green"...that to me is ignoring all the other great looks and strategic considerations the hole offers.  Also, we're not looking at other factors:

1.  Does the alternate green to the right play a part in the regard and.or viability of the hole for MOST of the golfers who play it.  does the hole stink if we're using the alternate green?  (I don't think it does, but I've only visited the property once and never played it)

2.  Are all the unfair, tricked-up, accusations grow moot when the pin is in front or more near the front?

cheers

vk
"The tee shot must first be hit straight and long between a vast bunker on the left which whispers 'slice' in the player's ear, and a wilderness on the right which induces a hurried hook." -

Gib_Papazian

Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #46 on: February 19, 2013, 04:00:38 PM »
#10 at Riviera is not *that* hard of a golf hole. The challenge is that it tests perception and ego more than shotmaking skill. It is a simple matter to hit a 4-iron down the left side and hit a crisp sand wedge to the front of the green. Maybe you lag it close and escape with a par and maybe you 3-jack; in either case, the worse result is a bogey. There is a guaranteed strategy to avoid a train wreck - yet the testosterone fueled ego coursing through the veins of the Tour boys make it a choice between machismo and intellect. Phil Mickelson is the greatest wedge player who ever lived - a man who from 60 yards can literally drop a golf ball out of the sky within a tight circle better than 80% of the time. What can possibly be the reason he'd deliberately select a lower percentage play?

I wonder - even given that as a group they are not great wedge players - how would the LPGA players fare on #10? Most of them cannot pump one far enough to reach the pad, so therefore would be forced to choose a different strategy. My bet is that their stroke average would equal or better the PGA Tour boys taking a rip from the tee. The 10th hole at the Belfry strikes me as a similar proposition - a sucker bet for compulsive gamblers who know the house has a huge advantage, but cannot bring themselves not to double-down with the dealer showing an Ace.

In similar fashion, I just do not understand why #14 at Bandon Trails inspires such plaintive cries of angst from the Hoi polloi. Cheat your tee shot to the left and how high you keep it on the fairway dictates how chesty you get with the wedge. Bailing left on approach leaves the opportunity to putt it onto the green. Again, maybe you get it up and down and maybe not, but the downside is bogey. There is no rule stating that short par-4s are to be an easy par. Tiny #13 at Spanish Bay is twice as nerve-wracking, especially with the wind racing up the valley - yet nobody blinks an eye because it is a par-3.

#4 at Spyglass is five times harder than #14 at Trails because there is no simple bailout where you can play for 4 1/2 and live to fight another day. I don't read about anybody wanting to rip down the dunes and replace it with a Rees Jones pancake. Last time I looked, Spyglass has plenty of "retail golfers" - the vast majority of whom are poor players when compared to Bandon's visitors. Peter is 100% correct, nobody wants to give things time to sink in - or give players the chance to experiment with different strategies. Instead we pander to whining.

If #17 at TOC was built today - maybe the greatest and most unique par-4 on the planet - the dozers would come out after the first week. The whole thing makes me sick. Holes like these are the absolute pinnacle of brilliant strategic geometry - and the ultimate test of verve and nerve in match play. Taking what the hole is willing to give you - which borders between par and bogey regardless of length - is the best test of golfing maturity I can think of. The older you get, the wiser you get about things that you cannot control.

#16 at Pac Dunes is another subject entirely. I have played it seven or eight times and cannot figure out how to make bogey, let alone par. The last time, I managed to place my drive to the left, but with the downwind gusts I was so freaked out I putted it onto the front of the green and three-jacked to a five. That tied my lowest score ever on the hole. If somebody can explain to me how to play it, please elucidate.

All this stated, they had better not dare change it until I figure out how to outsmart the gawdamned thing.      
« Last Edit: February 20, 2013, 01:51:19 PM by Gib Papazian »

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #47 on: February 19, 2013, 04:04:24 PM »
#10 at Riviera is not *that* hard of a golf hole. The challenge is that it tests perception and ego more than shotmaking skill. It is a simple matter to hit a 4-iron down the left side and hit a crisp sand wedge to the front of the green. Maybe you lag it close and escape with a par and maybe you 3-jack; in either case, the worse result is a bogey. There is a guaranteed strategy to avoid a train wreck - yet the testosterone fueled ego coursing through the veins of the Tour boys make it a choice between machismo and intellect. Phil Mickelson is the greatest wedge player who ever lived - a man who from 60 yards can literally drop a golf ball out of the sky within a tight circle better than 80% of the time. What can possibly be the reason he'd deliberately select a lower percentage play?

I wonder - even given that as a group they are not great wedge players - how would the LPGA players fare on #10? Most of them cannot pump one far enough to reach the pad, so therefore would be forced to choose a different strategy. My bet is that their stroke average would equal or better the PGA Tour boys taking a rip from the tee. The 10th hole at the Belfry strikes me as a similar proposition - a sucker bet for compulsive gamblers who know the house has a huge advantage, but cannot bring themselves not to double-down with the dealer showing an Ace.

In similar fashion, I just do not understand why #14 at Bandon Trails inspires such plaintive cries of angst from the Hoi polloi. Cheat your tee shot to the left and how high you keep it on the fairway dictates how chesty you get with the wedge. Bailing to the left leaves the opportunity to putt it onto the green. Again, maybe you get it up and down and maybe not, but the downside is bogey. There is no rule stating that short par-4s are to be an easy par. #13 at Spanish Bay is twice as nerve-wracking, especially with the wind racing up the valley - yet nobody blinks an eye because it is a par-3.

#4 at Spyglass is five times harder than #14 at Trails because there is no simple bailout where you can play for 4 1/2 and live to fight another day. I don't read about anybody wanting to rip down the dunes and replace it with a Rees Jones pancake. Last time I looked, Spyglass has plenty of "retail golfers" - the vast majority of whom are poor players when compared to Bandon's visitors.Peter is 100% correct, nobody wants to give things time to sink in - or give players the chance to experiment with different strategies. Instead we pander to whining.

If #17 at TOC was built today - maybe the greatest and most unique par-4 on the planet - the dozers would come out after the first week. The whole thing makes me sick. Holes like these are the absolute pinnacle of brilliant strategic geometry - and the ultimate test of verve and nerve in match play. For those willing to take what the hole is willing to give you - which borders between par and bogey regardless of length - is the best test of golfing maturity I can think of. The older you get, the wiser you get about things that you cannot control.

#16 at Pac Dunes is another subject entirely. I have played it seven or eight times and cannot figure out how to make bogey, let alone par. The last time, I managed to place my drive to the left, but with the downwind gusts I was so freaked out I putted it onto the front of the green and three-jacked to a five. That tied my lowest score ever on the hole. If somebody can explain to me how to play the hole, please elucidate.

All this stated, they had better not dare change it until I figure out how to outsmart the gawdamned thing.     

You had the most relevant comment a mere two sentences into your post.

David Bartman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #48 on: February 19, 2013, 05:50:30 PM »
Their are 2 major differences between #14 @ BT and #10 at Riv.  TD mentioned one, you can see where you are going @ #10 Riv while most golfers cannot see where they are going at BT because you are so far below the level of the green. 

That is also the second difference,  #10 at Riv is generally a level approach while BT you are hitting primarily uphill causing the ball to have less loft on it in proportion to the green surface, effectively coming in flatter, especially if you are at the bottom of the hill and not on the up slope.

Another thing to note about #10 at Riv , from someone who has played it 100 times over a 25 year period, is that the Greens are NEVER that hard or fast, I repeat NEVER.  When I layup on #10 and have 90 yards left I am frequently trying to take spin off the ball in order to control it from spinning backward off the front left. 

Due to the firmness of the greens the hole played as challenging as I have ever seen it play this past week, and that was without much wind if any. 
Still need to play Pine Valley!!

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OK, let's cut the bullshit . . . .
« Reply #49 on: February 19, 2013, 07:02:32 PM »
the tough thing about 14 @ Trails is the inability to stop the ball quickly from below right

there is no doubt that #14 Trails is more difficult than #10 Riv
It's all about the golf!