Golfbaan de Swinkelsche - post Buda photos and discussion

[John Mayhugh]

Sorry for the delay.  Resuming discussion with the 7th.

Hole 7     Par 5, 476/499
The next two holes cover an area of 25 acres (!) and have water in play. Its a relatively short par 5 where its all about risk, how much do you want to take to go for the green. No bunkers at the green!










Our first real encounter with water, and there's no question it's used strategically.  This is a short par 5, so it's possible to play without having much of a carry over water at all.  That turns it into a three shot hole.  Lots of confusion off the tee for the first time play.  I imagine lots of temptation after that.  The bunkerless green works really well.

[Mark Pearce]

Another hole that was extremely confusing standing on the tee.  There seem to be several landing zones but all look awfully small standing on the tee.  The strategy off the tee isn't ust about how much carry to take on to shorten your approach.  A conservative line off the tee will leave a second from further left, meaning you need to play towards the water with your second.  I don't know how I'd have played this without the print-out of the planer we had but a drive between the first two bunkers left a hybrid and a short pitch.

The bunker less green is again not straightforward but isn't as difficult as many.  I wasn't sure about this hole standing on the tee but on reflection and having had the benefit of playing it, I really like it.  As John says, I can Imagine that the tee shot would add temptation with further plays.

[Frank Pont]

As many of you know I am not a big fan of water, but in this case there was no way around it, the water authorities had stipulated that this part of the site had to have a big lake. That meant that I had to weave a number of sequential holes around the lake, which meant that there was a real danger of sameness to creep in unless I made the playing strategies quite different. In the end I decided to have two long holes in there, a medium length par 5 and a very long par 4.

The par 5 seventh hole hugs the shore line continuously from tee to green, showing all the hazards one will encounter on the way to the green clearly. The strategy is formed by a number of things. First the width of the fairway varies between 30 and 70 meters, with the narrow bits at the locations the best players are most likely to hit their balls and the wide bits where I hope most average to poor players will end up. Second is the bunker positions, which make it hard for the better players to try to go for the green in two. And finally the pin position on the green makes a big difference, with by far the hardest positions on the right hand side.

The main dilemma is what to hit off the tee. In the times I have played it off yellow and white so far driver has not been a very good choice for me, leading to 70% ball in the water hazard. I therefore mostly will hit 3 wood on white and 2 iron on yellow.



If you would play a safe shot left of the first bunker this would be the view you would have towards the green. If you hit a lay up shot there is a lot of space both left and right of the bunker at 120 m in front of the green, although the left is much more preferable than the right side.




The green is slightly raised and gently undulating. Originally I had planned to have a bunker left in front of the green, but opted not to put one there when we were building the hole because I felt the green did not need more defence. Also I was keen to get players to try to hit the green with their second shot and thought that by leaving them more space to run a ball on the green I would give back some of what I took away by making the tee shot so hard.



Looking back over the green to hole 7 it shows how much (fear of) water dictates the strategy on this hole

[John Mayhugh]

The green is slightly raised and gently undulating. Originally I had planned to have a bunker left in front of the green, but opted not to put one there when we were building the hole because I felt the green did not need more defence. Also I was keen to get players to try to hit the green with their second shot and thought that by leaving them more space to run a ball on the green I would give back some of what I took away by making the tee shot so hard.

Thanks so much for sharing your thought process here.  Makes a lot of sense, and really enhances my understanding of the course.  

Moving on to the 8th, I think there will be some questions....


Hole 8     Par 4, 425/450
The other water hole. I've tried to make it a completely different hole. Its either a long long par 4, or if you are brave a mid length par 4. You choose. In the last case the shot into the green is much harder though.








To me, it seemed like the carry to the alternate fairway was too long and the target not large enough to make it viable.  But I don't hit the ball very far.  Playing safely, it's a reasonable hard par easy bogey hole.  

Frank,
How did you end up deciding to build a dune instead of just a bunker on the right side of the fairway?  Was this to really force a safe or aggressive tee shot?

[Mark Pearce]

The hole I liked least on the course, though I made a 4.  Like John, I think the carry tee shot is simply too difficult to be a realistic option for a golfer of my standard.  The safe tee shot is reasonably straightforward but leaves an exceptionally difficult 2nd.  Trees and OOB hard on the left, a bunker short right of the green and only the narrowest of gaps to thread it through.  If I was playing a medal here I wouldn't be tempted to take it on.  I'd hit mid-iron wedge and take my 5.  The "fix" might be to extend the carry fairway to make that shot more tempting or widen the "safe" faiway towards the water, tempting the player to get greedy with a safe tee shot.  I  don't know but as it is I felt this hole was just the wrong side of hard.

[Frank Pont]

One of the most difficult things when creating multiple options, and ways to cut off a hole, is not too make the short cut too easy or too hard. If anything I have erred on making some of the short cuts too hard at Swinkelsche, especially for the better players.



Hole 8 is a tough monster, a true 4.5. Play it left (see above) and you have to hit two perfect shots to be on the green, something David Davis pulled off in our round. ( a long fade drive followed by a drawn 7 iron from 150 m ). But if you hook the tee shot all of a sudden you are hitting a wood in, and as Mark states there is a lot of danger lurking (see below).



I have no problem with this part of the bargain, you pick the level of risk you want to run...




The right play alternative (see above) has a lot bigger landing zone than most people think when seen from the tees. Also the carry is not that long, from the yellows its (only) 210 yards. But still I have hit most of my balls in the water when I have played the hole via this route. The reason is the fact that the lake edge is running almost parallel to the shot, so that any tendency to hook means a lost ball. Still I have heard of others that have had a 65% success rate playing via the right.



The bowl shaped green is one of the most forgiving of the greens at Swinkelsche, somewhat compensating for all the other aforementioned difficulties.

Both "fix" options mentioned by Mark are good ones, however my preference would be to make the carry option easier. This can be done by making the bunker smaller, the landing area longer, or both.

[Frank Pont]

Frank,
How did you end up deciding to build a dune instead of just a bunker on the right side of the fairway?  Was this to really force a safe or aggressive tee shot?

The dune was an accident, originally I had planned a hill with pine trees there (see 3d visualisations below)









When we started building I realized that these trees would make the play for the average player far too difficult, and opted instead for a sandy waste area in the shape of a dune. In the end 5 shapers worked on the dune, and I am still not happy with the end result  . Plan is to seed the dune with heather and fescue this fall and see how it develops next year. Maybe we should read the signs, just give up and turn it into fairway  


PS. Notice how the bunkering on 7 has also evolved from the plan to what was built.

[Adam Lawrence]

The carry tee shot is very hard for sure, but the reward for going over that way is commensurately huge. Fresh off a perfect drive across the water on the previous hole, I tried it, only to lose the shot to the right and finish just above the water in the sandy waste. For the hell of it I threw a ball down in the fairway where a brave, but not outstanding drive would have finished, and was amazed how short the shot in was - only a gentle sand wedge to a front pin. As Frank says, the green is quite gathering too, so even if the flag is further back, and you have to carry the bunker, it's less scary than it looks. The only thing that would concern me is hitting a beauty and running out of fairway. Doubt I'd try it wih a medal card in my pocket, but I think I would in most other circumstances.

[John Mayhugh]

Adam's post reminds me of how difficult it is to get away from the stroke or medal play mentality.  Thinking of the 8th as a match play hole, you get all sorts of possibilities.  And it's still plenty playable as a par 4.5 if the scorecard is important.


Interesting to see how the 7th and 8th evolved in the field.  Thanks for that.  I think the trees in the waste areas could have been a cool look, but agree about playability.

[Josh Tarble]

From Frank's tour, this was the hole I was most looking forward seeing discussed - in theory it looks like the best hole on the course.

 From the overhead and Frank's shot above, I don't see how I would do anything other than go for the aggressive line - ever.  The reward is so huge, and I would be just as likely to be in trouble hitting a conservative shot.  Hopefully I can get over one day and play it.

[Mark Pearce]

Josh,

I gather from posts elsewhere that you hit the ball a good distance.  We played the hole from the yellow tees, so a required carry of 210 yards.  On the day there was a breeze in our faces.  Probably not a club but maybe a half club.  One player in our group (my memory as to which rounds I played with who isn't great, but I think Ward Peyronin who hits the ball pretty well but not elite distances) tried three times and lost three balls in the water.  I imagine for you no other route makes sense (you'd be hitting an iron down the safe line) than taking on the carry.  I drive the ball about 230/240 and wouldn't take that shot on in a medal without a strong helping wind.  Now, in a match, if the hole came later in the round.....

[Frank Pont]

From Frank's tour, this was the hole I was most looking forward seeing discussed - in theory it looks like the best hole on the course.

Josh, this has been one of the most bafling things of being a golf architect, the fact that what people like is all over the map. You think it could be maybe the best hole on the course and Mark thinks its the wordt hole on the course. You both could be right, it just depends on what you are looking for in a hole. And then keep in mind you are both well read GCA interested golfers  

I am probably more in Mark's camp, it is not one of the better holes on the course, but it sure as hell is fun, and i am also pretty sure one you will remember......

[Frank Pont]

Josh,

I gather from posts elsewhere that you hit the ball a good distance.  We played the hole from the yellow tees, so a required carry of 210 yards.  On the day there was a breeze in our faces.  Probably not a club but maybe a half club.  One player in our group (my memory as to which rounds I played with who isn't great, but I think Ward Peyronin who hits the ball pretty well but not elite distances) tried three times and lost three balls in the water.  I imagine for you no other route makes sense (you'd be hitting an iron down the safe line) than taking on the carry.  I drive the ball about 230/240 and wouldn't take that shot on in a medal without a strong helping wind.  Now, in a match, if the hole came later in the round.....

Mark,

I played this hole with a Dutch pro on the secondary US Tour from the blacks,. He tried the cut off twice hitting his driver, with no wind, and was just on the edge of the water left of the bunker once and in the water over the landspit right of the bunker the second shot. He seriously said he would probably aim at the bunker if he would play it again, because it was the safest option in his mind and he only had a 100 m in.

[David Davis]

Frank,

Good memory almost. I actually hit a faded drive, really wanted to go for the cut off but was having a very good round so decided to play it safe. I will say that a faded drive for me on the hole really takes the water out of play and I hit an 8 iron approach from 137 meters that just caught the front of the green. I liked this hole for the most part with the exception of the shaping of the dune on the right side of the fairway. As I mentioned, in general I'm not a big fan of water hazards on these inland links type courses but I understand much of that was out of your control. I do think it's a fair hole and the cut off point is certainly reachable although requires a long carry. The point is to sucker people into going for it and I think it does the job well, I'd be curious to know how many people stand on the tee and see that as an option, it is hard to judge the distance so if there was a sign there saying, why not take the short cut, it's only 180 meter carry (or whatever it is) more people would go for it. Had you not scared me out of it with the comments about Juriaan's attempt I would of likely went for it even with a good round going. It would not of been the wise option for me in terms of risk reward given I hit an 8 iron on the approach.

[Frank Pont]

David, I think you might be overestiating the dutch male golfers intelligence, from what I have heard from the guys at swinkelsche almost all men go for it (and virtually no women) so no suckering needed... 

[Josh Tarble]

Mark and Frank,
I'm sure the wind makes a huge difference and it may be the case of judging the hole through photographs so appreciate both of your responses.  In any case, it appears to me that Frank has done a good job in making the "easy" shot just hard enough and the "hard" shot just easy enough to make both alternatives viable, and looks to be a fun hole either way you play it.

[John Mayhugh]

Frank,
Did you ever think of leaving water out of play entirely, or were you forced to use it in a few spots because it had to be distributed around the course?  It seems to make sense to use it if you're required to have it anyway.

[Joe Perches]

From Frank's tour, this was the hole I was most looking forward seeing discussed - in theory it looks like the best hole on the course.

t is not one of the better holes on the course, but it sure as hell is fun, and i am also pretty sure one you will remember......

It was the most interesting hole I saw on the drawings.

If it's so fun, how can it not be one of the better holes?

[Frank Pont]

Frank,
Did you ever think of leaving water out of play entirely, or were you forced to use it in a few spots because it had to be distributed around the course?  It seems to make sense to use it if you're required to have it anyway.

I would have only used the stream winding through the property if I could have gotten away with it. But the water authorities had imposed a number of lakes that we had to put in at specific locations with minimum sizes. These were the aqua range, the lake between 7 and 8 and the lakes in front of the clubhouse near green 18.

Unfortunately the required sizes did not allow me to stay away from the lakes like I was able to do at hole 2, 11 and 13, where water is present but doesn't really come into play.

Another thing is that water is commercially very popular with golfers in Holland. Not putting any water in the course would give a course a disadvantage in the eyes of most customers.....

[Frank Pont]

From Frank's tour, this was the hole I was most looking forward seeing discussed - in theory it looks like the best hole on the course.

t is not one of the better holes on the course, but it sure as hell is fun, and i am also pretty sure one you will remember......

It was the most interesting hole I saw on the drawings.

If it's so fun, how can it not be one of the better holes?

Joe, it would be kind of strange for me to be arguing with you that some of the holes at Swinkelsche are no good  

But seriously, I just personally like a number of other holes more than others.
I have a sweet spot for holes 3, 9, 13, 16 and 17.

Holes 8 is very different and a lot of fun, but also has its weakness, the biggest one being the number of balls I would lose on the hole when I would be playing the hole aggressively day in day out.

[Frank Pont]

Some pictures of the green of hole 8. As said this green is quite receptive in that it is bowl shaped, the only difficulty being that it slopes slightly to the back.

Here you see the green from the right front side



Here from the left front side



And two pics from behind the green






The last picture also clearly shows the tightening role the forest plays for shots into the green from the "safer" left route of the tee

[John Mayhugh]

Hole 9     Par 3, 144/173
The second par 3 hole, cut our of the forest. Virtually no shaping was done here, like in most of the other holes cut out of the forest. Because it was the first hole we finished it was being used as putting green when I made the picture.





An attractive hole with the green surrounded by trees, though it didn't feel narrow from the tees we played from.  As you can see from the hole diagram, the green is angled and well-guarded on the right.  There is a bit more room to carry the front left bunker and still be sort of the green.  If I remember correctly, the right side of the green is higher than the left.

[Frank Pont]

This was the first hole built on the whole project. For some strange reason we were allowed earlier into the corridors of the wooded areas than we were in the agricultural fields. Dutch/EU regulations never ceases to amaze me.....

As stated very little shaping was done on this hole, I will dig upsome building stage pics later on.

The hole has one of the flatter and more subtle holes on the course, is defended by a classic diagonal of bunkers, with the left one quite a bit in front of the green, and therefore the hole almost asks for a fade shot. I like the fact that the pines come in from the left making theat fade shot somewhat uncomfortable, even though they should not really be in play.








Here are some more detailed pics of the green:








Again the interesting thing I learned from this hole is how different the design process is when you are designing in a "real" landscape instead of on flat agricultural land.

On the one hand it is a lot easier because you get to use the interesting landforms rather than having to make them up, on the other hand you are constrained by what is there.

However I think designing on flat ground might be harder from a creative point of view than on existing ground.

[David Davis]

I liked this hole, perhaps one of my favorites. Nice shaping in the green, was already rolling quite well too and everything was going in. I managed 0 putts on this green if I remember correctly, just after you mentioned how difficult my long putt from the fringe was to our far right hole location. Easy birdie in my book, as long as I never play it again.

[Mark Pearce]

One of a really strong set of par 3s.  Nothing showy about this hole but it felt like it could have been on one of the better courses in Surrey.   One of the subtler greens but not easy, for all that.