Should Turnberry new 9th be a short par 4 or a long par 3?

[Ben Stephens]

Having seen Trump/Mackenzie and Ebert proposals for a hugely revised Turnberry Ailsa course - most of it looks an improvement to the current course which we will see next week during the Women's British Open

One thing made me uncomfortable is the 4 par 3 holes in the first 11 holes and having 5 par 3's which no other Open course on the Rota has.

Would the 9th be a more exciting hole if it was a short par 4 utilising most of the coastline and making it a lateral water hazard so players if they go in the sandy hazard at the base they have to play out of it

Here is a quick sketch of the proposed hole which would keep the rectangular stone wall as an OOB feature of the hole. Mackenzie and Ebert's proposal completely removes the wall which I think would be a shame to do so.



The hole would be around 290-310 yards and I think it would be the most exciting short par 4 in the UK eclipsing the 10th at the Belfry as the most well known

[Pat Burke]

For the Open, obviously a par three, you know, to protect par.

[Doug Siebert]

Damn looks like a scary hole. I think I'll play a 4 iron off the tee in that middle line, but all power to those who dare to aim at the green with beach left and OB right!

I think that's a great hole, but haven't seen the Trump alternative. I think I'm probably going to miss the holes that are being changed, but I'm glad I got to play the 'old' Turnberry a couple times.

[Ben Stephens]

For the Open, obviously a par three, you know, to protect par.

I agree Pat - maybe they should reduce one of the new par 5s into a long par 4 just for the Open - to protect par if this hole became a short par 4


This hole prob range from a 2 up to an 8 which is more extreme than the par 3 proposal as like Doug said its scary - isn't it supposed to find the bravest golfer


Also where the green is here brings the lighthouse more in view also like the current 9th hole it is bunker less and also it brings the wow factor up another level

[Ben Stephens]

Damn looks like a scary hole. I think I'll play a 4 iron off the tee in that middle line, but all power to those who dare to aim at the green with beach left and OB right!

I think that's a great hole, but haven't seen the Trump alternative. I think I'm probably going to miss the holes that are being changed, but I'm glad I got to play the 'old' Turnberry a couple times.

Doug


Here is a link to the proposals for Ailsa course by Mackenzie and Ebert


http://www.mackenzieandebert.co.uk/Downloads/Proposals%20for%20the%20Ailsa%20Course%20at%20Trump%20Turnberry%20Booklet%202015%20LR.pdf


Cheers Ben

[Jon Wiggett]

Don't think you need the OOB over the wall as the hole would be pretty much impossible in a stiff side wind. Much better short par 4 than 3. Yes the par 3 might be spectacular but devoid of strategy and it should be about the quality of the hole not how spectacular it looks.

Why worry about protecting par? Anyway, I suspect Turnberry might have seen its last Open already for quite a while.

Jon

[Alex Miller]

Agree with John, keep the wall up but no need to make it OB. Perhaps a fearsome bunker or two built right up against it? Could make for a unique and penal hazard.


Also worth noting on pages 58/59 of that pdf Ben linked to is a very cool natural greensite at the base of the lighthouse/10th tee not far from where Ben's sketch is.

[Frank Pont]

Ben, really like your design, par 4 is much better than par 3.

Only question I have is the angle of the green, its now 7 to 1 o'clock.
What if the green was angled 4 to 10 o'clock?

[Jim Hoak]

What about the traditional principle that you don't have out-of-bounds inside a course?  I don't feel strongly abut that principle, but maybe others do.

[Marty Bonnar]

Yeah, I'm not a massive fan of internal OB's. How about just knocking a few random holes in the wall a la Renaissance? Add an element of luck and chance.
Nice idea though.
F.

[Pete_Pittock]

Why is the area currently out of bounds? Different ownership?  Looks  like a car park for the lighthouse.
Never mind.
Having watched the aerial of the proposed changes, I see that the proposed par 3 takes out part of the enclosure,
with the back part of the green within it.

[Jim Nugent]

Does anyone have a photo of how Ben's proposed par 4 would look from the tee to the green? 

[Doug Siebert]

Don't think you need the OOB over the wall as the hole would be pretty much impossible in a stiff side wind. Much better short par 4 than 3. Yes the par 3 might be spectacular but devoid of strategy and it should be about the quality of the hole not how spectacular it looks.

Why worry about protecting par? Anyway, I suspect Turnberry might have seen its last Open already for quite a while.

Jon

The crosswind is a valid objection. I think it could be handled by contouring on the left side for the approach and to the left of the green to allow a running shot to be played from the fairway (that may already be in Ben's design, I'm not really sure how to read the little lines to the left...)

That would also hide the view of the green from the tee, adding a bit of blindness when going for it, but also allowing for the possibility of a fortuitous bounce to add temptation to do so.

[Ben Stephens]

Here are some images from the tee to green which I have photoshopped

Existing view




Proposed view to new hole - without sand in the craggy rock faces




Proposed view to new hole - with sand in the craggy rock faces



Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

Ben, really like your design, par 4 is much better than par 3.

Only question I have is the angle of the green, its now 7 to 1 o'clock.
What if the green was angled 4 to 10 o'clock?

Hi Frank

I think it looks better from 7 to 1 o'clock similar to the 14th at Ganton and it is nice to have the green parallel to the rock wall a la Pit at North Berwick.

I can understand why you suggest it to be 4 to 10 o'clock - would this be more manufactured like the 2nd at NGLA

The Open rota courses really lack a short par 4 which is spectacular and this could be the one.

It would be a shame to get rid of historical rock walls I am a bit surprised that the designers have not incorporated it into the design

We could have it as a hazard rather than out of bounds which can be difficult to hold the ball chipping over the wall if the flag was close to the wall.

Cheers
Ben

[Thomas Dai]

Nice Ben. Well done for sharing. Would the sand in the craggy rock faces blow out? The top of the lighthouse would make a great location for a webcam.
atb

[Ben Stephens]

Nice Ben. Well done for sharing. Would the sand in the craggy rock faces blow out? The top of the lighthouse would make a great location for a webcam.
atb

The sand at the rocks could be blowouts - would take ages to draw that in Photoshop

Yes the top of the lighthouse would be a great location for a webcam

[Thomas Dai]

Perhaps I described the situation inaccurately, but by "blow out" I was meaning the wind etc could blow away all the sand so there'd be none left. For example, a links course where I used to play a lot installed a new bunker behind a green. Within a week a strong wind blew all the sand out of the bunker.
atb

[Jim Nugent]

Ben, looks spectacular.  How long is the carry if you try to drive the green... and why do you feel you need those bunkers? 

[Ben Stephens]

Ben, looks spectacular.  How long is the carry if you try to drive the green... and why do you feel you need those bunkers?

I would reckon it's 250 ish yards to carry and the front of the green would be 20-30 yards on


It's not just about the carry it's also the accuracy to get on the green as missing left or right is quote severe punishment


I am giving you all your views whether it looks better with or without the bunkers I would go without them as the craggy rock faces are already visually intimidating   and it looks more natural this way


This hole would give Turnberry Ailsa more variation because the new proposals show that 2 or 3 par 3s are too similar

[Ben Stephens]

Perhaps I described the situation inaccurately, but by "blow out" I was meaning the wind etc could blow away all the sand so there'd be none left. For example, a links course where I used to play a lot installed a new bunker behind a green. Within a week a strong wind blew all the sand out of the bunker.
atb

No probs I prefer the look without the bunkers and the rock wall as a unusual hazard

[Brad Tufts]

Love this idea.


Open-wise, I would think you would need to make the green small and the surrounds treacherous, as 250 carry and 290 hole would be a long iron for some of those guys in benign or downwind conditions.


What is the prevailing wind at the site?  I only played it once in 1999 and I believe #9 played downwind (this was in July).

[Jim Nugent]

Maybe it's still a par 3, a modern-length version of #16 at CPC.  You might have to open up things a bit around the green in that case. 

[Niall C]

Ben


In comparison to Martin Eberts design, how far back is your green ? I've no objection to the hole being a par 3 but from what I've seen of Martins design, there doesn't seem to be much of a bail out if you decide not to go for it, which I think is something you have going for you with your design. Assuming his green is closer to the edge of the rocks then I think that much would depend on how receptive the front of the green was to lower trajectory shots from shorter hitters.


Niall

[Ben Stephens]

Ben


In comparison to Martin Eberts design, how far back is your green ? I've no objection to the hole being a par 3 but from what I've seen of Martins design, there doesn't seem to be much of a bail out if you decide not to go for it, which I think is something you have going for you with your design. Assuming his green is closer to the edge of the rocks then I think that much would depend on how receptive the front of the green was to lower trajectory shots from shorter hitters.


Niall

My green location is much further left about 30/40 yards further up and closer to new 10th tee than Martin Ebert's proposal which completely removes the rock stone walls and re shape the flattish area


I propose to keep the rock stone wall and use it as a hazard feature to the right of the green which means that players if they miss right will need to chip over it and it will be harder if the flag was close to it


Having seen the photos showing view across the rocks makes me feel that Martin Ebert's green will be semi blind


Still not comfortable in having 4 par 3s in a 8 hole sequence for a major championship course Turnberry is perfect place to create a great short par four that could scare the pros