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.


Clyde Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: County Louth/Baltray Changes
« Reply #50 on: November 18, 2016, 11:35:11 AM »
Thanks for the comments/photos...

The 5th hole is still a good hole, though given Ian's passionate response, perhaps not as good (great!) as it once was. Bearing in mind it was November, there was no fear of barely being able to hang onto the green.

It appears that they have held up the back-left corner of the green, blending into a created mound. This has emphasised the little step tier, where it seemingly used to roll over the back with Simpson's typical ease and elegance.



« Last Edit: November 18, 2016, 12:02:15 PM by Clyde Johnson »

Philip Spogard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: County Louth/Baltray Changes
« Reply #51 on: November 21, 2016, 06:33:57 AM »
I just wanted to add a few comments as we have been advising on the changes to hole 5 and the final design.


I fully agree with Ian's analysis. The 5th hole is (and was) a wonderful par 3. The ONLY reason for adjusting the design was purely agronomical. The severity of the green surface - combined with modern mowing heights and the amount of traffic the course receives - resulted in a situation where there were really only 2 pin positions on the green. This resulted in severe turf issues as the wear and tear on the green could not be spread out enough to sustain a healthy turf.


As I saw it we were faced with 3 options:


The first would be to design a new 'modern' green with plenty of pin positions - disregarding the original, fantastic Simpson green. This was taken off the table (by myself) before even considering it further.


The second would be to respect the original green as much as possible, by adding the smallest possible extension to the green, which allowed the creation of additional pin positions.


The third would be to 'scale up' the green, by basically redoing the green but making it 30% bigger.


As I saw it, the second option was the most respectful to the philosophy of the hole, Mr. Simpson and the existing green. By taking this approach 90% of the original green surface remains EXACTLY as it has always been.


The philosophy of the hole is - in my opinion - 95% intact. We did not suggest or propose changes to the bunkering, as - like put forward by Ian - the most interesting aspect of the hole is the bunkering on the right, the severity of the green and the runoff on the left. We carried out a small extension on the back left of the green which now provides the hole with 5-6 pin positions and the ability to create a healthy turf.


The holes main defence and conundrum remains exactly the same as the original design provided - perhaps you can even argue that the runoff on the left is even more in play now.


We were faced with a safety problem as the drive on hole 6 is very tight to the green on hole 5. This resulted in the mound on the left being slightly more angled than we perhaps would have liked (even though Simpson himself talks about, if I remember correctly, that the only place where shapes can be unnatural and steep in appearance is on the back of greens). However, all shaping done near the green is directly inspired by the shaping found on the back right of the green (which can bee seen on the old before photo). To have this authentic shaping to use as a reference helped us achieve a blending in with the old part of the green. (This method of enlarging greens have been used historically on the course as well on other holes, such as the 6th).


Another option would of course be to mow the green at a different height and thereby influence the severity of the slopes, but that is not an option deemed realistic.


It is worth noting as well, that we had a complete 3D survey done of the 5th green before the work started, so if - at some point - a solution is found to sustain the original green with only 2 pin positions, it could relatively easily be converted back to the original design.


I am myself a huge admirer of Tom Simpson and we have been consulting the club now for close to 5 years. We have helped tweak the 2nd and 18th holes (both having undergone massive changes over the years) to offer more strategy in tune with Simpsons original design philosophies. We are currently working on a masterplan for the entire course, addressing mostly traffic issues to and from tees/greens and a few alterations mostly relating to safety.


At the moment we are also involved in adding a chipping facility and a complete transformation of the entry road, which is being changed from a shaded, parkland theme to a full, open 'linksland area'. About 30-40 trees have been removed and the clubhouse and practice area now opens up onto the golf course and not the trees. Where you could see 20yards ahead before - views now open up to the towering dunes 1000 yards away.


I wish I knew how to post photos as I could share some with you.

Philip Spogard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: County Louth/Baltray Changes
« Reply #52 on: November 21, 2016, 06:44:14 AM »
I don't want to spam this page with Ads, but you can see quite a few recent photos from County Louth on our Facebook page (Search for Spogard & VanderVaart).

Ben Stephens

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: County Louth/Baltray Changes
« Reply #53 on: November 21, 2016, 10:02:10 AM »

Philip


I remember playing this hole during the RIBA Architects Inter Regional Tournament in 2014.


Then it was easy to see the difference between the old and new parts of the green. I can remember the new green having a shallow mound in the middle part of the new section - was there any reason why it is there?


The new 17th just opened before this event.


Cheers
Ben



I just wanted to add a few comments as we have been advising on the changes to hole 5 and the final design.


I fully agree with Ian's analysis. The 5th hole is (and was) a wonderful par 3. The ONLY reason for adjusting the design was purely agronomical. The severity of the green surface - combined with modern mowing heights and the amount of traffic the course receives - resulted in a situation where there were really only 2 pin positions on the green. This resulted in severe turf issues as the wear and tear on the green could not be spread out enough to sustain a healthy turf.


As I saw it we were faced with 3 options:


The first would be to design a new 'modern' green with plenty of pin positions - disregarding the original, fantastic Simpson green. This was taken off the table (by myself) before even considering it further.


The second would be to respect the original green as much as possible, by adding the smallest possible extension to the green, which allowed the creation of additional pin positions.


The third would be to 'scale up' the green, by basically redoing the green but making it 30% bigger.


As I saw it, the second option was the most respectful to the philosophy of the hole, Mr. Simpson and the existing green. By taking this approach 90% of the original green surface remains EXACTLY as it has always been.


The philosophy of the hole is - in my opinion - 95% intact. We did not suggest or propose changes to the bunkering, as - like put forward by Ian - the most interesting aspect of the hole is the bunkering on the right, the severity of the green and the runoff on the left. We carried out a small extension on the back left of the green which now provides the hole with 5-6 pin positions and the ability to create a healthy turf.


The holes main defence and conundrum remains exactly the same as the original design provided - perhaps you can even argue that the runoff on the left is even more in play now.


We were faced with a safety problem as the drive on hole 6 is very tight to the green on hole 5. This resulted in the mound on the left being slightly more angled than we perhaps would have liked (even though Simpson himself talks about, if I remember correctly, that the only place where shapes can be unnatural and steep in appearance is on the back of greens). However, all shaping done near the green is directly inspired by the shaping found on the back right of the green (which can bee seen on the old before photo). To have this authentic shaping to use as a reference helped us achieve a blending in with the old part of the green. (This method of enlarging greens have been used historically on the course as well on other holes, such as the 6th).


Another option would of course be to mow the green at a different height and thereby influence the severity of the slopes, but that is not an option deemed realistic.


It is worth noting as well, that we had a complete 3D survey done of the 5th green before the work started, so if - at some point - a solution is found to sustain the original green with only 2 pin positions, it could relatively easily be converted back to the original design.


I am myself a huge admirer of Tom Simpson and we have been consulting the club now for close to 5 years. We have helped tweak the 2nd and 18th holes (both having undergone massive changes over the years) to offer more strategy in tune with Simpsons original design philosophies. We are currently working on a masterplan for the entire course, addressing mostly traffic issues to and from tees/greens and a few alterations mostly relating to safety.


At the moment we are also involved in adding a chipping facility and a complete transformation of the entry road, which is being changed from a shaded, parkland theme to a full, open 'linksland area'. About 30-40 trees have been removed and the clubhouse and practice area now opens up onto the golf course and not the trees. Where you could see 20yards ahead before - views now open up to the towering dunes 1000 yards away.


I wish I knew how to post photos as I could share some with you.

Philip Spogard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: County Louth/Baltray Changes
« Reply #54 on: November 21, 2016, 12:22:17 PM »

Hi Ben.


The mound you refer to was an original part of the old green complex. However, it used to flank the left side of the green.


As the fifth green was a sensitive part of the project, we decided to respect the original contours where we could and make it an integral part of the new green surface. In that way it would still influence shots like it had done in the past - deflecting some shots on and off the green.


The extension to the green is actually very small. Not much more than 100m2 I would guess - but it has had a remarkable effect on pin positions.


The new part of the green settled slightly in the period after the construction, so the mound became too dominant and as a result it was softened a bit last year, so it will have changed slightly since you played it. The turf has matured more now as well.


The alternate 17th is now in play during the winter and we are looking at adding a few punkers to toughen it up so it can compare more to the existing 17th (which is mostly regarded because of its difficulty).


Cheers,
Philip






Philip


I remember playing this hole during the RIBA Architects Inter Regional Tournament in 2014.


Then it was easy to see the difference between the old and new parts of the green. I can remember the new green having a shallow mound in the middle part of the new section - was there any reason why it is there?


The new 17th just opened before this event.


Cheers
Ben