[Dan_Belden]

What is the equivalent of a 390 yard par 4,or a 220 yard par 3 that was built in the 20's in todays modern game.  For example a 390 yard hole today is almost a driveable par 4 in todays game.  A 220 yard par 3 in the 20's was surely a brassie hole, and today it is a four iron.  
   I bring this up as it relates to the work being done at Brookside CC in Canton. More specificaly the work being done to the championship course. One of the things I noticed was that with the new yardages we will have only one par 4 under 400 yards.  That would seem a little extreme, but as most of the holes at BCC play shorter than their yardage indicates it seems right.  Our objective for laying out the back tees was to try and restore the shot that we felt Ross was trying to create.  For example our 10th hole drops about 30 to 40 feet from the tee to the beginning of the fairway.  The hole currently is 390 yards, and the expert player usually has less than 120 yards to the green.   If you take the 20 yards we are adding to the tee, that should leave a shot of 140 yards or less.  Yet I think there is a stigma about not having any holes playing less than 400 yards on the card.  
   Another example is our 4th hole.  When Ross built this hole in the 20's it measured 223 yards on the card.  A classic par 3 and a half.  It seems to me that todays equivalent is a 250 yard par 3. Yet when you suggest this to most members, some with alot of golf knowledge, they freak out.  
   I would very much like to hear some feedback.  And remember we are talking about the championship course.  

[ACR]

I don't know if you can even do that math.  In the 1920s, it was common for a par 4 to require Driver-3i from even the longest hitters (think of Hogan's 1i into the 18th at Merion).  The greens, however, were at speeds that could receive a 3i.  If you really wanted to build a course that played like that for the modern pros, you would have to make every par 4 north of 500 yards.  Tiger or Sergio or Vijay can easily hit Driver-3i 575 yards.  True three shot par 5s would have to be 700+ yards and all par 3s would be longer than 185.  If you can find some land where a 8,900 yard golf course can be routed then you can give it a shot.

[paul cowley]

shivas i agree.........for the longer pros ,290 yds  is a green light carry bunker....bunkers in the 295- 320 yd range ,positioning comes back into play [at least for now ]....

[Forrest Richardson]

Actually, a 220-yard par-3 back then is about the same — on many days. With no irrigation and very, very firm ground, a 220-yard par-3 could be played any number of ways, inclusing a well struck mid iron which would run and run and run and run. The difference is primarily that today, the 220-yard par-3 is played only with one or two clubs variation per player — and not the diverse variety of clubs you might have used as a 1920s vintage player: Driving club on a wet day, mid iron on a dry day, etc.

In Scotland many years ago I played a 480-yard par-5 with driver and then wedge to within 10-feet. Today, the same combination of clubs might be used by the better player (not me!) — but not because of ground conditions...rather, due to the increased ball and club dynamic.

[ed_getka]

Dan,
  I remember there was water to the right of #4, but did it cross in front of the landing area? What would be the carry if water is in play? I know I didn't even think about water to carry when I played the hole, so I assume the carry would still be manageable for most players if the tees were moved back.
   How is the project coming along? I hope you get a chance to post some pix along the way if you have time.

[Dan_Belden]

Forrest:  With firm turf conditions, wouldn't lengthening the hole add more variety.  It seems to me from talking to many of our older members the hole was designed with a brassie in mind.  The green is open in front, with a creek running down the left side of the green, cutting in front of the hole at around 190 yards.   Honestly the hole is a 4 or 5 iron now.  I remember in college making my first hole in one there with a 1-iron.  That was in 1989.  If I hit 1 iron there now I would hit it 30 yards over the green.  
   As for carry yardages I agree that is a huge change.  With drivers desinged to reduce spin and increase launch angle, guys are hitting it further than ever. However, remember how alot of guys had trouble reaching the fairway at the 10th at Bethpage.  They are not carrying quite as far as you think.  

[Dan_Belden]

Hey Ed:   The project is coming along very well, and we are currently ahead of schedule.  I must say too, that I am very impressed with Brian Silva.  He is first rate in every sense of the word.  
   The reason you probably don't remember the creek crossing number 4 is that when Jones remodeld the tee, he cut off the view of the creek in front.  A situation that will be remedied shortly.  
   My thought on that hole is to take it back to a par 3 and half.  I don't think there is anything wrong with an expert player having to hit a 3 wood on a par 3.  And with the fairway being expanded in front of the green, one should be able to play a wide variety of shots.  
  As for the project itself it is really coming along.  We have probably taken out 500 trees on the front nine alone.  You can now see all the way to two green from the first tee.  Along the left side of number six, all the trees save one have been removed, as well as all the trees on the right side of the green.  Interestingly enough, the members seem delighted with the new views of their golf course.  The bunker work is proceeding well, and Brian seems really pleased with the shaping.    I will try to post some pics this week.  

[ed_getka]

Dan,
  Thats awesome that the members are enjoying the new views with the trees being removed. That is some of the most beautiful rolling property I have seen in my travels and I can just imagine how much better it looks with 500 trees taken out. How are the green expansions coming out? Any suprising discoveries along the way? I look forward to hearing more as the project moves along. Thanks for taking the time to post.

[jimhealey24]

If you read descriptions of matches played in the 20's, they often describe the clubs used.  Now, factor in that the grounds today are generally softer than 80 years ago, what with better irrigation vs. not much at all in that era except hand watering, you have today's 3wood being equivalent to the driver then.  There are many instances where it was said Walter Travis hit two shots that carried 500 yards.  In 1913, when Vardon and Ray traveled the country, they often won driving contests with pokes of 280-300 yards.  At the 1921 US Amateur, the winning drive in the contest was 265 yards. I think the differences is much more related to conditioning and how softer the courses are.  They played a "harder" game, allowing for more running after the ball landed in the fairway as a result.  Jim Foulis, winner of the 1896 US Open, is known to have hit drives of 300 yards consistently and was considered one of the longest hitters in the country.  This was with haskell's and hickory.  Things changed in 1928 with the introduction of steel in large numbers, but even in the early 20's, they hit it a fairly long way.

[Forrest Richardson]

Firm conditions adds more variety — period. No matter the length of a hole.

[BCrosby]

Until titanium and Pro-V's in the late 90's, irrigation may have had the most profound impact of anything on the game during the 20th century.

As irrigation was laid in the 50's and 60's, courses:

(i) got longer (effectively),

(ii) favored the aerial game, and

(iii) distinguished the rough - the unirrigated surfaces - from the fairways. Roughs became more delineated and more penal. It made sense for the first time to treat rough as something like a hazard. (I don't believe that the USGA made it a policy to grow-up rough in Open set-ups as a check on scoring until after the advent of irrigation. Anyone have any contrary information?)

Related to the foregoing, to what extent was the rise of the high trajectory game played by Jack Nicklaus vs. the low trajectory game played by Arnold Palmer a result of the impact of irrigation?

Arnie developed a run-out game better suited to unirrigated courses. Jack came along just later enough to learn to play on lusher, irrigated courses. And, thus, developed his trademark high fade.
 
Bob

[Patrick_Mucci]

BCrosby,

Interesting thoughts.

Didn't Arnie's strong grip predispose him to the hook ?
Is that the way that Deacon taught him, or did he just thrive on the power game he could produce with that grip and swing ?

Didn't Sarazen say that his swing would never hold up ?

Do you feel it was the advent of irrigation systems or Nicklaus's flying right elbow that created his high trajectory ?

When did Scioto implement their irrigation system ?

What were Jack Grout's theories on ball flight ?

Can any Buckeye's enlighten us ?

[BCrosby]

Pat -

My point is not that Nicklaus consciously developed a high trajectory game because of irrigation at Scioto. In fact, I doubt that was the case. He developed the swing he was comfortable with as a kid. With help from Grout.

My hypothesis is that lusher, irrigated courses "selected for" players with higher trajectory games. They favored a Nicklaus-type swing.

By the same token, the new irrigation regimes would have "selected against" low ball hitters of the older generations. People like Hagan, Sarazen, Jones, Hogan, Palmer, etc.

If my conjecture is right, then Bobby Jones would not have been a dominant player on irrigated courses and Jack Nicklaus would not have been a dominant player on un-irrigated courses.

(My guess is that they both would have been very good players, but less than dominant players. Again. because their swing type would have been a bad match for courses of a different era.)

We'll never be able to test that. But it's an interesting thought experiment.

Bob

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jack has said he developed the (high) fade at Scioto because the front nine was an outside loop with OB right - he teed right, aimed left, and faded back right for control.  Has never mentioned irrigation, and in fact, in the 50s when he developed there, irrigation was likely a single row quick coupler system that didn't make it nearly as lush as it would be today.

[Jeff_Brauer]

BTW,

I was just reading somewhere about a memorial plaque to Hogan's play at the 6th at Carnoustie.  They had some young bucks play the hole with wooden woods and balls from that era and their average distance was, I believe, 239 yards!  

There is apparently some dispute now whether Hogan ever played up the narrow slot between the bunker and fence.

Anyone else read that, or do I have to cut down the salsa intensity I prefer with my Mexican food?

[Gary_Nelson]

Jeff,

I played Carnoustie in 1995 with a caddie who was 70+ years old.  He told me he watched all five rounds by Ben Hogan (practice + competition).  He said the wind was blowing from left to right (towards the fairway) and that Hogan aimed over the fence-line and the ball drifted back to the narrow slot of fairway between the fence & the bunkers.  Same shot... five rounds in a row.

Maybe this is an urban legend but he seemed believable.  That's my favorite memory of the trip... hearing this guy go on and on about the Open championship.  

Gary "dreaming about my next Scotland trip" Nelson

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()