Riviera's 18th as a Driveable Par 4?

[Doug Wright]

I read on Golfweek that the USGA is considering having the 18th at Riviera be a driveable par 4 during some of the match play portion of the US Amateur.  I like driveable par 4s and appreciate some creative thinking by the USGA, but they already have one of the best driveable holes in golf in the 10th. This seems odd to me. The blind tee shot up the hill to the sloped fairway at Riviera 18 is challenging, as is the second shot, and those would be pretty important shots to eliminate, particularly with a match on the line. Thoughts?

[Tom_Doak]

Square peg, round hole.  Genius!

[jeffwarne]

Mayber their president is sharing the kool aid?


No worries though, at the rate they're going all par 4's will soon be driveable, but hey why should we remember what's left of the architectural intent when we can instead glorify the setup guy?

[Kalen Braley]

That'd be about a 350 yard trudge from 17 green to what looks like the forward tee on Google maps...which I guess they'd have to walk anyways....

[Peter Pallotta]

Quick - get a couple of people in the USGA who hate architecture to take over. The ones who say they love it haven't shown it in over 3O years now. And I blame many of you guys here and on Geoff's site for that - you were so thrilled to see Tom Meeks go, so enamoured of any kind of short Par 4, and so praising of Mike Davis' early meddling and showy tricks that it all went to their heads and now they can't stop themselves. They are literally incapable of picking a classic site and then leaving it the f--k alone.
I hope you've all learned an important lesson: be careful in the demands for deforestation and your love of clear-cutting lest the USGA latches onto the idea and in 20 years has every course looking like Sand Hills and Ballyneal

[Joe Bausch]

Hmmm.

In case you missed what I said before:

Hmmm.

[Matthew Essig]

Riviera already has one of the most, if not THE most, famous drivable par 4s in the world.....


Dumb idea. Period.

[Matt_Cohn]

[Howard Riefs]

“Should they be playing for the back tee? Probably,” Tournament director Ben Kimball told Fox Sports Radio. “But there’s also a shorter alternate tee at about 325 yards to a front hole location that could be very entertaining down the stretch, too, for matches that make it that far. … One of the most iconic holes in golf, then you shorten it to an almost drivable par-4 option; is that the right thing to do? I don’t necessarily know.
“But given that it’s match play, you have a little bit of flexibility to try and advance some things that you normally wouldn’t if it was the U.S. Open or Senior Open. Riviera provides a lot of flexibility in the setup. We’re excited about enhancing that flexibility throughout the course of the U.S. Amateur.”

Related stories...


http://golfweek.com/2017/07/26/rivieras-18th-hole-could-play-as-drivable-par-4-during-u-s-amateur/


http://www.golfdigest.com/story/is-what-the-usga-thinking-about-doing-to-rivieras-18th-at-the-us-amateur-crazy-or-brilliant/amp

[Peter Pallotta]

Interesting distinction, Howard - the match play vs stroke play argument. 
I've read for years here people asking what makes for a good match play hole.
I could never make much sense of the question.
A good golf hole is just that; and whether in match or stroke play I'm always trying to get the ball into the hole in the fewest possible strokes, given my skill level. 
In my own experience, I've never found the (supposed) differences that others seem to between playing a golf hole in a match and playing it for a total score.   
But what the distinction allows for, intentionally or not, is the kind of tinkering/set-up that's based on the belief that something 'more' has to be done to the golf course/design - something to make it better/more interesting. 
In my mind, the 325 yard tee is not (as Mr Kimball says) an "alternate" tee, and was never intended as such; it's a "forward" tee, part of 18 other forward tees that were placed there so that certain golfers could as meaningfully engage with the architecture as their longer hitting compatriots.
Peter

[Tim Leahy]

It could be interesting though because balls will not come down the hill on the left above the green because of the kikuyu and chiping from a downhill lie from kikuyu would be tough. The front right drops off and there is a tree and trap with more kikuyu. Pretty narrow entrance would favor a fade but then that hillside on the left is in play.

[Sean_A]

I have no idea if playing the 18th from a shorter tee is wise or not...its small beer.  But to get up in arms about this, a situation which does not effect the course long term, then think its ok to narrow fairways for events doesn't make much sense to me. To me, the fairway issue is far more important because it can and often does effect the course long term. We are at the point now where fairways have been narrowed for so long that folks think this is what was intended by the archie.  We are coming up on (comfortably) two generations of golfers who think 25 yards is a wide fairway. It is not a coincidence that slow play and added rough/narrowed fairways coincide with each other.


Ciao

[Carl Rogers]

Are they under the influence of Top Golf?

[jeffwarne]

I have no idea if playing the 18th from a shorter tee is wise or not...its small beer.  But to get up in arms about this, a situation which does not effect the course long term, then think its ok to narrow fairways for events doesn't make much sense to me. To me, the fairway issue is far more important because it can and often does effect the course long term. We are at the point now where fairways have been narrowed for so long that folks think this is what was intended by the archie.  We are coming up on (comfortably) two generations of golfers who think 25 yards is a wide fairway. It is not a coincidence that slow play and added rough/narrowed fairways coincide with each other.


Ciao

Sean correctly points out that a tee setup issue isn't permanant at least, but then narrowed fairways for an event don't have to be permanant either, but it often does become so as it become a badge of honor.


The reason I'd say it's OK to get "up in arms" about it is that all dumb USGA ideas have the potential to become commonplace and permanant-along with their stupid (supposedly outside the box)thinking.


a dumb idea should be called out-while it can still be considered a dumb idea rather than an accepted permanent condition.
Sadly, the early knockers of hot equipment were considered misguided curmudgeons--now the idea that equipment is completely out of scale for many classic courses is pretty common amongst tournament players (I hear it all the time) and even average golfers---but no one has any about what to do now-and most that could affect change have financial conflicts of interest.


Narrowed fairways and other "par protecting" things that simply slow play are all misguided attempts to deal with the distance genie that was heavily fertilized in the last 15 years.


But why stop there with original thinking?
Why not push a tee back 150 yards on #4 at Rivierra and make it and "undriveable" par 3.
Now that's original thinking.
After all- it's match play.....


 

[Pat Burke]

if they put a tee by the putting green up top, they could gain some needed length for the short 10th


 

[Ted Sturges]

How about restoring the 8th green and cutting down the trees on 13?


TS

[Kalen Braley]

P.S.  I agree that it really doesn't matter thou.  Hell I'd love to see them do a match play at Lincoln Park in San Fran.  That would be must see TV....

[David Wuthrich]

Why ruin a great finishing hole.


Dumb idea!!

[Kalen Braley]

Not saying the hole is in the same class....


But was 14 at Torrey ruined in anyway when the tee was moved up in the US Open?

[Sean_A]

I have no idea if playing the 18th from a shorter tee is wise or not...its small beer.  But to get up in arms about this, a situation which does not effect the course long term, then think its ok to narrow fairways for events doesn't make much sense to me. To me, the fairway issue is far more important because it can and often does effect the course long term. We are at the point now where fairways have been narrowed for so long that folks think this is what was intended by the archie.  We are coming up on (comfortably) two generations of golfers who think 25 yards is a wide fairway. It is not a coincidence that slow play and added rough/narrowed fairways coincide with each other.


Ciao

Sean correctly points out that a tee setup issue isn't permanant at least, but then narrowed fairways for an event don't have to be permanant either, but it often does become so as it become a badge of honor.


The reason I'd say it's OK to get "up in arms" about it is that all dumb USGA ideas have the potential to become commonplace and permanant-along with their stupid (supposedly outside the box)thinking.


a dumb idea should be called out-while it can still be considered a dumb idea rather than an accepted permanent condition.
Sadly, the early knockers of hot equipment were considered misguided curmudgeons--now the idea that equipment is completely out of scale for many classic courses is pretty common amongst tournament players (I hear it all the time) and even average golfers---but no one has any about what to do now-and most that could affect change have financial conflicts of interest.


Narrowed fairways and other "par protecting" things that simply slow play are all misguided attempts to deal with the distance genie that was heavily fertilized in the last 15 years.


But why stop there with original thinking?
Why not push a tee back 150 yards on #4 at Rivierra and make it and "undriveable" par 3.
Now that's original thinking.
After all- it's match play.....

Whats a dumb idea for you may be a good idea for someone else.  Not all folks can be pleased at all times.  What difference does a radical tee change make on a day or two of some tournament?  If ya don't experiment ya don't learn anything.  As I say, this is small beer.


Ciao

[Carl Rogers]

Whats a dumb idea for you may be a good idea for someone else.  Not all folks can be pleased at all times.  What difference does a radical tee change make on a day or two of some tournament?  If ya don't experiment ya don't learn anything.  As I say, this is small beer.


Ciao

Aren't we living in a world with a huge number of bad ideas that never get dis-credited?

[Sam Kestin]

I know it seems so sacrilegious to take a great golf hole like this and monkey with it, but I will admit that I enjoy watching golf courses played as extremely variable tests from one day to the next.


Presumably, there is one hole location on every green that is the "best" hole location. There might be opinions about which hole location that is, but we can assume anyone would have one they would consider a "favorite." However, I assume we'd all agree that would hardly be an argument in favor of only playing to that hole location every day.


The "best" version of the 18th hole at Riviera is obviously the lower tee as designed (a stern closing par-four). Nevertheless, for the purposes of one day out of seven or so rounds in a Championship, I dig the interesting look at how a hole could play if given a completely different spin. You get to see shots played from areas usually easy to avoid--adding a interesting dimension to how you're used to seeing a hole played.


On the 18th--for example--the two cross bunkers (almost never in play at the elite level) become much more impactful. From the ordinary championship tee, those are strictly visual features with little strategic value. In fact--I've never once in however many LA Opens seen a single professional in either one.


Kudos to Mike Davis for experimenting. Not all of them are going to be hits--but why not have a little fun along the way?

[jeffwarne]

I know it seems so sacrilegious to take a great golf hole like this and monkey with it, but I will admit that I enjoy watching golf courses played as extremely variable tests from one day to the next.


Presumably, there is one hole location on every green that is the "best" hole location. There might be opinions about which hole location that is, but we can assume anyone would have one they would consider a "favorite." However, I assume we'd all agree that would hardly be an argument in favor of only playing to that hole location every day.


The "best" version of the 18th hole at Riviera is obviously the lower tee as designed (a stern closing par-four). Nevertheless, for the purposes of one day out of seven or so rounds in a Championship, I dig the interesting look at how a hole could play if given a completely different spin. You get to see shots played from areas usually easy to avoid--adding a interesting dimension to how you're used to seeing a hole played.


On the 18th--for example--the two cross bunkers (almost never in play at the elite level) become much more impactful. From the ordinary championship tee, those are strictly visual features with little strategic value. In fact--I've never once in however many LA Opens seen a single professional in either one.


Kudos to Mike Davis for experimenting. Not all of them are going to be hits--but why not have a little fun along the way?

Sam,
That's a well thought out and reasoned comment.


I really wish the USGA would select a site, leave it alone, and play it.
Equipmment advances (which they downplay) no doubt affect their decisions to alter (bastardize) courses-Pity.


The fact that you mention Mike Davis' name, and we all recognize his name, is a real part of the problem.
Let's let the courses, and players, be the stars-not a bluecoat.

[Matthew Essig]

It was reported today that "the 18th at Riviera won't play as drivable par-4 at any point during the U.S. Amateur. (We) thought it might be fun one day to play it short & presented the idea but decided it wasn't the best way to play it and have now squashed it."

[Sean_A]

Whats a dumb idea for you may be a good idea for someone else.  Not all folks can be pleased at all times.  What difference does a radical tee change make on a day or two of some tournament?  If ya don't experiment ya don't learn anything.  As I say, this is small beer.


Ciao

Aren't we living in a world with a huge number of bad ideas that never get dis-credited?

In this case I don't think ya can't know its a bad idea until ya try it,  Afterall, its only one golf hole for one tournament...maybe used one time. Folks need to lighten up...tv golf is in a serious tailspin and practically anything is worth trying to create some excitement. 


Ciao