Lively Little Levens from Lundin to Long Island

[Nigel Islam]

Your questions point to a general question that is what was being debated in the Old Mac thread.  At what point do the features of a hole deviate too far from the original to rightly be considered a template? 

Jon and I traded messages along those lines regarding Shipwreck at Boston Golf Club.  He comes down on the side that it is a Leven.  Given that the strategy from the tee is essentially reversed with regard to the greenside mound, I am not sure that I agree, but there certainly seems to be Leven inspiration there.

Jon and I have had some interesting messages about the leven template tonight. I tend to believe that the angled fairway challenge is what is important. Not putting words in his mouth, but I think he feels as if the risk/reward concept is more vital. I suppose CBM and Seth might suggest that I am wrong given the holes they built.


I would contend that Chicago Golf Club and to a softer extent Shoreacres hold the truest to the original hole at Lundin Links.

[Tom_Doak]

Your questions point to a general question that is what was being debated in the Old Mac thread.  At what point do the features of a hole deviate too far from the original to rightly be considered a template? 

Jon and I traded messages along those lines regarding Shipwreck at Boston Golf Club.  He comes down on the side that it is a Leven.  Given that the strategy from the tee is essentially reversed with regard to the greenside mound, I am not sure that I agree, but there certainly seems to be Leven inspiration there.

Jon and I have had some interesting messages about the leven template tonight. I tend to believe that the angled fairway challenge is what is important. Not putting words in his mouth, but I think he feels as if the risk/reward concept is more vital. I suppose CBM and Seth might suggest that I am wrong given the holes they built.


I would contend that Chicago Golf Club and to a softer extent Shoreacres hold the truest to the original hole at Lundin Links.

As Niall says, here's a question:  what is the purpose of this thread?


Nobody really knows exactly what Macdonald or Raynor thought were the important parts of the Leven template, because they never spelled it out for anyone.  Everyone here is just making their own interpretation.


I just don't see the point of trying to attribute motive to an architect unless he's said so himself.  If Gil Hanse wants to say that he got an idea for Boston Golf Club from the Leven hole, then that's great, but if he doesn't, then how can Jon and Jason tell him what he was thinking?


And regardless of where the idea came from, one should judge the hole on its own merits when one plays it.

[Tim Martin]

I would take exception with the features being “blunted” on the 6th at Yale. If played from the back tee as intended I think it’s a wonderful example of the Levin concept with all the boxes being checked. It’s when you move up to the member tee that the hole is shortened enough to take the intended “line of charm” out of the equation due to the carry being muted and the tee being too far right. I think that the better location for the member tee is in front of the back tee keeping the same angles and carry options as Raynor envisioned. Thanks.

[Nigel Islam]

Your questions point to a general question that is what was being debated in the Old Mac thread.  At what point do the features of a hole deviate too far from the original to rightly be considered a template? 

Jon and I traded messages along those lines regarding Shipwreck at Boston Golf Club.  He comes down on the side that it is a Leven.  Given that the strategy from the tee is essentially reversed with regard to the greenside mound, I am not sure that I agree, but there certainly seems to be Leven inspiration there.

Jon and I have had some interesting messages about the leven template tonight. I tend to believe that the angled fairway challenge is what is important. Not putting words in his mouth, but I think he feels as if the risk/reward concept is more vital. I suppose CBM and Seth might suggest that I am wrong given the holes they built.


I would contend that Chicago Golf Club and to a softer extent Shoreacres hold the truest to the original hole at Lundin Links.

As Niall says, here's a question:  what is the purpose of this thread?


Nobody really knows exactly what Macdonald or Raynor thought were the important parts of the Leven template, because they never spelled it out for anyone.  Everyone here is just making their own interpretation.


I just don't see the point of trying to attribute motive to an architect unless he's said so himself.  If Gil Hanse wants to say that he got an idea for Boston Golf Club from the Leven hole, then that's great, but if he doesn't, then how can Jon and Jason tell him what he was thinking?


And regardless of where the idea came from, one should judge the hole on its own merits when one plays it.

Tom,


I think the purpose of this thread is talk about a template concept that Jon and Jason both love. I don't particularly understand it all that well so I am trying to get a better handle on it. I personal messaged Jason, and he encouraged me (against my better judgement) to share this on the board for further discussion.


 Isn't that the purpose of Golf Club Atlas? Asking questions about interesting architectural features?

[Jason Way]

what is the purpose of this thread?

The purpose is to answer any or all of the 3 questions I posed in my OP:

1.  Does the Leven stand up in the context of today's game? 
2.  Which of the MacRaynor templates is your favorite, and why?
3.  Any other classic or modern short 4s of note employing these strategic principles and/or features?

Not exactly sure what is confusing or irksome to you about those questions Tom, but perhaps I'm inferring tone in your comment that you did not intend.

As seems to be the case often here, discussions of templates also ultimately touch on the subject of qualification.  What qualifies as a template?  That question is not the one that I asked, but if folks want to poke around in that area, more power to 'em.

[Nigel Islam]

I would take exception with the features being “blunted” on the 6th at Yale. If played from the back tee as intended I think it’s a wonderful example of the Levin concept with all the boxes being checked. It’s when you move up to the member tee that the hole is shortened enough to take the intended “line of charm” out of the equation due to the carry being muted and the tee being too far right. I think that the better location for the member tee is in front of the back tee keeping the same angles and carry options as Raynor envisioned. Thanks.

I actually think that the hole at Yale has similar playing characteristics to how I envision the original hole. The mounding is not all that high, but you have certainly played it many more times than I have. I actually thought the Yale hole was one of the more underrated holes on the course.

[Tim Martin]

I would take exception with the features being “blunted” on the 6th at Yale. If played from the back tee as intended I think it’s a wonderful example of the Levin concept with all the boxes being checked. It’s when you move up to the member tee that the hole is shortened enough to take the intended “line of charm” out of the equation due to the carry being muted and the tee being too far right. I think that the better location for the member tee is in front of the back tee keeping the same angles and carry options as Raynor envisioned. Thanks.

I actually think that the hole at Yale has similar playing characteristics to how I envision the original hole. The mounding is not all that high, but you have certainly played it many more times than I have. I actually thought the Yale hole was one of the more underrated holes on the course.

Nigel-I think that's an apt description. A lot of green space has been reclaimed in the ongoing restorative efforts and even a great approach can be very difficult to get down in two depending on pin placement. The tee shot when taking the bravest route requires a fair amount of hook to get the desired angle into the green unless you get a left pin. It is an underrated hole for me as well.

[Jason Way]

That is an interesting point you make about the tee shot at Yale, Tim, in the context of the modern game.  The impact of distance is not a new topic here, and I don't intend for this to devolve into a discussion about the ball, equipment, etc., but distance has certainly added to the strategic options on this template beyond what I suspect CBM intended. 

As I understand it (please correct me if I am wrong), the Trows hole was originally under 300 yards, and CBM's template was stretched to a longer distance, presumably to take going for the green off the table as an option from the tee.  For some of the templates, driving the green is now an option for long hitters.  An example:

On my lone visit to NGLA, my partner and I were 2 down on the 17th tee.  One of our competitors took the "safe" line into the right center of the fairway.  The second guy, a lefty who hits giant, bendy tee shots like Bubba Watson went for the green.  I thought he was nuts.  I striped my drive down the left into what I thought was position A and my partner tugged his a bit into the first cut left.  We get up to our balls and see a ball on the green.  I get mine up and down for birdie.  The other guy two putts for birdie.  Match over.

It would be easy for me to say, especially because we lost, that distance has diminished the strategy of the hole.  I wouldn't say that though.  3 options off the tee, especially where the risk-reward relationship is so high for the most aggressive option, seems to me to make the the 17th at NGLA a better hole.  Not that they reasonably could, but I would not want to see them put a tee at 400 yards just to preserve CMB's presumed intent by taking that option off the table. 

Conversely, I would argue that versions of the Leven where there is not significant challenge around or on the green have been muted somewhat by modern distances because the penalty for going for the green and missing is not high enough to keep that risk-reward relationship intact.   

[Tim Martin]

That is an interesting point you make about the tee shot at Yale, Tim, in the context of the modern game.  The impact of distance is not a new topic here, and I don't intend for this to devolve into a discussion about the ball, equipment, etc., but distance has certainly added to the strategic options on this template beyond what I suspect CBM intended. 

As I understand it (please correct me if I am wrong), the Trows hole was originally under 300 yards, and CBM's template was stretched to a longer distance, presumably to take going for the green off the table as an option from the tee.  For some of the templates, driving the green is now an option for long hitters.  An example:

On my lone visit to NGLA, my partner and I were 2 down on the 17th tee.  One of our competitors took the "safe" line into the right center of the fairway.  The second guy, a lefty who hits giant, bendy tee shots like Bubba Watson went for the green.  I thought he was nuts.  I striped my drive down the left into what I thought was position A and my partner tugged his a bit into the first cut left.  We get up to our balls and see a ball on the green.  I get mine up and down for birdie.  The other guy two putts for birdie.  Match over.

It would be easy for me to say, especially because we lost, that distance has diminished the strategy of the hole.  I wouldn't say that though.  3 options off the tee, especially where the risk-reward relationship is so high for the most aggressive option, seems to me to make the the 17th at NGLA a better hole.  Not that they reasonably could, but I would not want to see them put a tee at 400 yards just to preserve CMB's presumed intent by taking that option off the table. 

Conversely, I would argue that versions of the Leven where there is not significant challenge around or on the green have been muted somewhat by modern distances because the penalty for going for the green and missing is not high enough to keep that risk-reward relationship intact.

Jason-The original scorecard lists the hole as 350/342/318 with 318 as the "Short Course" designation so never under 300 yards to my knowledge. If you look at the 1934 aerial in Golf Couse Histories you can see that the "new" tee left and long behind the 5th green was already in use as it was recognized very early that the "burn" was not being fully utilized.

[Tom_Doak]

Not exactly sure what is confusing or irksome to you about those questions Tom, but perhaps I'm inferring tone in your comment that you did not intend.

Jason:


I get irked when the discussion of design is reduced down to a discussion of templates, because I think it has contributed to some lazy approaches to design.


It's one thing to go to Lundin Links and find something you want to emulate in that hole [or, in my case, the hole after it].  It's another to talk about building a template hole in your marketing materials to try and bolster your reputation as being knowledgable.  I see as much of the latter, as the former, in modern architecture.


I find the Leven hole particularly suspect as true inspiration because not many observers can agree on what's so special about it.  In some ways it is just being used as a status marker:  I know more about templates than those other guys who can only talk about the Redan or Biarritz.  But at least the Redan is generally accepted to be a great hole.


Your comment about how these holes are not replicas but deviations is true, but may not be as significant as you think.  I have never seen a hole that was even remotely close to a copy of the 15th at North Berwick; have you?  Even if you could reproduce it exactly, which would not be easy to do, those contours wouldn't work as well in other settings and with other grass types.


I learned a lot from comparing various versions of the Redan, and wondering why Raynor built the one at Shoreacres so much different than the one at Yeamans Hall or the one at Chicago Golf Club.  Was he experimenting with it and trying to perfect it?  Over time, I've come to the conclusion that he wasn't ... he was just dealing with different settings and different construction crews, and realized how hard it was to make it the same every time, so he [or his crew] just adapted to the situation. 


I can tell you that's true for my own versions of the Redan, too.  We did try consciously to make the Redan at Old Mac much different than the one at Pacific Dunes, because they're so close together -- one is downwind and one into the wind, one is on flat ground and one on big slopes, etc.  But as to the others - starting with the one at High Pointe - I just tried my best to adapt the concept based on my growing understanding of how the hole worked.

[Nigel Islam]

Not exactly sure what is confusing or irksome to you about those questions Tom, but perhaps I'm inferring tone in your comment that you did not intend.

Jason:


I get irked when the discussion of design is reduced down to a discussion of templates, because I think it has contributed to some lazy approaches to design.


It's one thing to go to Lundin Links and find something you want to emulate in that hole [or, in my case, the hole after it].  It's another to talk about building a template hole in your marketing materials to try and bolster your reputation as being knowledgable.  I see as much of the latter, as the former, in modern architecture.


I find the Leven hole particularly suspect as true inspiration because not many observers can agree on what's so special about it.  In some ways it is just being used as a status marker:  I know more about templates than those other guys who can only talk about the Redan or Biarritz.  But at least the Redan is generally accepted to be a great hole.


Your comment about how these holes are not replicas but deviations is true, but may not be as significant as you think.  I have never seen a hole that was even remotely close to a copy of the 15th at North Berwick; have you?  Even if you could reproduce it exactly, which would not be easy to do, those contours wouldn't work as well in other settings and with other grass types.


I learned a lot from comparing various versions of the Redan, and wondering why Raynor built the one at Shoreacres so much different than the one at Yeamans Hall or the one at Chicago Golf Club.  Was he experimenting with it and trying to perfect it?  Over time, I've come to the conclusion that he wasn't ... he was just dealing with different settings and different construction crews, and realized how hard it was to make it the same every time, so he [or his crew] just adapted to the situation. 


I can tell you that's true for my own versions of the Redan, too.  We did try consciously to make the Redan at Old Mac much different than the one at Pacific Dunes, because they're so close together -- one is downwind and one into the wind, one is on flat ground and one on big slopes, etc.  But as to the others - starting with the one at High Pointe - I just tried my best to adapt the concept based on my growing understanding of how the hole worked.

Tom,


I am glad you took the time to explain this.  What I find exceptional about the original hole (that I have not played) is the angled bern running through the fairway that dictates the tee shot. Despite my self professed love of CBM and Raynor, I find it disappointing that several of the aforementioned examples lack this feature. I tend to be inconsistent in my carry capabilities off of the tee. The Lundin hole would be one that I would very much enjoy trying to execute the tee shot. I think discussion of the features is quite helpful in understanding good golf architecture irrespective of what Charlie himself thought. I would love to hear YOUR opinion regarding the use of diagonal hazards such as the burn there.

[Peter Pallotta]

Nigel - just an aside,
A few years ago there was a post by one of our architects/shapers (I forget who) about cleaning up and expanding/moving an existing ditch by shoring up its sides with rocks and having it dissect the fairway diagonally, i.e. creating and utilizing a bern. 

And I remember thinking that, on a fairly flat and basically water-less site, such a diagonal bern served essentially the same 'function' as a big bay of water did on a cape hole, or almost the same function as a big expanse of sand does on a sahara or that a rising/mounded/sloping fairway does on a hog's back.

In short: when I read about templates (the originals or the 'replicas'), I can't often imagine what the (differing) golf holes themselves actually look like or play like, but I do get a sense of the (similar) vectors/angles/principles of design that the architect is employing.

Peter
     

[Marty Bonnar]

Not sure if anyone’s linked to this so far, but I think the Plan and drone footage help describe the terrain a tad clearer:


https://www.lundingolfclub.co.uk/holes/trows/


Cheers,
F.

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks for this link Marty.
Would the prevailing wind be from behind?
I’d be curious to know where the prevailing wind would be from on any other hole mentioned in this thread.
Atb

[Marty Bonnar]

Thanks for this link Marty.
Would the prevailing wind be from behind?
I’d be curious to know where the prevailing wind would be from on any other hole mentioned in this thread.
Atb

Dai,
By my reckoning the hole runs ENE, so the prevailing westerly wind is from behind, quartering off the left (approx of course!)
Cheers,
F.

[David McIntosh]

I played Lundin last week and the hole was straight downwind. Play was from the yellow forward tees so the green was certainly in range from the tee with less than driver and the sadly the burn wasn’t really a consideration. I did go up to the medal tee, which was 30 or so yards further back, for a look and now wish I could have played from there to sample a bit more of the intended strategy of the hole.

I understand this to be the prevailing wind - every time I’ve played Lundin the first four holes have been into the wind and the wind has been behind on the last four. I play Leven a lot more frequently and it’s always been in the same wind - helping on the first four to the mile dyke and against for the very tough last hole.

[Nigel Islam]

I played Lundin last week and the hole was straight downwind. Play was from the yellow forward tees so the green was certainly in range from the tee with less than driver and the sadly the burn wasn’t really a consideration. I did go up to the medal tee, which was 30 or so yards further back, for a look and now wish I could have played from there to sample a bit more of the intended strategy of the hole.

I understand this to be the prevailing wind - every time I’ve played Lundin the first four holes have been into the wind and the wind has been behind on the last four. I play Leven a lot more frequently and it’s always been in the same wind - helping on the first four to the mile dyke and against for the very tough last hole.

Interesting, so unless the hole plays into the wind the burn might not even influence play at all.

[JC Urbina]

I find the Leven hole to be the least understood hole of the templates.  In my mind the strategy for the Leven hole even though somewhat outdated for today's technology was certainly a thought provoking tee shot.  I always thought that Pete Dye was trying to emulate the Leven with his often controversial huge mound next to a waters edge with green partially hidden behind the mound.  I was always curious if Pete stopped by to look at Lundin Links while he was touring Scotland.


Pete used a big body of water, I know some of you may think that holes like The Punchbowl at Fishers Island maybe what Pete was trying to use as inspiration and some may be right.


It's fun to search these holes out, and even more fun to play them.





Some of Pete's versions I like.
The 5th at Old Marsh
The 5th at Long Cove
The 12th? at Mission Hills Dinah Shore course

[Jon Wiggett]

I played Lundin last week and the hole was straight downwind. Play was from the yellow forward tees so the green was certainly in range from the tee with less than driver and the sadly the burn wasn’t really a consideration. I did go up to the medal tee, which was 30 or so yards further back, for a look and now wish I could have played from there to sample a bit more of the intended strategy of the hole.

I understand this to be the prevailing wind - every time I’ve played Lundin the first four holes have been into the wind and the wind has been behind on the last four. I play Leven a lot more frequently and it’s always been in the same wind - helping on the first four to the mile dyke and against for the very tough last hole.

David,


your post about the burn no longer been in play got me thinking. We are all quite happy to play a shorter club to lay up and take feature such a a bunker or burn out of play but no thought given of doing the same to bring a feature back into play. We all eulogise about strategic placement of this feature or that but given the chance to simply hit it over the lot we take it without a thought whilst all the time lamenting 'what a shame it is no longer in play'. Yet it could be in play but we just decide not to take it on.


Jon

[David McIntosh]

David,

your post about the burn no longer been in play got me thinking. We are all quite happy to play a shorter club to lay up and take feature such a a bunker or burn out of play but no thought given of doing the same to bring a feature back into play. We all eulogise about strategic placement of this feature or that but given the chance to simply hit it over the lot we take it without a thought whilst all the time lamenting 'what a shame it is no longer in play'. Yet it could be in play but we just decide not to take it on.

Jon

Jon,

It makes sense to play a shorter club to take a hazard out of play though whereas the only reason for selecting a club to bring such a feature into play would be where there is a suitable reward for doing so. This would certainly be the case if playing for a score.

I get what you’re saying about choosing to take on a hazard you otherwise might not for the purposes of experiencing a particular feature or strategic element but that would’ve been very difficult to achieve on this hole as I played it last week. The tees were near the front of the forward tee box (perhaps the course was playing shorter than usual as we’re now into winter) and it was downwind, which meant it would only have taken an 8 or 9 iron to clear the burn. Now, I don’t play many 8/9 irons off the tee on par 4s and it would have felt artificial to have done so here purely to play the hole in keeping with the originally strategy. I do accept there may be times when it’s feasible to do this but it would have quite awkward to do so last week.

I must admit I was on a decent run of pars on the back nine when I reached the 16th so my main focus was on keeping that going by playing the hole in the way I could achieve the lowest score - which I felt was to try to drive the green.

David

[Jon Wiggett]

David,


completely understand why you went for the green. You have however left the most important information out namely did you keep your run of pars going??


Jon

[David McIntosh]

David,


completely understand why you went for the green. You have however left the most important information out namely did you keep your run of pars going? ?


Jon

Jon,

Yes I did, parred the 17th too before throwing in a double on the last!

Somewhat unorthodox 4 on the 16 - tried a gentle draw up the right hand side but overdone it and ended up on top of the mound on the left. Pin was front right, I very luckily almost pitched it straight in the hole, hit the flagstick and rolled out to about 10 feet. Then proceeded to pathetically dolly the putt back uphill for a tap in par!

David

[Tom_Doak]

I find the Leven hole to be the least understood hole of the templates.  In my mind the strategy for the Leven hole even though somewhat outdated for today's technology was certainly a thought provoking tee shot.  I always thought that Pete Dye was trying to emulate the Leven with his often controversial huge mound next to a waters edge with green partially hidden behind the mound.  I was always curious if Pete stopped by to look at Lundin Links while he was touring Scotland.

The 5th at Old Marsh
The 5th at Long Cove
The 12th? at Mission Hills Dinah Shore course

Jim:


I don't think so.  The hole Pete referred to in talking about those blind short par-4's, when he spoke to me about it, was the 14th at North Berwick.  I thought it was a pretty loose interpretation at best.


It's possible that he just combined that blind approach shot with his favorite angular water hazard to create his own template.


I know he saw a lot of courses in the UK, but I don't remember him ever mentioning Leven / Lundin Links.  Then again, C.B. Macdonald never mentioned Scotscraig in print even though he borrowed a template from there.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Thanks to all the contributors to this thread, which I really enjoyed, having the good fortune to have played each once, Lundin, North Berwick, and Scotscraig in October.

I'm chagrined to say, because I have G Bahto's book, that I didn't realize I was playing a "template" when I played 16 at Lundin, though I enjoyed the hole and it stands out in memory--perhaps because I hit a poor tee shot then a blind second that found the green, and then made par. 

I don't know the holes that Jim Urbina mentioned, but his comments remind me of the short par 4 15th at the Kampen course at Purdue (Pete Dye/Tim Liddy), which has a large mound and bunker blocking the view of the green from the left side.  It seems more like the 16th at Lundin than the more daunting 14th at North Berwick.

In my recent play in Scotland I was seeing the original Redan hole at North Berwick for only the second time, the first being more than 10 years ago.  Even in seeing it a second time,  I was astonished at how severe the hole is in comparison to its successors.  The original is an intimidating work of natural art.

At Scotscraig, the par 4 1st and par 3 3rd  seem to me to have been precursors to excellent holes designed by others.

[Tom_Doak]

At Scotscraig, the par 4 1st and par 3 3rd  seem to me to have been precursors to excellent holes designed by others.

Eric:


I think it was the 4th at Scotscraig that is the model for Macdonald's "Knoll" green on the 13th at Piping Rock [and others].  I only know that because I took a guest to Piping Rock 30 years ago who had grown up at Scotscraig, and as soon as he saw the hole he said, "I know where he got this idea."  I hadn't gone to Scotscraig when I lived in St. Andrews so it took me a few years to get back and confirm it, but it was clearly the hole ... the two-tiered green was the clincher.