News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
What were they thinking?
« on: March 20, 2021, 07:52:43 PM »
The Masters is coming up and we have been talking on a few threads about the mysterious and supposedly impossible to figure out concept of design intent.  I am sorry I can't post a hole diagram (if somebody can please do) but what was Mackenzie and Jones and ... thinking when they designed #13 at Augusta National?  Did they think it was meant to be what some call a par 4 1/2?  Was is supposed to be a risk/reward hole?  Did they expect anyone or every decent golfer to have a go in two shots? Did they even care if is was 3W/sand wedge?  Did they think one day it might be a one shorter?  Did they expect the stream to be unpredictable and maybe once in awhile afford a recovery shot?  Did they design the green surface for any particular approach shots?  Was the shape of the fairway supposed to favor any particular kind of shot?  Why was there a stream running all along the left and what purpose did they want it to serve?  Did they always plan to grow trees on the outside of the dogleg?  Maybe we will never know  :'(  But if you don't happen to know what they were thinking, how would you describe the hole that is there now or is that impossible to figure out as well? 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #1 on: March 20, 2021, 08:06:17 PM »
Maybe you should read Bobby Jones' book.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2021, 08:19:55 PM »
Which one?  I think I have read most of them.  Should I be able to answer the question if I did? 

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2021, 09:04:52 PM »
Most likely he was saying .."Ok , we can put a tee stake here...should be able to get a turnpoint stake in here...let' stake a lay up here and how bout a green stake over there...we should be able to build an interesting green complex with this creek in front..." then they went and had dinner or a drink...never, ever did they think that sometime there might be a recovery from the creek etc....JMO...
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2021, 09:15:26 PM »
Mike,
Of course, the old 18 stakes on a Sunday method  :D


I will grab Bobby’s book off my shelf and look that up to see if this is in there  :D

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2021, 09:24:03 PM »
Most likely he was saying .."Ok , we can put a tee stake here...should be able to get a turnpoint stake in here...let' stake a lay up here and how bout a green stake over there...we should be able to build an interesting green complex with this creek in front..." then they went and had dinner or a drink...never, ever did they think that sometime there might be a recovery from the creek etc....JMO...


I would disagree.
The greatest player of his era gets to design his dream course with a world class architect-I'm guessing he gave each and every hole a lot of thought-especially this one.
I'd even venture a guess he envisioned possible recoveries from the creek.
Plenty of picture evidence of him hitting shots during construction,and plenty of commentary re various holes, including and especially 4(13).
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2021, 09:39:47 PM »
One early article claims the inspiration for 13 was 17 at Cypress.
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Cliff Hamm

  • Karma: +0/-0

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2021, 10:17:56 PM »
From MacKenzie's notes for the program for the 1934 Masters -


"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2021, 09:19:00 AM »
Here is Bobby Jones' description of the 13th, from GOLF IS MY GAME, published 1960:


"Number ten at 470 yards is a par four because of the favorable slope of the ground offered to the tee shot.  We call thirteen a par five because under certain conditions of wind and ground, few players will risk trying for the green with a second shot.  In my opinion this thirteenth hole is one of the finest holes for competitive play I have ever seen.  The player is first tempted to dare the creek on his tee shot by playing in close to the corner, because if he attains his position he has not only shortened the hole, but obtained a more level lie for his second shot.  Driving out to the right not only increases the length of the second, but encounters an annoying sidehill lie.


Whatever position may be reached with the tee shot, the second shot as well entails a momentous decision whether or not to try for the green.  With the pin far back on the right, under normal weather conditions, this is a very good eagle hole, because the contours of the green tend to run the second shot close.  The chief danger is that the ball will follow the creek.


The most difficult pin locations are along the creek in the forward part of the green.  A player who dares the creek on either his first or second shot may very easily encounter a six or seven at this hole.  Yet the reward of successful, bold play is most enticing.


Several tournaments have been obviously won and lost at holes twelve and thirteen.  Others, upon careful analysis, will be seen to have been won or lost here, even though the decision may not have been obvious at the time.


This hole is a splendid example of what can be done by taking advantage of natural features.  The splashes of sand in the woods behind the green and the azalea along the left side were placed there in order to add beauty to this natural setting."




Observations:


1.  Bobby Jones could write well.


2.  This was written in 1959-60, so Jones had observed play on the hole for 25 years, and wasn't stuck in his "original design concept".  He was very happy with how the hole worked then.


3.  He never mentioned any clubs a player might hit, only position and stance and risk and reward.


4.  He didn't say anything about "maybe someday it will need more length" or "I wish we could have left a little more elasticity behind the tee" or "one day we will buy Augusta Country Club and make this into a really difficult hole again."


5.  He did describe the second shot as being "a momentous decision" and that is where some mind-reader may base their rationale for changing the hole.  [I believe Fred Ridley has already mentioned this.]  While it is certainly easier to get there in two than it was in 1960, you are still taking a chance at blowing the tournament, aren't you?


6.  Most importantly, those first four statements were statements of fact, while the last half of #5 is strictly opinion.  You will certainly find people on both sides of it.

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2021, 10:21:26 AM »
Last year, Golf Week conducted a survey of the Pros about whether to move the tee back. Much of it needs to be taken with a grain of salt because both long and shorter hitters have a self interest in not moving the tee back, but it is an interesting read particularly on the appreciation of several of them for the importance of taking the historical importance of the hole into consideration before messing with it.


I would post the link if I knew how.


Ira

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2021, 03:11:43 PM »
This thread proves the snow is still deep or it's very cold...Mark has some time off :)

I rarely get too caught up in par, although I'll gladly admit that "par" is something I have grown up with, and I suppose it is in my DNA as a golfer and designer. Still, I have learned here and elsewhere that par is an overrated measurement...at least to those who think we are "in the know". To most golfers, par is still real, alive and well. It defines a hole — even a course — in the eyes of nearly all golfers.

I think par at ANGC #13 is extremely important because it has such a powerful suggestion that goes along with it. Especially at this hole, where even in its early days there was some discussion that it was a "half-par" in spirit.

Like the ad on the menu at The Big Texan Steakhouse suggesting rules for devouring its famous 72 oz steak -- the ad describes the "par" and the "yardage" -- and those measurements (weight and time to eat) becomes the challenge. If they gave you one more hour it would not be a "dangerous" a challenge. Nor, too, if the steak were a mere 48 oz.

So...the par-5 today is "easy" to beat by many, whereas if a par-4 we would have another element at play. Changing it to a par-4 would be far less costly than buying property or building new tees, etc. Reminds me of another famous place where change in par has now created a "better narraive" for tournament play...TOC 17.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2021, 03:33:48 PM »
Forrest,
I get busy again tomorrow.  I have a small group of six so far coming this week to see us softening two very pitched greens.  Should be fun and educational. 


I like your Steakhouse analogy  :D


Talk soon,
Mark

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2021, 03:48:43 PM »
Some memory refreshers..........
From 28 secs in -

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-Lwm7Hi59Tg
and at 4 mins 30 secs -
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tipa4Mn-pYQ
and from the start -
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=chA0LjvZYNQ&pp=QACIAgA%3D

Enjoy
:)
Atb

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2021, 09:24:17 PM »
This is how the current green jackets see it.  I wonder how much other original source material they have access to behind closed doors?

"More discovered than designed, this hole was originally an open field. Virtually all that Alister MacKenzie had to do was to build a green on the far side of the stream."

https://www.masters.com/en_US/course/hole13.html

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2021, 11:08:28 PM »
For what it’s worth, every time I head into Amarillo from the airport that 72 ounce steak place looks like the busiest place in west Texas.

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What were they thinking?
« Reply #16 on: March 23, 2021, 04:48:59 AM »
The 13th hole 1948. The player is Claude Harmon.
atb


Photo per RGrayson on Twitter.


Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back