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.


GeoffreyC

The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« on: February 05, 2004, 01:02:04 PM »
The Travesty of Yale- the back 9- #17

It’s been a while since we visited the changes that were made to the Course at Yale. I thought it would be nice to visit a place on the course where there is absolutely no question that RESTORATION was the intended result.  

After the debacle of the front nine, John Beinecke was shown the work and he formed a committee to raise funds for a restoration and to advise Roger Rulewich, look over his shoulder and make sure the mistakes made on the front nine were not repeated. I managed to convince John to get together with George Bahto for consultation, guidance and plans. George wrote a “white paper” report to document Yale’s history and what is required to make it what it once was.  He drew hole diagrams to scale to show the committee exactly what needed to be done to restore them.  Members were asked to contribute $500 each or whatever they wished for “the complete restoration of our Charles Blair McDonald masterpiece” (quote from Peter Pulaski, director of golf’s letter to the members).  

George’s plans were ignored and the committee and Roger Rulewich went out on their own armed with the 1934 aerial and construction photos to work on holes, 10, 11,12 (alps), 13, (redan), 15 (eden), 16, 17 (double plateau) and 18. The work on #’s 12, 13 and 17 were saved for last presumably because they were more difficult and required more effort and research. I’d like to show you hole #17 because it was the last of the work done to the course and presumably when Mr. Rulewich and the committee were at the height of their powers and knew the most about the course and its architecture.

The double plateau hole at Yale is about my favorite par 4 on the course. It has a beautiful aesthetic quality to it along with difficulty from the tee shot all the way to the final putt. It is a 430 yard hole and a fitting penultimate hole for a great golf course. There is some room to lengthen it if needed.



The tee shot shown above from Ran’s course profile (back tee is above and behind this shot) is somewhat uphill and blind across the saddle above the pond and to a generous fairway with a sideboard on the right and scrubby rough on the left. Long time superintendent Harry Meusel took his bulldozer and knocked down 7-8 feet of rock and soil from the hill.  The result is an easier tee shot with a bit less of a blind aspect to it. This was the least egregious of his MANY changes to the course as the resulting saddle that was created looks both natural and pleasing to the eye.  One could argue that the tee shot was meant to be intimidating and difficult. There is an amazing construction photo taken from the same place as the above photo hanging in the dining room.  It shows the stark imposing rocky hillside that Mr. Meusel bulldozed away.



Having mastered the tee shot, the approach shot from a bit further away then this photo of Ran’s was taken, one can see the hillside that previously had the principal’s nose bunker complex surrounding it about 40-50 yards shot of the putting surface. It’s pretty clear to see that tee shot placement is important to attack a given pin location on this large double plateau green. Raynor  gave the player alternate alleys to use the ground game to approach each side of the green although this is less important given today’s distance premium coupled with the over watered maintenance meld of the recent past. The two handsome butts Ran captured are me and Andy Ryan.



Once at the green, the double plateau is obvious as are the myriad of options and interesting shots.  That’s me on the front left facing a long putt down the incline and across a slope to about the easiest pin location on the green.  Pat Mucci is pin high on the right with a pretty simple pitch from where the greenside bunker was located.

Now let’s look at an aerial of the green end of the 17th taken in 1934



One can see the right greenside bunker and the principal’s nose surrounding the little hill.  Please not the relative size and shapes of the bunkers.

Charles Banks wrote about the 17th hole shortly before this aerial was taken (copied from “The Evangelist of Golf” p244). The play from the tee is over the last of six water fairways at the far side of which is a lift of 20 feet from the water’s surface. The carry to the top of the lift opens up the hole. The ground from the edge of the lift slopes down to the green at a good angle so that a good roll can be expected. The green is composed of three plateaus. With an opening at the back between two of them and upon the low one.  The approach to the green on the left is guarded by a mound flanked with bunkers, one at the left and one at the right, both visible from the playing ground for the second shot and a third behind the knoll next to the green which is hidden from the player making his second shot.  This hazard is known as the principal’s nose and originates on the St. Andrews course. The approach on the right is smooth but not broad and travel that way may present a putting hazard unless the pin is on the lower plateau.”

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2004, 01:13:56 PM »
Now that we have seen the hole as it was in 2001 for the GCA outing and a bit of the past from the 1934 aerial and Charles Banks’ description, we are ready to see the final work done to the course at Yale by Roger Rulewich and the committee of amateurs.

Let’s take the Principal’s nose hazard first.  Look above to the old aerial and the hillside shown before the bunkers were rebuilt and picture their size and shape.

Here is presumably the best interpretation Mr. Rulewich could come up with for these bunkers. I wonder if he dug down and probed the soil for the edges and depths of the originals?


This shot is taken from the front of the green looking back up the fairway towards the tee. The alleys for bouncing a ball up onto the putting surface past the bunkers are easily seen in this view. Isn’t the knoll beautifully preserved with natural slopes and shaping? Isn’t the size and shape faithfully recreated from the 1934 aerial?  


This is the same bunker viewed from the right side of the knoll. Isn’t the shaping especially the bunker surrounds done to perfection?


Here we see the Rulewich interpretation of the bunker on the right side of the knoll.  The view is looking towards the right half of the putting surface from about 70 yards. Again look at the shape of the bunker, its relative size compared to the one in a comparable position in the 1934 aerial and also the shaping of the bunker surrounds.


Here we have the new bunker built on the left side of the knoll. I really like the upslope on the bunker surround facing the fairway. We wouldn’t want to facilitate any ball rolling into the bunker now would we?


Here is a view of the new Principal’s Nose comples and the knoll taken from farther back in the fairway.


Finally, I give you the new “restored” right greenside bunker.  Note its shape, the slopes leading down from the green pad down into it and its size and position relative to the front of the green relative to the 1934 aerial photo.

This was the end of the restoration project. My opinion is that this work is absolutely HORRIBLE. In fact, it is sadly amateurish, so much so that its hard to believe anyone really tried very hard at all. I am deeply saddened that THIS is the is what has become of the Course at Yale.  I argue that it is worse off for this “restoration” because much/most of the archeological evidence in the ground has been destroyed making any future restoration attempts purely interpretation.  The hard evidence in the ground to back op photos is GONE FOREVER.  

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2004, 01:17:56 PM »
Here's the aerial from recent years.  #17 runs due east,
second from bottom, with pond near tee.  You can see the
PN 'knob' 50 yards short of green:

« Last Edit: February 05, 2004, 01:18:45 PM by Scott_Burroughs »

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2004, 01:28:00 PM »
Here's what really gets me - before the restoration the slope on the right side of the green was nice and steep. It was a very difficult chip shot, especially if the pin was right, the only option was try a finesse lob shot. There was absolutely no reason to flatten that slope. All they needed to do to put a bunker in there was dig. Why in the world they messed with the edge of the green I don't know.

I could go on and on, but it's been done in many of the other Yale posts.

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2004, 01:34:36 PM »
Freemahc

Please do go on and on.  I don't want to be seen as the only malcontent who is criticising this work.

What do you think of the new Principal's Nose bunker complex?

Is this hole "restored" and faithful to the photo you see from 1934?

Is this work done in the MacRaynor style?

Geoff_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2004, 01:46:13 PM »
Geoff,

When I was there this fall, no hole stood out more than 17. The nose looked like Michael Jackson's plastic surgeon got ahold of it. Thanks for the photos,

Geoff

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2004, 01:53:05 PM »
Here is one of the problems Yale faced. The old bunkers were so bad that plenty of people are happy and content with the 'restoration' because it resulted in playable bunkers that actually had sand in them. The old bunkers were often 2-3 paces wide in spots, rock hard, had more than the occaisional rock, and never drained after any significant rainfall. The new bunkers don't have any of these charateristics, therefore they don't have people up in arms.

Is Yale a better course with the new bunkering, I'd say yes. It's certainly more playable for the average golfer. Could it be a whole lot better with PROPER restoration...absolutely. Yale won't touch it for at least a year though, an NCAA regional will be held there in the spring. If that's the type of event Yale decides it wants more of, then I think we'll see another round of work done in the coming years.

The NCAA big boys will post some very impressive scores. They will easily reach 16 in two. The really long hitters could feasably drive the green on 1, 2, 7, 11, and 14 if the conditions are right (although it's highly unlikely on all except 11 and 14)- they'll hit 16 in two no problem, and additionally after good drives they'll hit wedges into 1,2,3,4,5,7,11,14,and 17.

That does not make for a championship course anymore. I see in other treads that restorations are also bringing back the "intent" of the architect in terms of shot values. Yale needs some length to make this happen. They have plenty of room to lengthen a lot of these holes. No reason they can't bring back some penal bunkering and add a few yards and come back to being the beast of a course it used to be.

Geoff - you've had you hand in a few designs, can you see a NCAA player being intimidated by Yale as it is now?
« Last Edit: February 05, 2004, 01:55:02 PM by Freemahc »

Geoff_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2004, 02:07:24 PM »
Freemahc,

The course is still very intimidating but softening the bunkers makes it much less fearsome, and certainly strips the "championship" character from it. Restoring the crusty/sandy areas and putting back some bunker depth would return some teeth to the design if that's the goal. It sounds like the course is conflicted between pleasing member play and college golf needs. It's sort of hard to fathom sitting out here on the sunny west coast that the college golf needs and the CB Macdonald design heritage don't always come first.

There are plenty of mediocre, user-friendly, blinding-white-bunkered courses in CT that members should look to if they place themselves above the heritage of the course or the desire to have the best college course in the country, which is what it should be.  But it's not, and architecturally, it's getting worse by the day. My head still spins when I think of some of the things I saw out there! At least the maintenance will start to improve under Scott's direction.
Geoff

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2004, 02:17:26 PM »
Geoff, you should know that the folks at Yale are listening very carefully and with profound concern to all of this criticism. After I wrote my review back in October, the extent of any (un)official repsonse form the powers that be was a gracious Christmas card from Mr. Rulewich. I had also sent a detailed letter, including some recent articles, to the president of the university outlining the importance of these issues. No response.

Good to know they are listening to the critics.

Mike_Sweeney

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2004, 02:20:03 PM »

The NCAA big boys will post some very impressive scores. They will easily reach 16 in two. The really long hitters could feasably drive the green on 1, 2, 7, 11, and 14 if the conditions are right (although it's highly unlikely on all except 11 and 14)- they'll hit 16 in two no problem, and additionally after good drives they'll hit wedges into 1,2,3,4,5,7,11,14,and 17.


Fremac,

I agree with much of what you say, but there is no way they are driving 1, 2 or 7. With 11 and 14, I have had the same argument with people in reference to Merion 7 & 8. Yes they can do it, and let's see them try to hold 14, and let's see a few balls fly off the rocks left of 11. I mean it, I think technology make those holes more interesting for those willing to risk it.

Southampton GC (Raynor) plays around 6200 yards and has been a US Open qualifier site a few times. I don't know the actual numbers but few broke par. A few members post here, maybe they can fill us in. It all depends how they/Scott set up the course, specifically the greens. It could go low, but it may not. Let's tell it like it is, it is the NE Regional, so the best teams are not playing it.

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2004, 02:33:27 PM »
Mike - no argument here, I was talking about the longest of the long hitters - the Hank Keuhne typs, of which there are probably at least a dozen playing in college right now.

I played with some guys on the Yale team who hit 3 wood - 9 iron on 1 regularly. The thinking being that driver brought the stream on the left into play. on two you can hit driver on top of the second hill on the right and get very close ot the green if the course plays fast. And I've seen guys drive it into the right bunker on 7 if the tees are up a bit. That was all 6 or 7 years ago.

Certainly the longest players could do that this spring. It's pretty unlikely that they'd even try on 1 or 2, but there's not much to stop them from trying on 7. It's not too hard to be chipping on 14, although that's not an easy chip.

I didn't want to make it sound like Yale is defensless - there's a lot of trouble out there, especially if that fescue rough gets nice and thick, but as a whole, I expect to see some pretty low scoring.

You're right about the strength of the NE regional field, but there will be a couple really good teams in there - maybe a Wake Forest since the NCAA won;t have enough room for all the good teams to stay in their region.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2004, 02:36:15 PM by Freemahc »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2004, 02:34:54 PM »
Freemach,
I have to agree with Mike and was just about to post a similar disagreement as to drivng the greens on the holes you mentioned. The one place I disagree with Mike is at #11. I've seen balls on the fringe from the tips, from a couple of guys back in the '80s who were using the first Callaway metals.
#1 is too long, #2 is too penalif missed , the rise to the green on #7 seems to much for a ball on the decline to carry, and the combination of bend and green type/size at #14 won't entice anyone to try it.

The numbers are all about the hole locations, as Mike said.
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2004, 02:41:14 PM »
Brad- Now I'm really insulted.  Roger Rulewich left me off his Christmas list.  :'(  I wonder if George got a card this year?

I got initial replies from the Dean of the School of Architecture (Robert AM Stern) who made an inquiry to athletic director Tom Beckett who subsequently wrote the President of Yale and Fredrick Beinecke Professor of Economics (how ironic  ;D ) (Richard Levin) that bascially that my claims are baseless and Mr. Rulewich did a great job.  I responded to Mr. Beckett's letter by writing a reply to Mr. Levin asking for an academic peer review of the work done to the course.  I asked the president to form a committee of experts that could include Brad Klein, Geoff Shackleford, Ron Whitten, Dan Wexler or any INDEPENDENT authority on golf course architecture and preservation. Every academic appointment and promotion must include this process.  Why is the athletic director, Roger Rulewich and the golf course immune at this esteemed University?  NO REPLY.

Geoff- great response to Freemahc.  The Yale course as it was built was a terror and its grees and surrounding hazards (as originally built) would hold up.  There is lots of room to lengthen the course.  #'s 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15 and 17 come to mind. Aside form that, the original design should be the primary concern.  What a home course advantage the Yale team would have with the original design!  

CHrisB

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2004, 02:53:27 PM »
Let's tell it like it is, it is the NE Regional, so the best teams are not playing it.

Actually, Mike, the field for the NCAA East Regional at Yale is likely to be the strongest of the three NCAA Regionals, although they try to even out the strength of field in the three regional sites.

The Southeast probably has the highest concentration of higly ranked golf teams (the ACC, SEC, and teams like Augusta State), and last year the top 10 finishing teams in the East Regional were:

Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida, Tennessee, Duke, Wake Forest, Augusta State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, and Auburn.

So they'll throw the best the NCAA has to offer at Yale.

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2004, 02:53:56 PM »
First of all - sorry for leading this one off the topic of the work done on 17...apoligies...

Geoff & Geoffrey - I think the intimidation factor dissappeared for me a long long time ago, I've played that course so many times that I simply knew where I should be hitting it, knew where the trouble was, and knew where the safest spots were. It's very hard for me, at this point, to put myself into the shoes of someone who does not have such local knowledge. I know plenty of good golfers who weren't members and had trouble breaking 80 their first couple times around, so I guess I see your point.

Not sure how you could lengthen #2 - I don't remember any room right behind the existing tee, only room to the left of it (looking down the fairway) but that would put the first green in danger.

Mike & Jim - I guess we'll just have to wait and see. If I was an aggressive player who could just flat out bomb the ball, I would probably take it over the trees on 14, and if the pin was front right on 2, I might have a go there as well - it all depends on the condition of the course as I'd need to get a nice kick off the backside of the second mound.

Here's a link to last year's East regional field - unless they added more regionals, this should be the typ of field that shows up at Yale...there will be loads of good players in the bunch.

http://www.golfweek.com/articles/2003/college/mens1/32880.asp

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2004, 03:09:19 PM »
Geoff C,
You mentioned the terror factor of the original design. How much has this terror factor been lessened by the bunker work on 17 or other holes when, as Freemahc suggests, most approaches will be with wedges and not the clubs they were originally designed for.
(Serious question, not facetious)  ;D
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Patrick_Mucci

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2004, 03:15:12 PM »
Geoff Childs,

I don't know how anybody can honestly defend the work, in any context.

The softened approach diminishes ever facet of the architecture.

In reading your opening thread, and Brad Klein's thread, it's obvious that the powers that be at Yale are not competent when it comes to preserving the architectural integrity of the golf course, but they're never in doubt about the poor decisions they have made with respect to altering the golf course.

At this point I see it as a battle of wills, and unfortunately, absent a prudent position, they have the keys to the Kingdom.

I've seen this time and time again, clubs make a major mistake, and then redouble their misquided efforts, in the face of constructive criticism.

It's like arguing with a professor, he may be dead wrong in his position, and you may be absolutely correct, but, he's going to decide your grade/fate, irrespective of the merits of your position and arguments, and since he controls the power to determine your grade, there is little you can do, except to bring the injustice he's wrought upon you to the light of public scrutiny.

It's academia at their arrogant best, very learned, but inexperienced in practical matters

Keep the torch burning.

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2004, 03:25:48 PM »
Jim

That's a good point and a fair question. Lengthening the course in places I mentioned (I do now agree that 2 is not really practical unless they change the path from 6 to 7) or changing the golf ball is the only solution.

However, dumbing down the course as they have done for practical maintenance or pace of play issues only makes the matter worse.

Finally, it's a historic and landmark piece of architecture overseen by one of the finest institutions of learning in the world.  Yale has a world class school of architecture and landmark buildings, works of art and literature that they preserve. You would think they would know better.

Pat- its very true that "they have the keys to the Kingdom".  They are very quick point out that members are thought of a part of "our Yale Family" but heaven help the black sheep of the family that questions Papa John Beinecke's authority and rule.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2004, 03:26:17 PM by Geoffrey Childs »

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2004, 03:26:10 PM »
ChrisB - interesting about the scores, let's hope the course isn't defensless now after the changes. Your statements just further enforce the fact that my views are skewed by the fact that I am so familiar with the course. Pullling clubs on 9 (6 iron to the fron, 2 iron to the back) and 13 (almost always a 3 iron) was just second nature to me. having some local knowledge on that course is a HUGE advantage!

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2004, 03:31:35 PM »
Freemahc- You do know about the back tee on #16 right below and to the left of the 5th tee?  The hole plays a full 550 yards from there.  Not everyone is going to reach that hole in two and there will be plenty of drives blocked out on the left or kicked into the trees on the right by the contour of the hillside.

FREEMAHC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2004, 03:36:06 PM »
Yeah, that's a big difference if they employ that tee I kind of forgot about it since they almost never put the tees back there. Last I saw it the grass was struggling since it's in such a shady spot, I wouldn't be surprised ot see it regrassed and ready for the NCAA's. I would assume they'd have the course just about maxed out all the way around.


tonyt

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2004, 03:40:28 PM »
Thank you again Geoff.

Here in Australia, we have a few courses in small rural areas that are finally taking the plunge and rebuilding or removing some bunkers that are little more than circlular or rectangular flat shapes lined with sand. It's good to see small towns with a meagre handful of $300-400 per year members take such initiative. They can't be blamed for their original existence, because afterall, when these clubs often started decades ago with a dozen locals with shovels, we have no right to expect them to do any more than create a field in which to smack around a disobedient pill.

As you have very clearly shown, these bunkers that are a blight on a small town of 500 people anywhere in Australia, are now both welcome and aspired to in the name of historical restoration at Yale.

HamiltonBHearst

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #22 on: February 05, 2004, 04:20:29 PM »


What an embarrassment.  I know it is good enough for some but this work is a real disgrace and the powers at the university seem to have become hardened in their defense of the work.  When well known and well regarded people with no axe to grind like Brad Klein are ignored.  

Mr. Childs-thank you for bringing this to light again and your efforts.  It is rather comical in that I have played in the Payne Whitney golf outing a few times:It's goal is to support the renovation of that great facility.  One year we had a tour with the ASST AD bragging about how the work was very expensive because they were trying to be sensitive to the time period it was built.

GeoffreyC

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2004, 04:40:10 PM »
Hamilton

This whole project from start to finish is a disgrace.

They may call me whatever they wish, however, the independence and expertise of Dr. Bradley Klein can not be questioned. Brad's article in Golfweek this past October should have rightly been embarassing to the athletic department that runs the course as well as Roger Rulewich who was their architect/expert. John Beinecke and the restoration commitee are well intentioned but they too blew it big time. What I find amusing, frustrating and downright embarassing for the University is the inability of those outside of the athletic department and the golf course in general to objectively investigate the work done.  These include Robert AM Stern, Dean of the School of Architecture who believed the report from Tom Beckett an obviously biased insider; Vincent Scully, emeretus professor and saviour or the Divinity School buildings who did not bother to reply and finally Robert Levin, President of the freekin University.

As an academic myself I know that peer review is the hallmark of academic life.  No one gets promoted without independent outside review.  That's why I'm surprised that they wouldn't even listen to Brad (with his strong academic background).  They did not inquire about getting Geoff Shackleford's opinion or Ron Whitten's (GD even has a corperate membership at Yale) or Dan Wexler's or Bill Kittleman's (a Yale alum).
« Last Edit: February 05, 2004, 04:41:00 PM by Geoffrey Childs »

Mike_Cirba

Re:The Travesty of Yale- The back 9 - hole 17
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2004, 05:16:59 PM »
Patrick & Hamilton;

You guys aren't judging the work by pictures, are you?    :o ;) ;D

Sorry...couldn't resist.

Thanks to Geoffrey for pointing out what is surely a travesty.  Almost makes me feel like a whiner about the Merion bunker project, but this is clearly architectural malfeasance and malpractice.  

Don't want to scare anyone with the legalese, but give me 24 hours and a shovel and I bet I can do a better job.  How can this stand??

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back