Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Mike Golden on June 15, 2008, 06:24:08 PM
-
As I watch the way the tees have been moved around at Torrey Pines I'm thinking about which holes at Bethpage Black will be candidates for this flexibility.
The most obvious ones for me are the two par 5's, #4 and #13. Neither are reachable from the back tees (at least I don't think so) but a move to the forward tee on #4 could make it really interesting since the green is protected by a big bunker in front, the green slopes away from you, and there is a huge dropoff behind the green. You would have to hit an absolutely perfect approach shot to hold the small green but it would be exciting to watch.
On #13, the cross bunker is about 30(?) yards in front of the green, playing it at a distance that would make reaching in 2 require a perfect drive and fairway wood would really create some interesting decisions (much more than #18 at Torrey Pines, where it seems like almost everyone can reach).
#6 is also a candidate with the ability to cut the dogleg and get it down right in front of the green. The par 3's are all different lengths so I don't see moving them back and forth as making much sense.
#17 would play much differently, obviously, from the front tees at 175 than all the way back at 220, maybe a front tee with a front left hole location would be a challenge.
-
Mike,
Let's see if I can answer your questions.
You observed, "The most obvious ones for me are the two par 5's, #4 and #13. Neither are reachable from the back tees (at least I don't think so) but a move to the forward tee on #4 could make it really interesting since the green is protected by a big bunker in front, the green slopes away from you, and there is a huge dropoff behind the green. You would have to hit an absolutely perfect approach shot to hold the small green but it would be exciting to watch."
# 4 will only be played from the upper championship tee. The reason for this is that a number of players, including one of those in tomorrow's playoff, would consider going for the hole in two. Remember, it is only a 540 yard par-5 with a banked landing that shoots the ball forward and downhill. It is because no one will be going for it in two, the unanimous reason being the green sloping from front to back, that a planned further back tee was not built.
You observed, "On #13, the cross bunker is about 30(?) yards in front of the green, playing it at a distance that would make reaching in 2 require a perfect drive and fairway wood would really create some interesting decisions (much more than #18 at Torrey Pines, where it seems like almost everyone can reach)."
A new back tee adding some 65+ yards in length was added. I wouldn't be surprised to see a combination of hole lengths of the up tee of 595-600 and the new back tee at 660-670 used.
More interesting is a VERY new suggestion of playing 7 as the par-five that it was originally designed at from the original championship tee. It is 600 yards from there and there was a new tee that will make it a par-4 of 525-530 yards, about 30 more than in 2002.
You observed, "#6 is also a candidate with the ability to cut the dogleg and get it down right in front of the green. The par 3's are all different lengths so I don't see moving them back and forth as making much sense."
#6 will not have a forward tee. They have cut down the rough on the face of the downhill side of the slope. This is being done to encourage players to try and fly the hill.
You observed, "#17 would play much differently, obviously, from the front tees at 175 than all the way back at 220, maybe a front tee with a front left hole location would be a challenge."
I would expect some change in tee location but nothing that would be overly dramatic.
The bigger change will be at #14. I would expect to see a front-left hole location in the new tongue played from a far front-right tee. This will be a diabolical 130 yards. With the tee box approximately 20+ yards wide and 30+ yards long, and with the back and right portions of the gren also recovered, a wonderful choice of angles and distances will be available to choose from.
The 9th hole has three changes to it. The new tee will add length and, combined with the new bunker built across the face of the upslope to the second plateau, will make a player trying to reach it with their drive a real risk/reward decision. In addition, the fairway is being cut much firther to the right and into the existing rough area.
The 10th hole may be shaped differently than in 2002 with a decision to shift the fairway to the right in order to bring the bunkers back into play being considered. The same idea is also being considered for 11.
The 15th has the original far back tee built but never used for 2002. It's use is still being debated.
Also, a bit of distance has been added to 16 with an extension to the back of the tee box.
-
In a couple of weeks I will be playing a practice round there and will show how the 9th has been absolutley ruined. Once upon a time the Black was among my favorite courses in the world. Due to USGA or Rees tinkering I am not sure that it is as good as the Red anymore. 14 is an absolute piece of s__t hole. This was once a superb not so long par 3 and now it is the same length with a 47 yard deep green and a stupid back tier and out of place left bunker that looks totally Rees and absolutley not Tilly. From what I have heard, 9 is now fully ruined. I will post the the results of the damage in a a couple of weeks. If the USGA is serious about elasticity, The Black will be returned to wide fairways so that angle of attack is restored. Incidentally, the 4th should be reached by just about everone, but the cost of a short or long miss can be problematical.
-
How long could BPB play next year from the tournament tips? I mean, what is the max yardage?
-
Robert,
At first glance I also questioned the changes to #14 because the green shape with the new back tier/fall-off just looks so unnatural. I have less of an issue with the left bunker but they need to tweak the green shape.
I would withhold judgment on #9 until you play it. I actually liked the changes with the new back tees but I have yet to see it with the finished bunkers.
The new back tee on #13 is eye opening but with as far as these guys hit it, it will restore some of the shot values that Tillie intended. I hope they are versatile with the tees on that hole as Philip mentioned.
-
I agree with Robert that 9 and 14 have gotten worse. It seems as though the base of the hill in the fairway will be filled with divots, and everyone playing their second shots (blind) from about 175-180.
The 14th green is ugly now, and if they use the back tier on Sunday, you will see everyone hit to the middle of the green and try to two-putt. It just seems like too risky of a shot considering what trouble lurks behind the green. As evidenced by this year's Open, having some "birdie holes" down the stretch made it more interesting.
Someone mentioned playing 7 as a par 5. Most people around here would love to see that, but I doubt it will happen. There is a new tee on 7, closer to the 6th green, that would probably be used for the hole to play around 515 as a par 4.
-
The issue with Bethpage Black for 2009 is NOT TO GO hog wild with even MORE AND MORE DISTANCE !!!
The Black has plenty of qualities but this obsessive pursuit for yardage has only made the course one dimensional -- power before anything else.
A few suggestions for the '09 event ...
Let's start with my #1 pet peeve -- make the 18th a possible driveable par-3 hole -- I mean how much more interesting would that be with the 72nd hole of the event coming down to a hole where that possibility truly does exist.
Now you have a non-descript lay-up shot off the tee followed by even more boring mid-to-short iron to the putting surface. Kudos to Mike Davis for his understanding this dimensions with his work at WF/W, Oakmont and even with TP/S.
In regards to #15 -- the max tee box was not usedbecause of gallery stands and is likely to remain as such for the '09 event given the amount of people on property. The hole played to 4.6 stroke average anyway and adding length there is not really needed.
In regards to #7 I see no reason why the hole cannot be played as par-4 for two rounds and as a par-5 for the other two rounds. Make the hole even more versatile by this manner and the decision-making possibiltiies only increase several times over.
In regards to #6 it was a mistake to grow rough across the downslope of the hole for the '02 event. It makes more sense for that downslope to be cut as fairway grass so players can be tempted to get a ball to the botton of the hill.
In regards to #10 I see no reason why this hole -- similar to TP/S's 14th can't be played as short-par 4 for one of the rounds. This hole caused plenty of controversy when the tee markers were not pushed up during the early rounds because of inclement weather. I'd like the USGA to consider havign a tee box on the other side of the rough cut and provide a hole situation beyond being just another long par-4.
In regards to #13 enough of the talk in having the hole play a million more yards in length. Give the players an opportunity to go for the green in two blows at 500 or so yards. Make action the cominant ingredient for BB -- not an overkill with more distance for more distance sake.
I'd also like #17 to play shorter so that pin placements can be placed extremely close on either the extreme left or right sides.
I have long been a fan of BB but the drive for more distance is akin to the steroid induced baseball players -- it takes away what the course is about and only reinforces the thoughts of many people that BB is simply a brute of a layout with little compelling architecture. I can only hope the USGA seriously puts on its thinking hats for the '09 event.
-
some of these statements make it clear that many of you underestimate the skill of the golfers as well as the objective of the usga. AS IT SHOULD BE, the design of the set up is to create the most challenging test of the year. This is the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. playing 18 at 275-300 is outrageous, as is moving par 5s up to 500. guys would DESTROY that hole if it was anything under 550, theres not much to it really...
-
Bryce M:
The issue, which you have seemed to misplace in your thinking, is not to have holes play the exact way for everyday of the event. The USGA, to the considerable skill of Mike Davis and the Championship Committee, has seen fit to be elastic in how tees and pins are placed.
Bethpage Black would benefit greatly from being elastic in this regard and move away from utter dependence on sheer distance and overall difficulty. The Black's architecture can be maxed in a wider variety of ways than was demonstrated in the '02 event. The suggestions I offered below were meant to elevate the decision-making elements that were front and center on a number of holes at TP/S and previously at WF/W and Oakmont.
-
some of these statements make it clear that many of you underestimate the skill of the golfers as well as the objective of the usga. AS IT SHOULD BE, the design of the set up is to create the most challenging test of the year. This is the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. playing 18 at 275-300 is outrageous, as is moving par 5s up to 500. guys would DESTROY that hole if it was anything under 550, theres not much to it really...
there is nothing in the opening comment about playing a par 5 at 500 yards, if you knew the golf course you would know that no matter how far forward the tee would be on #4 no one will clear the cross bunker and the approach shot from just in front of the cross bunker, which would be about 195, requires an absolute perfectly hit ball and trajectory to have a chance of holding the green, which is no more than 15 paces deep, is fronted by a massive bunker, and is death long.
As for the other par 5, as Phillip Young says, the back tees are now over 600 yards, my thought was to have it play at probably 550-560 where two perfect shots could clear the cross bunker and hold the green.
-
Mike,
The only way to play 13 at 550-560 would be by building another new tee about 40-60 yards in front of the existing back tee used in 2002.
Actually, I am a big fan of the new far back tee at 660. The reason is because it actually returns the hole to being closer to it's original design aspects for those playing in the Open.
Most of the players will have a go/no go decision to make after their drives as to whether to lay-up back in the fairway because of the left-side bunker. This was very much a non-factor in 2002. Carrying this will be rewarded with a very desirable spot in the fairway between there and the further cross-bunker. Yet even a few will be able to consider going at the green in two by carrying that. In my opinion, the hole becomes far more multi-dimensional from the back tee...
-
I think people underestimate how far most tour players hit it now. I play college golf, I played there in the summer. I am a BELOW avg. length player in college. But with the technology, i hit 3 iron into 13 from the farthest back we could play at that moment... Tiger is 30 yds longer than 2002 if he wants to be now. Look at how he eagled 13 at Torrey from the back tee on Friday, at 615... (it was COLD too)
I understand the elastic tee idea, but I think its better suited to be prudent and selective with it, rather than some of the crazy ideas listed here (ie 18 at 300)
-
Bryce,
You'll have to forgive Matt as he had that "revelation" of a drivable par-four several years back. Whenever anyone on staff at the home hear him spouting away about that "idiot Phil Young doesn't know a damn thing" and "Turn 18 into a drivable par-four" they just give him a glass of warm milk so that he can go back to sleep... ;D
-
haha well i love the elastic tee thing as well, i hope they use it for match play at pinehurst this summer for the amateur. I just don't think it should be forced... there are a bunch of great holes for this on certain courses, i just don't think bethpage is one of those courses...
-
Phil Y:
Be sure to send the same "warm milk" to Mike Davis and the folks on the championship committee regarding the usage of driveable par-4's as the perfect decision-making type hole for US Opens. It worked very well at WF/W and even better at Oakmont. Having that situation replicated at TP/S's 14th hole was also well done.
The 18th at BB has had more face-lifts save for Medinah #3. It is a boring mindless lay-up hole that becomes nothing more than formulaic long iron or metal club / hybrid to hit nothing more than a short to mid-iron for the approach. Hello Phil -- anybody home? I call that a zzzzzzzzz type hole for its unique position at the end of such a unique and fascinating golf course.
The issue with BB which you Phil don't want to acknowledge is that the course has been morphed with steroid-induced distance grabbing obsession. Every hole, in the minds of those responsible, is to add EVEN MORE AND MORE distance. I say this as a true lover of the course and as a guy who can hit the ball a decent ways off the tee.
The spirit of the Black and the magic of the US Open is to bring to the forefront a number of exciting elements that MAGNIFY the spirit of Tillinghast without overdosing to the point of OVERKILL this manic desire to have more and more distance without regard for finesse.
The 18th at BB can play as a driveable par-4 -- it would not be anymore forced or unnatural than what the USGA did with the 14th at TP/S.
Bryce Mueller:
I take issue with your statements that Tiger is 20 yards longer now than in 2002. Back then he hit the ball even further than what you see today. Check out the stats from the various majors over the last few years to see for yourself. In fact, Golf World recently ran a story on equipment in which Tiger purposely plays a high spin ball that leaves 7-10 yards out of play for him.