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.


Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« on: July 07, 2007, 03:36:28 PM »
...to maintain the areas in front of some greens softer so the ball won't run up. It's very un-links-like but Pete Dye says it makes the green look bigger than it really is."

They just said that on NBC and it sounds bizarre.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 03:37:17 PM by Matt_Cohn »

Chris_Clouser

Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2007, 04:49:38 PM »
That is very much an incorrect statement.  That is almost anti-Dye on all of his courses that I have ever played in the Indy area or otherwise.  They typically are very acceptable to run ups.  Dye is not subtle in the least in regards to this.  If he wants to allow a run up, it is there.  If he doesn't, he usually protects the front with a waste bunker or water.  It is not usually a debatable point on his layouts from my experience, especially in his modern style.  

This sounds more like a maintenance practice for the tournament and they have taken a Pete Dye statement out of context.  Or it is something that is done at Whistling Straits in particular for some reason.  Curious if Miller said this or one of the other commentators.  It sounds like one of the half-baked Miller-truisms that you hear everytime he's on the air.  I haven't watched a tournament on NBC since he basically ruined the coverage for me last year at the Senior Open with all of his inaccuracies about Prairie Dunes.  My wife turned it off because I was getting so upset.  Probably a smart move on her part.  

Tim Gavrich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2007, 04:51:44 PM »
I also found that statement odd.  One would think that if Pete Dye aimed to imitate "true" links courses with the Straits (which is obvious), he would want the areas short of the greens to play firm and fast...
Senior Writer, GolfPass

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2007, 04:53:33 PM »
I didn't realize Dye had control of course maintenance, either at PGA events or USGA events -- or at any club, for that matter, other than (maybe) Crooked Stick.

They probably doesn't know that the underlying soil base at Whistling Straits is not sand, and so maybe he's mistaking its heavier quality for deliberate maintenance rather than its nature. But then that's a charitable interpretation, and it'sd not always deserved.

« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 05:11:23 PM by Brad Klein »

Chris Cupit

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2007, 04:53:39 PM »
I read in one of Dave Pelz's books about the soft in front, firm on the green effect.  It seems that players would land short in say a US Open and think that the front area was extra soft or had been watered more than the rest of the green or approach.  The players assumed the dastardly USGA was "tricking up" the course in this way when in fact on many older courses there was a steep pitch or angle just short of the green.

The momentum killing effect of the slope, not any extra moisture was what killed short shots and prevented a run-up.  Of course the greens are firm/hard and many landing beyond the slope would not hold the green.

I agree that this doesn't seem like a Dye approach to architecture as much as it may be a turf care practice.

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2007, 04:55:25 PM »
Johnny's not there. I forget if it was Hicks or Koch.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2007, 05:12:42 PM »
Brad:

While normally I am a staunch defender of Pete Dye, I believe it was Pete's decision to plant bentgrass on the approaches at Whistling Straits, instead of fescue.  The bent gets all thatchy and really discourages a bounced-in approach.  I don't know if that was his intent but it did create the issue.

The one place on a links course where having fescue is most important is around the greens, precisely where Whistling Straits doesn't have it.

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2007, 05:14:44 PM »
Whenever I have played WS the bet grass infront of the green did not allow a run up shot.  It was disappointing to say the least.  He may not control the maintenance, but he did control what grass to use.
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2007, 05:20:23 PM »
This was a common complaint at the '04 PGA at WS, which played really, really long, from the far-back tees, on many holes, and led several players to say they couldn't utilize the run-up shot under the wind when conditions dictated such a shot.

Chris Cupit

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #9 on: July 07, 2007, 08:22:00 PM »
Well I could certainly be wrong about PD's philosophy.  At the Honors Course which he did, the fairways are an older variety of zoysia and about the only complaint I've ever had there was that the "velcro factor" of that zoysia prevented most any type of bump and run shot.

I do still think the angle of the slope in front of the green plays at least an equal role in the "run up ability" of many courses.  Often on those fairly steep slopes the shot landing right in the hill is killed but the shot that works lands well short and bounds over the steep slope and onto the green.

I'd hate to think that philosophically PD was opposed to run up shots   :(

Patrick_Mucci

Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #10 on: July 07, 2007, 08:29:10 PM »
...to maintain the areas in front of some greens softer so the ball won't run up. It's very un-links-like but Pete Dye says it makes the green look bigger than it really is."

They just said that on NBC and it sounds bizarre.


Matt,

I heard that and immediately thought that the announcer didn't know what he was talking about.

That's a maintainance issue not a design issue.

If they're trying to market the golf course as "Links Like" I can't see them deliberately softening the approaches.

Tom Doak,

Irrespective of the fairway grass chosen, which is tightly mown, wouldn't water be the defining catalyst ?

Lloyd_Cole

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #11 on: July 07, 2007, 09:26:11 PM »
Quite a few of the greens at Valderama have aprons, extending from the front of the green into what would normally be the end of the fairway, of a type of grass which was quite different to the fairways. I don't know what it is - it is greener and the underfoot feeling is much spongier than the fairways, almost mossy. This made pitch and run shots very difficult, and frankly a bad idea, as the ball would tend to pull up on landing, rather than bounce forward. This strikes me as a design issue -  no matter how dry this turf was it would be worse than the fairway for rolling the ball. It looked rather pretty and I suspect that is why it's there, which is right up there with planting beautiful trees in stupid spots.

Tim Bert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2007, 10:01:13 PM »
Well I could certainly be wrong about PD's philosophy.  At the Honors Course which he did, the fairways are an older variety of zoysia and about the only complaint I've ever had there was that the "velcro factor" of that zoysia prevented most any type of bump and run shot.

I do still think the angle of the slope in front of the green plays at least an equal role in the "run up ability" of many courses.  Often on those fairly steep slopes the shot landing right in the hill is killed but the shot that works lands well short and bounds over the steep slope and onto the green.

I'd hate to think that philosophically PD was opposed to run up shots   :(

I had the good fortune to play the Honors Course this week.  While it certainly isn't links-style or bump'n'run golf, I've always thought that the "velcro factor" of zoysia is a bit over-stated.  I certainly wouldn't have played bump shots from 100+ yards there, but I thought they worked as an option from from 40 yards in.  I also found some of the greenside areas rather "puttable."  I, like many other mid-handicappers, love zoysia!  Nothing like a teed up ball (as long as you hit the fairway.)

As for Mr. Dye's philosophy, Mr. Doak probably knows as well as anyone here, but I'd be surprised if this is his design intent (although I agree with the many comments here about Whistling Straits - no run-up options when I played it in 2002.)  For all the press his wife gets for her input to the process and her impact on his designs remaining playable for women golfers, I doubt that he would incorporate this into his regular design process.  Sounds like the TV comments probably missed the mark.    

TEPaul

Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #13 on: July 08, 2007, 07:17:41 AM »
Whether it's a design issue or a maintenance issue it should be fixed. Those approach areas should function effectively with adequate bounce and roll when conditions allow (lack of rain). If they are dried out they will function effectively unless they are thatchy and then they should be dethatched.

Creating a situation where balls stop dead in approaches and won't stop if flown on greens is about the most backwards setup imaginable. It's completely anti-maintenance meld---eg anti design.

Palmer and Co did this a few times at Bay Hill and apologized to the field for it.

If a course has really firm greens it should have firm approaches as well---eg this is the essence of "option equilibrium" or "option balance"----The Ideal Maintenance Meld.

If a course has soft approaches the greens should at least be receptive to aerial shots.

If the approaches are soft and the greens too firm what real options do players have?

Basically none.

What the hell is the matter with those people who set up courses like that? Don't they know anything about the effective playablilities of golf---eg EFFECTIVE and FUNCTIONING SHOT OPTIONS?



 

Chris Cupit

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #14 on: July 08, 2007, 11:23:43 AM »
Well I could certainly be wrong about PD's philosophy.  At the Honors Course which he did, the fairways are an older variety of zoysia and about the only complaint I've ever had there was that the "velcro factor" of that zoysia prevented most any type of bump and run shot.

I do still think the angle of the slope in front of the green plays at least an equal role in the "run up ability" of many courses.  Often on those fairly steep slopes the shot landing right in the hill is killed but the shot that works lands well short and bounds over the steep slope and onto the green.

I'd hate to think that philosophically PD was opposed to run up shots   :(

I had the good fortune to play the Honors Course this week.  While it certainly isn't links-style or bump'n'run golf, I've always thought that the "velcro factor" of zoysia is a bit over-stated.  I certainly wouldn't have played bump shots from 100+ yards there, but I thought they worked as an option from from 40 yards in.  I also found some of the greenside areas rather "puttable."  I, like many other mid-handicappers, love zoysia!  Nothing like a teed up ball (as long as you hit the fairway.)

As for Mr. Dye's philosophy, Mr. Doak probably knows as well as anyone here, but I'd be surprised if this is his design intent (although I agree with the many comments here about Whistling Straits - no run-up options when I played it in 2002.)  For all the press his wife gets for her input to the process and her impact on his designs remaining playable for women golfers, I doubt that he would incorporate this into his regular design process.  Sounds like the TV comments probably missed the mark.    

Tim

Glad you had a good time.  I've been up there since 1991 and this time of year the zoysia is at its "velcro-least" :)  Spring though it gets rather sticky.

Funny you mentioned Alice Dye.  The specific hole she was credited for "discovering/building" at the Honors was the 10th hole which you saw was being blown up.  I am sad to say that Tuesday will be my first trip up there this year so I haven't even seen the new hole. >:(

How does it look?  I heard the green may be struggling with anthrachnos (sp?)  :( :( and I know it is not close to open yet.  But the new fairway is open and I was curious as to how the new tee shot plays??  

Tim Bert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #15 on: July 08, 2007, 01:23:37 PM »
Chris,

The hole will definitely play a bit differently to the new green.  It is coming along, but there are still some bare spots on it.  Our caddie told us September was the target to begin play.  It will definitely remove a little bit of the hike to the 11th tee.  In the 100 degree heat index that march really caught us all off guard.

This was my first time seeing the course, so when you say new fairway, I'm not sure how the original played.  Is the only "new" fairway the part that leads up to the new green, or did they do something much more dramatic?  I thought the hole played well enough to the current green that they could use it as an alternate green when the new one opens (though I'm told that is not the plan.)

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #16 on: July 08, 2007, 02:25:52 PM »
The run-up aprons in front of WS 17 and 18 are perfect examples of areas that are bent grass, need to be watered more heavily in heat, or need to have the Scott Anderson, years of cultural treatment to make the turf evolve to hearty that can stand the practice of browning out, lean and mean, firmer and faster than what we see for TV greenery at current WS.  

Also, just before the 2004 PGA, there were select FWs well before the immediate forefront of greens that were more rye-fescue, that were wider in the throat and allowed balls to bound from pretty significant distances short and wide high of greens where they could bound in for a greater optional playing choice for shorter knockers.  The bent grass that swings from left to right with what was a mid FW bunker slightly off the higher left of the FW had mowed rye-fescue mowed around it, and that big bouncing from right to left shot could be an option.  But, it was brought maybe 25-30 yards in as intermediate rye-fescue about 2 1/2 inches to 3 inches, where it has now remained.  

But, as the WS design is from the begining, with the general sloping contouring in the foregreens, that if maintained more firm would only bound most shots into the difficult bunkers, I think that firm and fast conditions in those immediate foregreens would be a double penal factor and would put even more balls into bunkers rather than allow or reward the crafty ground players to bound some good shots in.  So, I guess it is all relative and probable the bent and predictably softer fore greens is a concession to the more tricky foregreen and side green shaping that would catch perhaps an unfair amount of shots.  They need fewer green surrounds bunkers and milder contouring in my opinion if they want firmer foregreens.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2007, 02:28:42 PM by RJ_Daley »
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Chris Cupit

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2007, 10:39:57 PM »
Tim,

The old tenth hole was a straightaway par 4 about 435.  The fairway set down low in a valley.  It was impossible to keep dry and the fairway was always in (relatively) poor condition.  Also, at 435 the hole was becoming a drive and 8-PW for many scratch players, particularly the college kids. :(

The "new" fairway was routed to the right and up on the higher ground in what was the right rough.  The valley became a large bunker to the left of the new fairway.  The new green is now an additional 55 yards behind the old green--490! :o ???

I hope September is possible but based on what I've recently heard it may be next year.  Hope you had a fun day!

Ian Andrew

Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2007, 10:54:24 PM »
Patrick,

Irrespective of the fairway grass chosen, which is tightly mown, wouldn't water be the defining catalyst ?

I built a public course near Toronto where I planned ample room on the fairways and created most of the difficulty at the greens using short grass. It was the key element to the design and since the course was built on sand and well drained I assumed it would play hard and fast always.

While the thatch was kept off the greens through regular maintenance the surrounds were left alone - resulting in a thatch build up. Any ball hitting the short grass banks around the greens would not bounce and the players now had to play flop shots when putts and bump and run shots were intended.

The problem was thatch, not water.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2007, 11:03:36 PM by Ian Andrew »

TaylorA

Re:"It's a design philosophy of Pete Dye...
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2007, 11:33:06 PM »
Why not ask Pete Dye why the approaches are what they are? Maybe if Tim Liddy, since he was working with Dye at the time WS  was built, catches wind of this thread he would know or could find out.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back