[Marc Haring]

My home club at Cumberwell Park, just on the southern edge of the Cotswolds has recently unveiled the new orange nine holes that brings us up to quite an impressive 36 hole complex. I managed to persuade the owners to go with a totally different concept for the design that personally speaking was very golfclubatlas inspired. I wanted ground game options, masses of strategy, wide fairways and no forced carries over water. Thankfully our course architect Adrian Stiff was all for the ideas and together we have come up with the following. The site was actually inert waste landfill and the project was low budget so we haven’t incorporated anything pretty or superfluous. The main thing is, since opening, it’s been a real hit with the members which is nice as this is a real departure from what they’re used to.

The 1st sets the scene with a short par 4 of about 330, downhill. We tightened things up around the green and added a couple of little things to get the golfers thinking from the off, like a nice little downhill slope at the front of the green and a rise going up to it. We have also tried to incorporate sucker pin positions on every hole.



We also added a nice level ledge in the fairway that is a good lay up point at about 100 yards back from the green.



#2 is a short hole where we’ve stuck in a kick plate on the right side of the green and some pretty severe slopes. The back tee plays from the left side and is about 220 yards so the bunkers come into play big time.



I like #3. It is about 420 from the tips and plays to an angled fairway with a carry bunker at about 250 and a aiming bunker at 350. The green is kind of a modified redan with some severe slopes to the right but it runs away from you and there is a nice deep swale protecting the left side of the green.


The approach with the pin way over on the right side.



4 is 190 yarder. We wanted a punchbowl here and I literally gave a picture of a classic UK hole to the shaper. I think he did a pretty good job.



#5 is a 360 yard par four with 100 yards of fairway and a row of central bunkers. The right side bail out option leaves a blind second to a small and sloping green.



The tighter left side fairway leaves a straight-ahead approach.

[Marc Haring]

#6 is a real tough 440 yards against the prevailing wind which is often very severe. It plays to a shared fairway with OB tight up the left side.


The big bale out right will still get you on the fairway but you’ll be totally blind and hitting to a skyline green.

[Marc Haring]

#7 is 560 odd and again gives the option of a safe hit to the right into the shared 6th fairway. If your looking at going for the green in two you need to skirt these bunkers, ideally with a power draw. The fairway narrows up a lot at about 260.


This is the second shot if you nail the drive.


#8 tee shot. The hole is pushing 600 yards from the tips. The three bunkers in the fairway are in play but the real trick is to commit yourself to blasting one left over the rough and mounds. There’s plenty of fairway up there but it requires a bit of bravery, especially into the wind.


The second is played towards a couple of bunkers at about 50 yards out.


You need to be over the right side as the green is heavily sloped with a diagonal tier in it.



This is the last hole. 220 yards from the tips, the other side of the valley. We’ve got a hollow right in front of the green that catches a lot of golfers. The back of the green is made up of a wall of quarry stone that is a feature of the local Bath area. We have softened it with some gorse planting.


Finally, here is a view that you get from the top of the course.

[James Bennett]

Marc

good to hear about your success, and Adrian Stiff's input.

When I saw your second hole, my first thought was Riviera #4 in LA.  Cumberwell Park Orange #2 is a bit shorter, and a bit less use of the right slope (slightly steeper by the green at your course).  If the tee could be placed just a little to the left (your back tee is further left according to your text), and the hill slope on the right cut back to fairway, and the front bunkers gathered a lesser shot played straight at the green, then voila, George Thomas and Riviera #4 - well in part.  No short front bunker on the right though

I am not seriously suggesting anything, but here are three pictures of Riviera #4 for your interest. I think Riviera #4 is about 240 yards.

Ben Hogan's opinion


From the tee (you can hit it too far right!  If you block it)


Looking back from the green


James B

[Adrian_Stiff]

Nice to see those pics Marc! I especially like the 9th from behind the green, that gorse looks pretty vicious already.

[Marc Haring]

Quite like to keep this on the first page for a couple of days at least. I think I speak for Adrian when I say we are keen on feedback, including any negative comments.

Thanks for the pictures James. That is one great hole.

[Jon Earl]

Marc

I reckon you and Adrian have done a fine job. It looks like a fun and interesting 9 to play. Plenty of width and interesting movement on both fairways and greens. I also like the slightly ragged-looking bunkers.

A few questions.

What are the main characteristics of the other 27 holes  if this 9 is a 'real departure' for the members?

What was the thinking behind having back-to-back long par 5s?

How did you persuade the owner to go with your plans?

[Marc Haring]

[quote author=Jon Earl
A few questions.

What are the main characteristics of the other 27 holes  if this 9 is a 'real departure' for the members?

What was the thinking behind having back-to-back long par 5s?

How did you persuade the owner to go with your plans?

John, thanks.

To be fair all the nines have an individual character, which we sum up as Parkland, Woodland and Lakeland. This made it easy to go with yet another design concept. Also, the new nine is located on the higher ground that was devoid of trees and offered great views, and we did not want to block them out.

The owners are not golfers but do like to see a return on their investment. The Lakeland nine which was the third nine to be built is great to play for the visitor but has become the least popular with the members due to the forced carries. I think they just got fed up with losing golf balls and ruined scores. Because of this, I think the owners were quite happy to go along with our thoughts on the new nine.

I’ll let Adrian respond on the back to back fives question as he was totally responsible for the routing, of which I think he did a terrific job. With the exposed nature of the site and the two holes going in opposite directions, the holes do play completely differently.


Here's a view which I think is fairly typical of Cumberwell in general.

[Adrian_Stiff]

A few questions.

What are the main characteristics of the other 27 holes  if this 9 is a 'real departure' for the members?

What was the thinking behind having back-to-back long par 5s?

How did you persuade the owner to go with your plans?

Hi Jon - The first '18' are very parkland with a typical resort type feel, Par 72 but very user friendly, the next '9' were more difficult with more undulating greens and water far more 'in play'. It is intended to add a further nine to this one and a further nine to the new 'Orange' nine (4 holes are already shaped and have been since about 1995!) This new 'Orange' nine formed part of the original scheme which we started way back in 1989, its just taken a long time with landfill to form the site.
This site is on top of a hill will 360 degree views. so never really lent itself to an 'American' type of course anyway. As Marc says its definitely been inspired from what we have both learned on this web-site. The owners liked the minimal concept so were onboard straight away.
The back to back 'fives, 7 & 8 actually came out of an error, the 4th hole was never part of the orginal routing as the 4th to 5th were one hole (a par 5) and there was a hole between 7 and 8. Too much material got dumped by the contractor in the wrong position and we chose to re work the routing rather than move the material (it was quite a lot). I think its ended up for the better. That aside I dont see any reason in having consective par 5 holes, if it fits the routing I think do it!

[Jon Earl]

Marc

Thanks for the response.

Just checked the website. Can't be many clubs where you get 4 distinctive 9s to play for £700 per year.

[Jon Earl]

Adrian

Thanks for your answers too.

I don't have a problem with back-to-back to par 5s either. It's just rare to see especially in the UK.

Interesting story about the change in the routing and how you feel that the new configuration was better. Has anything like this happened to you before?

Thanks

Jon

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian

Thanks for your answers too.

I don't have a problem with back-to-back to par 5s either. It's just rare to see especially in the UK.

Interesting story about the change in the routing and how you feel that the new configuration was better. Has anything like this happened to you before?

Thanks

Jon

Jon- I think there are a few occasions where I have changed the routings 'during construction', a couple of times I have made holes that run in the same direction with different green positions, ie the short hole first then the par 4 rather than 'as drawn'. I normally do 18 green plans and 18 tee plans, I think the best I have stuck with is 14 'as drawn' green plans, and sometimes I wonder why I bother with tee plans, I think sometimes during construction you just see better opportunities. At Cumberwell whilst we made similar drawings, we relied more on principles, Marc had ideas of incorporating certain styles of greens which mainly I was in favour of, we argued quite a bit about the 3rd hole, where he wanted a Redan and I think it did not quite fit. We compromised. We worked more with individual sketch plans and site visits to check, plus of course Marc was there to help sculpt the individual bunker finishes.

[Jon Earl]

Thanks again for the response.

Any hints on which classic UK hole was the 'template' for the 4th?

PS Hope you get some more questions on this thread as you have an interesting story to tell.

[Marc Haring]

Here you go John.

[Jon Earl]

Nice comparison pictures. Looks like the shaper did a good job.

I think I know what hole it is. It should get some exposure next July.

I am ashamed to say that I only recognised it by playing Tiger Woods PGA tour!  
Must play the real thing one day.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Great stuff and congratulations to all.


Marc I thought one of the accepted facts on here is that courses have lost width at least partly to keep costs down.  Less width = less irrgiation and less grass to cut.  Was that a major discussion with the owners?  Isn't the worry that when you are no longer involved someone will say hey we can save money ...


Best news of all is the members reaction.
PS I'm now very curious to play these holes, well done.

[Sean_A]

I like the look of the course.  The par 3s look especially devine.  Typically, I would like to see less bunkering as the land looks as though it provides plenty of interest.  The one aspect which really interests me is that most of the holes tell me to open the shoulders and have a go.  How much balls the ball run?  The course looks like it may be near an escarpement which suggests that what happens after the ball lands is more important than when its in the air.  Also, does the land left of the last green kick balls hard toward oob?

Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

I like the look of the course.  The par 3s look especially devine.  Typically, I would like to see less bunkering as the land looks as though it provides plenty of interest.  The one aspect which really interests me is that most of the holes tell me to open the shoulders and have a go.  How much balls the ball run?  The course looks like it may be near an escarpement which suggests that what happens after the ball lands is more important than when its in the air.  Also, does the land left of the last green kick balls hard toward oob?

Ciao

Sean & Tony- I am sure theres an invatation to come down and play it.. Sean the last hole is about 150 yards from the normal tees, I suppose a hooky 7 iron might get into trouble, but I certainly never thought OOB would play much part in this hole.. We made the valley that runs through the course much steeper during the construction, it will be left mainly wild and should natural rejevunate with whatever self seeds, Marc will pretty much decide the planting over this winter, but I know he intends to keep things to a minimum with perhaps just a few thorn, field maple and oak in the roughs and maybe some gorse.

[Sean_A]

I like the look of the course.  The par 3s look especially devine.  Typically, I would like to see less bunkering as the land looks as though it provides plenty of interest.  The one aspect which really interests me is that most of the holes tell me to open the shoulders and have a go.  How much balls the ball run?  The course looks like it may be near an escarpement which suggests that what happens after the ball lands is more important than when its in the air.  Also, does the land left of the last green kick balls hard toward oob?

Ciao

Sean & Tony- I am sure theres an invatation to come down and play it.. Sean the last hole is about 150 yards from the normal tees, I suppose a hooky 7 iron might get into trouble, but I certainly never thought OOB would play much part in this hole.. We made the valley that runs through the course much steeper during the construction, it will be left mainly wild and should natural rejevunate with whatever self seeds, Marc will pretty much decide the planting over this winter, but I know he intends to keep things to a minimum with perhaps just a few thorn, field maple and oak in the roughs and maybe some gorse.

Adrian

Thanks!  I was just curious if you you designed oob as a problem on the last.  Be sure to tell Marc to go easy on the gorse.  We don't want the Scots to feel at home now do we?  I am sure Tony and I would graciously accept any offer to play Cumberwell.  All I have to do is find it on the map.  

Ciao

[Marc Haring]

Marc I thought one of the accepted facts on here is that courses have lost width at least partly to keep costs down.  Less width = less irrgiation and less grass to cut.  Was that a major discussion with the owners?  Isn't the worry that when you are no longer involved someone will say hey we can save money ...

Tony, we are able to maintain wide fairways because of this......


Nearly every golf club has gone to lightweight dedicated fairway mowers but our mower has at least double the output. The biggest factor though is that a dedicated mower will cost you about £35,000 and you can throw it in the skip after about 5 years. Our one costs £15,000 and should still be mowing without any problems in 20 years time. We even have one old set of gangs that is about 30 years old and still gives as good a cut as anything. So depreciation is what gives you the big saving. Most courses these days have about 15 hectares of fairway mown turf. We have at least 70, so you'd need maybe 3 of the expensive mowers to do the job. There are draw backs. For instance we’re not going to get that super fine 9mm cut and we can’t box off the clippings and you certainly won’t get any checkerboard finish with these mowers but for our market, it really isn’t a problem.

Guy’s!!
All GCA’ers are more than welcome to come over anytime as my guest. We are still carrying out a lot of work on the Orange nine but please just let me know and I will arrange everything this end.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()