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.


Ted_Sturges

Redan greens
« on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
I played a round at Camargo Club in Cincinnati yesterday, and noticed a feature on their redan hole that I had not seen or noticed before on any of the other redans I have played.  Their redan hole (#15) is an absolutely gorgeous hole that looks and plays as well as any redan I've seen.  The green has a feature that I think might be unique to redan holes.  The green has a mini-spine or ridge in it, bisecting the green at approximately the same angle as the green complex, that "catches" any shots that land on the front part of the green and turn those balls down left and short of the back half of the green.  To get to the back hole location, the golfer must land beyond this spine, or play the shot higher up the bank to allow the ball to roll beyond the spine and get to the back half of the green.  It was a really cool feature that made the redan at Camargo play differently than any other I can remember playing.  Is this a unique feature to Carmargo's redan?  Has anyone seen another redan hole that has this feature?  George Bahto are you listening?TS

MYoung

Dunlop White III's Below the Trees is now posted
« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
Dunlop,I enjoyed your article ,Below The Trees, very much .  I am a member atAthens Country Club in Athens, Ga. which is a 1926 Ross course that is stillintact.  I have requested that all members of our Historic Comm. read yourarticle and I have forwarded it to several.From a post I read today it seems as though you may have revised thearticle.  Is this correct?  If so could you e-mail me a copy?Thanks!

ofccsupt

Terry Lavin's My Home Course on Olympia Fields North Course is posted
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
When the club was selected for the Senior Open a 'master plan' renovation was in progress.  The master plan involved reworking bunkers, leveling and adding tees, recapturing lost green space, etc. The club never anticipated a US Open so the renovation was not too drastic in terms of length or depth of bunkers.   After the club was selected to host the Open, All of the bunkers were deepened, new tees were added to lengthen the course (7177 yard, par 70)and two greens were redone because they had too much slope at US Open green speeds.  

Bill_Spellman

Bunker placement
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
At the Pete Dye Cup held at Crooked Stick a few years ago, PD was the speaker at the cocktail party and he was in a story telling mood(ie-scotch on the rocks). He talked about when Harbortown was built, there was a tree next to the big fairway bunker on the left side of 13 or 14(can't remeber-upcoming senior). After watching the players go through the hole in the 1st round, 12 guys hit the ball into the bunker. That night he got a crew out there, took the tree down and sodded it over. The next day 37 players went into the bunker, and all of them were cussing at Dye. Perception is reality  

RAW

TEE Reconstruction
« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
PatrickIt may come as no surprise that I also belong to a club that is going through a similar master plan program. I made it a point to bring our Greens chairman to a one-day seminar put on by the ASGCA. The program is Renovation 101 and is held throughout the Country at 3-5 locations each year. The program includes presentations by four to six architects and provides a step by step approach to initiating, developing, selling, and implementing a master plan. I will never forget Craig Schreiner adamantly warning that a vote for approval should never take place without knowing that the vote will pass.  The presentation explains how to get the majority of the membership on board during the early stages by educating them and identifying their concerns. It is very important to retain the righr architect, one who is willing to work with the membership and make them feel comfortable with the plan. As far as the $25,000 for a useless plan, it must be considered as a lesson learned.  In the big picture $25,000 is less than 1% of the total $3.0 million budget....peanuts. Regroup, interview several architects who are interested in implementing modern technology into an older design and move forward with plan that will serve the membership for the next 25-50 years. If you would like to contact me directly, please email me at puregolf@erols.com  

RAW

TEE Reconstruction
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
PatrickSorry, the proper name for the course is Remodeling University. You can obtain more info at ASGCA.org

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Importance of Tweaking New Courses by the Oringinal Archie
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
We batted this one around quite some time ago, and I was also of the mind that it would be good for the archie to be able to go back and tweak things, and that it would be a preferable thing for that to happen.  But, I was surprised at what Tom Doak had to say about that.  Perhaps he will once again step in here and give his thoughts about the need to do that...
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.

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Importance of Tweaking New Courses by the Oringinal Archie
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
RJ, given your statement, hope Tom comments. If I were the Czar of my own club, would always see it as an asset to have someone like TD, BC and GH and the others come back and brainstorm, its a free option isn't it?? (low cost)? Pat's membership idea would suit me well.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Five and Dime at Ridgewood
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
I expect Gib will comment on the drivable par four on the frontside at Olympic Lake.  I believe it's #7.  I love that golf hole.  

Ed_Baker

The common Qualites of the Past and Present
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
Tom MacW,A very interesting question,particularly because at face value it would seem an impossible comparison between apples and oranges. However,you did specify "the very best modern designs".Certainly,with the cummulative knowledge of the contributors here, a reasonable number of common elements should be easily identified between great golf courses regardless of the date of construction.I put up the same kind of rhetorical thread a few weeks back on "Just what makes a Classic a Classic",it turns out that this is difficult to define.(redanman) opined that the very reason he preferred "classics" was that they had very little in common,ie; they had a unique character and personality of their own.Which to me is a very valid viewpoint.To try and list actual physical design elements that are common to all great courses is virtually impossible.So it would seem that our preferences seem to come more from the subjective and difficult to define result of the "proper" melding of form and function that is both utiliterian and an art form for that particular site.Many on this site have agreed that the personal preference between one great course over another comes down largely to the blonde,brunette,redhead,evaluation.All are great,for different reasons based on individual taste.I would offer the following commonalities to great golf courses,yet each entry on my list is a concept in itself and difficult to define as an individual element.None are exclusive to a particular era,or date of construction.Great Routing.Variety of holes.Including the ability to be equally interesting in most weather conditions.(A course that does not rely more than it should on wind,or fast and firm conditions,to be challenging for the expert.)The architectural merits stand by themselves regardless of conditions.(NGLA,Pine Valley,Pebble.)No obvious contrived artificial features.Proper maintenence meld considered by design.Maximum use of the most severe topographical features of the land disturbing them as little as possible during construction.(The hand of man,is much more obvious,than the hand of god.)I am sure many on here can expand on this much better than I.Just my opinion.  

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Five and Dime at Ridgewood
« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
Mike,The hole you are describing sounds very much like the "Knoll" style hole, as described by George Bahto in his informative interview here at GCA. A driveable par four, if done well, is definitely fun to play. More should be built.    
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

John Bernhardt

Golden Ocala and other classic "knockoffs"
« Reply #11 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
That would be great Neal. Money Hill is nice Ron Garl course near Slidell.

John Bernhardt

Golden Ocala and other classic "knockoffs"
« Reply #12 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
Actually i played at the Country Club of Louisiana sunday. It is a Jack N course which as a general rule means I would not think much of it. It has 18 good to great holes with wonderful balance. It really is a good course yet Jack moves so much dirt which adds nothing and takes away from the natural feel of the course that one leaves wondering why anyone would hire his firm now.Also, the Univiersity Club and Baton rouge Country Club and the Bluffs are good Baton Rouge courses too.

THuckaby2

Five and Dime at Ridgewood
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2001, 07:00:00 PM »
On the subject of drivable par 4's, can I just say that I was COMPLETELY blown away by the genius of #2 at NGLA?  You have all of this going on:1. The caddie gives you the aggressive line for the tee shot and you think to yourself "he's insane - there's no way that can be the intended golf shot" as he stands in the brush 50 yards left of the bunker and fairway to the right of that, with a carry over a valley that visually looks too for for Tiger to do.  All your senses tell you to hit it at the grass you can see, or maybe if you are bold over the bunker - but that visually looks damn far also.2. Thus the unitiated, timid, or smart (depending on the wind direction) hit it at or right of the fairway bunker, toward the beckoning grass.3. You then find that IF you've kept it far enough left (ie over the bunker), you are down in a bowl with a semi-blind pitch over a bunker... if you've gone too far right, you can be completely blind... but for those of lesser strength, there also is a flat area way to the right that makes for a clear, but longer shot...4. Meanwhile, on the caddie's given aggressive line, upon reaching the area of one's 2nd shot, you see the issue - the carry really ISN'T that far - it has to be very doable in no wind - and the reward is VERY tangible - a fairway appears up there on the left shelf, and slopes quite sharply down toward the green, with no bunkers or anything in the way - here comes the head slap - a drive in that direction can CERTAINLY not only make the carry, but also reach the green!5. But oh no, genius CB Mac isn't done yet.  Just to show that the power game isn't completely rewarded with reckless abandon, he throws in a sharp "ramp" about five yards short of the green... with the result that in normal firm and fast conditions, three things occur:  a) it helps a ball creeping down the hill but hit strong enough to actually reach the green; b)it punishes the over-egoed who take the aggressive line but don't hit it far enough, by complicating tremendously a pitch from back by the fairway bunker; and most importantly, c) an aggressive drive played perhaps too low and too hard will actually PICK UP speed off that ramp, and thus the very real possibility of going THROUGH the green presents itself!  To make matters "worse", there is a sharp slope behind the green, leading to a shot that cannot be very good for the score if one goes over.Whew!  What a great golf hole!  There are at least five very real distinct ways to play the tee shot, and the world of outcomes seems to be limitless.  A strong player has the very real chance to make a 2... but a mistep most definitely means 5 or higher.  The player of less strength has a quite doable way to make a 4 with two well-planned shots...Now THAT is a great short par 4.And here's the greatness of NGLA again - one could make a strong argument that #2 is among the weaker holes on the course!Do NOT get me started on #3... #8... Sorry for the ramble.  This all might be very obvious to those who frequent NGLA but it literally took my breath away.  I didn't want to leave this hole!TH

gookin

Re:Redan greens
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2004, 10:13:24 PM »
Ted,

Looking at old threads. I have an answer to your question.  The sixth hole at Fox Chapel has a green just as you described.  I is a left to right redan with a spine down the middle.  Any pin placed between the spine and the deep faced bunker results in a devilish down hill putt.  Just getting the ball on the green is not enough.

Top100Guru

Re:Redan greens
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2004, 10:51:11 PM »
I had a hole-in-one a few weeks ago on a Redan Hole.......Number 11 at Mountain Lake!!!!!!!!!

Donnie Beck

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redan greens
« Reply #16 on: February 27, 2004, 07:31:30 AM »
Ted,

I have never been to Camargo, but The Knoll has a very interesting spine running through their redan. I am sure George could tell you much more about it.

A_Clay_Man

Re:Redan greens
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2004, 08:04:01 AM »
Ted- I seem to recall the redan hole at Heather Glen, in MB, as having the spine like ridge you seem to be describing.