[Forrest Richardson]

It would have to be a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very long creek to store much water!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I think there are several keys to building a successful hole over water.

One of them may be the "offset" from the water.
An example of that would be the 18th at GCGC

While the water is there, the carry to the green isn't all water, there's a buffer of land, which graduallly slopes from the bank to the green.

Another key might be the tangential nature of the water to the green.

The 16th at GCGC comes to mind.
Again, there's a bit of an offset, and the water is semi-flanking the green from certain angles.

The 8th at Sebonack seems to have a tee that sits low and the carry appears heroic with an inadequate buffer between the pond and the lake.

Certainly the 9th at Yale works well, but, I would submit that the key to it's success is the highly elevated tee.
If that tee was at the water's level, I don't think the hole would be so well regarded.  It would lose its visual image, and its playability would suffer due to the trajectory of the approach shot.

I wonder, if the tee at # 8 were elevated, would the hole present a better image, a more pleasurable challenge ?

On # 13 the bank near the green appears very steep and I wonder if that's not too intimidating for the average to good golfer.

The water features at Pine Tree and Boca Rio seem to work very well, albeit for different reasons.   Pine Trees are offset, and I think that's a key issue.  Boca Rio's are more flanking in nature.

The more I reflect on it, the more I think a tee on top of a "dune" at # 8 would work well.

Your thoughts ?

[Mike Nuzzo]

I think generally the small size of the lake makes it look artificial.  Swoops also look artificial.
With one exception:  one of the lakes at Seminole, very tiny, does posess a look that makes it look larger, it wiggles.  

I'm trying the scale approach.  I'm making a very large lake.

[Adam Clayman]

Has anyone mentioned the great use of water features at Victoria Nat'l?

I was thinking of Crespi pond on the seventeenth at Pacific Grove. It's a natural pond.

Tom,
Seems studying the natural ones, would give the right insight on how craggy, or varied, the edges need to be.

I suppose it's similar in concept to the berm you built in Lubbock. The random mixing of shape gives the illusion of a natural feature.

[Tony_Muldoon]

I'll admit this doesn't quite fit in this thread but it's in my head and this is the best thread yet to express it on.

If you were standing over a shot across a pond, and you noticed an island on it that was the same shape as the green, it would be very distracting.  You might wonder which came first; was the green a copy of the island, etc? It would be a talking point and if done cleverly this most unnatural feature could end up making the lake look more natural.  It would also be disorientating and would distract the golfer - is that a bad thing?

On topic - when deigning an awkward feature just be bold. 10th at Worplesdon – nothing else on the course prepares you for it, but it works.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tommy,
Don't worry, skunk cabbage get's its name because the leaves, when crushed, smell just like one. No one in their right mind would make you eat it.  

Now, some baby ferns...............

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()