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.


James Edwards

For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« on: August 15, 2006, 09:27:38 AM »
For the Architects: An Architectural Query?
For the Historians : What would you suggest?
For the GCA'er :  What would you do?

A longish par 3 of 185 yards all carry to a green perched high up on a hill surrounded by a quarry but with a large drop off on the left hand side... the right hand side (the only available route in) has a bunker to protect it directly in the gap/// would you remove it even though its historically important?
« Last Edit: August 15, 2006, 09:54:31 AM by James Edwards »
@EDI__ADI

Phil McDade

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2006, 10:04:59 AM »
James:

Wimpy answer -- it depends.

I love to play courses with a variety of par 3s -- short, longish, par 3-1/2s, all carry, pure targets, the opportunity to run the ball up, uphill and downhill. I'd be loathe to remove any feature that's "historically important" (as in, important to the original intent of the course/hole), and if it's the only "all-carry" hole on the course, I'd be fine leaving it there. But I'd also look to see if the other par 3s on the course were of similar design, and would seek to find holes that provided different options/different requirements of the golfer. In short, I'd be OK with the hole if it was the only all-carry, longish par 3 on the course. I'd be more motivated to change it if the course consisted of nothing but those kind of par 3s.

James Edwards

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2006, 10:11:10 AM »
Phil, thoughtful answer thanks.

Yes, it would be the only 'carry' par 3 hole on the course.  The problem is, its high up.  For me, just a solid 6 or 7 iron all the way, but for the higher handicapper, no such play it would seem?  Back in the day, the tees would have been shorter and the carry shorter?  
@EDI__ADI

Phil McDade

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2006, 10:28:02 AM »
James:

As a high handicapper, I think it's perfectly fine for a course to present one very difficult, longish, all-carry par 3 if there is at least some option for bailing, even if that's a bunker. I think a 185-yard or so hole that's entirely carry, with absolutely no place to bail (typically over a pond or marsh, with the green sited directly beyond the far edge of the hazard), is one that gets beyond the normal ability of many high handicappers. But the hole you describe seems to at least provide a place for a high handicapper to bail.

(Most high handicappers I know would probably approach such a hole this way: Geez, 185-yard par 3 that's all carry. I don't have that shot. But, I can probably put a tee shot in that bunker, to avoid the quarry and death. Once in the bunker, the high handicapper's only thought is: get out. If you succeed, you're likely left with a two-putt for bogey, or -- if you get out of the bunker but not on the green -- a chip and two putts. With the former, you get a bogey -- a result most high handicappers, standing on the tee, would take in a heartbeat. With the latter, they end up with a double-bogey -- not great, but not the worst thing, either, as this hole may be the toughest single hole they encounter during the round ((smart high-handicappers can maneuver their way around most par 4s and 5s to avoid similar sorts of shots)). The bunker, in that sense, provides the relief the high-handicapper is looking for on a very tough tee shot. What the high handicapper is hoping to avoid is the shot in the quarry that forces them to reload, and end up with a huge number.)

Chris_Clouser

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2006, 10:29:06 AM »
Well said Phil.

Leave it.

Jonathan Davison

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2006, 11:12:24 AM »
James

Sound's like it is a very interesting site, and close to home.
Post or send some pic's.
What's the club's thoughts and whats the brief?

Ulrich Mayring

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #6 on: August 15, 2006, 05:44:27 PM »
High handicappers are terrified of bunkers and will hit away from them, they'd rather risk an awkward lie on a slope, if the slope is not clearly visually intimidating from the tee. What you need here is the opportunity to lay up in front of the green. A high handicapper can make a 150+ shot, which will be short of the bunker and the quarry, then chip up for bogie.

You have to think of something to make this lay up possible. It will not make the hole any easier for the better players, as they will carry the ball to the green anyway.

Ulrich
« Last Edit: August 15, 2006, 05:45:55 PM by Ulrich Mayring »
Golf Course Exposé (300+ courses reviewed), Golf CV (how I keep track of 'em)

Phil McDade

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #7 on: August 15, 2006, 06:04:35 PM »
Ulrich:

I think many high handicappers are afraid of shots they can't make, and I know many high (18+ handicap, e.g.) handicappers who simply can't hit a 185-yard all-carry shot.

Having said that, as stated previously, I think it's perfectly fine for a course to have one exceedingly difficult par 3 for a high handicapper that doesn't provide an easy, relatively low-penalty bailout. From James' original post, I got the impression the bunker in question was both right and somewhat short of the green. I think, if the hole in question is going to be the (or just about the) toughest par 3 on the course, there ought to be some penalty for not being able to hit the shot. Most high-handicappers aren't great sand players (that's partly why they carry high handicaps). But many can (unless it's a truly penal bunker, which I didn't get the impression this one was) get their ball out of the bunker, if not necessarily on the green or even toward the hole. For the high handicapper, keeping the bunker there allows them to hit one semi-decent shot (hitting a bunker from 160-180 yards away), one good shot (a sand wedge on to the green), another semi-decent shot (a lag putt to within a few feet), which leaves a three-footer for bogey, which in the mind of a high-handicap player, is a par. That's the way I think most high-handicappers play any hole -- a mix of semi-decent shots with an occasional good-to-very-good one. (Even a series of mediocre but smartly played shots on this hole should leave the high handicapper with no more than a double bogey, not a bad result. Most "bogey" golfers go into rounds thinking they'll make a few double bogeys on the hardest holes, compensated by a few pars on the easy holes.) I don't see that leaving the bunker there, and not providing any other bailout area, makes the hole overly penal for a high-handicapper. Tough, but still fair.


James Edwards

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #8 on: August 15, 2006, 06:19:41 PM »
Yes thats correct Phil in the positoning of the bunker - a little short and in the gap... to the left of the gap is an extreme bank, maybe 25ft deep to a lower fairway but tightly mown... left of that is dead.. i will try and post a picture.  To the right of the bunker is a bank feeding onto the green and around the entire greens right side and back - maybe 6 ft high, but miss that and above it is the quarry which is dead
« Last Edit: August 15, 2006, 06:20:56 PM by James Edwards »
@EDI__ADI

Patrick_Mucci

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2006, 09:19:48 PM »
James  Edwards,

Will we see Query # 18 ?

Disecting every hole and every feature leads to disfiguration in the great majority of cases.

It creates a perpetual open season for alterations to the golf course.

Tell us more about the golf course.
Its architect, date of origin, history, etc., etc..
Let us examine it on Google Earth.
Show us ground and aerial photos, circa original date and currently.

The more data presented, the better the ability to make well informed, intelligent decisions.

James Edwards

Re:For All GCA'ers: A Query ¬ 2?
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2006, 04:51:15 AM »
Patrick,

1.  Im sure we will see Query #18 and many more - Could be challenging Scott's AOT Days!

2.  Yes, disecting every hole of course leads to disfiguration in the wrong hands - There needs to be a rationel behind such changes and at the moment on the two i decided to post, there ARE PROBLEMS with playablity for the members which need to be considered.. hence the discussion.

3.  I disagree Patrick - it does not create open season (not in this case it wont anyway) - only if the greens committee and present Captain want to make their mark.

4.  The Golf Club is R.E.G.C - Royal Eastbourne Golf Club was founded in 1887.  It is a downland, excellent drainage and has magnificent views across Eastbourne on the South coast of England and the sea.  Laid out by a couple of gentlemen including Horace G Hutchinson.

5.  I cant unfortunately post - but if any of you are lucky enough to have "British Golf Links" by Horace Hutchinson from 1887 which we have in our library - you will see some incredible pictures of the Chalk Pit Green, The 'Zaruba' feature as mentioned in Query ¬ 2 which reminded HH of an arabian horse enclosure.... nice !!  The 11th named the 'Paradise Green' with square cut/false front green / The Gate hole - 15th

6.  The well informed, intelligent decision lies with me  ;)

7.  I cant unfortunately post pictures.. but here is a link to the green in query ¬ 1 .. the bunker is just out of shot to the right.

http://www.regc.co.uk/index.lasso?pg=07721951740c8aee&v=1&mpd=2307729df8798b8b&catid=e0adfa278c29948e&mp=3392c4e5b2c3ac02&-session=ldcms:65CB281075B54854708F4646841B5BF0
« Last Edit: August 16, 2006, 04:54:44 AM by James Edwards »
@EDI__ADI

Tags: