Template for the 10th at Riviera?

[Dan Moore]

"Again, I was struck by the similarities betweeen the Langford work and Thomas at Riv10. Just wondering if one of them might have been thinking of the other hole or some previous hole that was a multi-route short par 4.

We don't know as much about Langford/Moreau as we should but I think its safe to assume they were familiar with the work of Macdonald and Raynor.  I am unaware of any connection between them working mostly in the Midwest and Thomas in Philly and California though Langford attended school at Yale and Columbia Univ.  In any event Acacia predates Riviera.  

The basic concept of the driveable par 4 must have existed prior to the Golden Age.  The former 16th at Royal County Down comes to mind.  

There must be other examples.  

[Garland Bayley]

Re: 5th at Cusco...

...
But, I really don't see it as having followed a 10th at Riviera template.  
...

Me either.

[Jeff Doerr]

"Again, I was struck by the similarities betweeen the Langford work and Thomas at Riv10. Just wondering if one of them might have been thinking of the other hole or some previous hole that was a multi-route short par 4.

  In any event Acacia predates Riviera.  

The basic concept of the driveable par 4 must have existed prior to the Golden Age.  The former 16th at Royal County Down comes to mind.  

There must be other examples.  

Thanks Dan!

I just keep wondering if some of our across the pond folks (or well traveled) have some insights.

[Dan Moore]

In any case, "par" as we know it today wasn't primarily used until the 1st decade of the century.  

Before then, the term "bogey" would have been used.  Bogey isn't quite the same thing as par as the standard is a bit more relaxed.  OR, just describing holes as short holes, two shotters etc. would have been used.  The term "par" comes of age at nearly the precise time the Haskell ball hit the market and became the ball of the future.  With the intoduction of the Haskell came the more stringent standard of "par".

So to answer your question, I am not convinced the idea of a driveable par 4 existed before the construction of Huntercombe and Sunningdale IMO is the early stages of the Golden Age.

Ciao

We can agree the concept of par may not be relevant, but does that matter in terms of the concept or design of the hole.  Surely the concept of a hole that could be reached in one with only your most heroic or foolish shot using your longest club that offered strategic alternatives to the less brave or skilled player would have existed.  

[Jeff Doerr]

Thanks Sean & Dan.

Dan has a little more of what I'm trying to find.  I've never been to the orginals, TOC, etc., so I don't have a great reference for holes that may follow this idea.

The greater challenge is finding that hole that might provide some of what Riv10 does - that is reachable with your longest and best, a heroic and inviting path to the hole, a safer and even more productive play that is less obvious when first played.

As stated earlier, #10 at Bandon Dunes has this idea. Is there something earlier (1800s) that does?

Thanks for helping in my little pursuit!

[ForkaB]

Vis a vis pre-Riviera models, it seems to me that the 1st at Brora and the 6th at Deal are the same golf hole, just with dunes in the elbow rather than a bunker.  I am sure there are many more, as the average length of a "par" 4 in the late 1800's was about 280.  Mosat of them got lengthened when the Haskell came in around the turn of the century, but many did not.  Willie Park Jr.s 15th at Burntisland comes to mind.

[Dan Moore]

Sean,

I agree the gutty haskel evolution no doubt caused many 2 shot holes to turn into 1 shot holes and that some of those would have fallen into what we now see as driveable par 4 holes.  

The gutty haskel divide also seems to beg the question of whether in the gutty era there were long  high risk single shot holes that were driveable for some but not all that offered Riviera like strategic alternatives for the shorter hitters such that the concept of the driveable par 4 hole hole existed in the gutty era as a viable concept.  Of course most of those holes would have evoloved into 1 shot holes.  

I also wonder what if the original Sahara hole at St George's was a two shotter in the gutty era.  Macdonald conducted his search for the template holes to use at NGLA right at the time of the transition.  His Sahara was designed as a two shot hole and therefore has been viewed as modification of the Sahara at St Georges. Or did he just add length in order to keep it playing the way Sahara would have played in the gutty era.  

I wonder what ever happened to Macdonald's surveys and drawings of the original holes he used for templates at NGLA.  

[Jeff Doerr]

Rich, thanks for your suggestion of the 6th at Deal. Having hosted the Open in 1909 and 1920, it would have been in the mix of holes to think about. On non-links layouts, the bunkering that Langford and Thomas used would be necessary substitutes for the natural dunes.

Here is #6



Here is Langord at Acacia



Here is Thomas at Riv10

[Jeff Doerr]

I'm still doing my study of short Par 4 holes...

Ian Andrew's series is very good:
http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2006_11_26_archive.html

Here is a list from Ian:

The Best Short Par Fours that I can think of

Great Drivable Par Fours

#10 at Riviera 315
#9 Cypress Point 292
#12 at St. Andrew’s (Old) 316
#3 Sunningdale (Old) 298
#10 at Merion 312
#5 at Friar’s Head 330
#7 at Scarboro 290
#6 at Pacific Dunes 315
#8 at Cruden Bay 295
#14 at Gleneagles (Kings) 260
#3 Walton Heath (Old) 285
#17 Crystal Downs 311
#2 National 271

Great Drive and Pitch Holes
#8 at Pine Valley 327
#5 at Crystal Downs 355
#4 at Pebble Beach 327
#5 at Royal Dornock 359
#3 Pinehurst 335
#8 Merion 360
#4 Spyglass Hill 365
#5 Hamilton 321
#13 North Berick 347
#5 at Royal Portrush 392
#14 National GL 356

Mark Fine also has a nice piece on short 4s:
http://www.finegolfdesign.com/articles/golf_tips_6_05.pdf