Time for your daily ration of greens

[Mark Bourgeois]

Maybe it's down to dry conditions, but i think a good drive on the 7th should put you right in the throw-up zone of go or lay up? this is due to downhill nature plus a turboboost you get. lay up does mean two wedges...

[Tom_Doak]

P.B. was always one of the most creative people in the business, and if you'd told me twenty years ago that this would be his most famous solo work, I would have been shocked.  Obviously, his health issues have held back his career, and so has the burden of trying to outdo his dad, which is just impossible.  But, I'm sure there is a lot of cool stuff to find on nearly any one of his courses.

I learned a lot from P.B., as did Bobby Weed; and I believe that Mike Strantz had one or two shapers who got their start with P.B. at The Legends in Myrtle Beach.

[Patrick_Mucci]

AHughes,
Shall we start with a drive with sufficient height.
If you can't see the forced nature of the shots required at
# 17 on TOC, that's your problem.

Patrick, I have lots of problems, what's one more?

The tee shot at the Road Hole only requires sufficient height if you choose certain lines off the tee

You can hit it left of the sheds, but then you're in deep rough.[/color]

(setting aside that players can hit that shot with a fade or a draw or straight).

Wait a second.  They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ?   You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.[/color]

Other lines off the tee are available and do not require the height you are suggesting. Do you disagree?  

Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.

If you go in the deep rough left, you're forced to hit back to the fairway, toward the OB to give you the best angle of attack into the green.[/color]

Beyond that, which shots are forced ?

The ones I listed above.[/color]

[Mark Bourgeois]

As promised, more pics of the 12th green:






And...a miss:


Did they actually finish this hole? The trees take away the idiot / bomber route.  Without them, you'd end up playing too far right, probably, especially given the green orientation favors a drive hit down center-left. It's a better view from there, but many will be tempted by the prospect of a shorter shot into a green whose rear half falls away.

Even better / worse, the direct-route-to-green line probably would entice more fools than this does.  I gave it a whack and you can carry the junk on the dolt tiger line, but the green was impossible.

Seriously, who's got a Stihl?

Mark

[TEPaul]

That course is PB Dye? Wow, at first I thought it was abroad.

I guess I'd have to say I knew Pete and Alice better than PB but whenever PB's name comes up I can only think of the funniest day I ever had on a golf course and by a mile.

We were playing in the Florida International years ago at the Palm Beach Polo club on a course that PB built. We were paired with Davis Sezna (who later built Hartefeld) and PB both of who we knew.

Davis Sezna is funnier than 75% of the professional comedians in this world and PB isn't far behind.

This was a pretty serious tournament but PB was racing around in his cart apparently checking for problems on the course particularly grassing.

On the second hole things started out with a bang when PB went racing off the side of a fairway and flipped his cart right into a hidden bunker on a parallel hole on the other side. He was lucky he didn't kill himself and that he could still play with his clubs.

Anyway I've never laughed that hard and that much on a golf course. It seemed like we never stopped and on something like the 15th hole my partner and I fell down and rolled around on the fairway we were laughing so hard.

Somehow both groups managed to play some pretty good golf and turn in some decent scores.

If I put together all the laughing I've done on golf courses in my entire life there's no way it would exceed that day. The irony is back then I didn't care a whit about golf course architecture.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Interesting...

Strantz, Stonehouse (8th? a par 3)


PB Dye, 12th


Mark

[Andy Hughes]

Patrick, I have lots of problems, what's one more?

The tee shot at the Road Hole only requires sufficient height if you choose certain lines off the tee

You can hit it left of the sheds, but then you're in deep rough.

(setting aside that players can hit that shot with a fade or a draw or straight).


Other lines off the tee are available and do not require the height you are suggesting. Do you disagree?  


If you go in the deep rough left, you're forced to hit back to the fairway, toward the OB to give you the best angle of attack into the green.

Beyond that, which shots are forced ?

The ones I listed above.

Patrick, I can only assume we are not talking about the same course when you say 'TOC'.  I am referring to the Old Course in St Andrews.  And by Road Hole, I mean the 17th hole. What course and hole are you referring to?  I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form. You have choices upon choices. I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.

Wait a second.  They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ?  You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.

Who said some random player wasn't good enough to hit a fade or a draw?  I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left.  It might be better if you restricted your comments to courses you have played  

Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.

Err, no.  You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings.  Needs a fade but certainly quite doable. Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.
Really, your comments here are quite off the mark.  

[Mike_Cirba]

In the original thread on the courses built in the past 10 years in the area west of Baltimore and DC, someone asked us to rank the courses in order of preference.

With the passage of time, and even with the planting of just some horrendous trees (is it a crime to kill trees that are only 10 feet tall so far?), I'd list them with my "Doak Scale" ratings as follows;

PB Dye - 6.5

Maryland National - 5
Worthington Manor - 5
Whiskey Creek - 4

Muskrat Ridge - 3

That should bring my Maryland architecture-arch-nemesis (Rob Waldron) out of the woodwork.  

[Andy Hughes]

Mark, that par 3 is the eighth at Stonehouse and those pictures surely do have more than a passing resemblance. I don't know the actual square footage of either green, but somehow the PB Dye green has a much 'bigger' feel to it, a sense of vastness and depth. Also, I seem to recall the slopes being more pronounced and the change of elevation being much greater at PB Dye.  Lastly, the Strantz is clearly a poorer hole because my opponent hit some flare that landed very close to where your pic was taken and somehow bounced off the hill to within 10' of the hole.  

Guess it's no coincidence that courses with similar greens like that would both be very high on my personal list.
(PS Stonehouse is better than everyone gives it credit for! Yeah, there are some issues.)

[Andy Hughes]

P.B. was always one of the most creative people in the business, and if you'd told me twenty years ago that this would be his most famous solo work, I would have been shocked.

I didn't realize this was his most famous course. Seems hard to believe considering its lukewarm-at-best reception by the locals. TomD or anyone else who has seen enough, is it also his best course?

[Mark Bourgeois]

Mark, that par 3 is the eighth at Stonehouse and those pictures surely do have more than a passing resemblance. I don't know the actual square footage of either green, but somehow the PB Dye green has a much 'bigger' feel to it, a sense of vastness and depth. Also, I seem to recall the slopes being more pronounced and the change of elevation being much greater at PB Dye.  

It could just be down to Stonehouse being a par 3 whereas PB Dye is a par 5 / 4.5 and the look is from 220 yards, downhill.  Also, PB's is banked into a hillside whereas I recall Stonehouse not only does not back into a hill but has a road behind it, presenting less of a "theater" look. Thus, PB's views and scale may appear much "grander."

For even though I can't recall, judging by the flagsticks Stonehouse's back shelf looks higher, doesn't it? Is that the case?

Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

[quote author=AHughes link=board=1;threadid=29538;start=0#msg572167


Patrick, I can only assume we are not talking about the same course when you say 'TOC'.  I am referring to the Old Course in St Andrews.  And by Road Hole, I mean the 17th hole.

What course and hole are you referring to?  


The same one.

I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form.

You already admited that the tee shot was forced.
You have to get sufficient elevation and carry on the drive, and playing left puts you in the left rough, not a desirable location by anyone's reconing.

My position isn't based solely on my experiences at TOC.
I relied on James Anderson's views with respect to how to best play the hole and going over the sheds is the prefered line, if you can execute a drive with sufficient height and distance.  He indicated that playing left, into the rough is not a viable option.  In addition, TOC narrowed their fairways for the last Open making the left rough bigger.

I suppose you could also play down # 2 or back up # 16, down # 2, and over to # 17 if you were so inclined.[/color]

You have choices upon choices.

But, none of them are viable, and that's critical[/color]

I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.

The issue ISN'T the rest of the golf course, it's the DRIVE on
# 17.  Please stick to the issue.[/color]

Wait a second.  They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ?  You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.

Who said some random player wasn't good enough to hit a fade or a draw?  

Let's see, he's not good enough to get sufficient height and distance, but this phantom golfer of of yours can now fade and draw the ball at will.

Please, keep the discussion within the realm of reality.[/color]

I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
 
A "choice" is only available if the golfer can execute the shot.
If a golfer can't hit a fade or hook, then those aren't viable options, rather, figments of your imagination.[/color]

And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left.  

If your golfer can't get the height and distance to get over the sheds, how's he going to hit a draw that starts out over the sheds ?  You're contradicting yourself.[/color]

It might be better if you restricted your comments to courses you have played  

I've played TOC.[/color]

Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.

Err, no.  You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings.  Needs a fade but certainly quite doable.

So, your golfer, who can't drive the ball with sufficient height and distance can now hit a fade at will ?  You're living in a fantasy world.[/color]

Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.

I don't know any golfers that willingly and gladly drive the ball into deep rough on the left, rough that will leave them in a difficult position to finish the hole.

If they're in the deep left rough, they're FORCED to hit it back to the fairway, toward the OB, unless your golfers prefer to continue to play the ball down the left rough, barely finishing before dark.[/color]

Really, your comments here are quite off the mark.  

I stand by them.

What was the lowest handicap you ever maintained ?[/color]

[Andy Hughes]

I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form.
You already admited that the tee shot was forced.

If we interpret me saying the tee shot is anything but forced as 'admitting it is forced', than yes, I have admitted such.  Conversely, if we let my words mean something along the normal accepted meanings then no, no such luck.

You have to get sufficient elevation and carry on the drive, and playing left puts you in the left rough, not a desirable location by anyone's reconing.

Wrong on several levels.  Believe it or not, playing left is a desirable location for some. I know I intentionally played left into the wind. Was it the garden spot with the absolute best angle into the green? Nope, but it gave me the safest and best way for me to get into the hole in the fewest strokes.

My position isn't based solely on my experiences at TOC.
I relied on James Anderson's views with respect to how to best play the hole and going over the sheds is the prefered line, if you can execute a drive with sufficient height and distance.  He indicated that playing left, into the rough is not a viable option.  In addition, TOC narrowed their fairways for the last Open making the left rough bigger.

As previously noted, it is not only viable but preferred at times.
Also please note, you said it was 'preferred'. That implies options.

I suppose you could also play down # 2 or back up # 16, down # 2, and over to # 17 if you were so inclined.

Or you could play left and then layup either right of the green or left of the Road Hole Bunker.

You have choices upon choices.
But, none of them are viable, and that's critical

Again, if you mean we should ignore all the options present and just accept your one shot on one particular line as the only viable option then you'd be on to something. But I am shocked you can't see what else is going on both left and right in the context of both good, average and poor players.

I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.
The issue ISN'T the rest of the golf course, it's the DRIVE on
# 17.  Please stick to the issue.

Actually, you are wrong about that. The issue was the Road Hole itself.  You happened to incorrectly claim the tee shot only had one option and then punted when asked about the variety of shots that follow on the hole.  The fact that you declined to stand by your comment surely does not mean this was only about the tee shot. Also, this does seem to be a tendency of late--suddenly changing the subject and trying to call someone on it when they don't pivot with you.

Let's see, he's not good enough to get sufficient height and distance, but this phantom golfer of of yours can now fade and draw the ball at will.

Please, keep the discussion within the realm of reality.

I am not at all sure where you have invented some golfer I said was not good enough to hit over the sheds but can hit controlled draws and fades at will. I never said that--I suspect we had a miscommunication. Or something else?

I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
A "choice" is only available if the golfer can execute the shot.
If a golfer can't hit a fade or hook, then those aren't viable options, rather, figments of your imagination.

As we are not speaking of any particular golfer, how are we to know which shots or options are available? Not sure how you arrived there. As we are discussing the hole and not one particular player, it makes sense to see what options generally are available.
Of course, if a golfer is incapable of hitting a draw then a drawing shot is not a viable option for that golfer.

And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left.  
If your golfer can't get the height and distance to get over the sheds, how's he going to hit a draw that starts out over the sheds ?  You're contradicting yourself.

I am not sure where you are coming up with all this?  I truly do not recall specifically saying anything about one particular golfer who was incapable of carrying the sheds but could hit a draw over the sheds. I was under the impression the hole itself was the issue, and the variety of options were the topic. Either you have badly misinterpretted something I have typed, or I have typed quite badly.
I mentioned that a draw over the sheds is certainly an option, and one that you have incorrectly said would have to end up in thick rough. I am not referring to someone who could not hit the ball high enough to hit over the sheds. That would be kinda silly. I will certainly stick with my contention that a draw over the buildings is a very clear option.

Err, no.  You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings.  Needs a fade but certainly quite doable.
So, your golfer, who can't drive the ball with sufficient height and distance can now hit a fade at will ?  You're living in a fantasy world.

'My golfer'? Who is 'my golfer'?  Concentrate on the particular shot I mentioned--a fade left of the sheds that can end up in the fairway. That is all. No particular golfer who can or can't hit over the sheds.
I am not sure why you insist on going down the 'my golfer' path. I am mentioning particular shots and options that shows your contention that the Road Hole forces you to play a particular shot was erroneous.  

Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.
I don't know any golfers that willingly and gladly drive the ball into deep rough on the left, rough that will leave them in a difficult position to finish the hole.

Sure you do, me. And lots of others. Also, the rough left is often not nearly the impenetrable jungle you keep making it out to be.

What was the lowest handicap you ever maintained ?

Whether it was a 1 or a 18 would have no bearing on this.  It happened to be low single digits but that means nothing. Or is the implication that I am not a good enough golfer to understand what shots are available?

[Andy Hughes]

It could just be down to Stonehouse being a par 3 whereas PB Dye is a par 5 / 4.5 and the look is from 220 yards, downhill.  Also, PB's is banked into a hillside whereas I recall Stonehouse not only does not back into a hill but has a road behind it, presenting less of a "theater" look. Thus, PB's views and scale may appear much "grander."

For even though I can't recall, judging by the flagsticks Stonehouse's back shelf looks higher, doesn't it? Is that the case?

That's a good point Mark--Dye's setting for 12 does lend itself to greater drama.
You know, I would not swear to it, but I don't remember Stonehouse's back shelf being higher. But it was only two plays and the pin wasn't back there and neither was I so I could well be wrong. The pics you found sure do make it look like it though.

[Andy Hughes]

Patrick, Ron Whitten said about the Road Hole:
The dreaded Road Hole at St. Andrews is a 455-yard, straightaway par 4 that many play as a double dogleg. The bold drive is blind over a corner of the Old Course Hotel property, and the smart approach is at the right-front edge of the diagonal green.

Thought you might like an overhead of the hole: tee upper left, green lower right: