Biarritz - Doesn't the tee to green elevation differential, or rather the lack

[Bill Brightly]

Whenever we talk about how Biarritz holes play in 2015, it makes me wonder how they played when they were first built between the years 1910-1929.


How firm was the turf? And how would that turf comapre to the lush grass we play on today?


What was the first bounce like then compared to modern times? Did the ball bound forward or did it check a bit like it does so often now?

[Sven Nilsen]

Bill:

Here are Emmet's words on Piping Rock from the Nov. 1913 edition of Golf Magazine:

"The ninth is a very uncommon hole.  I have never seen one like it.  There are two large greens, one beyond the other, with a hollow between them and serious trouble on either side in the shape of bunkers.  It must be 220 yards (I speak from memory) from the tee to the center of the farthest green.  It is slightly down hill, so that one can see exactly what there is to do.  It will take a fine cleek shot or a difficult drive with wooden club by a second class player, as the gulley which separates the two greens must be run through at the end of the shot.  This is one of the only good cleek holes I have ever seen.  There is a slight upward slope beyond the green so that there may be no fear of hitting the ball a little too hard - the difficulty being to get there."

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sven,
 
This is a very important find.
 
It states, that in 1913, both the front and back tiers were maintained as putting surfaces.
 
Over the years we had heard a number of contributors claim to the contrary, but, Emmett's written words confirm that both tiers were maintained as putting surfaces/greens.
 
 

Bill:

Here are Emmet's words on Piping Rock from the Nov. 1913 edition of Golf Magazine:

"The ninth is a very uncommon hole.  I have never seen one like it.  There are two large greens, one beyond the other, with a hollow between them and serious trouble on either side in the shape of bunkers.  It must be 220 yards (I speak from memory) from the tee to the center of the farthest green.  It is slightly down hill, so that one can see exactly what there is to do.  It will take a fine cleek shot or a difficult drive with wooden club by a second class player, as the gulley which separates the two greens must be run through at the end of the shot.  This is one of the only good cleek holes I have ever seen.  There is a slight upward slope beyond the green so that there may be no fear of hitting the ball a little too hard - the difficulty being to get there."

[Sven Nilsen]

Pat:


Is it really that important?  Emmet clearly delineates that the pin was in the back section.


Sven

[Keith OHalloran]

Sven,
We have been doing some research on the Biarritz concept. Clearly, we have not had the same success as you have. I know you mention that most were not designed with bunkers short to frame the hole. The Piping Rock photo shows a framing bunker short. Do you have early photos or evidence of other holes that were built without that bunker? Thanks
Also, was Piping Rock the first Biarritz that Mac/Raynor built?

Thanks

[Sven Nilsen]

Keith:

Piping Rock was the first.

Here are a few early aerials or map images of courses.  Hopefully there's enough definition to pick out the Biarritz Holes.

Sleepy Hollow (top left of photo) -



Lido (far right, there was a carry over a sandy area before reaching the turf before the green) -



Links Club (the Biarritz is pretty much right in the middle of the course) -



Shoreacres -



Yeaman's Hall -

[Sven Nilsen]

Keith:


If your question has to do with a crossing bunker short of the front tier, here are some examples of courses that had them -


Blue Mound - had one in its early days, wasn't there last time I looked.  Not sure if it was original.
Chicago Golf - had and still has one.
Fishers - no cross bunker, but you could say the terrain provides that feature.
Oakland - severe pinching of the flanking bunkers as well as two bunkers well short of the green.
Yale - same idea as Fishers.


The biggest confusion relating to this hole is that the mistaken thought that the Chasm Hole at Biarritz was its inspiration.  Not only was the Chasm Hole no longer part of the course when CBM visited, he clearly notes that he took his concept for the par 3 Biarritz from the short par 4 12th Hole (the Chasm Hole, when it existed, was always part of the front 9).  His writings on the template make no mention of a compulsory carry, but focus on the "hogsback" feature short of the green.


We do know his disdain for being able to putt your way all the way to a par 3.  It isn't surprising that a cross bunker was added to some of their versions, just like how he "corrected" his version of the Eden at NGLA.


Hope this helps (I do have other photos and maps, but would have to search for them if you want to see them),


Sven

[Keith OHalloran]

Thanks Sven. I am a bit less interested in the muse than I am in the product. Would you say that some cross bunker, or forced carry was present in most of the original MAc/Raynor versions? Or no?

[BCrosby]

"It isn't surprising that a cross bunker was added to some of their versions, just like how he "corrected" his version of the Eden at NGLA."

Sven -

I had not heard before that the Eden at NGLA was "corrected". Could you amplify?

Bob

[Sven Nilsen]

Keith:


Its a tough question to answer, as most of the aerial photos I have are from 20 to 30 years after the courses were built.  I will say I've been surprised going back through the old photos and course maps and seeing how many did.  I might have to retract the "exception" comment.


Sven

[Sven Nilsen]

"It isn't surprising that a cross bunker was added to some of their versions, just like how he "corrected" his version of the Eden at NGLA."

Sven -

I had not heard before that the Eden at NGLA was "corrected". Could you amplify?

Bob

Bob:


The correction was to the original St. Andrews layout, which could be played with a putter.  CBM noted that he did not think the hole should be played that way, and designed his Eden at NGLA accordingly.


Sven

[BCrosby]

Gotcha. I had read your first comment to suggest that the Eden at NGLA had been redone at some point.


Bob

[Bill Brightly]

Sven,
 
This is a very important find.
 
It states, that in 1913, both the front and back tiers were maintained as putting surfaces.
 
Over the years we had heard a number of contributors claim to the contrary, but, Emmett's written words confirm that both tiers were maintained as putting surfaces/greens.
 
 

Emmett did NOT say the front section was maintained as a putting surface. He merely referred to it as a green. And he described the length of  the hole using only the rear portion, he did NOT give a wide yardage fluctuation such as "170-220." And the shading on the front section is obviously much darker than the rear, which would indicate a higher cut on the approach.

[Jim Nugent]

Sven, do you read Emmett's statement as saying the swale was also part of the green?  Or does he indicate two separate greens, with a swale between them that was not maintained as green? 

[Bill Brightly]

Pat,


To paraphrase a famous GCA poster, common sense is not that common.


Let's think about what we know. CB Macdonald was a great golf course architect, right? You love what he did at NGLA. You know what he wrote in Scotland's Gift about the ideal "classical "golf course. You know that he streesed the importance of par three hole varying in length.


How could he possibly design a front section on his longest par three so that there was a  playing distance rougly equal to the Redan and Eden hole? There is NO WAY Macdonald would do that!


Playing to the front section of a MacRaynor Biarritz hole is an absolute letdown. The hole becomes SO much easier. I'll never be able to conceive Macdonald designing such a boring hole.

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven, do you read Emmett's statement as saying the swale was also part of the green?  Or does he indicate two separate greens, with a swale between them that was not maintained as green?

Jim:


I read it as saying the pin was on the back portion.


Sven

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,
 
Devereaux Emmett was a highly respected, talented architect.
 
In fact, I think Macdonald may have solicited his advice in planning and designing NGLA.
 
When he stated that both tiers at Piping Rock were maintained as greens, are you stating that he was lying or ignorant when it came to identifying what a green looked like ?
 
Emmett was crystal clear and no amount of wishful thinking on your part can change that

[Bill Brightly]

Pat,

As Sven points out, it does not matter a bit what anyone calls the approach. It is still the approach and the pin is located on the back section beyond the swale. This is exactly what Macdonald wrote about in Scotland's gift and he listed the yardage as 210.

Whether ones likes the look and play of these holes or not, we should all agree that all Biarritz holes are very tough pars. To put it politely, when the pin is up front, the holes generally SUCK. They play as BORING 170-180 shots and it is such a letdown when a player sees the pin is located up front. Macdonald never said one word about a two-sectioned green and he did not build golf holes that suck. This is where applying common sense helps. Sticking a pin in the front section of a Biarritz just because the front section resembles a putting green is what committees do.

[Sven Nilsen]

Thanks Sven. I am a bit less interested in the muse than I am in the product. Would you say that some cross bunker, or forced carry was present in most of the original MAc/Raynor versions? Or no?

Keith:


I did a fairly comprehensive review of all of the images I could find of MacRaynorBanks Biarritz holes, and from what I can tell the cross bunker/carry concept was the exception.  If I had to put a percentage on it I'd say only 30-40% had them, if that.


Certainly not an exact study, but the best I could do with what I have available.


Sven

[Dan Kelly]

Pat,


To paraphrase a famous GCA poster, common sense is not that common.


Let's think about what we know. CB Macdonald was a great golf course architect, right? You love what he did at NGLA. You know what he wrote in Scotland's Gift about the ideal "classical "golf course. You know that he streesed the importance of par three hole varying in length.


How could he possibly design a front section on his longest par three so that there was a  playing distance rougly equal to the Redan and Eden hole? There is NO WAY Macdonald would do that!


Playing to the front section of a MacRaynor Biarritz hole is an absolute letdown. The hole becomes SO much easier. I'll never be able to conceive Macdonald designing such a boring hole.

BINGO!

[DMoriarty]

Regarding Piping Rock's Biarritz, there is no question that the pin was intended to be on the back section.  H.J. Whigham was with Macdonald when they discovered the inspiration for the hole in Biarritz in 1907, and he helped Macdonald build the Piping Rock course.  He also put to pen many of Macdonald's early descriptions of the concepts underlying Macdonalds holes. Here is a more complete quote of H.J. Whigham's description of the hole at Piping Rock, from Town and Country:

"There is a Biarritz hole of about 220 yards which is new to this country and is one of the best one-shot holes in existence. There is a hog's back extending to within thirty yards of the green and a dip between the hog's back and the green. Under normal conditions the hole has to be played with what is now known as the push shot, a low ball with plenty of run, which will land short of the dip and run through it on to the green. A drive with a longer carry is apt to land in the dip and stay there. But the push shot must be very straight, otherwise it will land on one side or the other of the hog's back and break off into a bunker. This is the ninth hole at Piping Rock."

Note that the swale is largely a defensive feature, in that it punishes the drive that was almost but not quite long enough to carry the swale.  Punishing the almost-perfect overreach of the better player was typical of CBM's design approach.

For what it is worth, Walter Travis strongly disagreed with with Whigham's characterization of the proper shot as a "push" shot.  Travis called it a "straight-arm shot" but it is clear they are both talking about the same thing; a very straight shot that would land on the first plateau and run through the dip and onto the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Whenever we talk about how Biarritz holes play in 2015, it makes me wonder how they played when they were first built between the years 1910-1929.


Bill,

I think they played like par 3 1/2, not too disimilar from the par 5's that play as a par 4 1/2's.

I think my first experience with a Biarritz may have been # 13 at The Knoll in the mid 50's.

# 13 was always one of the hardest holes on the golf course because you had to be long and straight, and, the green had a spine in it, so putting was also a challenge.

Getting to the back tier was a considerable challenge and we used 3-woods or drivers.  Nothing less could reach the back tier.

A par was a great score.
Birdies were virtually unheard of.


How firm was the turf? And how would that turf comapre to the lush grass we play on today?


I think Mother Nature was the primary factor in determining the quality of the playing surfaces.

However, due to their elevated footpads I think they dried out sooner Han other sections of the golf courses.

And, I suspect that they got plenty of sunlight and wind due to the absence of nearby trees

What was the first bounce like then compared to modern times? Did the ball bound forward or did it check a bit like it does so often now?


My recollection from the 50's is that courses were far firmer than the wall to wall green we typically see today.

[Bill Brightly]

I think that is right, Pat. I think the ground underneath the grass was generally FAR firmer when we were kids. And my guess it was at least that firm when golf was played at our NJ clubs in the 1920's. I mostly played municipal courses until I went to college. I always remember being invited to Saucon Valley in 1977 and walking down the first fairway of the Grace Course. The turf was so plush, so full of grass, so tight, so perfect. (I said it felt like I was playing golf on my Mother's dining room carpet!) That type of turf management became the standard at good US clubs. And THAT type of turf does NOT make for a good biarritz hole, IMO.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,


What I also find interesting about Biarritz holes is the introduction of flanking kick plates.


I'd be interested to discover whether their introduction was to make the hole play harder or easier.


In other words, what were the architect's thoughts behind them.


The kick plates were probably at the 180-190 mark.


One would think that they were intended to help, to deflect balls heading into the flanking bunkers back toward the putting surface.


I know that Banks used them, I wonder if Raynor or CBM employed them ?