[Mike_Sweeney]

Hole #14 - 350 Yard * 4 Par



More pics:
http://www.tgccc.com/progress.asp


These early pics of Rees Jones' The Golf Club at Cape Cod look pretty good to me. However, I will say that Rees Jones bunkering seems to have evolved since I first saw Atlantic, and at least in these pictures, the mounding is gone.

I see width, options, some very strategic shots, rolling terrain.

Thoughts?

[Philippe Binette]

if every architect improve on the field...players would benefit and the game would benefit...

could have been a great guess the architect on this pic

[mike_malone]

You see "width" ? It must be because you live in the "canyons" all day.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Mike I am sad to say, as a know anti Reesian, that looks like a fun hole too. If the next tee were 300 then I would think it is a great hole. I am not sure anyone but the tour guys can play this at 350 as a risk reward short drivable 4. It would be a hit a 200 to 220 yard shot and then wedge to 8 iron it in as it stands now. Ergo I do not see the opportunity value in using a driver to have a 50 to 80 yard pitch.

[Mike_Sweeney]

You see "width" ? It must be because you live in the "canyons" all day.

Same hole different angle

[Aaron Katz]

Something just still looks wrong to me.  Specifically, I hate how the entire left side of the hole is artificially recessed (or the fairway artificially built up).  Look at the hill on the left that serves as the hole's containment.  Is there any explanation why that would quickly drop off to where the bunkers are and then pop back up real quickly to where the fairway is?  Perhaps if the recessed area were smaller, it would look better.  But as it stands now, that recessed channel runs the entire length of the hole.  Standing alone, I'm not saying that this sort of design feature makes for a bad architect or bad architecture.  The problem is that is that on all the Rees courses I've seen, this feature is the PREDOMINANT one on the course.  The only thing that strikes me as an evolution here is the hairy pot bunkers on the right side.  

[paul cowley]

.....I would suggest that it is result of natural design evolution, combined with a bit of looking over your neighbors shoulder, and all the while trying to ignore criticism in Golf Club Atlas.

I find it a fine looking hole that probably plays good too.

Anyone disagree?    [Note: this is a trick question designed to lure the truly talented people out of their chairs].........

[Mike_Sweeney]

You see "width" ? It must be because you live in the "canyons" all day.

Mr Greens Committee Member,

People in glass houses..............

[JESII]

Mike,

A couple questions about the playability of the hole:

- If I lay up off the tee say about 225, do I need to favor the left side of the fairway for the best visual into the green? Is the green oriented to favor approaches from the left?

- Is there a reward to hitting driver if I can carry the ball 270? Does that get me over those left bunkers and give me at least a little bit of room to play to? Assuming I can get there (50 - 70 yards from the green) what type of shot do I have?

[mike_malone]

 That Rolling Green hole does not have "width" for sure.  BTW many trees have come out since that picture.

  The hole you show seems to have significant constaints on both sides of the fairway. The "width" looks to be only for the bailout area to the right and short.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Mike,

A couple questions about the playability of the hole:

It opens next season, so probably only Rees knows and I don't think he will be making a guest appearance here soon.

More width for Mayday on Hole #8 - 210 Yard * 3 Par:

[Mike_Sweeney]

  The hole you show seems to have significant constaints on both sides of the fairway. The "width" looks to be only for the bailout area to the right and short.

Let's say it plays 300 - 320 from the member tee. It looks like a player of Sully's ability can hit a drive over the bunker or hit a draw up the slot. The width is there for the member who play hybrid short and right, next shot over the trouble to a green.

I sort of agree with Tiger that 350 may be too long, but obviously this is all BS untill the course opens.

I also agree with Aaron's assessment, but this gives the left miss a big penalty, the point of a short 4 - risk reward? However I don't see it as a dominant feature in the rest of the pics:

http://www.tgccc.com/progress.asp

[paul cowley]

OK ....after that last picture I take it all back, I mean how could anyone design a soft surface cartpath with grass growing thru it....and put it in full view?.....instead of just running it around thru the woods or creating at least a little bit of low mounding to hide it. .

I know alot of people are not going to agree with me on this, [but I'm prepared to go it alone].

[mike_malone]

 Mike Sweeney,


   You must excuse me, but my trip to "Mecca" aka TOC has permanently affected my view of "width". While that second picture sure has it to the right side, why not fairway to the left of those bunkers ? Then "width" becomes an apt word for the hole.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Mike Sweeney,


   You must excuse me, but my trip to "Mecca" aka TOC has permanently affected my view of "width". While that second picture sure has it to the right side, why not fairway to the left of those bunkers ? Then "width" becomes an apt word for the hole.

I think a btter comparison to point to would be a Pine Valley, Boston GC or Old Sandwich type of course. The Old Course is links land with no trees. This is rolling Pine Barrens type of terrain and not comparable, IMHO.

It is afterall 2006 on Cape Cod, and there must have been some restrictions on the number of trees removed.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

As far as how long the hole may play, it is a slight dog-leg left and so the "350" yardage may actually be 330 or less, making the front tee possibly 290-310. I think MANY who play the hole will give it a go.

Aaron, you asked, "Specifically, I hate how the entire left side of the hole is artificially recessed (or the fairway artificially built up).  Look at the hill on the left that serves as the hole's containment.  Is there any explanation why that would quickly drop off to where the bunkers are and then pop back up real quickly to where the fairway is?"

I disagree with your take on the hole. The hillside drop-off could be quite natural. How many courses have you played where the tee is from a promonitory to a lower fairway?  

Secondly, I don't believe the fairway comes back up to anything near  the height of the hill you refer. Remember (I am assuming you make your statement based upon the photo, same as me) that the photo is taken from a higher elevation than the fairway and the area you refer to is about 900+ feet away. I just think your perspective is incorrect, though I could be wrong.

Mike, since you took the photos, what is the answer to this?

[Mike_Sweeney]

Mike, since you took the photos, what is the answer to this?

As mentioned above, these pics were all pulled from the clubs website:

http://www.tgccc.com/progress.asp

I have not been on the property, but have driven around that area.

Ok here it comes, I like Atlantic, Bethpage Black, Montauk and Olde Kinderhook and with the risk that Tommy deletes me from GCA when he wakes up, I am a Rees Jones fan!

[JESII]

Paul Cowley,

I have never entered into these cart path conversations on this thread because of lack of interest, but your post confused me. Are you suggesting that a different material cart path would not need to be hidden? I prefer the look of that cart path so much better than the one on Anthony Butler's thread from yesterday about The Cut in Western Australia. Would you really feel the need to hide this one?

[mike_malone]

 Mike,

   I don't know whether the hole is good or bad since I haven't been there. But, it looks just like every other hole to me.

   That bunkering on both sides is possibly "strategic" but not wide.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Sweeney,

You shouldn't have posted the name of the architect.
You should have asked a question that was feature specific, like, should the right side bunker complex be bigger or smaller.
Or, should the left side complex be chopped into seperate bunkers.

Then, at the tail end of 12 days of discussion, someone would have asked where the golf course was and who designed it

Once you mention Rees's name, the whiners and the critics leap into action.

How does anyone know anything about the hole until they've played it ?

As to the narrow shute pictured from some course in PA, that dogwood is a recent edition, probably at the suggestion of a green committee member who wanted to add "color" to the golf course, and should come down tomorrow.

All of a sudden Mayday has seen the light, vis a vis a trip to TOC.  Better late than never, but Mayday, if you want to do something constructive, increase the greens budget for the line item, "chainsaws", and don't worry about width in the pictures Mike Sweeney has provided, worry about it at holes where you have to walk single file to get to the fairway.

[mike_malone]

 Pat,


  That pretty little tree is long gone!


   I don't think all holes need "width".  In fact, that hole at Rolling Green is often cited as proof that Flynn designed testing tee shots. I'm just saying that the one Sweeney says has it, doesn't have it!



    BTW was that Mr. Mucci commenting on a picture of a course he has not played? And not reading someone's post that the picture was outdated?

[Jimmy Muratt]

Mike,

I agree with you.  Based on the picture you posted and the others on the club's website, it looks interesting and a course I'd enjoy playing.  The terrain looks very similar to that of Old Sandwich.  

From the appropriate set of tees #14 appears to be an excellent risk/reward short par 4.  

Another hole that I like the look of is #9, a uphill 425 yard par 4.  Take a look at the pic though and I can see a great potential skyline green if they just remove a few of the trees behind the green.  That would really make for a cool looking approach shot.  

#12 also looks like an interesting par 4.  I like how in many of these pictures Rees has only bunkered one side of the hole.  For the tee shot here, a drive bailing out right will be faced with a severe side hill hook lie.  The golfer is rewarded for playing down the left side closer to the bunker.  

[RJ_Daley]

"We like to have definition... because of the lay of the land, you can see the targets so well...If I tell you what to do, you are more apt to hit a good shot than if it's blind, or there is no trouble out there, your mind is apt to go to sleep, if it looks hard - you'll tense up, I want shot options... blah blah blah...)"

Mike, I think all you have to do is listen to the little video and hear Rees in his own words, using every cliche in the book, and one gets a sense of what his design ideals are all about.  

Ironically, he talks about offering options, because he doesn't want the mind to go to sleep, at the same time talking about laying it all out obviously for you to see the hazards and the safe "options".  The way I see it, he is putting the mind to sleep.  For instance, in the featured picture, who in their right mind is hitting it straight away or drawing the ball across the upholstered bunker complex and trough as Aaron points out, rather than dink it up the right and a wedge or so in to the green?  What option is that, unless you are Shivas/Seve?    If you go over the bunker complex with a draw that carries about 270, you either go into that rough trough, or you may go through the FW to the pots beyond.   It seems to me, the strong player has about 10 yards to make the shot, to gain what - a chip of 20-50 rather than a wedge of 100-115?  Hit it too far up far right with more than 4-3I, and you run through the FW.  ZZZZ

[Mike Benham]

I would like to see the rough line eliminated and have fairway length turf all the way into the bunkers ...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mayday,

I know enough to know that someone who fades the golf ball is in serious trouble when he walked onto the tee pictured above.

I don't think Flynn ever intended to present that test.

Like "Girls gone Wild" that hole appears to represent "Green Committees gone Wild"

That the tree was allowed to grow to that size and invade the line of play tells me that someone was misguided or asleep at the switch, or both.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()