[ForkaB]

Looks very much like the 13th at Royal Aberdour.  Was Flynn ever in West Fife?

PS--we still play our version as a "par" 4.  You Philly guys must really be studs........

[mike_malone]

 Noel,
    The reason the trees  need to come out is that they should never have been planted.There is no need for a bunker;just play it the way it was designed and built and you have a great hole. There is no reason to mess with this magnificent hole. I don't want a replica of #5 at Merion ;I want #7 at RG;the most fun hole on the course-returned;restored.
        There are holes on this course where time has indicated that changes are necessary,but not this one.

[TEPaul]

Noel:

Actually George Thomas's ideas about designing more holes in the "half par" range was in close inter-relationship with his idea on putts as "half-strokes".

Some may've thought Thomas didn't like putting but it really wasn't that at all. He believed that if golf had half strokes for putts it'd allow architects to more easily design holes in the half par range as they then wouldn't need to be so closely bunkered to put the necessary demand on good players and would consequently cost less to built and maintain.

You can see in a very real way Thomas's ideas on the half-stroke" for putts gave an advantage to the better player over the handicap player compared to the way golf is played as in a certain sense it took some of the luck out of the game when a handicap player chips or pitches and one putts for half against a good player who has played the hole with ideal shots in regulation par.

[NAF]

Paul-

The first at Meyrick Park is a harder hole than the one at Rolling Green due to the topography. Meyrick's hole is all carry unless u bail out to the small fairway before the hole and play pitch and putt.  Plus, what a way to start a course- 3 wood or driver right out of the gate!

Tom Paul-  I did not know that Thomas related the two (half-par vs. half putts) but don't you think even with today's game the change in setups--say one day a par 70 vs. par 72 would be fun or would our country club memberships not like that and believe the elasticity to be mickey mouse?

[wsmorrison]

Generally, Mike Malone thinks that the original design by Flynn was best and should not be tampered with.  I strongly disagree and feel that Flynn was making changes over time on a number of courses, such as Merion, Philadelphia Country, Cascades, Rolling Green and others.  Flynn changed the bunkering at Rolling Green over time.  Now, Mike would have you believe that with all these changes he did not add a bunker on 7 so, in his mind, he clearly did not intend to do it--there must have been a reason for Flynn not to.  Well, I disagree.  Flynn died nearly 60 years ago and he more than most would've welcomed change.  Flynn remodeled some of the great courses in America (Pine Valley, Shinnecock, and The Country Club in Brookline); nothing was sacred to him.  He predicted much of what has taken place with B&I and the athletic ability of golfers today and would want to keep pace.  My suggestion to place a bunker on 7 reminiscent of the bunker on 5 at Merion is not to emulate Merion for emulation sake but to refine a great hole at Rolling Green.  Harkening the design to Merion, in my feeling, helps to sell the concept to the membership.  Yet,the 5th at Merion is one of the great holes in golf and there's nothing wrong with taking a page from that design sheet.  Take the trees down, remove the cart path and put in a bunker.  If it works great, as I suspect it will, keep it.  If not take it out and the trees will still be gone.  The fact that a number of architects and enthusiasts agree with me is satisfying.

"The reason the trees  need to come out is that they should never have been planted."

Mike, I know you are capable of a better explanation than this.  I know it must sound like a BillV quote to people in the treehouse, but I assure you they are 2 different people  

[wsmorrison]

Paul,

The 1st at Meyrick Park looks difficult, especially the 1st hole of the day and as a par 3.  It makes the 1st at The Addington look like a chip and putt opening.  Did Dunn create tough openers on other courses?  What is the rest of the course like?

[Mark_Rowlinson]

I'm afraid I've mentioned it before on this site.  Glencorse Golf Club on the southern outskirts of Edinburgh at Penicuik has eight par three os which only one is under 200 yards.  The longest is 236 yards.  Its opener is 225 yards.

[Ron Kern]

I thought that this may be of interest.  Maybe not.

James Braid believed in the long par 3.

From "The Golf Courses of James Braid" by John F. Moreton, with regard to James Braid's ideal golf course -

"We should note here than on specifications accompanying his course plans, Braid often designated holes as 'bogey 3 1/2' or 'bogey 4 1/2' if he felt what we now call a 'par' figure for a hole was beyond the reach of the average golfer.  He specified clubs to be used for the tee shots at each of these holes.  One of his short holes would 'demand a full drive.'"

Braid's ideal course's fourth hole was a 190 yard par 3 and is noted as follows:

"Meant to be a full shot for the good player.  Length may be increased up to 210 or 220 yards."

Back to lurkdom.

[Brad Tufts]

The par-3 7th at my home course, Tedesco, is listed on the card at 239.  It is downhill to a very small green surrounded by two large bunkers, with a pond down the entire left side, and a busy street over the lefthand greenside bunker.  This hole is what I would call a par 3.5, as one day I played it last year, the back tees were way back, and the pin was on the back of the green, and I calculated the distance to 261, the longest par-3 I've ever played.

Honorable mention: No. 3 at Myopia is 253, which sometimes plays longer than No. 6, a par 4 listed at 260 on the card.

--Brad

[Tyler Kearns]

Donald Ross deisgned two clubs next door to each other in my hometown, Elmhurst & Pine Ridge. Both clubs feature a long par three that plays significantly longer due to the uphill nature of the hole. I have always questioned the green contouring at Pine Ridge's ninth (235 yds., and frequently one of the hardest holes in relation to par on the Canadian Tour), however, if the hole was intended by Ross to play as a 3.5 par hole, it becomes much more acceptable. And in fact, as the distance factor becomes less of a burden to the golfer, the inverted saucer nature of this green will keep it a half-par hole for eternity. At Elmhurst, a little knoll exists probably 50-60 yards short of the green, that used to be a small bunker. Once again, Ross may have designed this hole to play as a 3.5 stroke hole, and was offering a challenge to those who needed two strokes to get home.

Tyler Kearns

[BCrosby]

It does seem odd that as longer and longer courses are being built to accommodate modern distances, the long par 3 is not getting longer.

In fact, compared to Golden Age models, long part 3's have gotten (a) shorter in absolute yards and (b) vastly shorter after adjusting for modern equipment.
 

Bob

[mike_malone]

 Wayne,
 I appreciate your reply. It helps me to refine what I mean.I do think we should  change Flynn's design/build/adjustments. I just feel in this particular instance that the way this hole was in the 40's after Flynn died is perfect.He  made no changes other than planting trees way up on the hill.

      The randomness of the hill creates enough interest.The topography is so good that no additional hazard is needed.I believe Flynn did write that he would prefer the land  over a manmade hazard.

        I would like to add fairway to the back of #5 at RG;this is not Flynn,but I believe it is fine with his point of view.I think the fairway added to the right of #1 has been a great addition.When I watched Noel hit an excellent shot from that right side,I noticed how being able to bump that shot into fairway length grass made it a more challenging shot--by challenging I mean  using skills.
         

[NAF]

the 5th at Rolling Green..from the right appraoch angle.

[wsmorrison]

Bob,
I guess that it is an artifact of stroke play, GIR and fair expectations in modern design.  

Maybe even more than the par 3 10th at RGGC, the par 5 9th must have been a real brute during the 1920s.  614 yards uphill with a steeply canted fairway for the first 400 yards.  If, as Bob surmises, this was equivalent to a 675 yard or greater hole today; that was something.  It isn't just a long slog, it is a very good hole.  The original plan was to make it 551 yards (see plan below) which is the member's tee today.  It opened at 614 yards with the tee back and up a slight hill near in line with the back of the 11th green.  Preceeded by the 8th and followed by the 10th; this 8-10 was a difficult stretch of holes and remains so today.

[wsmorrison]

"I would like to add fairway to the back of #5 at RG;this is not Flynn,but I believe it is fine with his point of view"

Mike, what point of view are you referring to?  I think it is a fairly good idea, but certainly not because of any connection to Flynn's preferences or intents.  It creates an interesting result if you don't control your distance into this relatively short hole.  In my opinion, this is one of the very best greens and green complexes on the golf course and doesn't need a chipping area.  The front and rear angle of the green to the fairway line is superb as is the bunkering.  Frankly, I don't think Flynn ever used them on the sides or rear of any greens.

As for only relying on the ground topography at the green end of #7; it is awfully good ground for golf.  I don't think you could practically convince the general membership of that partly because mishit or topped shots would are more accepted under the scenario you prefer and also because most of the membership doesn't "get it."  For good players, with a bunker in the location I suggested, their second shot into the green should have some added intimidation or shot requirement.  For higher handicappers or those coming out of the rough (on 2nd or 3rd shots), there should be something to think about on the 3rd shot.  It doesn't take away the possibility of most shots from the hillside to the short right of the green.  It makes some of the pitches onto the green more intense and doesn't have any effect on most of them.  You like variety, what's wrong with hitting out of a bunker over canted ground with the green falling away from you?  It adds to the additional variety there will be with the trees removed.

Noel,
Mysterious last post.  Very succinct  

[NAF]

the mighty 9th at rolling green

[wsmorrison]

Ahh, that's better!

[NAF]

wayne..check out my mysterious post (the one b4 the 9th) now..

[Keith Durrant]

Looking at the 9th hole original plan, it appears that some strategy has been lost, based on the absence of the right sided bunker at 200 yds and the right-sided "rough gulley" at 350 yds?

Also on the plan, the point to point line indicates a drive distance of 245 yds and a second shot of 200 yds to allow a pitch from 110 yds. So it was envisaged as a true 3-shotter back in the day.

[BCrosby]

Wayne -

Flynn was a real dude. I had forgotten his ninth at RG. It is another example of his unusual view of golfer expectations v. par.

I hope you and Tom spend some time in your book teasing out those issues. As Tom noted above, there is a lot going on there.

I can't think of anyone, now or then, who approached "playing challenges" quite the same way. Flynn was truly sui generis and maybe that's why his courses have held up so well.

Bob  

[Paul_Turner]

Wayne

I posted a thread on the course:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=13751;start=msg235143#msg235143

[Doug Braunsdorf]

 I would like to add fairway to the back of #5 at RG;this is not Flynn,but I believe it is fine with his point of view.
         

Mike-

  What would be the purpose of adding fairway to the back of the green?  It's a reasonably short hole, do you think it's unreasonable to ask the player to hit the green?   I am of the opinion that it's not too much to ask of a player to hit the green with a short iron or wedge.  Even myself.  

  The reason I ask is, I found the hole to be very fair (yes, on THAT visit   ) but seriously, do a lot of iron shots not hold the green?  

Wayne-

   On my visit to RG, you told me a little about the seventh hole, and I've read and seen for myself the need for tree removal and cartpath shifting.  

Just for comparison's sake--do you, or does anyone here-- have a picture of #5 at Merion where Flynn used this feature?
  Alternatively, what if the right side of the fairway was cut in a different pattern?  Hitting a third to that green, and holding it, from the rough would be plenty testing as well, in my opinion.  Or a fourth    

[mike_malone]

 To say adding fairway to the back of #5 would be consistent with Flynn's point of view may require  an "either or " comparison. For instance,I believe he would oppose planting an evergreen tree right behind that green because it would not afford a recovery shot,but, adding something that would create an interesting recovery shot that also would add variety to the shots around the course would be consistent. I guess I could imagine Flynn responding to today's lush turf around greens by using fairway length grass.
    This would be "trying to think what he would he would do today". I am comfortable with us disagreeing about "what he might do".But,the opposition I usually encounter is"I don't care what he would do".

   Doug,

       The interesting thing about the shot to #5 is that my fairway proposal would almost never come into play when hitting from the preferred angle.It would usually come into play for shots from the right rough. Presently there are some evergreen trees short and right that impede some of those shots.Of course,I want to get rid of those trees,but realize that players hit higher shots nowadays and the existing bunkers and tilt of the green may not be sufficient. So, I ask"what can be done that allows a shot but creates a penalty for a mishit while still allowing a recovery----voila!-fairway on the downslope would do it.

   more later--someone just came in my office

[ChasLawler]

Flynn's 14th at the CC of Virginia's River course plays to 235 yards today from the tips (and generally into the wind). As seen in the photo below, it's all carry with no option to run it in. According to some older members, the hole originally played around 210 from the tips.
I'm not sure how it ties in with this topic, but there's no question this hole demands a well-executed golf shot with very little room for error. The ideal shot is a high fade, but anything pulled left is dead. The green is large, and there is more room to work the ball either way than appears from the tee, but this is not a hole where you can "get away" with anything. Even at 210,  I can't imagine this hole was much easier back in the 30's.


This photo is taken from one of the forward tees (around 155), and the further one moves back - the narrower that chute appears.

[Mike_Cirba]

Let's see what we're looking at here, shall we?....



Ok...back to work.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()