Ridgewood CC in NJ

« **Reply #25 on:** December 21, 2004, 08:56:31 PM »

Ed,

Based on the writers description, about a dozen other holes qualify as redans, or sedans if you prefer.

There is good movement in the greens at Ridgewood.

« **Reply #26 on:** December 21, 2004, 10:02:39 PM »

Having played the course about at least 1000 times, I'd like to share my thoughts on Ridgewood.

First of all, I NEVER try to drive the green on 6 center. A slight pull off the tee will result in disaster with this strategy. The way to play the hole is to first check out the pin when you walk off the 2nd green. When I lay up, I usually try to leave myslef a 3/4 wedge so that I don't spin the ball off the front of the green as the green has a steep back to front and left to right pitch. If the pin is in front or back left, I will try to lay up on the right side of the fairway where it is flatter and the green will act as a backboard. If the pin is back center/right, I will try to lay up to the left as it is easier to skip a wedge back to the pin from there.

5 west is a controversial hole as the left side of the green is now completely unaccessable from anywhere but the right rough off the tee. Its a shame because it is a great green, but most of the members love the tree. Why? I have no idea.

The bunker work undertaken by Todd Raich and his staff is about 1/2 complete and the results are spectacular. Green expansions have also continued and have made a huge difference on holes like 5 center where the green is nearly double the size now and 2 west where the green to the right of the ridge has been recaptured. I'm even surprised how much of a difference it has made.

Next on the docket is the expansion of the pond on 1 center to the left to make the tee shot more of a true cape.

Bottom line, some great work going on, but we need to be much more aggressive with tree clearing along the fairways as intended lines of play are still blocked on holes such as 7 east, 3 center, 1 west, 4 west, and especially 9 west. I'm also hoping that fairways will be brought back to their original widths and shapes when the new irrigation system is installed in a few years. The tee shots on 4 center and 7 west are awkward and one can easily decipher where the countours should be.

A great course that is getting better every year with the restoratoin work that is currently going on.

« **Reply #27 on:** December 21, 2004, 10:19:50 PM »

Greg,
Thanks for the feedback. Do you like #6C? Is it fair, or just a hole you know you have to survive? Since you have played it 1000 times, what percentage of those times would you say you hit the green? It sounds like you are a low handicap golfer given the terms you use with which my game is not familiar.

Happy holidays.

« **Reply #28 on:** December 21, 2004, 10:26:00 PM »

Ed Getka,

It's eminently fair.

It tends to embarrass golfers because they look at the scorecard and assume it's an easy birdie hole, which it can be.

It can also be a disastrous hole, one that ruins your round based on your performance versus your expectations.

« **Reply #29 on:** December 21, 2004, 10:30:29 PM »

Once you know the hole, would you say that you go in there expecting to make 5 more often than not? or that five generally won't cost you the hole in matchplay?

« **Reply #30 on:** December 21, 2004, 11:29:23 PM »

Ed,

If I hit the fairway, I am thinking birdie. A top amateur should hit the green 8-9 times out of 10 with the exception being if the pin is way back and one tries to get it all the way back there. The hole is not that difficult as the fairway is easy to hit. One with a poor wedge game may disagree however. In match play, a 5 will lose more often than not. The hole is completely fair.

I would go as far as to say the hole is considered one of the least difficult on the course. The potential for disaster is what makes it great. That being said, a player with a solid short game will almost never make more that 5, but someone with a poor bunker/wedge game could spend all day around the green.

I find the 15th green at Fenway much tougher to hit as it is hard for me not to spin the ball off the green with a full shot and it is a very narrow target in front for a running pitch.

« **Reply #31 on:** December 22, 2004, 07:09:52 AM »

Ed -

Sorry for the late response--.. Anyhoo, Alpine's 10th is/was known as the SKI Hill.. It is directly uphill, I reckon tee to green is at least 100+ feet. Just a guess. It is bunkerless (although on Tillie's original design plans it had 2 bunkers).. Although it is only 320 yards long there was a blurb I found as club historian that it was supposed to be 430 yards long at one phase. Let me say the hole would be impossible then. The fairway is crowned to make things worse and you have OB right (it wasnt supposed to be that way) and a cartpath left (if you hook one and it ends up hitting the path, you are looking at 6 easily even playing from the 18th fairway..

But ah, I am leaving out the best part of the hole, the green. The green has a pitch in the back of almost 10 percent. The only pinable spots are in the front, plus there is a convex vortex in the green which makes the putts fast and enormously breaking. There is also a steep false front, so you have to fly it on to the green. If you fly the green and go over with a hot approach, forget it, you are likely to pitch off of it and back down the false front into the fairway. There is almost no room to miss left b/c the cartpath snakes around that way. You can miss right and sometimes salvage a par or bogey. The green is viewed as a bastard by some including the pro and the low handicappers at the club (b/c they spin approaches off the green back down the fairway!) It is a terrific match play hole, people here who have played it with me like it- Redanman, Mcirba, Dr. Childs, Paul Turner, Corey Miller, John Lovito etc. I don't want to change it, we've restored the front 9 at Alpine with Ron Forse. Ron addressed changing this hole as past consulting archies like Gil Hanse and Mark Mungeam suggested flattening the green but it seems if we flatten the 10% pitch in the back the corresponding mound/hill behind the green (I forgot to mention that) will become too steep. So we might leave it as it is. Let me say this about the 10th--it was softened years ago after a hurricane but still is what ALPINE is all about.. When people play Alpine, the remember the 10th good or bad. When Peter Oosterhaus was the pro at Fortsgate and played a tournament at Alpine he walked off after putting on the 10th.. I'm kind of proud about that. I hope we leave it.

Tillinghast called the 10th a SICK hole.. He didnt want to create the 10th in the present form, he wanted the tee shot to be steeply uphill but the approach to dogleg right on flatter land into an adjacent farm (now OB as a house and backyard are there). Alpine couldnt buy the land, so the hole went straight uphill acting as a straight elevator. This move affected our 11th hole (a very good hole anyway) as the dogleg would have been more severe and the 17th hole as well.

Ed- you must come play Alpine with me or Deal (my other love). I'm likely to be at Alpine only 1 more year so if anyone else here wants to play, you best let me know.

I think I have some pix of #10, I'll try to find them and have them posted.

Matt Ward- I never thought Alpine would surpass Ridgewood, only solidify #2 in the county! And you forget, you birdied the 10th when we played there 2 years ago. As a caddy, regal me of your experiences with members there this year, their thoughts and scores or wild things. In our match play championship I watched a guy snake in a par saver from the back to front to sink my hopes there. I've also birdied #10 more than any other hole at Alpine.

Greg Stebbins- A while back I suggested you come out to play Alpine with me.. Offer is still open. BTW, I have a friend/colleague at work joining Ridgewood.

« **Reply #32 on:** December 22, 2004, 08:37:44 AM »

Quote from: Greg_Stebbins on December 21, 2004, 10:02:39 PM

Having played the course about at least 1000 times, I'd like to share my thoughts on Ridgewood.

First of all, I NEVER try to drive the green on 6 center. A slight pull off the tee will result in disaster with this strategy. The way to play the hole is to first check out the pin when you walk off the 2nd green. When I lay up, I usually try to leave myslef a 3/4 wedge so that I don't spin the ball off the front of the green as the green has a steep back to front and left to right pitch. If the pin is in front or back left, I will try to lay up on the right side of the fairway where it is flatter and the green will act as a backboard. If the pin is back center/right, I will try to lay up to the left as it is easier to skip a wedge back to the pin from there.

5 west is a controversial hole as the left side of the green is now completely unaccessable from anywhere but the right rough off the tee. Its a shame because it is a great green, but most of the members love the tree. Why? I have no idea.

The bunker work undertaken by Todd Raich and his staff is about 1/2 complete and the results are spectacular. Green expansions have also continued and have made a huge difference on holes like 5 center where the green is nearly double the size now and 2 west where the green to the right of the ridge has been recaptured. I'm even surprised how much of a difference it has made.

Next on the docket is the expansion of the pond on 1 center to the left to make the tee shot more of a true cape.

Bottom line, some great work going on, but we need to be much more aggressive with tree clearing along the fairways as intended lines of play are still blocked on holes such as 7 east, 3 center, 1 west, 4 west, and especially 9 west. I'm also hoping that fairways will be brought back to their original widths and shapes when the new irrigation system is installed in a few years. The tee shots on 4 center and 7 west are awkward and one can easily decipher where the countours should be.

A great course that is getting better every year with the restoratoin work that is currently going on.

Your 1000 rounds to my 1 certainly makes you a lot more knowledgeable about the course than I am . . .
I'd like to ask you this question:

10 top amatuers show up RWCC for a round including the Center 9. None of the players have ever played the course before. They all have caddies who can describe the holes to them from the tees and offer suggestions/strategy as they play their way around the course. All 10 decide to lay up on to their favorite wedge or 3/4 wedge distance on #6. How many of them hit the green?

-Ted

« **Reply #33 on:** December 22, 2004, 09:07:06 AM »

Ted Kramer,

Noone can answer a hypothetical.

How were those 10 good golfers playiing prior to their arrival at the 6th tee ? Good, Bad, Mediocre ?

Where did their tee shots end up, where is the wind, how firm is the green, what's the weather like, where is the cup cut ?

Perhaps a statistical review of the US Senior Open would provide better insight.

« **Reply #34 on:** December 22, 2004, 09:33:19 AM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on December 22, 2004, 09:07:06 AM

Ted Kramer,

Noone can answer a hypothetical.

How were those 10 good golfers playiing prior to their arrival at the 6th tee ? Good, Bad, Mediocre ?

Where did their tee shots end up, where is the wind, how firm is the green, what's the weather like, where is the cup cut ?

Perhaps a statistical review of the US Senior Open would provide better insight.

Fair enough.
There obviously is no "right answer" for the question that I posed.
However, I will add this:
You could take the 10 best players in the world who have never played the hole before, they can place their ball anywhere in the fairway that they want, with no wind at all, reasonably firm greens, and I'd take the under if you put the line at 9 of them hitting the green.

Now I'm going to see what I can find out about the Senior Open and how that hole played.

-Ted

« **Reply #35 on:** December 22, 2004, 09:37:25 AM »

Greg;

Thanks for the report on Ridgewood. It's great to hear about the ongoing work and the bones of the course are really superb.

Can you explain the goals of the bunker work and what you're hoping to accomplish or correct?

« **Reply #36 on:** December 22, 2004, 09:42:04 AM »

I found the following picture and description of #6 on the homepage for the 2001 Senior PGA. The picture is from the left fairway bunker looking up to the green.

This is a perfect example of how a short hole can be a great hole. This green is small, elevated and the flagstick location dictates strategy. A ridge divides the green into two levels. When the flagstick is down front playing to the right side of the fairway will give the players a backstop effect for their short iron approach. The back hole location is best approached from the left of the fairway, giving the player the entire green to work with. Long irons and fairway woods are the usual choice from the tee. Putting is a great challenge here. In the 1990 Senior Open, Jack Nicklaus was in the fairway each day and missed the green all four days. Getting up and down on this hole is really tough and any shot missing this green to the left is a guaranteed bogey.

« **Reply #37 on:** December 22, 2004, 09:50:45 AM »

Noel:

Yes, I had the pleasure in observing countless members attempt to handle the unique and quirky 10th hole T Alpine. In doing the book I am working on dealing with caddying I had first hand observations of what members and their guests attempted to do.

The hole needs some sort of defined landing area off the tee. The pitch of the fairway is only tolerable NOW because it's kept so soft. If the fairway were to become firm -- not FIRM mind out -- then balls would be running back to the cut where the rough meets the fairway just in front of the women's tee.

There's nothing that can be done on the OB right -- the property can't be altered in this regard. As far as the left side is concerned -- the close proximity of the cart path is a factor for those intent on avoiding the OB but as you said if you should pull the shot it's very possible you'll either catch the cart path or the angled landing area and simply go even further left towards the 18th fairway.

The green is certainly a controversial point. I can understand the "love affair" that certain people have for it but when people only play the hole periodically there is a tendency to get caught up with the "quirK" it provides and fail to graps how good golf can simply be turned on its head.

The pitch is fine if stimp speeds were kept at what Tillie envisioned back in the 20's when the course was opened. When you have doube or even triple cuts and the surface is rolled in tandem with the existing severe pitch from back to front it then becomes a Nascar crash site -- three-putting for most people is a blessing.

I would not want the green to be fundamentally altered but the pinnable area on the surface now is really laughable -- you cannot use the rear 1/2 of the green at ANY time.

You also have issues dealing with reasonable recovery shoulc you miss the small target. Right now the pitch / chip shot option is severely limited because of the Autobahn speed of the green.

The solution?

Either soften the pitch of the green to maintain the current grass cut or raise the grass level so that the green doesn't become an impossible situation save for those who happen to "luck it out."

By the way I have seen many a player who comes up just short and then have the ball gather pace coming back down the fairway for as much as 40-50 yards.

No doubt -- people will be talking about the hole but here's something to remember -- you don't want the impact of the 10th hole to take away from what Alpine is truly about. You need to think about that because such a situation can minimize and even cause negative feelings about the totality of the course and the fine work Ron Forse and crew are doing now. The 10th hole should have an impact -- it should not be of the tsunami variety.

« **Reply #38 on:** December 22, 2004, 10:22:41 AM »

Jimmy Murratt,

Did you say that in 1990, that Jack Nicklaus hit the fairway all four days and didn't hit the green once ?

The picture doesn't do the hole justice, nor does it give you a sense of the hole.

The picture is taken from an awkward angle.
It's almost as if Tommy Naccarato took this picture

Ted Kramer,

Would you say that the runner up in the 1990 US Senior Open, Jack Nicklaus, in 1990 was as good as a one of the top 10 amateurs offered in your hypothetical ?

He was zero for four in the tournament.

I wonder how he fared in the practice rounds ?

« **Reply #39 on:** December 22, 2004, 10:35:41 AM »

Pat,

Yes, Nicklaus was 0 for 4 with his approaches in 1990. That's hard to believe, especially seeing that his game must have been very sharp finishing 2nd in the tournament. I'd love to see how Jack played the hole in the 2001 Senior PGA. I wonder if his strategy changed and if he took the aggressive route going for the green or once again played for the short iron in.

I agree that the picture is poor, it's the only one that I could find. It doesn't show any of the good qualities of the hole and is from a terrible angle. The one thing that it does somewhat show though further up by the green is the trouble that can arise if you go for the green and miss your tee shot left. You must then deal with the tree, bunkers, and a green that slopes away to the right.

« **Reply #40 on:** December 22, 2004, 10:36:30 AM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on December 22, 2004, 10:22:41 AM

Jimmy Murratt,

Did you say that in 1990, that Jack Nicklaus hit the fairway all four days and didn't hit the green once ?

The picture doesn't do the hole justice, nor does it give you a sense of the hole.

The picture is taken from an awkward angle.
It's almost as if Tommy Naccarato took this picture

Ted Kramer,

Would you say that the runner up in the 1990 US Senior Open, Jack Nicklaus, in 1990 was as good as a one of the top 10 amateurs offered in your hypothetical ?

He was zero for four in the tournament.

I wonder how he fared in the practice rounds ?

Yes Patrick, I would consider Jack from 1990 to be at least as good as the hypothetical amateurs that I mentioned.

Jack going 0-4 says an awful lot about that hole.

I'd rather deal with one of those green side bunkers on my 2nd shot instead of my 3rd, and there is a very good chance I'll be playing my 3rd from one of those bunkers if I hit my 2nd from the fairway.

And the comment that left of the green with the driver is dead is totally valid, so don't hit it left. If we are talking about top players, they should be able to eliminate one side or the other. And my guess is that most top players wouldn't need driver to hit one of those bunkers anyway, making the idea of losing the ball left even less of an issue.

-Ted

« **Reply #41 on:** December 22, 2004, 11:05:41 AM »

Ted Kramer,

Nicklaus was viewed as a pretty good diagnostician when it came to analyzing how to play golf courses/holes.

While not absolute, I'd take his methodology on playing the hole over the amateurs you reference, and your preference for driving it in the bunker

If Greg Stebbins, an excellent golfer and the Club Champion at Ridgewood, with 1,000 rounds under his belt, and my experience in playing the hole a hundred times or so, agree with Nicklaus's practice on playing the hole, that would seem to be the prudent approach.

In order to better understand you prefered strategy of deliberately driving it into the greenside bunker, could you tell us what your handicap is ?

Since you indicated that you only played the hole once, perhaps your strategy will change with the benefit of additional experience.

« **Reply #42 on:** December 22, 2004, 11:36:44 AM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on December 22, 2004, 11:05:41 AM

Ted Kramer,

Nicklaus was viewed as a pretty good diagnostician when it came to analyzing how to play golf courses/holes.

While not absolute, I'd take his methodology on playing the hole over the amateurs you reference, and your preference for driving it in the bunker

If Greg Stebbins, an excellent golfer and the Club Champion at Ridgewood, with 1,000 rounds under his belt, and my experience in playing the hole a hundred times or so, agree with Nicklaus's practice on playing the hole, that would seem to be the prudent approach.

In order to better understand you prefered strategy of deliberately driving it into the greenside bunker, could you tell us what your handicap is ?

Since you indicated that you only played the hole once, perhaps your strategy will change with the benefit of additional experience.

The last thing I am trying to do is come off sounding like i know more about the hole than anyone else. I'm sure that both you and Greg Stebbins know a ton more about the course and that hole in particular than I do, no question about it. Please forgive me if I came across sounding like a know-it-all, that really wasn't my intentionat all.

I play to an 8 handicap. When I played Ridgewood I shot a very disapointing 46 on the East nine with 2 pars and 2 triples, followed up with a pretty solid 39 on the Center nine with 6 pars and 3 bogeys.

Again, I know that my experience is limitted in regards to this debate, and I sincerely hope that I was able to express my opnions without sounding like some kind of silly know-it-all.

-Ted

« **Reply #43 on:** December 22, 2004, 03:15:12 PM »

Ted Kramer,

I didn't get that impression at all.

Sometimes our first impression goes through an evolutionary process as our ongoing experience forms a more complete understanding of the hole.

A bunker shot from a bunker well below the putting surface, to an extremely narrow green, with severe penalties for going long, doesn't sound like the shot of choice for an 8 handicap, or Jack Nicklaus.

Sometimes its easier to play a hole in our head or on the scorecard then it is on the golf course, and this may be one of those holes where discretion is the better part of valor.

It looks easy, but one errant shot can lead to a distasteful score, and ruin your round.

If you can, play two balls the next time you visit.
One from the right center of the fairway just short of the hillside rough and the other from a ball thrown into the greenside bunker.

Also, look at the consequence of leaving a drive intended for the right greenside bunker, out to the right. It's not pretty.

« **Reply #44 on:** December 22, 2004, 03:49:13 PM »

Quote from: Greg_Stebbins on December 21, 2004, 10:02:39 PM

Having played the course about at least 1000 times, I'd like to share my thoughts on Ridgewood.

Greg-

Just a quick question--I haven't seen this hole before--about how high is the green above the fairway, and does the fairway end at a certain point?

From what it sounds like, the fairway is relatively flat, and the green is up on a hill at the end of it--I saw the one picture in this post and I'm just trying to understand the rough dimenions of it.

Thanks-

DRB

« **Reply #45 on:** December 22, 2004, 06:56:18 PM »

Doug,

The fairway isn't flat.

It ascends toward the green and has a general left to right cant to it.

The rough begins well before the green.

The green is probably 15 to 30 feet above the fairway depending on which side of the fairway you measure from, and at what distance.

« **Reply #46 on:** December 22, 2004, 08:57:49 PM »

One thing we are forgetting about this hole is the green. Not the size of the green, but the slope! One must be really carful with a front pin to leave the ball short and right. If not, it is easy to three putt from three feet. On occasion if you are on the back portion of the green and the pin is up front, you need to purposely putt the ball into the fringe to kill the speed.

One of the most frustrating aspects of the hole is to stick a wedge to 3 feet, then fail to even get a piece of the hole with your birdie putt.

Noel, I'm sorry but I don't recall your offer. I'd love to take you up on it in the spring. Did we meet at the Travis this year?

« **Reply #47 on:** December 24, 2004, 12:17:50 PM »

Thanks again for all the feedback. I suspect the Nicklaus statistic of 0 for 4, which I mentioned early on, is misleading. I would imagine at least 2 of those attempts just ended up on the fringe, but technically were a green missed.

« **Reply #48 on:** December 25, 2004, 11:48:36 AM »

As a follow-up to the discussion on the 6th hole at Ridgewood's Center Nine I was able to dig up some stats from the 2001 Sr. PGA on the hole ...

The hole was the 13th toughest during the event ...

Stroke average for the weak was ... 4.0315

Out of 445 total rounds there were ...

83 birdies
273 pars
82 bogeys
6 double bogeys
1 triple bogey / other

When factoring the standard deviation for the hole the rank jumped to 6th.

As an FYI -- the 3rd on the Center -- a long par-4 of roughly 450 yards had only 24 birdies for the week.

« **Reply #49 on:** December 25, 2004, 12:28:05 PM »

Ed Getka,

Matt's numbers show that this short hole played over par for the best Senior golfers in the World, for four days.

That would seem to send a clear signal with respect to the creation of an interesting design that appeals to all players, yet resists scoring from some of the best golfers in the world.

News:

Patrick_Mucci

Greg Stebbins

ed_getka

Patrick_Mucci

ed_getka

Greg Stebbins

NAF

Ted Kramer

Patrick_Mucci

Ted Kramer

Mike_Cirba

Jimmy Muratt

Matt_Ward

Patrick_Mucci

Jimmy Muratt

Ted Kramer

Patrick_Mucci

Ted Kramer

Patrick_Mucci

Doug Braunsdorf

Patrick_Mucci

Greg Stebbins

ed_getka

Matt_Ward

Patrick_Mucci