[mike_malone]

 My reference is to the strategy on the tee shot on #11 HVCC.  Do you think anyone would mess with that left side intentionally? Without the trees some may go over the bunker . If the pin is right then they have the best angle; if left they MAY believe they can work an iron around the trees short and left.

    It seems to me now it is just hit it straight out there.


  In some ways it reminds me of #12 at Rolling Green. It has bunkers on both sides of a short hole in the landing area that seem anti-strategy to me. Interestingly, Flynn had bunkers on EACH side ; he changed his mind after the course was built and eliminated the left bunker and added two on the right.


 I know that Wayne and Tom Paul have talked about Flynn showing you a way to go which you should reject. This hole seems to scream " Don't go left off the tee".


 BTW  my thinking about those trees started because they looked younger to me.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Congratulations Andrew on posting this. Too often the word trees, produces an instant jack boot response on this site.

Trees are such beautiful things it would be a sad place if there was no place for them ever on any golf course.  The arguments against them are well made and very important but that doesn’t mean the careful use of trees can not be a good thing.

One of the things they can do is introduce a third dimension to the game. The need for control of height in the shot. I.e. dare I aim to go over the tree, where the risk of failing is great but the reward can be sweet. There are a couple of courses near me where there is a single large mature Oak at about 200 yards from the tee on the right hand side of the fairway and a high draw will give you a big advantage. For a player of my ability it puts on a lot of pressure as you stand on the tee, but oh the joy in pulling it off!

Another joy can be going over the trees to gain an advantage on a dog leg. This is particularly exciting if the result is a blind shot and you have the delay in seeing what your result is.  Ideally this should also incorporate a cape element –bite off too much and you might never see the ball again. Play safe and you should have enough room to avoid the trees entirely.

Most of the arguments against trees are maintenance issues, I think a well chosen tree or two can add great joy to the game.

[JESII]

If you are of the length to consider hitting it over that left bunker (about 250 in the air) you also are long enough to go through the fairway on the right if you choose that direction. Probably about 275 or 280 in the right center.

It is certainly not a "just hit it straight out there" hole.

The pin dictates the strategy off the tee, the interesting thing is that it dictates it differently for each person because of the risks of the approach shot.

[mike_malone]

 Jim,

    I just think if Flynn did not intend trees there they should go.  Wayne said  "There were a few trees shown on the 1926 drawing." If Flynn intended a bunker  and trees there and trees by the green left then I bow to his genius. I'm just speculating that the trees by the bunker look added and in my view wrongly so. If that's not true then I'm wrong again.

   One other question---Are the bunkers right original?

[mike_malone]

 How about them Phillies!

[JESII]

How about them Phillies!

It'll be an uphill fight, but fun to watch. 2 back with 10 to play.

[mike_malone]

Jim,
   You must a real job---they just scored 4 runs in the top of the ninth-4 to 0

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Wayne
That single picture from Huntington, has made me decide to do everything I can to play in the Invitational next year..I do not need to see anything else, I know Iwill love the course...thanks for the post.
Send me the dates as soon as they are available...thanks

[JESII]

Jim,

    I just think if Flynn did not intend trees there they should go. Slippery slope in this day and and age. Are there any trees that you like that were not planted by Flynn? Better yet, how do you feel about the trees that were there when he was around? Would the course be improved if any one of them were removed?[/color] Wayne said  "There were a few trees shown on the 1926 drawing." If Flynn intended a bunker  and trees there and trees by the green left then I bow to his genius. I'm just speculating that the trees by the bunker look added and in my view wrongly so. If that's not true then I'm wrong again. For clarity, I am in favor of removing 99% of the trees inside the border growth, but the reality is that the trees you speak of are in the rough and do not effect a ball played into the fairway over the bunker with the exception of one small area of the fairway (maybe a 3 yard semicircle at about 90 yards)[/color]

   One other question---Are the bunkers right original?
Good question, the answer is yes but the configuration was different. There was more of a distance disparity between the left and the right originally. The current setup does play a bit like you mention above, but not fully because there is a slight variation in distance so the strategy offered is real in that you can alter your line of play based on the desired distance and use the bunker distances as a guide.[/color]

[mike_malone]

 When an accomplished designer like Flynn decides to leave trees or plant trees he usually gets it right. He DESIGNED the course with tree locations in mind. I find that amateurs who added trees afterwards usually get it wrong and don't keep the design intent in mind.


 Wait ! Stop the presses ! I can think of trees that were planted after Flynn was gone that I like. I am not knowledgeable of the tree history at HVCC  so the idea is from Rolling Green. I like the three trees planted some time in the last forty years on the left side of #4.

[Mark Studer]

Example of good use of trees.....hum...........................Mark Kuhns used the solid cherry wood from some of the first trees removed at Oakmont to make tongue and groove paneling for the superintendent's office in about 1994.  If you visit, check out the office...it has Arnold Palmer's old trophy case built into the wall as well.  Yes , paneling, beautiful, full grained ,solid 3/4 inch,air dried, cherry wood paneling.  By the way the paneling makes a perfect back drop for the before and after framed aerials on the wall.                         Also, the picture of Huntingdon Valley's 11th does show the green site but I'll bet if you kept the strategic tree about 90 yards out from the green on the left, and removed most of the trees behind and directly left on the woods line, you would have a better hole with healthier turf and  a firmer , scarier putting green.  I worked rules at the 11th all day , the first day, during this year's state am, and before the morning rain came, it was most difficult to hold the green(many well struck approach shots were bouncing into the rough behind).  One quarter of an inch of rain later, the players were  backing up balls into the fronting water hazard.

[wsmorrison]

MWP,

Why wait for the invitational?

Mike Malone,

First you say get rid of the trees, then you say if they were by Flynn they must be right.  I don't think you shuld judge Flynn as infallable; stick to your guns even if Flynn was responsible for the hole as it is today.  But keep in mind he usually is right and you are usually wrong.  Simple as that  

Why did you think that Flynn did not intend that trees should be there?  Because you don't like them and see them as limiting?  I keep telling you that Flynn was an early proponent of shot demands and shot testing.  The pin position on the 11th green demands precise placement of the tee shot.  It is a wide fairway but the ideal approach is from a small area that you have to think about depending on pin position.  The direct line between tee and green is not the way to go.  Again, you've played a number of Flynn holes like that, its just you may not have seen what is there.

Good call on the tree grouping on the left at #4.  I may be wrong (I'm going on memory here) but there used to be a bunker there before the trees were planted.  In my mind I like the bunker better with the creek bed brought out on a diagonal to the fairway.

Flynn planted strategic trees and used existing trees in strategic ways.  Like you said, it is often unknowing tree committees that err in the use of trees.  Too bad all the evergreens that were planted in the inner portion of the course weren't planted along the borders of the course.  All of those views should be obscured.

[wsmorrison]

Mark,

The ridge that bisects that green from front to rear is such a key feature to the hole influencing the tee and approach shots.  It is a wonderful hole.  

The Flynn drawing shows two strategic trees near the fairway in the area you prefer.  

I'll ask Scott if there are any problems with grass on the green due to the close proximity of the trees around the green.  I can't recall problems.  It seems that without rain the green is usually firm.  I didn't see the early rounds where balls were bouncing over the green but I sure did see some shots spinning into the stream in soft conditions.    

[Mark Studer]

The green was firm enough to bounce balls over before the rain, but I'll bet(sans trees left and behind)it could have been rock hard like most of the others monday morning.  I have to add that the super, Scott Anderson, had that wonderful course tournament tough and as ready for a competition as I have seen........ local , regional, or national.  

[Mark Studer]

Wayne- Another problem with those trees behind  the green-- I had to call for someone to blow off the leaves and seeds that fell from those trees during the rain.   What do you think that costs?  It is a great hole.... I had a chance to play it on Sunday before the competition, and played my 3 wood tee shot out to the right enough to have a straight ~ 125 yard shot to the hole(TEP gave me the line)  

[Kyle Harris]

I look forward to Sully, Kyle, Tom Paul, Mike C and others commenting on your idea as well.  Mike, you're starting to really worry me.  You want to mess up one of the great holes on one of the great courses? Hmmm...we might have to lay in a new supply of blackballs  

Not to steal Scott's thunder, but the 11th green is also cut a bit longer than the other greens (along with 7, also in the woods and near the 1th green).

Those trees on the left place a significant premium on getting the tee shot as far down the hole as possible to set up an ideal angle. Coincidentally, one of the few holes out there where distance is a priori to getting the ideal angle. The 11th fairway is also the flatest on the course, probably a good idea considering the location and type of shot needed into the green.

For the better player, I feel the trees are necessary since at that distance from the green the angle isn't quite as pertinent as say, having 100 yards to the green. These trees provide an aerial hazard that give the long hitter something to worry about. However, I did see someone during the PA Am hit a wonderful shot from the left fairway bunker: stopping the ball on the green to a back left hole location. The shot just skirted under the tree branches.

[Kyle Harris]

Wayne- Another problem with those trees behind  the green-- I had to call for someone to blow off the leaves and seeds that fell from those trees during the rain.   What do you think that costs?  It is a great hole.... I had a chance to play it on Sunday before the competition, and played my 3 wood tee shot out to the right enough to have a straight ~ 125 yard shot to the hole(TEP gave me the line)  

I've had that job!!!

That and the goose leftovers on 14  

[mike_malone]

 Kyle,

  What you say is interesting. I wonder if it was a Flynn concept or just some modern positive interpretation of trees planted to keep you from going left.

[JESII]

In my opinion, the trees add to the demand of the hole to the low handicapper that might think about carrying the bunker to leave a wedge in to a tough green, but it takes away from the hole for the weaker player that more often drives short and/or left of the fairway bunker. The player now has no choice but to chip out sideways and hope to wedge on.

Is there a happy medium?

[mike_malone]

 Jim,

  This gets somewhat to my concern about the trees. Isn't that green well protected by trees , hills behind the green , and a creek ? Why have these trees which eliminate the recovery shot for so many?

   

[JESII]

If I were to take those trees out, most of the ones immediately beyond the bunker, I would like to stiffen the challenge of driving it over that left bunker.

I would not argue a minute if the trees left, but increase the penalty or likelihood of landing in the bunker, and make sure there is some negative consequence to missing the bunker left for the good player. As it is, if you simply remove 10 of the 12 or 13 trees in that area it becomes a no-brainer for me to hit it into that area as the approach is no problem for me.

How do we do that?

[mike_malone]

 Well first of all I would get a guy like Prichard , who did your master plan , out there.

   But since this is all amateur speculation, I would balance the risk and reward for the good player. Bunkers seem an obvious choice, but if the message to that good golfer becomes "don't go there" than it is overkill. You also don't want to replicate the look of #4. It has it's appeal as the short hole with alot of bunkers.

      Moving the fairway right could be one idea, but honestly , Jim, I have played there 5/6 times and my recall on this hole is limited to "I hate those trees".


   Wayne I'm sure will smack me down if I am even an inch off in my suggestions, but I think things that eliminate recovery shots to that wonderful green over that creek are mistakes.

    Does HVCC have another green more narrow from front to back than this?


     Other ideas might  be to increase the penalty for going long--At RG Flynn came back and added bunkers into the hills behind #12 and #16 because balls would bounce back onto the greens.

[JESII]

#11 is about 12 - 20 yards deep along its different points, I think it is by far the shallowest green on the course.

I think one bunker beyond the current, and angled to the left with the flow of the hole would add suffient consequence to the tee shot if the trees were to go. This setup would demand an accurate drive on the aggressive line for strong players while allowing a recovery shot for less strong players that might have been behind those trees in the past.

Look out Mike, much more of this agreeing and it might be considered a lovefest.

[wsmorrison]

"I wonder if it was a Flynn concept or just some modern positive interpretation of trees planted to keep you from going left."

The trees before the creek were already there when Flynn designed the course.  Some trees were probably cleared as the primary tree line further left was intact and only two strategic trees retained closer to the fairway.

As for the trees behind and left of the green on the far side of the creek, a 1938 aerial shows that there were a few trees there but a number of small trees were planted in that area.

The design intent of the trees on the left before the creek is clear.  The number of trees behind the green probably got out of hand.  Somebody made the decision to plant those trees in the 1930s.  Flynn?  It could be since they were doing tree plantings of a similar nature at Rolling Green around the same time.  Maybe it was a fad that swept the area or maybe it was systematic Flynn.  Hard to say about these but I don't think there is anything to wonder about the trees before the creek that determine the tee shot so effectively.  

Please explain why you would consider taking trees out and adding a bunker.  Could this be a direct result of the bunker proposition on 7 at RGGC?  If so, its good to see that something is sinking in, its just that is mis-applied at HVCC where it is not revisionist thinking but Flynn's deliberate strategic use of trees that is evident.  There are examples he used all around the golf course, some still exist today.  Again, Linc's article in the feature interview section is worth reading again.  I think he's right.

Jim,

We had a great time yesterday.  There may be an interesting consequence of our day that you may like.  I'll call you early in the week.  Have a great weekend.  Oh, and stop with the Mike Malone lovefest.  If I see you two walking hand in hand I might just barf all over my Eccos    

I think it is important to retain the strategic trees even though they are a bit out of favor by some on this site.  Trees that were planned by Flynn to influence play are worth keeping.  Could some thinning benefit?  Mark Studer and you seem to think so and I tend to agree.  Most of the thinning should come on the far side of the creek though.

[Kyle Harris]

If I were to take those trees out, most of the ones immediately beyond the bunker, I would like to stiffen the challenge of driving it over that left bunker.

I would not argue a minute if the trees left, but increase the penalty or likelihood of landing in the bunker, and make sure there is some negative consequence to missing the bunker left for the good player. As it is, if you simply remove 10 of the 12 or 13 trees in that area it becomes a no-brainer for me to hit it into that area as the approach is no problem for me.

How do we do that?

I'd go with more fairway down the right side (Perhaps remove THOSE trees, as well?) and have it almost envelop the right fairway bunker. Let the golfer get the ideal angle with a shorter tee shot, just with a longer approach. From that point in the fairway, anywhere around the green is probably good, even one of those bunkers - which can be putted out of, so it's not too punitive, IMO.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()