Tommy Naccarato & Jeff Fortson,

How much of a negative influence has the L-wedge had on the play of the hole and it's architectural values ?

Did the creation of the L-wedge permit better players to try to get as close to the green as possible ?

Pat I don't think the L wedge has changed things much.  Out of kikuyu rough, nothing grabs on the green.  And any good sand wedge from the kikuyu fairway has always grabbed.  The thing is the look.  It appears you need to land the wedge shot onto the top of your car's hood.  As Johnny Miller would say, "it will tighten your fanny."
If you are coming in from the right or for than matter over any bunker, you cannot hold any wedge within 5 feet of it landing spot.
This is even more true as you get closer to the green.

"Tom Paul,
In my view of things, the bunker was just one of those "added" touch-ups that any course needs to make the strategy even more defined. It was really needed for the better player, not so much the everyday guy who had better options going left."

TommyN:

I agree. I think on the tee shot alone that right greenside bunker absolutely and specifically "defines" the line for the long driver attempting to go right at and near or on the green. He knows (as Love did in 1998) he really can't stray even a yard right of the line from the tee to the left side of that right greenside bunker. And that is "defining" that strategy for him. Is "defining" a strategy more what's needed? Not in my book! I prefer a philosophy of "anti-definition". I think it serves to make strategies appear to the golfer through both continuous play and experience, not just visuals.

TommyN:

That's exactly what I mean. Rustic Canyon's #12 is the same basic concept as Riviera's #10 with at least one very different wrinkle. Or at least that was the idea before it got built.

Obviously at Riv's #10 there are a number of different options from the tee that makes the hole so good and those options appear to be in a fairly steady "balance" or "equilibrium" over the years, in that they all seem to be used indiscriminately by even very good players. In other words, it seems that no one ever seems to settle on one way or the best way to play it. But Riv's #10 has a considerable amount of fairway bunkering on an enormous fairway and always has had. That bunkering does dictate tee shot decisions to a large extent.

At Rustic's #12 the concept discussed was to do that or how to do that with no bunkering on an enormously wide fairway while at the same time getting players to figure out both why and how it really did make a difference where you placed your ball on that tee shot---obviously depending on where the pin was.

Some of what was discussed out there was the idea that if an arrangement could be created that could eventually get players to understand that despite that huge unencumbered fairway (no bunkers at all on it unlike Riv #10) that the hole might really be sophisticated because it would basically force players to think more in "whole hole" strategic way instead of the more common way of overcoming the problem on a tee shot frist and after that was done then beginning to consider and overcome the problems on the approach shot.

They wanted the players to notice the green and it's particular pin before deciding what to do on the tee shot. That was what it was all about---and that's why it was decided that no bunkering should go on the fairway. At least that's my recollection.

Riviera's #10 was probably mentioned at some point but there certainly was no attempt made to actually copy the look of it--just the same basic multi-optional tee shot and a green that could kick strategy all the way back to the tee shot.

GeoffShac sent me a whole bunch of really good photos of it from all kinds of angles but I've never seen it in person. We all did discuss the fact that doing such a big fairway with no bunkering at all on it could be a bit risky in that it might have been that most players simply didn't see the point of it and might just criticize the tee shot for being too easy.

All I said to Geoff and Jim is that obviously with that arrangement the green itself sure did have to kick back a ton of actual strategy to the tee. I said that had to happen by making a player realize over time that even if he thought he hit a good tee shot without thinking about where on that fairway it was that green was going to have to make him really pay on the approach shot if he happened to hit what he thought was a good tee ball but into the wrong place on that big unencumbered fairway.

I can't really remember that well now but I think I might've been visualizing a green that had a ridge running from front left to back right that would dictate the best place to come from on that fairway depending on the pin. I don't remember if I mentioned a green formation like that only that the green had to make players pay for being in the wrong place without realizing it.

I'm certainly not talking about removing the right greenside bunker on Riviera's #10---this to me is simply a discussion of a concept and how it would work best in play.

Interesting question, George.

Why would it be less interesting for pros today?

Remember it is 315 to the middle, so say 310 to the left front edge.  There aren't many, if any, pros for whom that's not a driver.

I'd say the temptation for them is even greater today, as so many more can reach that front edge, and not with some herculean shot... Not too many years ago, it was out of reach for damn near all of them, so the choice was simple, as a few have explained here - just plunk down a 2iron and try to stay left.

What's your thinking here?

TH

Just seems like we're approaching the point of just pull out the driver and hit it.

I read a book a long time ago called Through the Green (I think) that detailed the '92 LA Open as seen through the eyes of DLIII, who ended up losing in a playoff to Freddie. He goes through an agonizing process each day trying to decide whether or not to layup. I think he went for it more often than he laid up, usually to his detriment.

Now, back then DLIII was enough longer than the average Tour player that he was probably faced with a decision the rest weren't. But the distances have increased so much that I wonder if the "just plunk a 2 iron" hasn't changed to "just hit driver".

This is not to say it isn't still one of the best, maybe the absolute best, hole that the big boys face all year. It just shows how fine the lines are.

As an aside, in the book I referenced, Davis describes an area near the green as the barranca, an unkempt area that was marked as a hazard (important because it ended up being part of a ruling where someone accused him of grounding his club - he was absolved). Where is this barranca?

It's an amazing hole.

How receptive does the green have to be kept, to give at least a fighting chance of holding the green from the right hand side?


It's hole that could only have been designed inland IMO.

shiv:

Fair and sincere question:  you hit the ball as long or longer than most pros.  If trying to reach the green was your goal, would you sincerely do it with anything less than driver?  And IF you were playing this in serious competition, would it be "just pull out the driver and hit it" as George says?  That is, that driving it is so doable, with so little risk, that the options really aren't there for the big hitter other than to just fire away.

Note I'm not asking "playing for the hell of it, hole by hole, just caring about making birdies" shivas.  I'm asking the "competitive, needs to think carefully" shivas that is still in there and does come out from time to time when need be.  

I don't see it this way, but George is very astute and has me questioning a bit my original thought that it's more interesting today than it ever has been, because so many more people can now think of getting close to the green....in the old days most couldn't reach anyway, so that temptation didn't exist.

Whaddya think?

TH

Mike:

I get that, without a doubt.  Re #3 Rustic, hell I reached that with a freakin' 3iron down-gale.  I also can definitely reach that with a driver with no wind, due to the slight downhill nature and firm and fast conditions you usually have there.  So for shivas, it's a 3wood or 2iron, the equivalent of my driver.  No problem there.

But that ain't #10 Riv...

Which is, as I understand it and remember it, 310 to the front edge, rarely if ever has a helping wind, is if anything completely flat, and doesn't get NEARLY the roll you'd get at Rustic or TPC Scottsdale, particularly in early February.

With that as a basis, please do take another stab at my question... is 310 with basically no help really a ROUTINE driver or 3-wood, such that it's so in range the choice NOT to try it seems non-existent?

It seems to me that's what George is saying, and I just can't buy it.

But I am a short-knocker, often out of touch with how far the big hitters really do hit the ball.  Thus my question.

TH

shivas:

Many thanks, great stuff.  I believe I have this correct - you reaffirm my thinking, anyway.

Just one other thing though:  I didn't mean the first question to be anything other than specific to #10 Riviera.  Hell, there are par 4's out there you can likely reach with 5iron given enough helping variables.  That's not the question.  What I want to know is on THAT GOLF HOLE - #10 Riv - at 310 with no help and not much chance of roll - is that ever gonna be less than driver for you?

TH



TH

Shivas:  many thanks.  I am often out of touch with reality re golf and life, but this just REALLY sounded wrong to me.

So if reaching the green is the choice taken, it's gonna be driver, and it damn well better be hit well, and straight.  Look at the pic... that's not a very big target.  Jeff explains PERFECTLY where the good and bad misses are... it really seems to me there are more bad than good - anything right is dead, in the front bunker isn't exactly great, left rough isn't a horrid place but not nice... long is ok, short and left is ok..

I just can't see it being a thoughtless bang away, as George postulated.  But George, as I say, you did get me thinking.  No harm, no foul.

And dammit this remains a great golf hole.  Tommy and Jeff and those who love it are right... the more you think about it, the better it gets.

TH

George:

Gotcha.  Just remember that the pros don't like 40 yard pitches any more than you do, really, and in fact most actively try to avoid them.  Getting to the 20 yard chip zone really isn't worth the risk for the most part...

And sure, don't trust me re the barranca.  But if I were a betting man, and I am - I'd give 7 to 1 there has never been any semblance of barranca on this golf hole - at least when DLIII played it - and your memory is therefore faulty, on this one issue.

 

Thanks, Pete.  I TRIED[/i] to tell him the barranca was on 11, but nooooooo.... don't trust me......

 

TH

ps - you coming to Stevinson for TKPIV?