Fortress Greens - What happened to them ?

[Jeff Goldman]

What is the difference between a fortress green and a volcano green?  Either way, #6 on the South Course a Olympia Fields has huge falloffs on 3 sides (the picture at the end of Terry Lavin's piece on the North Course does not do it justice).  If you miss on one side, you have very little space to land it to avoid going to the other side.  Don't ask me how I know.

Jeff Goldman

[A_Clay_Man]

Jeff, The fundamental difference that I've observed are the steep bunkers that gaurd.

The 11th at Spyglass has that fortress effect on the right. The two examples I posted earlier have them on the left.
I believe Fazio did the work here. I never saw it pre-1996 The complex is actually much larger than pictured and is quite steep. It's  ability to magneticly attract surlyn, is worthy of serious considieration, upon approach.

The volcano greens, I have seen, are more like pimples and usually bunkerless.

[archie_struthers]

 


Fortress greens that come to mind #8 Pine Valley (mini fortress), the caddies are very familiar with the flip flop effect here. Banks built a couple good ones at Forsgate.

However, the top one on my list is at the CC of Charleston, an
almost unassailable par 3  ( I believe it is the 8th hole). Anyone who has played it will never forget it, being one of the most difficult holes anywhere if it is unchanged from twenty years ago!

[archie_struthers]

p.s.

  Forgot a good Flynn fortress, the 3rd at Indian Creek in Miami Beach, which is a good example of the genre. As to why none are being built, could it be the "fairness criteria" architects often feel compelled to follow?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Archie, et. al.,

Missing from many of the examples is the critical factor,
STEEP ELEVATION, with the green sitting high above the fairway.

#8 at Pine Valley wouldn't qualify as a fortress green complex.

[BCrosby]

Nicklaus has one at Laural Springs in ATL. 3rd hole, about 280 yards. Green elevated 20 feet on all sides but rear. You can't see the putting surface.

I thought it was the only hole of its kind until I played Cruden Bay. 2nd hole, 280 yards, Green elevated 20 feet on all sides but rear. You can't see the putting surface. (Was this the NGLA prototype?)

Great little holes.

I don't understand the reluctance to designing these holes on modern courses. Blind, yes, but you are hitting a PW/SW. One of those rare full sphincter lock-down shots that does not involve a forced carry over water. There should be more holes like it.

Bob

[Michael J. Moss]

Pat, I like the topic.

I've had the opportunity to play the Medalist GC in Hobe Sound on several occasions - a Pete Dye/Greg Norman collaboration that today, I understand, is more Norman than Dye.

Their par-3 fourth hole is an intimidating hole with a set of escarpments making any assault or recovery problematic. I'm told the original green was even more severe than today's version, but when thinking of any green that seems fortress-like, this is the one.

I would also nominate the par-3 17th at Winged Foot East. Pat, this one might not qualify because it plays somewhat downhill. The green is surrounded by a ditch to the left, steep walls on three sides and no bunkers. Therefore, recoveries out of the rough without the ability to spin the ball is difficult, to say the least. I am told that they have added a new back tee.  I think it's the most difficult par-3 on both courses.

Because the hole is without bunkers with a green that is pushed up, it gives the visual appearance of being fortress-like.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael J Moss,

The original 4th at The Medalist would be in the fortress category, but, I'm not sure it had fronting bunkers.

WFE's 17th hole is downhill and as such would fall out of the fortress category.  The entire putting surface is visible from the tee.

Gib Papazian,

The lack of a steep wall on most redans would differentiate them from a green structure like that at # 8 at NGLA.

[paul cowley]

...the aforementioned hole at the cc of charleston is the 11th not the 8th but very much a fortress.....with a hint of reverse redan....one tough raynor on the steroid scale.

[Jeff_Mingay]

As per Mike's photo, that little John Fought hole in Portland is one of the neatest things I've seen recently.

[johnk]

I recall that The Meadows Valley course at Blackwolf Run has at least 4 or 5 greens that are uber fortresses.  Maybe more...

Holes like:
#2, #11, #12, #13 (an all-world fortress), #15 (par 3 - also all world fortress) and #17...

These all had plateaus, rising up high and missing them was a big mistake.  I've only played it once - and it was 36deg. outside, so it played a little long

I'd never really played Dye before that, and I thought it was very severe...

[scratch]

One of the best examples of the 'fortress green' can be found on the 4th at Woodlands on Melbourne's famous sandbelt.  At 250 metres (280 yards) and no bunkering, the hole is not visually intimidating from the tee although once the tee shot is played, the fun really begins - miss the green short and you have a three foot rise to come up, left and you have about 5 feet of almost vertical shaved surround, likewise on the right and long is about 4 feet high with a large shoulder feeding the ball ever right. Scores can range from 2 to 7 in the blink of an eye!  I dont have any photos but maybe some Aussie guy might???

[Andy Hughes]

Mr Mucci. Interesting.  
I wonder, is there a minimum green size a fortress can be, or a bare minimum softness the green must maintain. Never been to NLGA or some of the others mentioned, but it would seem offhand that a green like this that wasn't fairly large could easily lead to endless back and forth. Is the 8th at NLGA fairly large?

[James Edwards]

Andy,

Yes of course this would lead to back and forth as you mentioned if the green wasn't designed correctly for the type of approach shot being hit.. and also dependent on where you are in the world id say along with how penal the greenstaff prepare it also...  NGLA 8th was medium sized If I remember correctly (Im sure Patrick will chime in).  I seem to remember (as has been mentioned) most holes at Pinehurst being this way - whether they are defined as fortress is another matter.  A lot of courses in the london heathland areas have fortress greens...

[Andy Hughes]

James
There are several pictures of NGLA's 8th hole in the 'Courses' section of this site, but none are of the green itself. No real detail, though the green itself does not appear to be as intimidating as other holes mentioned here. However, that may just be camera angle and distance from the green.
I don't recall when playing Pinehurst feeling like I may be in danger of ping-ponging back and forth. I did happen to play the course right after hours of rain, so the greens may have been far softer than they ordinarily are. I also don't recall them having the type of heights described here, or the sheer verticality some have described here.
The Courses section here does show the 3rd hole on the Kiawah Ocean course. I can easily imagine, with some wind and a grumpy greenskeeper, some players hitting more than a few shots around the green before actually finding the green!

[James Edwards]

Yes Andy, Kiawah 3rd hole does have an elevated green where this is possible...  but 14 more so at Kiawah is quite something!  That is table top stuff (Im sure Mike Vegis will chime in at some stage).

I visited Pinehurst when our conference tournament was at Buies Creek, and again 2 years later in 2002, and Id say that holes like 15 are great examples of this where the ball just hits the edges and runs miles away...

[A_Clay_Man]

John K, I know Pat will correct me if I'm wrong, but of the greensites you mention in Kohler, the only one that might qualify as a fortress, is the 13th. But I don't think so, because it lacks the steep, usually stacked, bunkers. The 2nd comes close too, but isn't. The 11th is absolutely NOT a fortress. 12th is reverse redan like and 15 & 17 are not uphill.

Pat, An almost skyline effect needs to be present, to qualify, beside the steep bunkers. Would you agree?

[BCrosby]

On second thought, I think the reason so few fortress greens are built these days has less to do with the blind approach than the unnatural look of them. Aesthetics are much more important in selling golf design these days. Exhibit A: Fazio.

C.B. MacD, Raynor, Dye, Nicklaus and Simpson (Cruden Bay) had/have fewer reservations about building holes that are straight forward artificial platforms for strategic shot-making. My sesne is that they often didn't try to make their holes look natural if it reduced the edginess of shot choices.

The Shorts, the Biarritzs, the fortresses, the railway ties, the whole bit, evidence a very different way of viewing the ultimate aims of golf design than those of, say, MacK, Ross, C&C or others.

It takes a lot more guts these days to design a course that has shamelessly artificial features. That branch of gca has always been a wonderful counter weight to the naturalists. I hope it doesn't disappear.

Bob

[Patrick_Mucci]

Andy Hughes,

The 8th green at NGLA is larger then it seems, from the fairway, and given the length of the hole, and the effect of trajectory on an elevated green, more then ample for approach shots.

The green is fairly benign, with subtle contours and slopes, probably one of the flattest at NGLA.

Adam Clayman,

There is a skyline effect, mostly from the right side of the fairway.  Tall trees on property adjacent to NGLA prevent a complete skyline effect.

I'm not familiar with Kohler, hence I can't comment

[A_Clay_Man]

Pat- Mine was a generalization of characteristics in reference to the make-up of what is being described as a Fortress green, not specifically NGLA's.

 I am like you, in that regard, with Kohler. Never been to NGLA.

[Andy Hughes]

The 8th green at NGLA is larger then it seems, from the fairway, and given the length of the hole, and the effect of trajectory on an elevated green, more then ample for approach shots.
The green is fairly benign, with subtle contours and slopes, probably one of the flattest at NGLA.

Patrick
Its virtually impossible to tell from the pictures here; is that green actually well-elevated from its surrounds? Are the sides fairly vertical? It appears short and right run away from the green, but gradually.  I could be misreading it entirely, but it doesn't look like you would need to be too concerned with hitting back and forth on that green.

[johnk]

Clayman,

You are right, the ones I remember at Kohler all pretty much lack the bunkers.  I've never seen the archetype at NGLA, and I wasn't really clear on what is or isn't a fortress.

However, if you want greens that look a lot like the Devil's Tower place in "Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind" where the aliens land,  Meadow Valleys has 'em.  One is even called Chimney.

They remind me of Rooks in chess, so I thought they might qualify as fortresses...  looking at the pix of the 8th at NGLA, I see that the bunkers provide a "moat"...

What if the green has a steep dropoff, going to a hazard all around them, why doesn't that fit the definition of a fortress then?

[archie_struthers]

 


Paul,

Thanks for helping out with #11 at CC of Charleston, although when I played there over 20 years ago I was more a student of malt and hops than architecture!

It certainly is a fortress!

[George_Bahto]

Archie: (unfortunately) they've soften the 11th at C C of Charleston a fair amount, not long ago. That hole was a beast.

[A_Clay_Man]

JohnK, I certainly wasn't dictating what is a fortress green. More hoping we could clarify it's definition. Chimmney is one of my favorites holes (arent they all) I was always fascinated by the right side with it's unrecoverable doom and that little bunker along the drop-off.

 However, The ultimate in steep fronts, used to be on that nine too (orig. 10th). It lacked any bunkering and had a tree placed on the left side, acting like the guarding bunker. It's all gone now.