[Mark F]

Given a nicely undulating property, with perhaps a couple of steeper hills, and without resorting to:
A)out of bounds more than twice,
B)water more than three or four times, and only a stream at that,
C)ridiculous rough,
would it be possible to build a 6500 yard course to test the best?
If not, why not?
If so, what would its component parts be?
If so, why won't someone?

[ian]

Mark, I'm convinced its possible. It would have to be tight in the landing areas, with lots of difficulty around the greens, and have really demanding green surfaces. Uneven stances would certainly help plave a premium on shot making too.

[A.G._Crockett]

This is an excellent question, and in many ways a summary of what a lot of topics on this website seem to be about.

I think the answer is that such courses can be built, and  probably already exist.  However, they probably aren't links type courses.  Rather, they may be heavily wooded and involve a number of doglegs which require layups off the tee to force longer clubs into the green.

As to building such courses in the future with the intent of hosting championship events, a number of problems exist, including:
     1. the par issue which has been discussed so much on
         GCA
     2. the need to limit the use of the driver in order to test
         the whole game of the pros, to which there is great
         resistance because of the skill level traditionally
         associated with long, accurate driving of the golf ball
     3. the marketing problems inherent in building, at current
         prices, a 6500 yd. course, since so much course and
         real estate/resort marketing includes the magical
         7000 yd. barrier

I feel more and more that the future of golf course construction may be in more and longer par threes, and shorter par fours that require very specific shots.  This might reduce par for the course, and would certainly reduce yardage.  It just turn out to be a very slow process.

[brad_miller]

Prairie Dunes?  Typical wind, and maybe mowed down chipping areas around certain greens, heard that a very knowledgeable source called the rough around the greens at PD "mercy rough"

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mark F,
I would add a higher fairway cut to Ian's list.

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Jim

I'd argue for a lower fairway cut (I'm asuming that this means shorter grass!).  All the 6500 yard of so great courses that I know play a lot harder when they play shorter (at least for the relatively skilled player), due to the unpredictability caused by and greater precision required by hard and fast fairways and greens.

Rich

[Jim_Kennedy]

Rich,
I agree with you about greens but not so much when it comes to the fairways. If a course is set up such that a player hitting a precision shot doesn't have a reasonable chance of stopping a ball on a hard and fast fairway then the set-up is over the top.
    
A higher cut didn't mean shag, just 1/4" or so longer than the usual Berber. Nicklaus and Player have said that at the '66 Masters it was very hard to spin the ball properly due to the longer fairways. Augusta grew them longer that year in reaction to JN's -17 win in '65.
A Nicklaus comment about the conditions at the '65 Masters: "The fairways were nice and tight and you could do whatever you wanted to with the golf ball. The golf course was fast and short and the greens were receptive".

[ChipOat]

Haven't George Crump and Hugh Wilson/Flynn already built such courses?

[John Morrissett]

Chechessee Creek is perhaps the best modern candidate I have seen that fits the description.  From the tips, it's something like 6600 yards, par 70.  The property has few outstanding natural features, and the marsh comes into play on just a few shots.  However, it is the most difficult Coore and Crenshaw course I have played, thanks to the very demanding greens (most of which are slightly raised and sloping off on all sides).  Unlike, say, Pinehurst No.2 though, the interior undulations on the greens are quite difficult as well.  There is plenty of room to hit the driver, and several holes require a long-iron or wood for an approach.  

In the latter regard, perhaps the key to designing a course that fits the description listed in this thread is to have five (or six) one-shotters -- those are the holes you can force the player to play a long shot into the green no matter what, and they reduce the overall length of the course.  Chechessee has one at 240 yards (the 16th), another at about 210 (the 11th), and one around 190 (the 2nd).  The others are about 175 and 160.  

Of course, Pacific Dunes at 6500-6600 yards isn't too shabby . . . (and it too features five three-shotters).  

And let's not forget about Merion.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Chechessee is a good choice, John.  Glad to see you contributing here again.

In that realm, Inniscrone also fits.  The Excelon (sp?) exhibition held there a few years ago showed that the course gave the Tour pros fits, especially the greens.  It's a par 70 and is 6630 yards.  Shorten a few holes there (not #5) to 6500 and it'll still baffle 'em.

[John_Conley]

6500 at par 70 with shorter par 3s actually plays long to an average golfer.  I know two guys who went back at Homestead because it was "only" 6600 and almost gave up it was so long.

[Mike Benham]

Since the USGA has a disdain for Par 5's, you could craft a 6,500 yard course that has 4 par 3's, that average 175 yards each (130, 165, 190, 215) and 14 par 4's that average 415 yards.

This will give a variety of Par 4 lengths to challenge the tee shot, and offer risk/reward on the approach shot.  Can you name 14 par's that average 414 yards that you like?  Sure you can ...

Modest elavation changes and wind would also be a requirement, and I would make sure that the fairways are not rock hard, allow for roll and ground play, but 50-60 yards rolls on 3-iron are not needed for US parkland golf.

Unfortunately, the perception of a 6,500 yard course would be difficult to overcome, similar to a comedy winning the Best Picture Oscar ...

[brad miller]

Chip, YES, should have included them in my post from last night.

[Mike Benham]

Both Olympic Lake (6,790 yds) and Pebble (6,759) could both be tweaked to get down to 6,500 yards, in fact, you could double the pleasure and get the Lake down to a par 68 also.

Here's how:

Change #1 to a 463 yard par 4 that would require a challenging right to left tee shot around the bend and a downhill second shot to front to back sloping and usually firm green.  Not a birdie hole ...

Change #16 to a 450 yard par 4 that would require a straigh forward drive but a difficult 2nd that needs to draw around the corner to a green that may not be receptive to medium to long irons.

Keep #17 at the USGA set-up ball-buster par 4 ...

About 6,520 and par 68 ...

[Dave_Miller]

Mark F:

Yes I believe it is possible.  Yet I feel it would depend on the the specific Championship being played.  

As an example next September our Club is hosting the USGA Men's State Team Championship.  Charles River from all the way back can play approximately 6,680 give or take a few yards.  

The USGA is setting up the course to play approx. 6,545 yards.  The course will play as a Par 70.  While I realize this a minor Championship the defense of par will most assuredly be at the Green.  

With the proper conditions it is felt this will provide ample challenge to the players and the greens are fast and in spots undulating with many subtle breaks.  

In 1982 we served as the second Club to Brookline for the US Amateur and the qualifying scores at Charles River were high with a similar setup.

It will be interesting to see how this works out.

Best,
Dave

[jaybrdy18]

"What is a Championship Course?"
by William B. Langford (USGA Journal Sept '48)
    
The usual request made of a golf course architect by the construction committee of a new golf club is that he shall create a championship course.  Most of the members probably would prefer a layout they could enjoy--they should have one.  However, a champiosip course can be made pleasant for the rank and file.  The ability to make it so is the architect's real test.
    The term "championship course" means various things to different golfers.  There is no definite standard which stamps one course as championship and another as mine-run, nor is it possible or desirable to have such a standard.
    It is not desirable because the charm of golf lies in its variety, in the ever-changing mental and physical problems presented the player by weather, terrain, luck and his opponent.
    It is not possible because no two golf course sites are the same, and no two architects would design the same, and no two architects would design the same or probably even similar courses on any given site.  Could he forget his previous production, any one designer would, in all likelihood, bring forth different layouts at each succeeding attempt.
    Many champions owe their success to supreme competence in one of the various departments of the game: wood club play, long irons, short irons, chipping, putting, or recovery shots.  Hence, the length of a course cannot alone measure its championship calibre.  The player whose long woods and irons might make him invincible on one course could be in constant difficulty on a layout where tricky short shots predominate.
    Custom now dictates that a championship course must measure at least 6,500 yards.  This is a fallacy, for the distribution of length much more than the total yardage determines a course's character.  A short course may present more long shots to the green than one of considerably greater total length.  this can be illustrated by the following which shows two hypothetical courses arranged in order of length.
Course A:
Length of holes: 480*,470*,460* 450*, 440*, 430*,415*,400,385,370,355,340,325,210*,180,
155,135,129=6,120
Course B:
570,555,540,480*,465*,450*,435*,420*,405,390,
375,360,345,330,180,160,140,120=6,720
*=Hole Calling for Long Shot to Green
    Course A contains eight holes affording long shots to the green, although it measures only 6,120 yards; while Course B, 600 yards longer, has only five holes calling for long wood or iron shots home.
   Any course, short or long, with 18 holes which require accuracy or distance and are sufficiently varied to test all deparments of the game is a course fit for a championship.  One which unduly rewards excellence in any one shot is not a fair test of all-around ability and thus not of true championship status.

[Kelly M.]

Reading your description immediately brought Taconic Golf Club to mind... very little water, well placed bunkers, cunningly placed green complexes and challenging greens.  It can hold up against good golfers, as the average score in the NE U.S. Open qualifier last spring was close to 80 despite calm conditions.  

[Doug Siebert]

That Langford quote really shows how times have changed.  A 415 yard hole "calls for a long shot to the green"?  More interesting is that the 180 yard holes aren't so marked, just how short of a drive was he assuming?

[db]

How about Rolling Green?  Like Merion, this facility could never hold 30,000 (maybe 3,000???) spectators, but in terms of golf, there is plenty in its 6628 yards.  I had the pleasure of playing a round there earlier this year (my first at RGGC) and was overwhelmed by the decision-making, shot-making and putting demands that this course exacts.

Oh, and it is very beautiful.  Unfortunately, no waterfalls.

[Matt_Ward]

Mark F:

In general terms -- NO.

Unless you changed the par to a 68-69 and included either one or two maximum par-5's. You could also do as someone suggested having two short par-3's so that you could bulk up the yardage on a few of the par-4's.

In order to accomodate a 6500-yard championship course you would have to follow the route of Carnoustie -- single lane fairways with hale on the sides. I don't know if that makes for an exciting event as all the players would likely "club down" and the use of the driver would be abandoned in almost all circumstances.

The other thing that might be added is having putting greens that are borderline fair -- you know, do the trick that was done at Olympic's 18th in the '98 Open and have loop-to-loop type greens similar to miniature golf. All that's missing is having the clown's mouth.

The last thing -- make sure all fairways and greens are concrete hard -- no H20 for the last 10-14 days prior. This would make sure that any shot not hit with max spin would bound into some form of trouble.

If you get my drift the circumstances needed for a 6500 yard course would call upon plenty of intervention by man and the "doctoring" of a layout in order for it to contain world class play.

Mark, are you angling for a return of the Open to Merion?

[Mark_F]

Matt Ward,

I haven't played Merion, Matt, but, next time I am in the US, if you want to take me around so I can cast my critical eye and make a reasoned judgement, I'm by all means willing...  

What's wrong, by the way, with a par of 68 or 69?  In posting this thread, that is what I kind of figured.  A course with two max par fives, five par threes, a couple of them long enough to test a long iron, and maybe three long par four's, where either the tee and or second shot plays uphill.

Throw in some great short par fours like, say, Salem's 13th, Merion's 11th (I'm going by pictures!), Pine valley's 8th, etc, and the mix is complete.  

As Ian Andrew posted, I would think undulating fairways similar to Royal St George's would also go to help the cause of our dream "little tiger".  Aren't they one of the reasons St. George's has stood it's own through the years?

Maybe a few narrow fairways, but I was thinking more along the lines of say having fairways that curved enough to require a controlled fade or draw to get in the proper position, or fairways that sloped enough from one side to the other requiring the same in order to stay on the correct side.  

I was also thinking minimal bunkers, maybe fifty-sixty or so, but unraked, so they are a real hazard.  

And if you had relatively small greens with Perry Maxwell contours, wouldn't that all be enough?  And provide great golf?  :-/

Mark F:

In general terms -- NO.

Unless you changed the par to a 68-69 and included either one or two maximum par-5's. You could also do as someone suggested having two short par-3's so that you could bulk up the yardage on a few of the par-4's.

In order to accomodate a 6500-yard championship course you would have to follow the route of Carnoustie -- single lane fairways with hale on the sides. I don't know if that makes for an exciting event as all the players would likely "club down" and the use of the driver would be abandoned in almost all circumstances.

The other thing that might be added is having putting greens that are borderline fair -- you know, do the trick that was done at Olympic's 18th in the '98 Open and have loop-to-loop type greens similar to miniature golf. All that's missing is having the clown's mouth.

The last thing -- make sure all fairways and greens are concrete hard -- no H20 for the last 10-14 days prior. This would make sure that any shot not hit with max spin would bound into some form of trouble.

If you get my drift the circumstances needed for a 6500 yard course would call upon plenty of intervention by man and the "doctoring" of a layout in order for it to contain world class play.

Mark, are you angling for a return of the Open to Merion?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()