[Joel_Stewart]

Here is another photo of the 6th hole at Olympic.  The rough line on the left side of the hole has always bothered me but we have never come to a conclusion on how to fix it.  

As you can see, the rough line is now cut directly in the center of the famous fairway bunker.  As you get to within a few feet of the bunker the rough line moves to the right and goes around it.

Granted its an odd shaped bunker, very wide.   Does anyone feel that the rough line should be cut to the far left hand side of the bunker?

[Mike Benham]

Joel,

I usually play a straight to slight fade/push tee shot and the 6th ALWAYS makes a draw or pull come out of my bag.

Although I agree that it is an odd shape bunker, I believe the design of the hole including the rough, treeline and slightly visable piece of the bunkers plays mental games with the golfer.

Even though the tee shot should be played well right of the bunker (think republican on this election day) and the tee box directs you away from the bunker, the edge of the fairway is to the center of the green, the treeline on the left is to the center of the green, and finally the upper edge of the bunker, being visable and white, draws my subconscious mind line up down the left-side of the fairway.

I think that the current line of the left edge of the rough is fair.  Although your picture doesn't show it, there is a very generous rough line and landing area on the right-side of the fairway which gives the smart golfer an ample target away from the bunker.

Mike

Ps:  I still find it hard to believe that at the last US Open at Olympic, the big hitters were bombing there drives to the bottom of the hill ...

[Doug Siebert]

Widening the fairway on the left might make the hole play more difficult, as it'd increase the chance of ending up in the bunker but more importantly for longer hitters who don't care about that bunker, it'd increase the chances of rolling too far left and having trouble from those trees.  Narrower fairways aren't always more difficult, especially when those fairways are firm and sloped.

[TEPaul]

I don't know this hole at Olympic at all so I can't comment how it plays or the significance of how it's rough lines play.

But I'm coming to believe more and more that rough lines themselves should not be the sole or even primary indicator demarking strategies of how to play various holes if there are other "features" that are natural or architectural that could do the same thing!

In a sense this thought is an application of Max Behr's concepts that led him to develop his ideas on "lines of charm" and also in a general sense to advocate the use of no rough at all!

His overall idea with the concept of no rough was to give golfers as total individual freedom as possible within golf architecture so they could find and ply their own way in golf, on golf holes and apply their own individual strategies to the ultimate end of the green and cup!

Clearly this idea is somewhat idealized by Behr because the necessity of width is at a real premium and is something not that avaibable on most golf holes and courses.

But his ideas generally (no rough) is a great one and should be an "ideal" to be strived for in some sense and to some degree to create architecture that reliies on other things than rough!

Rough is basically an easy "road mapping" technique in architecture--sort of a highly indentifiable "path" along which a golfer can see clearly how he should proceed!

I feel ideally it would be more interesting, maybe even better really to remove that "road mapping" as much as possible and thereby allow a golfer to "search" a course, "search" it's features that are the subtle strategy creators and find the safe areas along with the danger areas and ply his own individual way as much as possible.

Of course supers, clubs, etc may say this would be too expensive to nearly impossible and in a way they are probably right. But this idea should be sought as much as possible in architecture although it is somewhat "idealized".

It interests me too that the original labatory of golf--TOC--is much this way--and it's always been called the "ideal" that all good architects seem to subscribe too in principle but not really in practice!

I wonder why?

Do I know of a course anywhere like what I'm describing?

Yes, it's apparently William Flynn's "reversible" course at the Rockefeller estate at Pocantico Hills. We have the original plans for it and although the plans do demark fairways there never really were any, just an enormous mown area everywhere with tees and greens and various bunker features and such sprinkled here and there.

Max Behr would probably approve of Pocantico Hills G.C. very much as very close to his ideal or "no rough lines" and as ideal an indicaton of "lines of charm" as possible for any golfer to play a hole in any direction and anyway he sees best!

With this kind of NO rough line direction Behr believed golf itself became more of a "sport" again (freedom of expression in nature) rather than a "game" that he viewed as a series of man-made directions and restrictions that ultimately attempted to dominate nature instead of using nature itself as the primary vehicle to play golf in!

[Eric Pevoto]

I'ts kind of hard to get a sense of playing angles, but my inclination is to move the rough line left and bring the bunker into the fairway.  

Without seeing the line beyond.  Does rough completely back the bunker?  If so, wouldn't it be desirable to move the line left to tempt the player to skirt the bunker for the preferred angle from the fairway?

[corey miller]

TEP- was the flynn course at pocantico hills ever built?  I have spoken to some who have played the course and it is still unclear to me what the layout is like.

[OLY]

 I still find it hard to believe that at the last US Open at Olympic, the big hitters were bombing there drives to the bottom of the hill ...

THEY WOUND UP THERE IN 1986 ALSO

[Mike_Cirba]

Corey;

Hopefully Wayne Morrison will weigh in as he was just up there recently and shared some pics with me this past weekend that look fascinating.  

Everything is mowed the same length except the greens, but the cut seems to be higher than standard fairway length.  

[Joel_Stewart]

To answer a few questions, if you hit the ball directly over the bunker you will be in fairly deep rough.  Again the rough makes a huge swoop around the bunker and then continues on past the bunker.  

Should rough prevent the ball from entering the bunker?  It is my feeling that it should not.  Hitting your ball at this bunker is probably a mis-hit.

Mike: Very few players (John Daly is the only one I can think of) reached the bottom of the hill.

[Mike Benham]

Joel,

Correct on Big John and I remember a few others during the practice rounds.

I'll disagree with Oly as I don't think anyone came close in '86 ...

Mike

[Kevin_Reilly]

I'll disagree with Oly as I don't think anyone came close in '86 ...

Or '87.  

[TEPaul]

Corey:

Pocantico Hills's course was designed and built by Flynn in the late 1930s for John D. Rockefeller Jr and has been there almost the same since.

Wayne went up there and saw it and played it (I was busy that day and couldn't go).

Wayne and I have talked about putting our feelings about the course on here but have decided to wait to find out if there may be a reason not to do so in detail for probably reasons of personal privacy.

Pocantico is not a private club per se and I don't think ever was or will be. It's a golf course for a family's own use and as such I'm sure you'all understand our thoughts to not be more forthcoming now.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

I have not had the opportunity to play Olympic, but when looking at the picture it would seem that the trees on the left are dictating the position of the fairway.  Rough is moving right because the Superintendent is unable to keep a solid stand of turf along that tree line.

Tell me could this be the underlying issue or am I full of it?  Would appreciate an invitation to do on site study!

[Joel_Stewart]

The trees boarding the left side of the fairway seperate the 6th and the 11th holes.  The fairway slopes right to left at a slight angle.

I still question if rough should stop the ball from going into a hazard?

Calling George Bahto.

[Eric Pevoto]

I don't think rough should keep the ball out of the hazard.  It softens it's effect.  

Also, with no rough beyond the bunker (or contoured more to the left) would the player be tempted flirt with the bunker and use the slope for extra roll?

[TEPaul]

Joel:

What's the good of rough preventing a ball from getting into a bunker? That basically weakens the strategic function of a bunker. If rough is going to have any useful purpose around a bunker it should prevent some balls from getting out of the bunker, not going into it!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()