What makes Shinnecock Hills so difficult? Can difficult still be enjoyable?

[JESII]

Oh and I was not suggesting the ideal approach needs to be fairway, I was just curious as to the opinions of others. Hell, just look at the prior hole to this example and you'll see there is no real reason to give the golfer an ideal look at anything, even with a tee under his ball.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I think I agree with Jim here.   I'm not sure that Flynn was employing "anti-strategy", in what you're terming his "reverse doglegs".  

For one, I think that sort of "fooled me once" thing only works once.  After the observant player realizes that there is no advantage, and particularly if there's a disadvantage in terms of the subsequent shot in trying to cut the dogleg, or challenge a hazard, then he'll likely steer clear in the future.  

I can appreciate the idea that things shouldn't become so standardized and formulaic that deviations from certain rules, however strategic, are not accepted, and I'm sure he was trying to create a level of balance and interest.

However, I think we also can't forget that there are multiple design considerations at Shinny, including prevailing winds, as well as carry lengths for players in 1930 that Flynn concerned himself with and I'm thinking the 8th hole carry out to the left hand corner was a pretty daunting carry, even if it required the smart golfer to play a bit away from the apparent intended line of the hole.

[nandoal]

I played Oakmont CC on Monday, and it was as difficult from 7300 as It was enjoyable.  Best golf experience I've ever had!  And had my ass handed to me despite hitting the ball very well.

[JESII]

The question is though Tom,

Will the fairway also extend over to those right bunkers? That would make it about what, 60 yards wide? Assuming that is a yes, because they do tend to widen out the fairways between Opens, will they keep it that way for the next Open? Assuming not, which side would they bring back in.

[Michael Ryan]

Gentleman,

How are you?  I'm new to the site, and enjoying reading the posts and different opinions, I'm very impressed with the level of knowledge regarding architecture across the board.  I have been lucky enough to play a handful of the great courses (Pine Valley, Winged Foot West, Southern Hills) but I have yet to play what I feel is the greatest course in the world, Shinnecock Hills.  I have walked the property during the last two US Opens ('04 and '95) and any chance I get to speak to someone who has played it, I ususally pepper them with questions.  I recently had some dealings with Lee Trevino due to my job in golf event management, and he said nothing has changed his opinion of #11 being the shortest par 5 in the world.  

My question to you all regarding how the course plays to the amateur golfer....have you seen any changes in how the course plays with the recent change in equipment?  I was very intrigued (and then dissappointed) in the set up of the course by the USGA in 2004.  In 1995 I recall that for the 4 days, the closest I saw anyone to the 16th in two was just inside 100 (I think Norman had 87 left for a 3rd shot in the final round...being one of the longest in the game at the time).  I arrived at the first round in 2004 and watched Fred Funk and Jay Haas (both two of the shorter players in the field) knock rescue clubs to hole-high with their second shots.  Granted there was no wind the first 2 and 1/2 days in 2004, but 1995 didn't have what I would say "blustery conditions", just the prevailing wind, into the player's face at 16.  Anyway, I remember feeling terrible that the course seemed to have been lapped by technology, and therefore, forcing the USGA's hand in the set up, and condition of the greens.  1995, players left saying it was one of the best tests in golf, 2004, players left saying it was a circus act.

Sorry for the long winded question, I was just wondering if the course still holds up to the amateur golfer in the same manner...I suspect it does.

[JESII]

Boy, look at those triangles along the right. I always thought that was such a cool technique. I think it was Adam Clayman that pointed out the three sets to me a few months ago on here. The only concession needed is for 10, 12 and 13 with the short 11th filling out a bit of space.


Michael Ryan,

Good questions, I'll try to answer for what I can.

I was also disappointed in the set-up for 2004 due to the rough having little teeth. Because of that they felt the need to protect par at the green primarily and got in a bit of trouble.

I think the course still holds up tremendously well for amateurs and pros alike. The distance issues you noticed are certainly a factor. #3 is not the long bear of a par 4 it once was, and #9 was approached from 110 yards by a couple of the guys. As you know, the wind plays a huge factor in the "playability" of the course. I remember watching the 1986 Open video maky times and seeing Mark McCumber hitting the 5th green with a 5 iron. Of course that same wind made the 16th a driver - 1 iron - 9 iron for Floyd in the final round.

Your concerns for the course being lapped by technology are probably stronger about Shinnecock than most other courses because Shinnecock is one of the true gems in the world. Needless to say the course still has plenty of teeth for the top guys.

[wsmorrison]

Yet there is a Redan-like hole (Flynn's completely redesigned 7th) and a Channel-like hole, the sixth at the top of the photograph.  Flynn wasn't designing templates, or replicating concepts, at least he never wrote about it.   Flynn used alternate fairways, as he did on the 5th hole (with the scorpion shaped sandy waste areas).  Rather than water, Flynn used undulating sandy waste areas that hid some of the landing zones and offered risk/reward options off the tee on the par 4 sixth with a bit less of one on the par 5 fifth.

Now there is a Biarritz, it is just south of St. Andrews Road near the railroad tracks.  I was on the remnants of it a few days ago.  

What made you think there was a Bottle Hole on Flynn's version of SH?   He wasn't making conceptual remakes.  If Flynn had a template hole it would be like the 12th at Pine Valley and replicated elsewhere such as the 1st at Philadelphia Country and the 4th at Huntingdon Valley.  There are more examples, some of which NLE.

[wsmorrison]

Jim,

I think you addressed Michael's questions quite well--no surprise given your familiarity with the course.  You're right that the determination to cut the rough a week before the Open set into motion a chain of events, brought on by rain and an unforseen wind, resulting in some measures taken that were not successful in showcasing the golf course or the abilities of the club's green staff.

I will say that the ability to recover lost greenspace will allow some very interesting pin positions and green diagonals that are currently lost.  The potential for pins tucked behind bunkers and closer to fall-offs will require outstanding precision in trajectory and distance on approach shots while having a strategic impact all the way back to the tee.  Additional width, if firm and fast, will intensify the decision making demands.

In addition, there still is a bit more length designed into the course that has not yet been utilized.  There also may be a few angles of play that could be put into use that will be extremely interesting.

I think any course today is susceptible to the best players today.  SHGC still has plenty of teeth and if presented correctly will easily show the world why this is one of the great courses in golf.  It is easily my favorite.  My second favorite is a bit closer to home  

[Michael Ryan]

Jim/Wayne,

Thanks for the replies, very interesting to read your insights.  Are any of the tee shots truly blind out there?  The only knocks I have ever heard on the place usually contain something along those lines.  Again, never having played, I'm going on what a person can see from "outside the ropes".  #6, #8, #10, #18, can you see the landing areas?  Those are the only ones that come to mind.  Personally, I don't get as upset about blind tee shots as most, I think they add to the game if used very sparingly.  

One more from the amateur playing view, #10, can an average Am knock driver down the hill?  By average I would say the 230 to 250 yard driver.  Would you say it helps or hurts your chances on that hole?

[JESII]

6 and 8 are obstructed. In other words, Mike Sweeney might be able to see the fairway, but most cannot. the top of the hill on 10 is also a bit obstructed but is also very undulating so a ball in certain spots on top of the mounds out there might be visible, others are not. 18 is right in front of you unless you hit it inside of about 145 from the green, then it is hidden. Unlike the prior three you asked about, the fairway edge is very well defined on 18 whether you drive it over the hill or not.

I believe the crest of the hill on #10 is about 240 from the tee. So depending on conditions your numbers may or may not get you over. If that is how far you hit it, I would say it is not advisable to try. Even though the hill is incredibly steep and long, balls with out a lot of speed going over the hill will likely stop short of the very base of the hill. this will leave you with a substantially downhill stance hitting a short shot up to a green with no backboard. My advice is, on this hole the 60 yards of roll would not be worth it.

[wsmorrison]

Michael,

The landing areas are fully or partially obscured on several holes such as 5,6,8 (left), 9,10, much of 14 and 18.  The 10th hole is really the only one that you lose sight of the ball so soon after the shot.

I cannot find my yardage book--I think I left it up there--but I think a carry and roll of 260 yards will continue down the slope.  I don't know if the average player wants to execute a blind approach up the hill to the skyline green, especially knowing how much trouble there is behind.  Then again, would the average player hit one 230 to the top of the hill and then 180 onto the visible green?  I don't know.  Interestingly, Flynn's green was slightly smaller than the present one, which was expanded a bit at the rear.

[Michael Ryan]

Jim,

Thanks for the answer.  I hit it a bit further (tap out at around 275), but a buddy of mine that made the field in 2004 told me that the 60 yard wedge shot to that green is one of the toughest he has ever faced.  Tried it in the practice round and hit iron off the tee on that hole the rest of the way.  If I ever get lucky enough to play it, I don't think I'll even consider driver....I was just wondering how the course plays to regular players as I have only seen the best in the world play it in tournament conditions.  I'm guessing there are a lot of putters being used from behind the 11th green....

[JESII]

The great thing about that 60 yard wedge on #10 is that when they really have the course greased up you can hit it three or four times in a row and really get good at it.


11 is really an unbelievable hole if you ask me.

[Brad Swanson]

Jim
   Here's an image of my second shot on #10 that somewhat illustrates your point.  My drive did manage to get down to the flat (right next to the drainiage grate) though as the hole was playing downwind.  I don't think I have ever played to the fat of the green from 60 yds before.  

 

Here's a wider angle shot that gives the elevation change more perspective

Thanks to Neil Regan for the photos.

Cheers,
Brad

[Michael Ryan]

I think Ben Crenshaw had that pleasure on #10 in 1995 if I remember correctly.  Tom Kite had a similar run in around the 5th green as well, with his chip shots.

[mike_malone]

 #10 SHGC--harder than #8 at Rolling Green?

[JESII]

#10 SHGC--harder than #8 at Rolling Green?

Just different.

At RG, if you can drive it over the creek, you do. At SH, if you can drive it over the hill, you think about it, and usually wish you hadn't.

Totally different holes if you ask me. Which one is tougher? Beats me!

[JESII]

I don't know Brad, looks to me like you're aimed pretty far right. What a great opportunistic photo by Neil.

[mike_malone]

 One of these days I'll make my own comparison. But, it looks like the similarity is the approach shot. I imagine the internals of the greens are different but the ridge that runs through #8 at RG is very difficult.

[JESII]

Mayday,

How close to the green does a 250 drive from the white tees get you on #8 at RGGC?

[mike_malone]

 If the tees are on the plate then it depends on where you hit the drive. If you go to the right you end up 150 ish in the rough. If you go straight you may just get over the creek and be in the ideal spot or go in the water. If you go well left you are short of the creek with 170 ish and significantly uphill.

[JESII]

None of those positions are possible on the 10th at Shinnecock with any distance drive.

I would say the third, fourth, fifth and sixth shots are very similar though.

[mike_malone]

exactly!

[JESII]

Mayday,

I think the design intention is to approach those holes with second shots.

[JESII]

Throw HVCC C-2 into that mix as well. In fact, I think that hole might be a good model for a way to improve #2.