News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mike Phelan

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2007, 01:21:40 PM »
18th at beverly...tree at dogleg.

Good one...was that tree there when Ross laid out the course?

Not sure.  I believe Paul Thomas is the resident expert.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2007, 03:22:19 PM »
Mike P,
   That would be Paul Richards.

John P,
   Great call on #5 at CD, that is the first one I thought of. CD has some of the best use of specimen trees I have seen. The 2 trees used to frame #6 come to mind, among others.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

John Pflum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2007, 03:29:13 PM »
--
jvdp

John Kavanaugh

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #28 on: April 10, 2007, 03:30:24 PM »
18th at beverly...tree at dogleg.

Good one...was that tree there when Ross laid out the course?

Not sure.  I believe Paul Thomas is the resident expert.

Paul Richards is the historian of Beverly...Paul Thomas is a member of another Chicago course whose name excapes me.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #29 on: April 10, 2007, 03:33:07 PM »
John / Ed:

I can't agree that the tree on the 5th at Crystal Downs is a key to the greatness of that hole.  About the only purpose it really serves is to prevent people from aiming too far right and cutting their tee shots o.b. right onto the entrance drive.  The tree was there in MacKenzie and Maxwell's day ... but it was only about 15 feet tall then.

The trees on 6 and 8 were both beside the original Sutter Road, which ran through the lower end of the course instead of around it.  I think the tree on 8 is in the perfect spot; the one on 6 is more controversial because you can hit a good drive up the fairway and be stymied by it.

John:

The problem with replacing trees is that it's very expensive to plant a large tree, and there is no guarantee that the transplanted tree will live.  Pebble Beach can afford to spend $3 million to try it, but they'll be bummed if the replacement dies.  I think trees can sometimes be a great hazard on a golf hole, but when they die, the truth is that it's nearly impossible to replace them with another tree, and bunkers are usually called on to substitute even though they have much less effect.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2007, 03:36:19 PM by Tom_Doak »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #30 on: April 10, 2007, 03:35:49 PM »
The old Lime tree on The Addington's 10th hole would have been a nice one to have around still.

This tree (oak?) stuck in the middle of a dune on Formby's 15th is a surprise.  I think it's still there?


From tee.

Looking back

(photo: Chris Hunt)
« Last Edit: April 10, 2007, 03:37:30 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #31 on: April 10, 2007, 03:39:29 PM »
From my own courses, maybe the most important tree is the one to the right of the second shot on #11 at Stonewall, which keeps everyone aiming left and keeps the end of the parking lot from being in play.  The tree just behind the 16th green there is also important, as a target when you're too far back in the fairway to see the flag.

John Kavanaugh

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #32 on: April 10, 2007, 03:41:48 PM »
Paul,

Thanks for the picture of that tree...I can think of a few members of parkland courses that are smiling as we speak.

Tom,

The large expense to replace was why I was sticking to trees of great importance.  I play a course that recently replaced an oak with a weeping willow...the weeping willow really returned the strategic interest to the hole.  Cheaply I might add but yearly dues are less than $500 per year for 200 members.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #33 on: April 10, 2007, 03:42:24 PM »
How about the tree gate on the par 5 10th at Black Forest. Gotta replace the tree(s) to keep the book accurate.  ;)
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Mike Phelan

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #34 on: April 10, 2007, 03:54:51 PM »
18th at beverly...tree at dogleg.

Good one...was that tree there when Ross laid out the course?

Not sure.  I believe Paul Thomas is the resident expert.

Paul Richards is the historian of Beverly...Paul Thomas is a member of another Chicago course whose name excapes me.

Ah yes....I apologize to all parties involved.

tlavin

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #35 on: April 10, 2007, 05:44:00 PM »
18th at beverly...tree at dogleg.

Good one...was that tree there when Ross laid out the course?





Yes it was.  It is a native Red Oak, probably 150 years old and in very good health.  It's in a very strategic place and the hole was surely laid out with the tree in mind.  From the back tee, the tree is roughly 265 yards out, on the inside of the dogleg.

Tom Birkert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #36 on: April 10, 2007, 05:53:14 PM »
The tree behind the 18th green of the Old at Sunningdale would be I imagine. It's the club's emblem.

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #37 on: April 10, 2007, 06:01:31 PM »
How about the Linden at the corner of the dogleg 15th on Blackwolf Run River?  An interesting par 5 and the tree plays a key role in deciding what shot to play for your second.

Barney;  Weeping willows are not the tree of choice, particularly near the line of play.  They are fast growers but like most fast growers they have very soft wood.  They are also very dirty and since they grow so low to the ground they take the elemnt of recovery out of the hole that the older hardwood probably allowed.  Its a cheaper and more expedient choice but it comes with inevitable problems.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #38 on: April 10, 2007, 07:05:10 PM »
Tom D,
    I was not indicating that the tree on #5 has anything to do with the greatness of the hole. I just happen to like it.
    If your drive is stymied by the tree on #6, then it is not a good drive is it? You can play farther left to keep that from happening, but as you know you will be left with a blind shot off an upslope. I suppose that given the carry to the top of the rise, the tree is a little superfluous. Why did they cut the trees to the right of that down?

John P,
    I don't like that tree on #8. It is some sort of ball magnet, at least for my golf balls. :P :)
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #39 on: April 10, 2007, 08:26:30 PM »
Paul,

Thanks for the picture of that tree...I can think of a few members of parkland courses that are smiling as we speak.


John

I had a look at the club website and the tree doesn't show on the Strokesaver, so it might have been felled recently.  A bloody shame if it has been chopped;  that tree had some strategic value as it magnified the dune protecting the short cut.  It was pretty too.
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

John Kavanaugh

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #40 on: April 10, 2007, 08:34:49 PM »


Barney;  Weeping willows are not the tree of choice, particularly near the line of play.  They are fast growers but like most fast growers they have very soft wood.  They are also very dirty and since they grow so low to the ground they take the elemnt of recovery out of the hole that the older hardwood probably allowed.  Its a cheaper and more expedient choice but it comes with inevitable problems.

Being a member of "the goat" is not a club of choice either but it is the course where I live.  It is dirty and it has sucked all the water out of the ground so the dirt underneath is as hard as a pool table and the branches do hang to the ground but it eats balls alive and makes for interesting backswings when you are found underneath.  It presents a cornocopia of options as around a top third of the top half in now dead and gone.  As it sits 190 yds out on a short par 5 you almost always challenge it because birdie is mandatory on the hole.  It is right at home at "the goat".
« Last Edit: April 10, 2007, 08:36:41 PM by John Kavanaugh »

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #41 on: April 11, 2007, 12:40:15 AM »
The small forest in the middle of #17 CPC might be a candidate. The membership did pop for a support to prop up the dead one adjacent to #16, which I find very Tim-Burtonesque.

You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #42 on: April 11, 2007, 09:30:38 AM »
How about the Linden at the corner of the dogleg 15th on Blackwolf Run River?  An interesting par 5 and the tree plays a key role in deciding what shot to play for your second.


great call there Shel...that is a perfectly situated tree that truly influences the play of the hole
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Eric Morrison

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #43 on: April 11, 2007, 11:46:21 AM »
9th at the K club...makes the drive interesting
It is what it is.

Tony Ristola

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #44 on: April 11, 2007, 02:26:30 PM »
The massive Elm Winged Foot lost.  

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #45 on: April 11, 2007, 02:44:34 PM »
 None, unless one has more money than brains.
AKA Mayday

Mark Bourgeois

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #46 on: April 13, 2007, 06:33:25 PM »
Despite the thread-killing power of the prior post, how about these:

The tree on the left is the killer as it forces you to either lay up, bend it around the tree, or just go right at the bunker and hope for the best.





Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #47 on: April 15, 2007, 07:21:06 PM »
Mark,

In that first picture I'm not sure why that tree matters at all, from the photo it looks you'd have to hit a low shot like a duck hook to hit it, at least from the blue tees where the picture was taken.
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Mark Bourgeois

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #48 on: April 15, 2007, 09:08:39 PM »
Doug,

If I had more than one chance to play the hole, I might have given that option a go, too! But it's definitely in play for most; the tee is over to the left, more along the tree line.

FWIW, I just aimed right at that bunker...and one hopped it in, ugh.

There's a little "depth compression" in the picture as in fact this hole is 525 yards.  It's the par 5 7th on the Eden Course, Hong Kong Golf Club (Fanling).  This pic is from the blue tee but there's another "blue tee" further back that makes the hole 551 yards.

I'm not sure the hole will be defenseless after the tree departs, but they will have to do it with rough on the hillside and probably just beyond that bunker leading up to that tree.

Mark

Mark Bourgeois

Re:Great trees that would be replaced.
« Reply #49 on: April 15, 2007, 09:12:06 PM »
Oh, to your comment: it matters because if it wasn't there you'd definitely have a go right down the line to the green.  With it in place, you pretty much have to play away from it or around it, bringing that bunker into play.

All of that plus the fact that the photo angle actually is to the right of the tee markers.  Move over to the left and the tree really sticks out.

Mark

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back