Possibilities On The Hemstead Plain

[Tommy_Naccarato]

The Current Robert Trent Jones Sr. Version

Aerial Image From The Old Hole

An Idea Of How The Hole Might Look If Properly restored

[Tim Weiman]

Tommy:

What was behind eliminating the forced carry? How long is this hole?

[A_Clay_Man]

I'll take a guess at answering Tim's Q....

Modern playability perceptions.

From what I've seen many bunkers were removed from older courses for pace and playability justifications.

IMHO the most ridiculous justification of all.

[TEPaul]

TommyN:

Great work there with a digital peception! How do you do that??

The club lost or sold some land apparently and lost the original length on that par 3 and has no ability to get it back--unless of course.....!!! I don't know the course that well but one would have to look to see how close #13 tee is behind the green and the available space behind present #12. In my recollection there is useable space behind and to the left of that present green!

But from the original ariel TommyN produced we really should have a disussion about that original green. From the look of it, it really was radical!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tommy,

Didn't you do this one a year ago or so?  No matter, an update (or back date) is fine.

I think the green is cool, and I tried on on a project after seeing your last post.  It lasted about five minutes after the super saw it!  We did leave the ridge on one side, in softened form.  I think the reason it was modified was mostly maintenance, and secondarily to eliminate quirk, not in fashion in RTJ's days.

There is a similar green at Lahainch, the seventeenth, and I recall putting over one of the ridges for a near eagle (it was shortened during renvoations to a driveable par four) and a tap in birdie.  That put was even more fun than one out of the valley of sin!  

Of course, Tommy, I will not admit to purposely hitting into the valley, a la the Naccarrato flop, at the tenth of PV.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Yes, Jeff and all, this is a repost of the 12th at Garden City Golf Club. Although, I wasn't really happy with the original image, I redid it.

Jeff, Even the attempt to try to do a green like this is certainly with a huge measure of respect. Glad to hear that there are architects out there that are capable of taking a chance!

[Paul Turner]

I think Painswick's 6th has some features in a similar vein:



An old photo, but it hasn't been changed.  And maintained with a budget of 2 bob, 6 pence per month  

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Paul

In yet another example of serendipity, I need to fly to Bristol in a couple of weeks to collect the car I'm shipping over from the US.  Rather than try to make it back up to Aberdour in a oner, I think I'll take the leisurely 1 hour drive to Painswick, play a few holes of golf, have a pint or three, a  and a nice comfy bed and then get up to Scotland the next morning.  Anything you would like me to report back on?

Tommy

This is an oldie but definitely goodie--though I think I liked your previous attempt at virtual reality better (more Painswickian). In general, however, just looking at the photos, is not "plain" the operative word when looking at the basic landform (hope TEP is watching so he can see me using his mot du jour ....)?  Isn't the option on a piece of ground like that:  1.  Simple and boring, as Jones did, or 2.  Camp and over the top, as Travis(?) did?  Won't any attempt at compromise be, well...compromised?

Rich

PS--the 250 yard uphill 13th at Aberdour looks a bit like the GCGC Travis original.  Miss long or right (assuming you are trying to drive the green) and you've got that "putt it up and over the ridge" feature.  It works.

[TEPaul]

My God, you can't be serious--that hasn't changed?

I gotta know then how that green and surrounds is maintained. Where does the green space begin and end and how are those radical mounds maintained on cut?

Have they got some kind of green mower over there in Europe we should know about or is super-scalping part of their maintenance practice? Does the crew at Painswick have seat belts, shoulder straps and roll bars on their mowing equipment?

[TEPaul]

Rich:

By all means do exactly as you say--take your time, analyze the place but not just the radical architecture but you very much must have a discussion with the maintenance crew of Painswick. If those mounds are remotely like green space I want to know how in the hell they manage and maintain that.

Report directly to me by email and no smart ass remarks on here! If those radical contours are even remotely close cropped this will be most fascinating!! And I might have to come directly over there and have a pint of four with you!

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

TE Paul et. al.

Look closely at Paul T's picture of Painswick.  In the foreground you can see what looks to be a golf ball.  Assume it is one.  How would you play the hole?  Let me speculate.

1.  The Papazian school would hit a little punch hook chip at that knob on the left, hitting it precisely at the proper spot, from which it would rebound to within 5 feet of hte hole.

2.  The Fireball Roberts/Morrisett school would see all those contours on the right and find some sort of wacky pinball wizard way of banking the pelota off the side slopes and back slopes towards the hole.

3.  The Imperial school would just deliberately chili dip a lob wedge into the DAWOS ("Devil's Asshole With Out Sand") in front of the pin and then putt up and over the ridge into the hole.

4.  The TE Paul school would just hit a soft GAP wedge into the hill stiff.

5.  The Floppy McChokelstein school would hit the helicopter wedge at the back features, spinning it back impressively 100 feet past the pin to the very place where the Emperor was waiting to hit his next shot.

6.  etc. etc.

Of course, the real answer to that shot is to hit a putter as hard as you possibly can, DEAD STRAIGHT!  Look at the contours and remember that the greens probably stimped at .72 when that picture was taken.

Helpfully

Rich

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

If I remember correctly, the old 12th was some where between 240 and 280 yards, and then at some point was converted to shorter par-3, before being totally remodeled by RTJ. If the hole is ever restored, I hope it is restored as a short par-4, that is how the hole was concieved. It would create some very interesting decisions on the tee.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tommy,
Were the mounds, in the old photo, maintained at the same height as the rest of the green?

Does anyone think the hole in Tommy's first photo is any good if judged on its own merits and not as a redo?    

[TEPaul]

Rick:

If that's a golf ball in the foreground it's possibly the biggest one ever made! You're perspective must be off--as usual!!

[RJ_Daley]

What, so it's Saturday.  Did one of our resident GCA superintendents go home early?

I really would like to hear from some of them how they would devise a strategy to mow the sideboard humps on Tommy's rendition, and at what height.  Very nicely done Tommy!

Painswick is of course a different kettle of fish.  I sure hope that Rich can get us a picture of the current state of that view of the 6th with better detail of the turf surrounding the shortest cut putting green areas.

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Dick

Does this mean I have to buy a camera?  Isn't my prose enough?

Wondering.......

Rihc

[Paul Turner]

Those mounds at Painswick aren't at green height, more like shaggy fairway height.  But they must be cut periodically.  

Geoff Childs posted a pic of the 12th at GCGC and it looked like the mounds weren't at green height for that photo, eventhough Tommy's aerial clearly is.

There's a website for the P'wick now at www.painswickgolf.com which has couple of modern photos of the 6th to show it hasn't changed, and the grass length.





I love "The Well" on the right, it's just a big mound and hole!


Rich

That's a stroke of luck.  Did you see Chris Hunt's thread (about 7 pages back)? He visited the course and liked it, which was a bit of a relief for me!  The village of Painswick is lovely and historic; with, I'm sure, a few great old houses to stay in.

Have a look at the club history booklet when you're there, it mentions a lost hole that sounds pretty exciting, which I think was beyond the current 3rd in the quarry works.  Please take a look and pic of what the hole might have been like-it's bound to be better than the current useless 18th.

[RJ_Daley]

The Painswick pictures are so seductive, I feel a little naughty just looking at them...

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rich, Just as you move out of the US of A, digital camera prices seem to have fallen to an all-time low. YOU MUSST get one and take pictures of Painswick!!!!

And while your at it, stop by Petreavie on the way home and get some shots there too!:)

As Dick has elaborated, I too feel seduced by some of these pictures of Painswick. I'll try to capture an aerial of the course and piece it together later on.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Jim,
As far as I can tell from the old aerials and decriptions from Pat, yes everything was maintained as putting surface over the wild and quirky humps.

[RJ_Daley]

I'm still waiting for a super to tell us what they would do to maintain the 12th humps at GCGC.  If RTJ remodelled it in 1962, there must be some living memory or documentation of how it was done.  For instance, was it hand mowed at collar level, a 1/4 inch or so longer than the putting surface?  So what if it got scalped a bit... scalped turf heals and can be reseeded and so forth...  I imagine the trick is keeping the top of the humps healthy and watered without the bottom of them getting soggy.  If they had the laborer time set aside to take into consideration the hour a day more that hole may have taken, it is doable if that is your priority, it seems to me.

[Jeff_Brauer]

RJ,

I got to thinking about what it might take to make this practical.  IF RTJ redid it in 1962, it seems that was the start of the machine mowing era for greens, and those couldn't possibly mow those steep slopes.  Plus, irrigation was still pretty primitive back then.

Perhaps modern technology would actually help restore this type of concept.  I tried it, and the super rightfully knew it wouldn't work under his equipment and budget regimen.  As TEPauls says, we do defer to the better judgment of supers.  If I were to do it again, I would pre-plan it a little better, and here's what I think it might need to be close to practical:

1. Probably best in new Bermudas, althogh heat tolerant bents may work, although I would probably put mounds in collar, as bents damage more, especially at lower cuts.

2. Use USGA greens construction, but make humps shallower in mix to keep wet, knowing the pin should never be set there.  I just saw some new research that confirms greens can be of varying mix depth to suit contours.  Shallow mix doesn't drain as fast - if you don't beleive, wet a sponge, and turn it on shallow, medium and long ends and watch the water continue to pour out.

3. Add Hydro Zone, or similar polymers to mounds to help them hold water.

4. Add small lawn type heads to spray just the mounds in addition to regular green irrigation heads.

5. Make sure the outside 6-10 feet of the green is flat, as in the old photo.  I think the clean up pass would do less mowing damage on flat ground than on those hills.

6.  Those hills looks like 45% slopes.  They would have to be softened to about 25% maximum, and commit the super to hand mowing.  They would probably have to be lowered, too, but with modern green speeds, it would proabably replicate the thrill of the recovery fairly closely.  Actually, Tommys ground level version looks on the verge of practical mowing.

7.  Be sure to leave at least one opening in the punchbowl to cofnform to ADA rules.

That is about all a "cwazy" architect could do.....and even then, I would attempt it only in an "easier" climate, like northern MN (wait a second, I have one green left to build!) Would any of the supers out there in GCA land agree to try to maintain that if all the above were provided?

Thinking about the original as a short four, I think we should be sure to build that green similary, or on a reachable par 5, which I guess these days, is anything under 640 yards!  Watching good players try to drive or reach the green, and then possibly be foiled by the mounds and the subsequent revovery putt would be fun, but proabably frustrating for them.

Architecturally speaking, do you think the cross bunker is as strong conept as angling the green and providing an opening from one side or the other?

[TEPaul]

Rick:

A camera would do nicely, thank you! If you can figure out how to use it effectively I think you're prose might not be necessary at all--thanks very much! Some straight factual reporting on your part from Painswick's maintenance crew might be interesting though!

[RJ_Daley]

Well Jeff, I see I am not the only one who is all college footballed out on a Saturday eve!  

The design is obviously something where Travis let his imagination run wild. So your idea Jeff of turning the green on a diagonal, and leaving an open run-up apron is just as valid.  But then where or how would you locate the boundary mounds within the mowed green?  Would you leave them at the opposite horizontal sides to the line of play into the green, or put them on kitty-corners?  

It does make you wonder if Travis had ever heard of crop circles when looking at this from the air.

[Jeff_Brauer]

RJ,RJ,RJ,.....

Have they added ice, skates, and a puck to college football?  Until they do, I will never watch!

I was only considering a small angle, perhaps 10 degrees, to favor a shot from one side or the other.  Then the mounds could be on either side, but one would just creep over the front of one side, meaning an approach short from the wrong side may kick off the mounds to the right fairway cut, or turbo boost all the way to the back of the green, or over.

It looks like the original crossing bunker has a down slope behind it, and w/o irrigation it was really a frontal bunker, with a punchbowl behind, so Travis was saying "don't be short, but you have some help long".  Introducing a slight angle (if not a par 3) would, IMHO, add some interest.