News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2007, 10:13:59 AM »
Wayne,

I also read this the same way you did.

But when George stated "Pretty Clear" I thought this to mean that this is further evidence that the 9th at Yale was not originally a Biarratiz green, but as described otherwise.
Logged

wsmorrison

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2007, 10:16:32 AM »
He could have meant that it was clear the green was only behind the swale.  However, and I may be mistaken, but I think he has always maintained that Yale was one of the few Biarritz greens that always had green space in front of the swale.  Given that this passage was known for some time, I find it hard to believe it was interpreted otherwise than the green was behind the trench.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2007, 10:18:18 AM by Wayne Morrison »
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2007, 10:17:23 AM »
To me pins should always be beyond the swale.
Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2007, 10:28:31 AM »
OK, so you guys are saying that in this drawing, Charles Banks intended the front portion to be a landing area, and only the rear portion as putting surface?


We have aerial photos of the traps built as drawn, not clear if the front was putting surface or not. For information purposes, here is what the hole looks like today:


« Last Edit: November 17, 2007, 10:31:11 AM by Bill Brightly »
Logged

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2007, 10:36:15 AM »
Bill,

That's what we're saying.

Anthony
Logged

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2007, 10:53:07 AM »
So it begs the question: "If you are to restore the hole, and put back the bunkers as built, what do you do with the front section?"
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2007, 11:07:56 AM »
Personal club preference. I like it as full green (that's why I promoted it) but it works the other way very nicely if you maintain firm and fast.

Also these Biarritz holes were originally built with a single tee (225 to 245) but clubs began adding tees because it was "too hard"  ..... (whining)  :-[

The 17 at Westhampton was one of a kind - the bunkering was very interesting - like a reverse horseshoe.

The 13th at Essex County was also one of a kind, downhill  with the green set at an oblique angle and a beautiful ridge line all the way up the left side to near the tee - it was originally all one bunker (probably 300+ feet long) and you had to cross the bunker someplace, on the tee shot. That evolved into 4 smaller bunkers up the hill, then one bunker greenside. I'm hoping to put the entire string of bunkers back in one day.

The one at Blind Brook (when I first saw it) was a propped up single-green affair, fairly short - Geoff Cornish thought it was their Eden hole.

Most all of the remaining greens have lost their complex internal contours over the years.
Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

wsmorrison

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2007, 12:13:46 PM »
This one is pretty different also but like Westhampton with a horseshoe like bunkering around the green.  I don't know if it is reverse or not.  How does this compare to Westhampton's bunkering?



« Last Edit: November 17, 2007, 05:04:38 PM by Wayne Morrison »
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2007, 01:35:09 PM »
original Westhamton 17

Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Noel Freeman

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2007, 04:06:34 PM »
Tony/George, I have a funny story about Dr. Childs and the Westhampton biarritz... Lets just say the good doctor got a swimming pool lesson on the hole.. You'll have to email me for the details as I don't want to embarrass him.
Logged

Michael_Stachowicz

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2007, 04:38:33 PM »
While everyone is sharing old Biarritz pictures:

 

No room for a green's height front section here.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2007, 04:45:48 PM by Michael_Stachowicz »
Logged

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #36 on: November 18, 2007, 11:30:33 AM »
For a good view of a Banks Biarritz head over to the 1934 Connecticut Aerials thread now on page 3 (sad) and check out the Tamarack version. I wish I had the computer smarts to post a photo of it here. (again, sad.)

Anthony
Logged

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #37 on: November 18, 2007, 12:00:56 PM »
Link to Tamarack's Biarritz:
http://tinyurl.com/yu9o5w

Logged
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Jim Nugent

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #38 on: November 18, 2007, 12:33:27 PM »
Can someone clear up for me whether the front sections on most Biarritz holes now are part of the green.  
Logged

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #39 on: November 18, 2007, 12:43:10 PM »
Jim:

In a word, no.

It appears the vast majority of Biarritz greens were design to the front portion was the approach and not green, however, there are some cases where the front portion was or might have been green.

I'm of the opinion they should not be green unless there is undeniable proof that it was built to be green and maintained that way from the day it opened.

Does that help?

Tony

Logged

Jim Nugent

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #40 on: November 18, 2007, 12:53:22 PM »
Anthony, Tom Paul names 4 courses where the front portion is part of the green.  That is also true of St. Louis CC and Yale.  Phil McDade quotes Ran's review of Shoreacres, which also has the front section in the green.  So there are seven courses right off the bat.  

Any others?  I'm still interested when and why the courses that changed their Biarritz holes -- by extending the greens to include the swale and the front section -- did so.
Logged

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #41 on: November 18, 2007, 01:12:03 PM »
Jim:

The only course I can speak of when it comes to conversion is Shoreacres. During a massive project to recapture the original green pads at Shoreacres the superintendent made the decision to convert the front portion because it is very flat, especially in comparison to a place such as Fishers Island with its tilt and undulations. The tameness of the Shoreacres front allows for miriad pin placements. Some time after the project was completed the superintendent talked with a man who had worked on the course in the early 30s who told him the front portion had never been green.

Anthony

 
Logged

Mike Sweeney

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #42 on: November 18, 2007, 02:19:41 PM »
Quote from: Jim Nugent on November 18, 2007, 12:53:22 PM

Any others?  I'm still interested when and why the courses that changed their Biarritz holes -- by extending the greens to include the swale and the front section -- did so.

Last time I was there 2-3 years ago, Forsgate Banks was grassed in the front and I think there was talk of making it green. The Knoll's has the potential to be the best of the bunch and it currently is all green.

George B,

What would be your preference for The Knoll, grass or green?
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #43 on: November 18, 2007, 02:40:03 PM »
George B,

"What would be your preference for The Knoll, grass or green?"


Mike, at The Knoll, being a semi-public access course and maintenance understaffed, I think it would be better it remain a “single back green” with landing area in front.

Just the other day I expanded the approach to it’s full width, the very wide approach area ..... now if I could get them to keep it more FIRM !!!!

If The Knoll was (once again) a private course I think I would try to convince them to make it all putting surface, especially since the “approach” has so much original movement on it.


Aside: there are a lot more Biarritz hole full putting surfaces now than you might imagine and quite a few more considering making the approaches puttable.

When I first started Raynor-type visiting courses (in the name of research, of course - what a tough job) I can only think of a few courses with fully putting surface:

Yale, of course;

Tim Davis had just done Shoreacres;

Creek decided to do their 11th;

Chicago Golf;

I hadn’t been to Mid Ocean but I know their’s was;
 
not sure if Tom had done Camargo ...... (Tom??)  -  (I met Mike De Vries there - he was doing some hand-shovel work in the pit bunker right of 10-green if I remember - we spent a long evening talking that night);

..... that’s about it at that time.

Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2007, 03:08:25 PM »
I have not played there, but doesn't Fox Chapel in Pittsburgh have both the front and back as putting surface?

Anthony,  weren't you out there last year?
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #45 on: November 18, 2007, 03:13:01 PM »
Bill, what I noted dated back to late 80's early 90's
Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

TEPaul

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #46 on: November 18, 2007, 04:26:26 PM »
To me it seems a bit silly to discuss endlessly if it should be positively determined if any Biarritz green originally had front greenspace BEFORE some club uses front greenspace.

You know, if it works well for a club and course just use the front section as greenspace. Does someone think either Macdonald or Raynor will turn over in their graves because of it? Don't worry about that--both Macdonald and Raynor have had enough excercise turning over in their graves recently  just trying to get out of the way of Wayne Morrison pissing on them.

I think a much more interesting question to pin down is where Macdonald even got the concept of the swale in Biarritz greens.

I sure don't think it came from the original Biarritz green at the Biarritz GC in France.

So where did he get the idea of the swale in Biarritzes?

My bet would be from the big swale green at North Berwick. And so the question should be asked how long that green has had greenspace before the swale? Did it have it before Macdonald built his first Biarritz (which was Piping Rock's)

But of course that one at NB isn't a par 3. Perhaps just another example of how Macdonald didn't really copy entire holes but various architectural concepts found on various holes.

« Last Edit: November 18, 2007, 04:33:53 PM by TEPaul »
Logged

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #47 on: November 18, 2007, 04:35:44 PM »
Tom, I’ve tried for years to find out what the original green looked like, to no avail.

Right or wrong I think he was influenced by the 18th TOC. At one time, early on, the Biarritz was labeled as the Valley of Sin hole (they were bantering him as you guys seem to enjoy doing today) - so I’m going with that until someone can come up with something better.

It also seem logical to me that the original green had to have been long and narrow given the elevated tee and the cliff side green location.

Most swales were not the same angle on each side nor were they equally equidistant fore to aft.
Logged
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Michael_Stachowicz

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #48 on: November 18, 2007, 04:37:27 PM »
You all inspired me to update my website with a slideshow of Biarritz's.  Some of the photography is mine, some is from this site, but it is nice to see them all in one place.

http://newenglandgreenkeeper.com/Biarritz.aspx
Logged

TEPaul

Re:Reassessing Yale’s Biarritz Green
« Reply #49 on: November 18, 2007, 04:46:08 PM »
George:

What original Biarritz green are you speaking of? Piping's? Yale's? And which one were they bantering him about calling it the Valley of Sin hole?

I'll tell you why I think Macdonald put a big swale in his first Biarritz (Piping's). He was probably just trying to get rainwater off about a 20,000sf man-made architectural platform more easily!  ;)
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back