DeVries Exacting Nature

[Adam Clayman]

One of the controversial  aspects I sensed from playing and hearing others on Mike's designs was in relation to his use of exacting shot demands. I.e. 2nd @ Kingsley, 1st @ Greywalls. At each  a diagonal fronting  slope repels shots that are slightly off. Sending the ball into either chipping areas or a bunker. To me this is not a new concept but Mike clearly has improved upon some of the ODG's like Ross, Raynor and Langford.  It's my belief that these shot testing scenarios are wonderful examples of quality design. It's my observation that those cryit doon this aspect are so focused on their own game and expectations that their disdain is a fruitless cry. What say any of you on any of that?

[Jeff Tang]

Adam,

While I agree both of those shots are demanding I think Devries did not make it unfair because of the length of the shot.  The approach to the first at Greywalls will most likely be with a short club for the third.  Likewise, on the second at Kingsley I think I hit 7 iron and 8 iron the two times I played it, not an overly long hole.  I would say the ninth at Kingsley is more exacting than either of those two holes. 

Where I found it difficult, especially on the ninth at Kingsley, is if you miss the green you could be going back and forth over the green trying to get your chip to stay on the green.  I couldn't really find a ridge on the ninth that I could play into to help feed the ball to the hole.  The pin was in the front right portion of the green the day I played and it's really narrow down there.

[Andy Troeger]

The front pin on #2 at Kingsley seems to be the one that would be controversial (and of course was the pin for my two rounds). I like the idea but admittedly still haven't decided if the gully is a little too deep given the exacting nature of the required approach to that pin. Once you got down there the recovery is really hard unless you have pretty good touch.

That said, most of the problem was that I was not willing to play short or to the back of the green to avoid having any chance of going into the gully, but I've never seen anything remotely as severe as that one. #9 was a piece of cake in comparison. Once down in there I guess you have to go out to the side one way or the other, but those shots aren't that easy either.

I certainly know of no other hole that would strike that much fear into me at that short of a yardage. It would be great for match play, but it can be a card wrecker early in the round too.

[Bruce Leland]

Any pictures of the severity of the green complexes under consideration?

[Steve Lang]

   My partner called the rough at Kingsley #2... "Billy Goat Golf" .. rejection is just the start of the penalty

[Jeff_Mingay]

I've seen much of Mike's work, and can attest he's certainly not trying to "dumb down" the game... which is a good thing 

[Adam Clayman]

Sorry, no pics. As Jeff Tang states, the shots are not without opportunities to avoid the diagonal and they both do not require long irons.
 Andy's response is exactly what I meant about the subjectivity. On both of those greens there's   comparatively ample space to play away from those difficult pin positions. It's the piggish nature that is responsible for pin seeking, and, it's Mike's thoughtful design that identifies that nature. When one is unsuccessful in attempting to get close they ding the architect rather than accept their own weakness or nature.

Jeff is correct that Mike is pushing the envelope of design by making the shots demanding but not impossible or exceedingly hard to the average player.

As for my own experience, I was only caught once and on subsequent plays made sure that my line of flight took into consideration the simple yet effective green's defense.

[Andy Troeger]

Adam,
I think the 3rd time would have been the charm for me as well 

In playing the hole with Mike the 2nd time around he laid up...on a 150 yard par three. And it worked a heck of a lot better than my effort which almost flew in the hole but didn't stay there!

I do still wonder if the penalty isn't just a tad too steep though. I'd rather hit into a pond than that dang swale again!

[Adam Clayman]

Andy, That's the thoughtful part. You wonder if the penalty is proportional? If it were a pond or a tree, many wouldn't give it a second thought. (and slope raters would add points for the difficulty) But, with Mike's style and adherence to principles, it's all right there in front of you, no vertical or unrecoverable hazard, other than a moderate slope. The architecture does not dictate the shot, that's left up to the player. It also does not mean that a five on a par three was a bad score. The situations on these Mike DeVries courses, and other great courses, challenge the flawed mindset rut many have fallen into as it relates to ol' man Par. I'd even argued that the wrong road taken, gca wise, is responsible for these shortcomings in the modern player. 

[Joe Hancock]

In playing the hole with Mike the 2nd time around he laid up...on a 150 yard par three. And it worked a heck of a lot better than my effort which almost flew in the hole but didn't stay there!

What? He led you to believe he laid up on purpose? Look Andy, I've played enough golf with Mike to know he is neither smart enough or secure enough in his masculinity to lay up on a 150 yard hole on purpose.....

A flat out top bordering on a whiff does not a lay up make......

Joe

[RJ_Daley]

Here are pics of the 2nd, which emphasize the nature of the somewhat deep but narrow turtle back green with trouble on both sides.  Even the so-called lay-up pregreen is a turtle back of sorts with a collection area down into the right side frontish bunkers. 

oops editted as I forgot the pics...


I think Mikey D really does have an interesting and demanding if not dramatic couple opening holes both at Greywalls and Kingsley, and has you thinking right off the bat, what kind of man would start his course routing with such bold design?   

[RSLivingston_III]

Laying up short on #2 is harder than hitting that front part of the green. If you don't have the skills to drop a ball 1-2 ft. left of center on that front part, aim for the back portion of the green and try for a two putt.

[Buck Wolter]

This was the first golf hole my 6 year old son ever played - he ran it on to the front of the green and had a 15 foot birdie putt -- needless to say he doesn't think its that difficult.

[Andy Troeger]

In playing the hole with Mike the 2nd time around he laid up...on a 150 yard par three. And it worked a heck of a lot better than my effort which almost flew in the hole but didn't stay there!

What? He led you to believe he laid up on purpose? Look Andy, I've played enough golf with Mike to know he is neither smart enough or secure enough in his masculinity to lay up on a 150 yard hole on purpose.....

A flat out top bordering on a whiff does not a lay up make......

Joe

Joe,
He called the shot before he hit it. That could be a case of knowing the odds of solid contact were poor, but it was a convincing display. I'll stand by the previous comment 

Adam,
I agree with you, and I love the course. I just haven't decided if I can call that slope "moderate." More like..."@*&)!&@." There are ways to avoid the issue though and still have a good chance at 3. That makes it work. I wish RJ's photo's showed the depth of the swale I'm talking about, my photos are from a similar angle and don't do it justice. Photos probably wouldn't do it justice given tht the camera tends to flatten that type of thing.

[Adam Clayman]

Andy, If you ever get to Lawsonia, you will see just how moderate Mike's little chasm is comparatively.

[Nick_Christopher]

The front pin is a sucker placement.  As Ralph said, hit it to the back and get down in two. 

If you've got the scrot for it, though, try it Mike's way!

[Larry_Keltto]

Adam, this a great analysis.

What's your take on Kingsley's #8?

[Greg Ohlendorf]

Having just finished playing Greywalls, the following thoughts come to mind. How many boring "two putt and move on greens" have we all played recently? So many courses have such bland putting complexes which reduces the challenge and thought of half the game. I played a course recently (which has in the past received much hype) and had no more than six inches of break the entire day. Not much challenge. At Greywalls, I agree with the thought that hole one may actually be playable since the third shot will likely by 125 yards or less. Green two may be tougher. The 14th is likely the hardest to hit of the day.

Greens like those at Greywalls require thought. I had 32 putts overall, with three 3 putts. Had to think the entire way around. Where issues arise with any greens like these is in the placement of the pins. There are some un-puttable locations. If the course super is careful, most of these greens can be managed. At the end of the day, at least they are interesting!

[Adam Clayman]

Larry, #8 was another one of a series of just flat out fun holes. I loved the look and use of the natural hillside and how it worked with #7. The centerline bunker complex was way cool(WFC).

Since I was fortunate to get to The Downs, Mike's considerable effort to capture the feeling was well done throughout but with total uniqueness.

 

[Jeff_Mingay]

In playing the hole with Mike the 2nd time around he laid up...on a 150 yard par three. And it worked a heck of a lot better than my effort which almost flew in the hole but didn't stay there!

What? He led you to believe he laid up on purpose? Look Andy, I've played enough golf with Mike to know he is neither smart enough or secure enough in his masculinity to lay up on a 150 yard hole on purpose.....

A flat out top bordering on a whiff does not a lay up make......

Joe

Joe,

Does he have a driver in the bag these days?!

[Joe Hancock]

In playing the hole with Mike the 2nd time around he laid up...on a 150 yard par three. And it worked a heck of a lot better than my effort which almost flew in the hole but didn't stay there!

What? He led you to believe he laid up on purpose? Look Andy, I've played enough golf with Mike to know he is neither smart enough or secure enough in his masculinity to lay up on a 150 yard hole on purpose.....

A flat out top bordering on a whiff does not a lay up make......

Joe

Joe,

Does he have a driver in the bag these days?!

I'm sure that's what he used to lay up on #2.......

[Mike_DeVries]

This was the first golf hole my 6 year old son ever played - he ran it on to the front of the green and had a 15 foot birdie putt -- needless to say he doesn't think its that difficult.

Buck,

Nice!  So there you have it, everyone, a 6-year-old can hit the green -- what's so tough about that?!?!!?   

Mike

[Mike_DeVries]

Hi All and thanks for the commentary!  I really appreciate hearing the subtle nuances that different players are seeing and it helps me, so keep it coming.

Andy, with regard to the severity of the bowl on the right of #2 (and #9), we have moved up the mowed rough line on them to help prevent balls releasing to the same spot and landing in a divot -- I don't think that is how it was when you played it -- therefore you often have a shorter shot and can get a wedge under it better, still leaving options for whatever you want to do with the ball, but not always that super-tight lie.  This mowing pattern change has been well received and requires good execution to recover close to the hole but I think it guarantees a better opportunity for all.

Cheers!
Mike

PS  Don't listen to a thing Grandpa Joe is spouting -- all those tops are planned to nth degree!!!!   

[Andy Troeger]

Mike,
That sounds like something that has been done since we played, and sounds like something that would make the shot a little more do-able. Obviously its still challenging, as it should be. It sounds like it might create more options for how to play the shot.

#9, although severe, didn't bother me. Even though my approach to a front pin also rolled away into a bunker, the bunker shot wasn't that difficult given the backstop. It's unique, challenging, and fun.

[TEPaul]

Adam:

The title of this thread is: "Re: Mike DeVries Exacting Nature."

I was wondering if by that you mean Mike DeVries' golf architecture in that it's exacting of the possibilities of what Mother Nature gives him in landforms for golf or whether you mean Mike DeVries' own nature itself.

If you mean the latter, like with his personality or whatever, he's actually a fun and funny and pretty laid back guy but only to a point, I think. I had a good time with him that way one time out at Crystal Downs sitting on the porch of a mutual friend next to the clubhouse. We were having a good time for about an hour or so and he was laughing a lot or whatnot until I actually asked him if he had the guts to create a hole as cool and radical as the 5th at Crystal Downs!

WELL---at that point his "nature", like in his personality or temperment, did get pretty exacting as he rushed over and grabbed me and tried to throw me off the porch onto the rocks on Lake Michigan about a hundred feet below the porch, until our mutual friend intervened.