[ChipOat]

For those  on GCA who haven't played it:

The 9th at PRC (played it today) appears to have a Biarritz green complex EXCEPT only the "back" part is putting surface - the deep swale and the front part are "closely mown portion of the course through the green" i.e. fairway.  That is, a full 3/5 of your basic Yale Biarritz is not part of the putting green at Piping.

It's still a fine hole, but what you've got is a long par 3 with a Valley of Sin-type front and a big swale in the fairway before you reach the edge of the green.

What the hole is missing is several playability characteristics that I ascribe to a "true" Biarritz:
1) Unlike Yale and Fishers Island, you can be short and still lie "1".
2) You are less likely to be able to run the ball through the swale to the back shelf with a low, boring shot due to the height of the grass and the softer turf.
3) There are no hole locations short of the swale.
4) You can't really putt through the swale for the same reasons as in #2 above.

Since George B. has educated us as to the accurate characteristics of both a true Cape and a true Redan, perhaps he will enlighten us as to what defines a true Biarritz.

Or maybe that's already been done in a previous thread that I didn't see.

[Tom Naccarato]

Chip,
Chicago and many others, the front portion of the green is approach length. My feelings on this are that the motivation was to recreate a deceptive rise and false front of the original.

[TEPaul]

Chip:

Piping's #9 is a real Biarritz alright and it's always been called a Biarritz. It never had green space before the swale and originally few did. Yale's is one that did. Quite a few do now though.

[George_Bahto]

Chip - yes it has been discussed quite a few times but here goes:

you asked:

"The 9th at PRC (played it today) appears to have a Biarritz green complex EXCEPT only the "back" part is putting surface - the deep swale and the front part are "closely mown portion of the course through the green" i.e. fairway.  That is, a full 3/5 of your basic Yale Biarritz is not part of the putting green at Piping."

It's still a fine hole, but what you've got is a long par 3 with a Valley of Sin-type front and a big swale in the fairway before you reach the edge of the green.

What the hole is missing is several playability characteristics that I ascribe to a "true" Biarritz:
1) Unlike Yale and Fishers Island, you can be short and still lie "1".


Chip it is the first Biarritz built by Macdonald and a true prototype although it lacked the topo of the original in France, that played from an 80' cliff over the Bay of Biscay to a 50' cliff beyond.

Yes you still lie "1"  ....... he never built one at NGLA, probably because he didn't think he had the topography he was looking for. PR was the first course after National and the 9th there was the first version.


2) "You are less likely to be able to run the ball through the swale to the back shelf with a low, boring shot due to the height of the grass and the softer turf."

To do that the turf has to be firm as it was when this hole was first built and yes, the grass would have to be cropped short in order to get the "roll" thru the swale. That was the way the hole was meant to play in the early days.


3) "There are no hole locations short of the swale."

There was never meant to be pins in the fronal area  (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)   and certainly not in the swale!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


4) "You can't really putt through the swale for the same reasons as in #2 above."

Answered above.

Chip - we recent uncovered factual information that told us there was never meant to be putting surface short of the swale and not in the swale. It was from the Yale archives.

As I stated before a number of times, when I first began researching Macdonald and Raynor there were just two courses that had full putting surfaces throughout. I encouraged others to think about doing that and at this point there are well over half the Macdonald Raynor courses fully planted Biarritz holes.

The "full putting surface" has been an evolution over the years - I like it either way, mostly relating to the type of course it would be on and whether they wanted to live with the maintenance it would entail.

Hope this helps.

[Patrick Boyd]

It seems like a lot of the older Biarritz complexes were halves.

Does someone know how many currently full length Biarritz complexes were originally intended as halves or vise versa?  

[George_Bahto]

Patrick: as stated above .............  none

These holes were originally built at between 220 to 235 yards from the middle of a SINGLE tee.  Shorter tees were added to the holes by clubs later.

[Patrick Boyd]

George-

Thank you for your answer....I should have read your post before posting my original reply.

[Patrick_Mucci]

George,

Do you believe that mowing all tiers and the swale to putting green height enhances the hole and the options relating to the play of the hole.

The 11th at The Creek appears to be a better hole with the entire footpad mowed as green.

Likewise Yale and Mountain Lakes.

I would think that the Knoll and Piping Rock would benefit as well since that change in maintainance practices enhances the hole, vis a vis diversity and options of play.

[George_Bahto]

Pat I do think it a better hole fully putting green.

Concerning the Knoll: I have enuf problems getting the course maintained to maximize the course's potential because of the town, the lack of enough funding and the crews ..... it's a lot better - I'm winning !! but it's like torture getting things done in that environment.

So in the case of the Knoll, I'd love to see it all putting surface but I'm not sure we can get there. It's taken me (with little "official" power) to even get the approach section mowed as fairway instead of rough with a dew line through to the green .........   finally got it all short-grassed now  -   I'm winning !!

[TEPaul]

George:

You say information has recently be uncovered at Yale that indicates Macdonald/Raynor Biarritzes were not supposed to have green space in the section before the swale. Any chance you could post whatever that information says? There are a number of clubs who already have transitioned the section before the swale to green space including The Creek and Fox Chapel. With both those clubs I believe I know that issue was pretty undocumented when they did it.

I generally like green space before the swale on Biarritzes but I doubt I would recommend that on Piping Rock's 9th. That "Biarritz shot" was the first golf shot I was taught at Piping as a kid (and the first golf shot I ever hit in my life on a golf course was to The Creek's Biarritz). Back then the "Biarritz shot" at Piping Rock worked very well if you hit the correct shot with a pretty low trajectory. The idea was to get the ball on the ground at least ten yards before the swale and with the right "weight" to run into the swale, disappear for a second and then run up onto the green space past the swale. If you left your tee shot short of the swale the same kind of shot was the play too in those days (nowhere near as many golfers back then, even good ones, used something like a sand wedge to loft a chip onto a green surface).

That "Biarritz shot" was taught to a bunch of us kids by a pretty well known old Scottish pro at Piping Rock we all called "Spence". I think his real name was something like Spencer Cortiss. That was back in the 1950s and before Tom Nieporte came to Piping Rock. At Meadowbrook back then was a really good teaching and playing pro by the name of Shelley Mayfield.

[Tom_Doak]

George:

Why, exactly, do you consider the Biarritz a better hole with the front part mowed NOT AS MACDONALD PRESCRIBED?

Just curious.  My feeling is that, as long as the front part is mowed tight and kept firm, it's better as approach because it's cheaper to maintain, and because nobody wants to play to the front hole locations anyway.

The only exceptions to this would be the holes with an abrupt hazard at the front of the green -- i.e. Yale and Old Macdonald.  In those cases, it's a totally different hole with the pin in front, but an interesting one.

[Bradley Anderson]

Chip - yes it has been discussed quite a few times but here goes:

Chip - we recent uncovered factual information that told us there was never meant to be putting surface short of the swale and not in the swale. It was from the Yale archives.


The "full putting surface" has been an evolution over the years - I like it either way, mostly relating to the type of course it would be on and whether they wanted to live with the maintenance it would entail.

George,

Do all of the Mac/Raynor greens have a layer of cinders in them? There is a reason why that question is critical:

If every course that has a Biarritz, was built with the cinder layer below the surface, we would be able to know with 100% certainty that there was never any intent to maintain the front half of the hole as putting green. All one would have to do is probe the soils in the front halves of all the Bairritz greens to see where the original putting surface was intended.

[Bradley Anderson]

Some of the reading that I have been doing about grass seed evolution, and early golf course design, has really amazed me.

I think that many of these old golf courses were actually seeded with bentgrass as the predominate variety in the fairway mix. I had always assumed that bentgrass fairways was a relatively new development. But I think it is safe to say that golf courses of the caliber that MacDonald and Raynor were building, would have been seeded with the finest textured grasses available in the bentgrass and fescue lines.

What that all means is that the front half of the Biarritz hole could have been cut a height that was not really significantly higher than the putting green. It means that all of the fairway would have been covered with a turf that the ball would really react to.

That may not seem like a revelation to anyone else, but it sure is to me. For I had always thought that any reaction that the ball in those days would have had to the terrain, was a function of keeping the course dry and rock hard. In other words, it was entirely  irrigation related. But now I am beginning to think that it was equally a function of some really good grooming practices of fine leaved turf.

[TEPaul]

"The only exceptions to this would be the holes with an abrupt hazard at the front of the green -- i.e. Yale and Old Macdonald.  In those cases, it's a totally different hole with the pin in front, but an interesting one."

TomD:

I couldn't agree more. The best use of green space before the swale on Biarritzes are on those ones that have something really dangerous right in front of that front section such as The Creek. Front pins on that green are wonderful because the idea with most golfers is to get the ball far enough into the green to not risk the hazard in front. The problem then becomes avoiding going so far into the green that the ball may roll into the swale or even worst to the back section.

But you're right about a lot to maintain. I've walked off the length of both The Creek and Fox Chapel's Biarriates and both of them are right around 80 YARDS long. That's a potential putt of over 200 feet!!!
 
 
 

[TEPaul]

Bradley:

I have an article around here somewhere that explains the first use of cinders under greens (which course---eg somewhere in New York state) and all the reasons for it. However, my recollection of that article was that it wasn't as early as one might suspect (but I could be wrong about that). My point is apparently Macdonald/Raynor's Shinnecock course (the second of three courses at Shinnecock G.C) did have cinders under those greens or some of them (some in the maintenance dept did do core samples). I think that course was built around 1915. Although cinders subsurface on greens were an interesting development at that time I don't know that even a Macdonald/Raynor would've done that everywhere. In other words, if no cinders turned up under the section before the swale on a Biarritz that does not prove that section never was green space but if cinders do turn up under some front section that probably would prove it was designed to be green space. Putting cinders under something that was only intended to be an open approach seems a bit excessive in that day and age, but who knows?

[George_Bahto]

Tom D

you asked:  “Why, exactly, do you consider the Biarritz a better hole with the front part mowed NOT AS MACDONALD PRESCRIBED?”

Only because like the dramatic appearance and I sort of like the idea of golfers occasionally faced with a very long putt (or chip) .....  I guess I also was influenced by the huge greens at The Monster course at The Concord Hotel in the Catskills early on - huge fun greens.


TD: “Just curious. My feeling is that, as long as the front part is mowed tight and kept firm, it's better as approach because it's cheaper to maintain, and because nobody wants to play to the front hole locations anyway.
The only exceptions to this would be the holes with an abrupt hazard at the front of the green -- i.e. Yale and Old Macdonald. In those cases, it's a totally different hole with the pin in front, but an interesting one.”

That’s my problem - the firm and fast aspect. Many courses aren’t kept firm enough in the front to fully afford that running shot.  I hate front pins but as you say above it works at Yale with the pond and what you now have at Old Macdonald with the abrupt approach which may be even more interesting (and less penal) than the Yale pond short of their green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak & TEPaul,

I'd disagree with both of you for several reasons, one of which George Bahto touched upon, namely, that the approach areas aren't maintained as firm and fast as they were in the days prior to automated irrigation systems, thus muting the playing intent.

Secondly, because the nature of the game has transitioned to a mostly aerial game.

Thirdly, because the INCREMENTAL costs to maintain the extended green are inconsequential.

Fourth, because the hole exponentially gains playing variety by having hole locations in the swale and on the fronting tier. 
When one examines the enormous variety presented by the 11th at The Creek, with a green approaching 80-90 yards in depth and a number of teeing locations, you have a hole with the putting surface elevated above the surrounds that can play from about 100 to almost 300 yards. 
The Creek has the additional asset of the wind, which can expand or shrink the effective playing yardage.

If a hole can be significantly enhanced by simply mowing and maintaining an extended putting surface, WHY WOULDN'T YOU DO IT ?

[TEPaul]

I believe what follows just might be one of the neatest and most valuable pieces of research information I've ever seen in my years on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

The reason I say this is this information from the contemporaneous observation and report of a truly recognized architect and architectural expert has apparently not been seen in many, many decades and as such has completely escaped all the researchers any of us are aware of or familiar with. In fact this article, could've been residing in God Only Knows what repositories for up to 95 years.

The primary reason I think this information is so good is because it not only explains a particular hole (The 9th at Piping Rock) in specific detail, but it also finally answers one of the most mysterious questions I'm aware of about a famous Macdonald/Raynor "Template" hole!

I'm speaking of course about the so-called Macdonald/Raynor American "Biarritz" hole and whether or not there was ever ORIGINALLY intended to be green space BEFORE the swale or if, in fact, there ever was.

I think many of us on here are also aware that the Macdonald/Raynor "Biarritz" has its name taken after a famous hole in Biarritz France that played across a deep gorge or finger of a bay. No one seems to know if that French hole had a dramatic swale in it.

And I think many of us suspected that despite the name (Biarritz) the actual prominent and massively long green formation and dramatic swale may've been borrowed by Macdonald (conceptually for a par 3 rather than par 4 green) from North Berwick's #16.

So what until you read this:

"The ninth (Piping Rock) is a very uncommon hole. I have never seen one like it. There are two large greens, one beyond the other, with a hollow between them and serious trouble on either side in the shape of bunkers. It must be 220 yards (I speak from memory) from the tee to the center of the farthest green. It is slightly down hill, so that one can see exactly what there is to do. It will take a fine cleek shot or a difficult drive with a wooden club by a second class player, as the gulley which separates the two greens must be run through at the end of the shot. This is one of the only good cleek holes I have ever seen. There is a slight upward slope beyond the green so that there may be no fear of hitting the ball too hard---the difficulty is to get there."

Piping Rock's Biarritz 9th is the first American Biarritz done by Macdonald/Raynor in 1913, and as most of us know it was obviously something of a combination concept hole from various things Macdonald was aware of abroad (Macdonald always did explain that many of his template holes were parts of holes or various parts of hole principles from abroad reinterpreted in various ways over here).

But better yet, that first hand description of Piping Rock's Biarritz from the year it opened (1913) was by none other than Devereaux Emmet, Macdonald associate or design committee member with Whigam and Travis before Macdonald dropped him) at NGLA!!! Who would know the real design deal and concept on a particular Macdonald/Raynor hole better than him other than Macdonald, Raynor and perhaps Whigam? And the best point is he was right there in 1913 looking at TWO GREENS one beyond the other on Piping's 9th!

So there you have it----eg the very first Macdonald/Raynor Biarritz proves that green space was not only intended but in that particular case (the 9th at Piping Rock) actually originally HAD IT. (Personally I think the fact that it was apparently TWO GREENS with a swale between them that probably wasn't even green space makes the whole thing even more interesting than ever suspected!!!).

But I've also got to mention that this information just shows what's still out there on research material that we don't know about and has been long forgotten and it also shows that even some of us who think we are experts on this old stuff and their concepts still have a lot of digging and researching and rethinking to do.

For this particular information I'd like to thank our very good friend and remarkably dedicated researcher, The Creek Club's George Holland. This guy is a dedicated research mole unlike any other I've seen in that he will not stop at anything to find stuff. I bet he's probably behind some furnace in the cellar of an old clubhouse as I speak checking to see if Raynor's routing of Cypress Point might, by chance, be back there. And this also indicates how cool unselfish research collaboration can be and can be on this website from its many and various resources and sources. Let's hope we have seen the end of some putting opinions on here with what they say is informational support and then "pledging" never to show it to anyone or to help others or those associated with them with it!

Way to go, George Holland, you just found the answer to one of the longest on-going questions and hole and hole concept mysteries on this website, maybe in architecture of how one of Macdonald/Raynor's template holes was intended to be or once was---and there's even a little wrinkle in it (that it may've been two greens, one beyond the other, separated by a swale that was not green space) that I don't think anyone on here EVER suspected before.

With this information, what will some of those Biarritz hole courses and clubs do now-----eg they may have an additional maintenance and playability option.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Your last post is interesting and informative.

However, it brings you into clear conflict with an earlier post where you agreed with Tom Doak.

Your most recent post supports my contention relative to creating variety in the hole and in the play of the hole.

One has to wonder if the reference to two (2) greens is solely in the context of a visual reference, since the area in the swale wouldn't be visible.

One also has to wonder about the manner in which the swale was maintained.

Was it as putting surface ?
Tightly mown (ie fringe/collar)
fairway height ?
rough

I'd lean toward # 1 or # 2, but, it could have been # 3.

If we accept that CBM's/SR's first Biarritz incorporated both tiers as putting surface, then, shouldn't all Biarritz's have that configuration ?

Don't Biarritz's FUNCTION better when the swale is cut to putting surface height, irrespective of whether you're playing them aerially or along the ground ?

And, doesn't the hole acquire an even more diverse character when hole locations can be in between the two tiers.

Thanks for posting this info and thanks to George Holland for his efforts in discovering this info.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Upon further reflection, this really is a wonderful revelation, one that should clear up, or at least clarify the original design intent of the Biarritz.

George should be thanked for his efforts.
It's really a great find.

George Bahto,

Get to work, you now have the smoking gun as exhibit "A"

[TEPaul]

"Your last post is interesting and informative.
However, it brings you into clear conflict with an earlier post where you agreed with Tom Doak."

Pat Mucci:

Brings me into conflict with an earlier post where I agreed with Doak??    

Well, Pal, I guess this just shows the beauty of some really good research, doesn't it?   Up until George Holland found that article (about a day ago), as far as I can tell, everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, was just speculating about whether any Biarritzes had green space in the front section. Well, now we know for sure, don't we? I think that gives all of us a much more informed basis to begin to build an informed opinion on what it should be, dont' you, even if that means changing our minds?  

[Tom Naccarato]

George:

Why, exactly, do you consider the Biarritz a better hole with the front part mowed NOT AS MACDONALD PRESCRIBED?

Just curious.  My feeling is that, as long as the front part is mowed tight and kept firm, it's better as approach because it's cheaper to maintain, and because nobody wants to play to the front hole locations anyway.

The only exceptions to this would be the holes with an abrupt hazard at the front of the green -- i.e. Yale and Old Macdonald.  In those cases, it's a totally different hole with the pin in front, but an interesting one.

Not if its towards the back portion of the front section where it can literally fall off into swale, no?

[ChipOat]

Emperor:

Given the current excessive speeds of golden Era greens, I would be skeptical of a hole location on the front part of a "full Biarritz" green that is set so close to the swale that the possibility of "losing" a putt down into it is high.  You could well end up with a #7 @ Shinnecock or #18 @ Olympic situation.

As you may be aware, one of my pet peeves is Golden Era greens that are maintained at speeds far in excess of the architect's original intent.  That seems to include darn near all of them these days and I did at least one thread about it whilst you were "on sabbatical".  Hole locations where putting off the green (or into a deep swale) are a "clear and present danger" for a reasonably capable golfer do not ring my chimes.

 

[Tom_Doak]

Tom P and George H:

Thank you for "doing the heavy lifting" with regard to finding this article.

It's interesting to note that the front part of the green at Piping Rock was done away with before 1926, when the first aerial photo of it was taken.  Perhaps the reason for this is to be found right in the second half of Emmet's text, from which I quote:

     "This is one of the only good cleek holes I have ever seen. There is a slight upward slope beyond the green so that there may be no fear of hitting the ball too hard---the difficulty is to get there."

Notice that all of his interest in the hole is with the flag in the back section.  In fact, that last sentence specifically addresses Tommy N.'s earlier comment about the putting the hole just in front of the swale -- it doesn't sound like Emmet would have liked that.

[TEPaul]

"Tom P and George H:
Thank you for "doing the heavy lifting" with regard to finding this article."

Chip:

I do no "heavy lifting" at all. It's George Holland who does that. He goes to bed about 3:30am and gets up at about 4:05am (that is if he actually feels he needs to sleep at all). He's the one who's the research ferret. I just go out for chinese lunches, come home and take a lot of naps, and just wait for him to call me if he thinks he has something good and then I analyze it. 

When Emmet made that comment about the upslope in the back of the green he was talking about the berm behind the back of the rear green section. To get up on that one would've had to hit it about 250 yards back in that day. That was a big driver for most anyone back then.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()