[John Mayhugh]

Hole #7

I like the extreme openness of the tee shot from on high, where much of the front nine is visible, and its contrast with the second shot, where the golfer is secluded in a bowl below the rest of the front and with a blind shot (although there is much information to know where to hit your second, once you have played the course).  The flow of the golf course is pertinent and takes a different turn here, but one that is natural in the return to the clubhouse and finish of the outward nine.

Thanks for posting this thought.  Were you trying to accomplish this from the start with the hole layout?

[Mike_DeVries]

Hole #7

I like the extreme openness of the tee shot from on high, where much of the front nine is visible, and its contrast with the second shot, where the golfer is secluded in a bowl below the rest of the front and with a blind shot (although there is much information to know where to hit your second, once you have played the course).  The flow of the golf course is pertinent and takes a different turn here, but one that is natural in the return to the clubhouse and finish of the outward nine.

Thanks for posting this thought.  Were you trying to accomplish this from the start with the hole layout?

John,
Yes, the transition from the high South 40 back to the start had to have an elevated tee shot with a big view and this was the natural transition, as the other way off the plateau was too long and had to deal with the wetland in the middle of the property, and I wanted to stay away from that for ecological reasons and there was a lack of width for much of that corner of the property.  There was also a great high point where the back tee rests, but with a ridge across the area where the forward tee no rests -- this needed to be cut to provide for a visual down to the 7th fairway and beyond and is about 25% of the dirtwork on the property.  What was nice about the big, open view up top was countered with the enclosed view below and I like the contrast of them right after each other to create a little change in the flow of the course -- it is definitely different and really worked out well and in conjunction with the 2 big sinkholes on the left and last one in the approach.  It provided for a nice change of pace and a different type of par 5 than the 1st, 14th, or 17th (probably the most similar, just because of the big downhill in the middle of the hole, but originally very tight and enclosed by trees).
Mike

[Tim Bert]

Hole #7

I like the extreme openness of the tee shot from on high, where much of the front nine is visible, and its contrast with the second shot, where the golfer is secluded in a bowl below the rest of the front and with a blind shot (although there is much information to know where to hit your second, once you have played the course).  The flow of the golf course is pertinent and takes a different turn here, but one that is natural in the return to the clubhouse and finish of the outward nine.

Thanks for posting this thought.  Were you trying to accomplish this from the start with the hole layout?

John,
Yes, the transition from the high South 40 back to the start had to have an elevated tee shot with a big view and this was the natural transition, as the other way off the plateau was too long and had to deal with the wetland in the middle of the property, and I wanted to stay away from that for ecological reasons and there was a lack of width for much of that corner of the property.  There was also a great high point where the back tee rests, but with a ridge across the area where the forward tee no rests -- this needed to be cut to provide for a visual down to the 7th fairway and beyond and is about 25% of the dirtwork on the property.  What was nice about the big, open view up top was countered with the enclosed view below and I like the contrast of them right after each other to create a little change in the flow of the course -- it is definitely different and really worked out well and in conjunction with the 2 big sinkholes on the left and last one in the approach.  It provided for a nice change of pace and a different type of par 5 than the 1st, 14th, or 17th (probably the most similar, just because of the big downhill in the middle of the hole, but originally very tight and enclosed by trees).
Mike

You told us onsite that the 1st accounted for about 50% of the dirt work.  Now you've thrown in another 25% on the 7th.  Either you moved a BUNCH on the 1st and the 7th or you haven't left yourself much dirt moving to account for the other 16 holes! 

[Mike_DeVries]

You told us onsite that the 1st accounted for about 50% of the dirt work.  Now you've thrown in another 25% on the 7th.  Either you moved a BUNCH on the 1st and the 7th or you haven't left yourself much dirt moving to account for the other 16 holes! 

Tim,
Correct.  Not much dirt was moved on the site period --  20,000 yards on the golf course + robbing 10,000 yards from another area on the property for green and tee mix, total.  I am not counting shaping a green or tee or cutting a bunker by pushing the dirt around in that localized area, so you could count more dirt for that, but that is minimal, as the soil structure was left intact and prepped for seeding -- we didn't strip topsoil, shape everything, and move the dirt back -- why mess up great material and Mother Nature's great handiwork?
Mike

[Mike_DeVries]

Hole #9

Well, what to say after all that?  I apologize to Chuck and all those that really dislike the hole and appreciate your candor in your explanations as to why – that helps me understand better and improves my abilities.  Thanks for all the responses, thoughts, and suggestions!   

I think we need to clarify a couple things: the hole plays 162 yards max (142 from the regular tee) from the south tees and about 134 max (128 from the regular tee) from the west tees.  There are other shorter tees down to about 100 and 75 from the west and about 85 from the “top of the mountain tee” on the south.  The predominant wind is from the SW 60-70% of the time, helping the longer shot from the south tees (of course, the other “general” direction is from the N-NW, thus making it play longer, but with the ability to hang the ball up in the air more).  The hole DOES NOT play 170-180 yards from any tee – only a fierce, cold north wind would add enough additional yardage to make it play that long.

The mow line of the regular rough cut around the greens was changed two years ago on both the 2nd and 9th holes to reduce the tendency of a ball to run so far away from the green surface on a short miss and to prevent too many balls from finding the same area and leading to “divot-filled areas with white paint for GUR” most of the time – the ball is meant to be played down all the time – it’s GAWF, isn’t it?!?  This change in the mow pattern has been well-received and reduced much of the crazy stuff that was described by some.  It doesn’t take away from the demands of the tee shot and keeps the intention of the hole but does allow for fair recoveries with a number of options.

Is some of the controversy based on stroke play versus medal play and our tendency to feel we need to finish every hole and post a score?  If so, what is the purpose of Equitable Stroke Control for handicapping?  About 5 years ago, I had a family outing (3 foursomes) with a wide range of golfing ability – myself and a couple others were 10-12 handicaps at the time and the best players in the group.  My foursome had 2 of those players, a 16-18, and a generous 24 (athletic, but not a regular golfer).  We played from 134 on the west tees to a far right lobed pin on the peninsula – the only one to hit and hold the green (on the right part of the green, also ) was the 24, while 2 of us (don’t remember who) hit the green but didn’t hold it.  The 24 definitely didn’t have spin or ball flight control, yet made a par.  I still find it interesting that many of the biggest detractors are the best players, when they have the most skill and opportunity to make the tee shot as well as the best recovery play.

In my opinion, the south tees offer the best orientation in the course layout composition.  It is the only par 3 that plays S-to-N (unless you count hitting from the circle drive or 10th tee to the pitching green!) and the distance is different than the other holes when you play the 2nd as a 138 yard hole.  I like the W orientation also and frequently will have first-timers play a ball from the 106 yard tee just behind the 8th green before going over to the S tees and playing another shot there – then you can play a better ball, yeah?!?

The 9th is definitely the most controversial hole and members are often vehemently for or against changing it, but that hasn’t happened yet.  The setting and shots for the “playoffs” of the Invitational tournament never fails to satisfy and excite everyone playing or spectating.

If I was asked to alter the hole by Ed, I would keep the integrity of the putting surface and tee shot but lay back the slope behind the green to make it less severe.  In order to do that, though, would require moving a lot of dirt and finding a balance with how it would tie into the clubhouse complex, parking lot, and other facilities and needs of the club.  The amount of dirt needed to move in the original construction was certainly one of the reasons we didn’t do it the first time, as the need to move all the dirt around would require not just removal but the tying in of an area much larger than the main area of contention next to the green.  We’ll see what the future holds!

Thanks,
Mike

[Tim Bert]

I still find it interesting that many of the biggest detractors are the best players, when they have the most skill and opportunity to make the tee shot as well as the best recovery play.

You mentioned this about #15 as well, but more on that later.  It seems to have something to do with the "expectation" of what a strong player is supposed to be able to accomplish.  On number #15 the expectation is that if it is a long par four the green should be sizeable enough that a skilled player is going to have a reasonable shot to hit it in two.  Ironic, since the strong golfer is most likely to be equipped with the skills to routinely get the ball up and down for four around that green.  I guess a traditional par is an entitlement!

[Mike_DeVries]

I guess a traditional par is an entitlement!

Very well stated -- can I steal that?   

[Wyatt Halliday]

Having not seen Kingsley, I have been carefully following this thread awaiting the commentary on the ninth hole. It seems to fall into the great unused category of love/hate golf holes. The only other hole I can think of that strongly divides opinions is #14 at Bandon Trails. I am interested to see if those who like the 14th at BT also have a favorable opinion of the 9th at Kingsley.

Tim,
As a fellow lefty, do you find the west tee less intimidating to the eye? The south tee looks menacing, with significantly less area to land an approach.

[Tim Bert]

Tim,
As a fellow lefty, do you find the west tee less intimidating to the eye? The south tee looks menacing, with significantly less area to land an approach.

I think the view from the south tee would look more menacing to most people, regardless of handedness.  From the south, you can clearly see death by both failing to strike a solid shot that makes the carry and also by missing long and right.  From the west tee, the initial appearance is that only a really long shot would truly be terrible. 

For a lefty that fades the ball, both tees ought to set up pretty well in THEORY.  From the south tee, short and left with the bunkers is the preferred miss, and long and left would likely find the west wing of the green.  From the west tee, as I mentioned above left doesn't LOOK extremely fierce and that's actually where I was trying to miss from that tee.

The thing about THEORY is that it doesn't work well on this hole.  It's all about execution and the hole can be equally difficult from both tees. 

[Wyatt Halliday]

Tim,
As a fellow lefty, do you find the west tee less intimidating to the eye? The south tee looks menacing, with significantly less area to land an approach.

From the west tee, as I mentioned above left doesn't LOOK extremely fierce and that's actually where I was trying to miss from that tee. 

Does the slope on the left side of the green help to feed the ball in any way, or is it too small of an area to hit consistently?

[ed_getka]

Wyatt,
   You don't want to get too far left on the green as that puts you farther up the slope which allows the ball to gather speed down to the right. In some cases the ball will roll into the bunkers.
   To answer your other question, I like #9 at TKC and #14 at BT.
The one possible change that Mike brings up on #9 is the one I would advocate. I wouldn't change the green itself, just soften the back. Softening the back will not really make recovering much easier, but I think it would eliminate the really big numbers. Going long off the south tee is still going to make par very tough.

[Mark Arata]

8 was the most boring hole on the course for me, I had the same approach shot into the green all 7 times, from the Arata memorial tree grove on the left side directly across from the fairway bunker...... 

Mark,
Excellent -- another name for something on the Spoiler!  What if I cut some of those trees down?  Are we fined due to the limited supply of "Arata memorial aspens" that are available?   

Cheers,
Mike

If you cut down all the arata memorial tree groves on golf courses, the Sierra club would be after you big time!  Besides, the tree grove on 8 is only one of the many memorials on your course, there are the trees on 12 on the left, I think you got rid of the pesky pole tree on 17 for me, so that was nice.....

The problem isnt with your golf course, which I love dearly, it is with my pathetic lack of ability to play it......

[David Neveux]

The ninth is certainly controversial, and I've definitely felt it has been undermining my efforts since my first round.  But then again, so have many of these holes  Personally, I like the hole.  It's short(ish), daunting, exhilirating and UNFAIR!!  (j/k Mike D.)  It's a par 3 that really demands a good smart shot, and the potential danger can really spoil a solid front nine, and has in my experience several times.  At the same time, I've pulled it off many times too, and the reward of a solid 3, when you can feel the pressure standing on the tee, is awesome.  

In my opinion it's better to miss short(or wide right) here, at least generally speaking.  A miss long (or left) will almost always end up short of the green on the second shot.  Generally a miss short(right) that doesn't find the bunker will give you a reasonable chance at a 4 and a likely worst case scenario 5.  

On a round this summer, a good friend of mine stood on the ninth tee pretty demoralized.  His game was in shambles, but he was fighting.  He was maybe a bit overwhelmed by the course, which he had never before laid eyes on, but his struggles were the result of a crooked wedge and a fiercely aggressive putting stroke.  I luckily found the front edge of the right half of the green, below the hole, giant grin and probably a laugh that it hung on the brink of no return.  We had another guy in the front right bunker, a likely death given his sand game.  Smitty, who I mentioned before played last, and struck a crisp little 7 iron, fading right at the stick.  Landed bout 5 feet past the holes, hung of the back collar for a second and crept back.  Nobody said a word, It caught more hole than the 5 footer for par I made and settled luckily no more than two feet past the hole.  Made his birdie (worth 4 pts.) and made a decent charge on the back only to be shut down by yours truly.  We really did think he was going to make a 1 on his first try, it was that close.  I think he made a 6 in the afternoon.  

I like 9 as i said before and I think it's an appropriate and for lack of a better word, COOL finish to the front nine.

[ed_getka]

David,
   You must have one heck of a short game if you think bailing out right is a good idea on #9. We named that area the Devil's Cauldron the first time we played there many years ago.

[Chuck Brown]

Again, since I complained about 9, and since Mike offered an admirable explanation, I think it only fair to say that his notion of a possible change is reasonable, and yet I'd be as unenthusiastic about the change as he is.

Mike, how about these two ideas?
1.  Make the back-right portion of the green less severe.  A little bigger, a little less slope.  That change would not do much to make the tee shot (which is dramatic, and fun) easier, but it would address the kind of disaster I encountered and which others seem to have seen as well.
2.  Also, expand the fringe-collar area on the right so that balls do not so easily careen off the edge of that green.  Just enough of an area so that little shots around the green do not end up 12 or 15 yards down the hill.

Again, it is worth noting how much of your design of this hole has been pretty much universally admired; the hole has lots of drama, it is set well into the land and fits beautifully with the rest of the course.  The front bunkering is good, and it is a green with lots of interest.

[ed_getka]

I think one of the problems with #9 is that people try too hard to make par there after a less than desirable tee shot. Sometimes you just can't make par from where you are, and the interesting thing is that this seems to happen more on great courses than not. On #9 at Kingsley you have to figure out where you can reasonably get to.
   IMO the front nine at Kingsley is as good as anything I've ever played. It is one of my favorite courses.

[Adam Clayman]

Changing nine green seems like a radical solution to a problem only perceived by those who fail at the task. Perhaps adding a shorter teeing ground from the south approach would work for those who lack the skills on that particular day. It might be cool since it would likely be below, at grade, making it an uphill shot. But, if it's with a wedge or 9 iron, excuses for missing will certainly be entertaining to hear.

I will qualify that suggestion because I never got to see the look, from the west tees, or, did I get to sense how the route to the W. tees works from 8 green. I did check them out from the clubhouse side, up behind the green.

   

[Andy Troeger]

I'd have liked to have seen the 9th with different pin placements. As much as any short hole I've played the pin there seems to make a HUGE difference. I have a hard believing any of them are easy, however.

Andy,
Why is it a HUGE difference when you can putt from any portion of the green to any other part fairly easily?  I think it is about getting the tee shot on the green or to where you are comfortable with your recovery.
Mike

I wrote that thinking that the strategy of the hole would change a lot depending on where the pin is located--its not a hole where one just aims at the middle of the green and hopes to two-putt after all (or is it!). I would have guessed just from playing that the area "where you are comfortable with your recovery" would change a lot depending on the pin.

After seeing other comments, perhaps one should always aim to be short (in the bunker area) and pitch up the hill and try to make a four. I was in the bunkers both times and made a 3 and 4 without much duress, but I would think the hole to a back/right pin (from the south tee) would have lent to a different approach and/or a more difficult bunker shot.

[Mike_DeVries]

Mike, how about these two ideas?
1.  Make the back-right portion of the green less severe.  A little bigger, a little less slope.  That change would not do much to make the tee shot (which is dramatic, and fun) easier, but it would address the kind of disaster I encountered and which others seem to have seen as well.
2.  Also, expand the fringe-collar area on the right so that balls do not so easily careen off the edge of that green.  Just enough of an area so that little shots around the green do not end up 12 or 15 yards down the hill.

Chuck,
Thanks for the positive thoughts. 

Regarding:
1)  changing the size of any portion of the green is not as simple as you might think.  To expand off to the right (which drops off fairly severely) would require lots of fill and additional area to tie in.  To expand into the hill would involve laying back the hill, which gets into more areas of disturbance to tie that into.  Not easy to explain in print and easier in the field -- maybe incentive to have a discussion about it at the GCA Get-together!
2)  We changed the mow line of the fringe and short rough a couple years ago and it has helped in that capacity -- there is only about 6-12 feet of fairway collar around the right side now, so depending on the speed of the ball coming off, it will travel shortly into the rough or further if hit from the tee shot -- this is quite a bit more consistent with the fraction of the error versus all balls gathering in one general area and has been very well received.

Mike

[David Neveux]

Ed,

Sorry I wasn't more specific, I meant depending on the tee location for that given day.  A miss short from the South Tee would be equivalent to a miss right from the West Tee.  Many apologies, and the short game is as rocky as the rest of the game.

[Mike_DeVries]

I'd have liked to have seen the 9th with different pin placements. As much as any short hole I've played the pin there seems to make a HUGE difference. I have a hard believing any of them are easy, however.

Andy,
Why is it a HUGE difference when you can putt from any portion of the green to any other part fairly easily?  I think it is about getting the tee shot on the green or to where you are comfortable with your recovery.
Mike

I wrote that thinking that the strategy of the hole would change a lot depending on where the pin is located--its not a hole where one just aims at the middle of the green and hopes to two-putt after all (or is it!). I would have guessed just from playing that the area "where you are comfortable with your recovery" would change a lot depending on the pin.

After seeing other comments, perhaps one should always aim to be short (in the bunker area) and pitch up the hill and try to make a four. I was in the bunkers both times and made a 3 and 4 without much duress, but I would think the hole to a back/right pin (from the south tee) would have lent to a different approach and/or a more difficult bunker shot.

Andy,
I think the area on the inside of the elbow, whether in a bunker or the rough, is the preferred place to miss the tee shot -- you always have an uphill shot into the bank and green, thus allowing you to recover much easier by using the slope to stop or move your ball where you want it to go.  

I guess my point about the HUGE difference is that it isn't, unless you are expecting to be really close and make a birdie, which is certainly very doable if you are on the right portion of the green.  Maybe that is one of the things that makes this a good hole -- it is short enough that you should have the control to get it on the green and have a go at it, but when you don't and make a mess of it, it really throws off your game for quite a while after that?

Mike

[J_ Crisham]

Mike , This was my favorite hole on the front 9. We played the West tees at 130 yds and it was a 9 or a wedge for the five of us-oops,yes we moved along quickly. I thought this was one of the scariest , but manageable shots if you hit the shot right. It is penal and 4 is a good # if you miss the green. Just a great short par 3. One of my top 10 short par3's.    Jack

[Wyatt Halliday]

Wyatt,
   You don't want to get too far left on the green as that puts you farther up the slope which allows the ball to gather speed down to the right. In some cases the ball will roll into the bunkers.   

Ed,

Thanks for painting a picture for me. Another question if you don't mind, From the West tee, is there any chance of firing directly at a right hole location? If not, what do you propose (sorry, that was two questions)?

Thanks

[ed_getka]

Wyatt,
    I don't think I have played the hole from the west tee to that pin. I would imagine it is doable since you have a short iron in hand from that tee. I don't get a lot of spin on the ball, so I might have trouble holding that part of the green since it is shallow from that tee angle. I can't picture exactly how wide it is, but I think O would fire at the pin since my usually miss is going to end up left of the hole and I feel pretty good about distance control.
   Missing short left, on the green, from the west tee would likely end up in a 3 putt so you may as well go for. The west end of the green is a punchbowl. It is the upper plateau between the wings that the hardest to get at from the tee I would think.

[Wyatt Halliday]

Ed,

After rereading the posts regarding the west tee, the misses are left, short left, or short straight in the
bunker(s). Given the same right hole location, which provides the best opportunity for a three? Is an up-and-down from the bunker easier than trying to two putt from the left side (or plateau you mentioned)?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()