News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Eden versus Short
« on: November 22, 2008, 01:21:20 PM »
I was just reading through my new World Atlas of Golf book this morning, specifically National Golf Links of America and was wondering what are the specific differences between the Short hole and the Eden hole from a design standpoint.  I realize the Short has a much bigger green with more internal contours and the Edan for the most part runs away toward the back half of the green.

What are a few more of the major differences between these two holes?



Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2008, 01:39:54 PM »
Chip:

The Eden green is sharply tilted from back to front, and over it is death.  The main thing it's got to have is an entrance at the left-center, so you can choose between playing for the opening of the green or taking on the Strath bunker (front right-center).

The Short green is more surrounded by bunkers, and the green is broken up into three parts with some severe internal contours.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2008, 02:38:14 PM »
Here is a topo of the Eden which I think I got from another posting here.  BTW, its of the original, not the CBM copies!

I have been over that green and certainly its a difficult up and down.  I think these contours are 1' but I don't recall the exact scale of the drawing.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2008, 02:40:55 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2008, 02:49:17 PM »
Jeff,
You stole that from me.

IMHO, I like the Eden at NGLA, but to me, it is nothing like the original which is a gut check from the second you walk on to the tee. the green is much deeper and much more sloped and contoured.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2008, 02:57:10 PM »
Tom,

Well then, thanks for posting the original on gca.com for me to hoist!

I recall that George Bahto had some discussion about being able to run the ball up on the original Eden being a design mistake in CBM's mind.  Hard to believe that, eh?  I also recall that the little knob left and other ground contours of the opening at TOC can be a real deflector and makes the run up shot tricky.

I think it was HHWind who described the Eden as a hole where if you get too concerned about the Strath bunker, you might accidentally play too far left into the milder bunker. I am not sure he had the whole concept of the hole down, but I am saying that from my ever more faulty memory......

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2008, 03:59:05 PM »
From G. Bahto's GCA interview:

2. Please briefly describe the matched set of par-3 holes the pair typically designed into their courses.


In the order of their length, we will start with the so-called 'Short', a fairly generic par-3 common to many courses in the British Isles long before Macdonald began his quest for the better holes in Europe. The 'Short' specifically tests the skills of the short-iron game. Macdonald always felt there was room for improvement in a golf hole, so he (and later Raynor) surrounded his versions of this genre' with a sea of sand - elevating the green to make the target more dramatic and intimidating. These Shorts were nearly always drawn as a squarish looking green with a larger surrounding enclosure indicating sand bunkering. The bunkering details would then be developed during the construction phase. Short hole putting surfaces were generally much wider than deep, containing strong undulations befitting a shorter hole. A horseshoe feature with the open end facing the tee or a rounded dished depression were mainstays of design. Two of their finest examples can be found at the wild 6th at National and 10th at Chicago Golf Club (where two depressions are separated by a ridge). The origin of the Macdonald/Raynor Short was the 5th at Brancaster. He favored this particular version over the 8th at St. Andrews because the tee-box was higher and afforded a clearer view of the green. Shorts were generally constructed 135 to 145 yards long but often clubs incorrectly added back tees in a pointless effort to gain yardage on the scorecard.


Next longest would be the 'Eden' hole, fashioned after the 11th at St. Andrews (A.K.A. High Hole-In), whose severely sloping back-to- front putting surface remains one of the most fearsome in golf. Original Macdonald/Raynor/Banks versions usually present teardrop shaped greens, falling in a yardage range between 160 to 175 yards. Aesthetically, their Eden holes have some of the most picturesque greenside bunkering on the course. Pinched in front by a representation of 'Strath's' pot bunker on the right and 'Hill' bunker on the left, Macdonald always installed an 'Eden' bunker behind the green representing the shoreline of the Eden River behind St. Andrews' 11th green. Strath's bunker, of course, is named for the great Davie Strath and his many unsuccessful bouts with this pit. Greenside left we find Hill bunker, so called because its cape creates a downhill slope in the putting surface. Most renditions include a 'Shelley' (or 'Cockleshell') bunker short right of the green. There are so many fine Eden holes that its difficult to identify the best one. However, there is a strong consensus that the 11th at Fishers Island, framed by Long Island Sound in the background, may be as good as it gets. Macdonald felt there should be an intimidating hazard fronting the Eden hole because at the turn of the century golfers sometimes played short of the hole (even using putters) and chipped on to avoid disaster. In addition, a topped ball was not punished. At the National Golf Links, Macdonald placed the 13th Eden green on the far side of a stretch of water to combat this.



BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2008, 04:41:29 PM »
Cool topo. Where can I get me one of them? ;)

The topo confirms what struck me about the Eden at TOC the first time I saw it.

It's the severe back to front fall off. Really dramatic stuff, heightened by the truly vicious Strath Bunker. And to a lesser extent Hill bunker

The original is a nasty, scary hole. Edens in the US don't begin to replicate its dramatic contouring.  The US copies are milk fed puppies by comparison. Which is why I never understood the fame of hole until I played the original.

Bob

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2008, 04:58:39 PM »
I witnessed the most amazing tee shot, and subsequent series of events at the Eden hole, St. Andrews, a few years ago. 

I was with a nice guy from Dundee -- about a 15-handicap, who was playing the Old Course for the first time. The wind was extremely hard into us at the 11th tee. This guy hits a hard, cutting driver -- his best shot with the driver all day -- that's on a great trajectory as soon as it takes off. His ball takes a couple bounces then stops about a foot left of the hole, cut just behind and slightly left of Strath.

He could barely stand over his putt, because the wind was blowing so strong, back toward the tee. He manages to make a stroke, and his ball immediately bends HARD right, takes the severe slope, and aided by the wind, rolls about 20 yards off the front of the putting surface!

He pitched up, missed next putt, and carded 5  :o
jeffmingay.com

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2008, 05:00:50 PM »
I have seen half a dozen MacDonald/Raynor Edens and none is anywhere near as deadly difficult as the original at St Andrews.  I second Bob Crosby's statement.

Chip, if you've been to St Andrews you've seen the prototypes of the Short (#8) and the Eden (#11).  If not, start making plans, you won't be sorry.

On another note, the Eden green played as I guess #7 Reverse course is brutal, with the approach played over Hill Bunker into a severely sloping green, left to right and away.  It's easy to wind up 100' past the hole location onto #7 Regular course side of the green.

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #9 on: November 22, 2008, 05:04:56 PM »
Do they ever put the pin to the right of Strath? Or would that cause too much congestion with the 7th?

Bob

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #10 on: November 22, 2008, 05:27:36 PM »
A point of note: George's information on the Strath bunker I believe is incorrect. The reason why it was named Strath wasn't because of Davie Strath's many unsuccessful bouts with the pit. According to Tom Jarrett's great book, St. Andrews Golf Links: The First 600 Years, the bunker was named after both Strath brothers, Davie and Andrew, especially Davie, who in the early 1870's played frequently with Tommy Morris and was one of the few who could stand him up on the golf course. I believe it was Old Tom that named the bunker as such.

Jean-Paul Perodi might be able to add if this point is correct or not.

If Strath isn't the Father of the DAH then I deserve to remain in it for--well hopefully not all eternity, but at least one or two more times in my lifetime! The biggest problem with our faux-Eden's here in America are that they aren't frightful enough. MacDonald and others were to busy trying to make the hole more intrinsically fair then instill it into the mindset of a tough as nails one-shot hole that didn't have length as its main defense.

As far as modern-Eden's go. the 8th at Rustic Canyon--which isn't an Eden by description by its creators--sure is the closest thing to it I've seen in the states, only lacking in some length and the ability to run the ball in, which of course was MacDonald's and many others critiques of the hole. The internal contours of the green itself are the closest thing I've seen to the original.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2008, 05:58:04 PM »
Bob Crosby:

Wait 'til you see the Eden hole at Old Macdonald.  It is almost as nasty as the real thing.

Jeff  and Tommy:

Scott Macpherson's new book on The Old Course has an even more detailed topo map of the green itself.

The interesting thing about it is that the pin behind the strath bunker is actually in a little depression which doesn't surface drain ... which is why it's so hard to tell which way the putts break around the hole.  (If it surface drained correctly, it would be easier to pick out the point where the drainage starts going the other way.)

I would love to copy that for Old Macdonald but I'm not sure it is wise to do so.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2008, 06:01:48 PM by Tom_Doak »

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2008, 06:02:43 PM »
Didn't some years ago, I challenge you to build a great Eden?

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #13 on: November 22, 2008, 06:14:16 PM »
Tommy

Some info on the death of David Strath - 20th March 1879


Page 2



Patrick Glynn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2008, 06:24:51 PM »
I really really enjoy the 11th at St Andrews. Its probably my favorite par 3 in the world. I played TOC over 3 days in very different winds and actually found the hole easier with a 3 iron into the wind over a 7 iron down wind.

I have never really understood the fascination with the "Short" - 8 at TOC is nice, so is 12 at Shoreacres. But they would not make it into a conversation piece on great par 3s.

Nice piece Melvyn.

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2008, 07:03:43 PM »
Neither one of the Short holes blew me away.  NGLA was better than TOC.  Good holes, but certainly nothing that I stood on the tee and was blown away with strategic options.

I loved both the Edens though, with TOC's being one of the best in the world.  Unfortunately I was taken hostage by that front right bunker at TOC and ruined an even par round. 

I personally love the Eden at Beechtree.  Penal penal front bunker and a very fun challenging green with death over the back.  I can't believe that hole is going away!

The Short at Old MacDonald looks like it redefines the Short hole for generations to come with its size, variety, and many many pin placements leading to many many four putts.

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2008, 05:03:55 AM »
Chip,
Are you calling the 8th at St. Andrews a "Short?" In actuality, the hole is based off of the 4th at Brancaster/Royal West Norfolk.


Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2008, 09:18:39 AM »
Tommy-

Actually I was.  According to the World Atlas of Golf scorecard and Mackenzie's Old Course survey map I have hanging on my wall, they both call #8 Short.

It sounds like MacDonald modeled it after another Short hole though, Royal West Norfolk.  I told you had to get George Bahto's book  ;D

Chip

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2008, 10:21:31 AM »
Macdonald ... (small “d”) ...    first referred to the inspiration of his Short as being the Brancaster Short but some time later also said he was influenced by the 8th TOC as well. I would say it was some combination of both since he seemed to feel each had a shortcoming he would modify.

I’m not sure I understand the original “question” though - these are two different type holes, one to test a short iron, the other to test a longer iron.

There are many, many good versions of both holes and as Tom D implied the Eden (hole 2) at Old Macdonald will be very representative of the original and the Short hole (hole 5), which has been post in CGA certainly speaks for itself.
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

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2008, 10:35:24 AM »
Scott Macpherson's (excellent) map of the 11th green at St. Andrews also features in Vol. 4 of Paul Daley's Golf Architecture series.
jeffmingay.com

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #20 on: November 23, 2008, 11:12:16 AM »
George-

My original question was simply what are the specific design features that make a hole a Short and an Eden.  What the putting surface itself should be shaped like and what bunkers should be located in certain places for strategic reason.  Also, I didn't know if there was a distance cut off between the two holes.  (i.e. once you get past say 150 yards it can't be considered a Short or you can't call a hole less than 160 a true Eden??).

Everyone has done a great job explaining the differences.  Thanks
Chip

Patrick Glynn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #21 on: November 23, 2008, 11:47:09 AM »
Any hazard a guess what the 5th at Meadow Club is supposed to be based on?

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2008, 05:37:49 PM »
It sounds like the "Strath Bunker" and the tilt of the green combine to capture the essence of an "Eden"

What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2008, 07:06:47 PM »
Uncle George,
I'm going to put you on the spot and ask you to direct me where MacDonald said this about the 8th. I'm very interested in reading it because I don't view the 8th as a "Short" hole, but more of a medium length (depending on the tee and the year where the tee was located) Also, I forgot that it was described as such on MacKenzie's map. Mind you that map was drawn in 1924, which was before MacKenzie had any chance of seeing the National or any other MacDonald's works as-far-as-I-know. But that's the point here, and maybe something for the MacKenzie time-line: did Mac ever make a trip to America that we don't know about, pre-world tour (MacKenzie's famed world tour which was no different then a rock band world tour of its day. He made a lot of trips, visited a lot of places and planted a lot of seeds....(maybe I could have used a better word there!  ;) )(MacKenzie, according to John Lovell, fathe.... NEVER MIND!) ;)

Anyway, getting back to the point: Did Mackenzie make a trip to America, more specifically Long Beach to view the hole he designed for MacDonald at the Lido which was built just before and during the first world war? (as a winner in the Town & Country contest) This would be previous to him coming to America in the 1920's. Uncle George, Your going to have some information on that, I know it. This is more stuff needed for the MacKenzie time line. Obviously there must have been some sort of correspondence or dialog between Charlie and Mac, and while this is just speculation it at least opens a new door which to look for material.

Congratulations Chip, you might be on to something!

Tom Naccarato

Re: Eden versus Short
« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2008, 07:24:16 PM »
One other thing to add: The 5th at Brancaster/Royal West Norfolk is everything we have come to recognize in a MacDonald/Raynor "Short." The moat is clearly evident around the front half of the green, thus, my thinking is that the only inspiration for MacDonald's copies to be nothing more then in name only. Still, I await Uncle George's take on the issue.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back