Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #15 posted)

[Ian_L]

Good point, Matt.  It would be interesting to hear from those who played the course a long time ago.  If you're good at hitting a worm burner with accuracy there are certainly recovery shots to be had, I don't possess that skill, however.

[Eric_Terhorst]

looks like if you hit it left in the old days you could manufacture a shot out; now you're pretty much done. cool hole though.

Matt,

I recall when I played it in the early 80s that a shot hit WAY left could often be better than a shot tugged a little bit while trying to cut the corner.  In other words, if you hit it way left over the first line of tree defense or somehow managed to thread the needle, you could end up with a  punch out and have a short iron left to salvage GIR, or even a shot at the green as Ian describes.

I always enjoyed this hole--you could often have a short shot for your third and a makeable putt for birdie even while playing safe as long as the first was long enough.  In these pics it seems the right side has been hemmed in a bit by the trees.  Would it be better to have fewer trees over there to lull the safe players into a longer route?

[John Kirk]

Not only is the corner too congested, the grass is too thick, further preventing creative recovery shots.

For tee shots that failed to reach the corner, there used to be a gap in the trees whch allowed an accurate second shot to cut the corner off, so a player could try for a shorter third shot, rather than simply punching a hook around the corner tree.

This was a rather common result.  Let's say you were trying to hit a high one over the last tree, or were just trying to hug the left side, in an effort to leave a second shot at the green.  If you failed to elevate your tee shot, the ball would often hit one of the trees, leaving a second shot in this position.

The gap in the trees is known as "Garcia's Alley".  The hole in the trees is very small these days.

The old oak tree at the corner is known in my family as The Grandfather Tree.  The tree lost a major branch about ten years ago, that more effectively guarded the corner.

Similar to holes 5 and 6, John Harbottle introduced a new back left portion to the seventh green that slopes away from the golfer.

[Ian_L]

In these pics it seems the right side has been hemmed in a bit by the trees.  Would it be better to have fewer trees over there to lull the safe players into a longer route?

Eric, there is more room to the right on the tee shot than it appears in the picture (you can see the fairway under the trees if you look closely).  Removing one or two of those trees would certainly open that up visually, though. 

Looking at the aerial, it looks like a tree actually guarded the far side of the dogleg as well.  I suppose this would complicate the second shot for the safer player?

[Rich Goodale]

Coming back onto this thread.....

6 used to be my favo(u)rite hole, and surely the toughest vs. "par," but now I think that the tree encroachment and the thicker grasses on the right make it a one-trick pony--drive it long and straight OR ELSE!  The re-angled and extended green is more modern and trendy, but is that what old classic courses such as Stanford should be all about?  The 6th green used to be a study in simplicity--now it looks like any post-modernist green "complex."  Regression rather than prgogress, at least to me.

7 is a hole that, like #18 Pebble Beach, has been made more interesting through advances in technology.  When I was a student, only Walt Driver and Tom Watson could think of comfortably cutting the dogleg with a high bomb.  The rest of us mortals and sub-humans had to be satisfied with trying to hit a sling hook on a narrow line to get even a glimpse of a chance of another sling hook to the green.  In 2001 at age 54 I made the carry for the first time in my life, with as good a swing as I could make in those days.  I think this technological dumbing down makes the hole a better one because it gives more of us a chance to look stupid by trying to make the carry, just as we can now have the chance to look stupid by trying to reach the 18th at Pebble in two, even though the odds are 100-1.  Well, 100-1 is infinitely better than zero, particularly in golf, where the dynamics of the game allow us to dream.  The green?  Who cares!  Stanford was never about the greens.  It was all about getting there....

[Jeff Doerr]

I remember Phil going for it in two easily during the Pac 10 championship. (I think it was 92 as I had my daughter in a backpack with me) He pushed his long iron approach just slightly and ended up in the left bunker. He blasted to a short distance for an easy birdie.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Rich

It's funny you write that re 7 as from the pics it does look like you could just bomb it over the top.  The analogy I had in mind however was Yale 14, similarly a "hit and find" type of shot, albeit a dogleg right.

Of course, that was true before technology, so 18 Pebble it is...

Mark

[Ian_L]

It's funny you write that re 7 as from the pics it does look like you could just bomb it over the top. 
Mark

Remember the picture is taken from the black tees, which are 60 yards forward.  I believe it's a 290 yard carry from the Cardinal tees to clear the trees on the dogleg.

[Jon Spaulding]

It's funny you write that re 7 as from the pics it does look like you could just bomb it over the top. 
Mark

Remember the picture is taken from the black tees, which are 60 yards forward.  I believe it's a 290 yard carry from the Cardinal tees to clear the trees on the dogleg.

290 and airborne! Certainly a tour-caliber shot from the back tees.

Last time I played, the ground was firm and allowed enough run-out to get into the "go zone". Most every other time it's been soft and the hole was not reachable unless your last name was Woods/Kribel, you got a lucky break and ran thru the trees, or you can high, cutting 3-wood out of the rough on the right.

[Ian_L]

Hole #8 -- Par-3

Cardinal: 172yds
Black: 144yds
White: 132yds
Blue: 117yds

In 1930: 140yds


Hole 8 is the third par-3 on the front 9, and the only one close to its original form.  After walking under Junipero Serra Blvd. and up a hill, one finds a downhill shot across a creek to a green guarded on both sides by bunkers.  The bunkers on the right appear to be mercy bunkers, preventing errant shots from bouncing into the creek.  The cardinal tees have been moved back to the 13th tee box to extend the yardage to 172 yards.

A small but influential ridge crosses from the left bunker to the middle of the green, effectively separating the front and back-left portions, making back-left pin positions (IMO) the most difficult.  Anybody know if this ridge is original?  I like it.

A wide view:


Zoomed in (looks like I cut off the left bunker):


My ball in the left bunker  :


Aerial comparison:
http://stanfordmensgolf.org/aerials/aerial8.htm

[Rich Goodale]

Ian

I do not think that ridge is original.  The green was re-done by RT Jones (Sr. or Jr. I do not know) during my undergraduate days (1964-1968).  I remember very little of the original green other than that it was less "modern" (i.e. contoured).  I do remember being taught on that hole by a good friend how to hit a proper bunker shot, a technique which I use to this day.

Rich

[Ian_L]

Thanks, Rich.  Any idea which of the greens have been left mostly untouched?  I suspect #14 would be an example?

[Eric_Terhorst]

Nice little half-a-drop-shot hole.  Used to be a smooth 8-iron for me every time--it was never boring though.  What's not to like about a hole on which you remember having a few kick-in birdies? 

I wish the cart path could be eliminated.

Seems like it would be a pretty small target at 172 yds--but then maybe the college boys hit an 8-iron that far these days.

[Ian_L]

---

[Rich Goodale]

Thanks, Rich.  Any idea which of the greens have been left mostly untouched?  I suspect #14 would be an example?

Hi, Ian

I would say that of the holes remaining, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15 and 18 have been the least touched, in terms of shape, contours and bunkering, but it is clear from the overheads that even the 14th has changed in size and shape over time.

Rich

[Ian_L]

Thanks Rich, hole #9 coming within the next day.

[Ian_L]

Hole #9 -- Par 4

Cardinal: 365yds
Black: 348yds
White: 340yds
Blue: 334yds

In 1930: 375yds

After a short climb from the 8th green, the golfer must again avoid San Francisquito Creek on the right side.  Along with hole 6 this is one of the most demanding tee shots on the course.  Although more visually intimidating, the hole overall is in my opinion easier than #6 due to its reduced length.  While demanding, the tee shot provides interest for all levels of golfers.  The fairway begins turning about 200 yards off the tee, with trees and long grass on the left giving little chance at the green.  The medium-length hitter can hit a fade that will continue to roll forward to the right side of the fairway (my usual choice).  Longer hitters can carry the trees on the right, but risk going in the creek if they get too greedy.

From left of the tee box (the "interesting" tree-bunker complex was discussed in a previous thread):


A drive that holds up on the left side of the fairway will leave an awkward sidehill lie to a significantly elevated green:


A tee shot that kicks right leaves a shorter shot from a fairly even lie, although still quite uphill:


Deepest bunker on the course?


A view of the green at sunset.  This green seems quite different from the rest of the front nine, with subtle internal contours that provide interesting putts and recovery shots.  It's currently my favorite green on the course.


The aerial shows tree encroachment as well as some narrowing over the years.  For those that have played the course a lot, has the strategy of the hole changed significantly?

http://stanfordmensgolf.org/aerials/aerial9.htm

[Eric_Terhorst]

One of my favorites on the course.  If you are fortunate enough to hit a well-placed tee shot. you still have a tricky approach where all kinds of bad things can happen.  One of those holes on which you stand on the tee feeling you should be putting for birdie but often are not. 

How long has that silly tree-bunker complex been there?  I don't recall it or have blocked it out. 

[Ian_L]

Finally...

Hole #10 -- Par 4

Cardinal: 440yds
Black: 404yds
White: 380yds
Blue: 343yds

In 1930: 425yds

The back nine starts about 100 yards from the clubhouse, although quite out of sight.  Interestingly, I hadn't noticed until now that it's the second of five consecutive par-4's (9-13).  Maybe the diversity throughout these holes prevents this stretch from becoming dull.

While not extremely long, the hole plays quite uphill.  There are two fairway bunkers, although the one on the left has become obsolete for most players.  The wide playing corridor is nice after the somewhat constrained feel of much of the front nine.  As you can see from the aerials ( http://stanfordmensgolf.org/aerials/aerial10.htm ), these fairways used to be joined, with only the fairway bunker complex separating them.

View from the black tees:


The shared bunker complex (looking from #10 fairway to #11 fairway):


The second shot plays to a blind green, usually with a mid- to long-iron for me.  This picture was taken from the right rough, just past the fairway bunker:


This is a dark picture, but it does show the two-tiered green.  Again, the green has been rotated away from the line of play during remodels:


Looking back from the 11th tee:


What do you all think of this hole?  I don't see a whole lot in it, but I could be missing something.

[Charlie Goerges]

I think the shared bunker complex is quite shapely. I forget who designed the course, I'll check.

I must comment on the beauty of that tree in the last couple of photos. I'm sure there is a good reason, but it's a pity the green couldn't be placed long and slightly to the right of it's location, making it a short par 5 with that knarly tree guarding the right side of the green and befuddling those coming up short and right of it.

[Mike Benham]

The trees/shrubs left of the tee box have started to become a visual distraction to the tee shot.

I find two things interesting about this hole, the angle of the tee box points you slightly towards the bunker on the right and the green.  For whatever reason, most of my plays have had the hole cut on the back shelf.

The hole does play10-15 yards longer then the card.


Ps:  what do you mean by "rotated away from the line of play"?

[Charlie Goerges]

Mike, I think he meant the angle of the photo is not taken along the line of play.

[Ian_L]

Ps:  what do you mean by "rotated away from the line of play"?

I mean that over time (or maybe in one fell swoop) the green has gone from being in line with the fairway to angled to the right.  Does that make more sense?

Charlie, moving the green back and right would make the entire green complex blind, and would encroach on #11 tee.  It's also a pretty severe downslope behind the current green, so I'm not sure that would work.  Trees used to be common near or even overhanging greens on the course (or so I hear), but most seem to have been removed.  Several big oaks still heavily influence play, though.

[Rich Goodale]

Ian

To me the best thing about this hole is the halfway house.  The burgers are good and the beer cold.  The hole itself is a long slog uphill, with no particular strategy required to get from point A to point B.  The separation of the 10th and 11th took place while I was there (64-68) but the focus was on the 11th.  Even without the separation, the tee shot on 10 has always been about getting the ball into its own fairway and as far up the hill as you are capable of.  On the other hand, without the separation and the new trees, hitting to the 10th fairway from the 11th tee was always an attractive option.  Maybe that's another reason I don't like the 11th--vestigal memories of ducking golf balls from the 11th tee.......

I think Bell/Thomas could have made a cool par-5 on this land with a tee further back into the oaks and a punchbowlish green just over the hilltop on which it is now placed.  Maybe that change could still be done?

Rich

[Charlie Goerges]

I think Bell/Thomas could have made a cool par-5 on this land with a tee further back into the oaks and a punchbowlish green just over the hilltop on which it is now placed.  Maybe that change could still be done?

Rich

Rich, that par 5 idea is what I was thinking (I've never been there).

Ian, I looked at the aerials linked in your first post and I see what you mean about moving the green right, but if it was moved basically straight back and/or the 11th tee moved to the right, it might work. Also, if the green was completely blind, I don't think it would be as big a deal on a par 5. Since it would be a shorter one, the third shot would be from close enough that the blindness wouldn't be a problem. And Rich's punchbowl green idea would help compensate for the blindness. And the tree would essentially be an obstacle only for people going for the green in 2.

Also, in looking at the old aerials, I was struck by how much bigger and prettier the bunkers looked in 1930, really striking (at least from overhead).