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.


Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #10 posted)
« Reply #125 on: February 13, 2009, 07:28:42 PM »
Hole #11 -- Par 4

Cardinal: 351yds
Black: 348yds
White: 343yds
Blue: 336yds

In 1930: 330yds


After taking three or four putts on the 10th green, the golfer takes a very short walk to the 11th tee, where only 15 yards separate the four sets of tees.  The tee shot plays downhill with pinching bunkers about 230-240 yards off the tee.  The bunkers are quite shallow, however, so finding one is really no penalty most of the time.  Trees have been planted down the entire right side of the fairway, presumably due to safety concerns.

The tee shot:



A good drive leaves a pitch to the green, which may be somewhat complicated by the downhill lie.
The green from back in the fairway:


From the right edge of the fairway:


The green is quite subtle (especially compared to #10), but 3-putts are still not uncommon.  From the left side of the green:


Looking back from the green:


Looking at the aerials  ( http://stanfordmensgolf.org/aerials/aerial10.htm ), you can again see how the angle of the green has been offset from the fairway.

As opposed to Tom, this is probably my least favorite hole on the course. :D  The bunkers aren't deep enough to make me think about them, which means I'm simply whacking a driver down the middle and pitching it to the green from wherever I end up.  I'm looking forward to an interesting discussion with Tom and others about this hole.  Maybe they'll enlighten me. ;)


Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #126 on: February 13, 2009, 10:28:03 PM »
Goodness, what a neat looking hole. Looking at the first image, you'd never know you were in a populated area. No way I'm bulldozing that hole.

Is the green drive-able? It looks like if you get over the right-hand bunker, you'd run all the way down to the green.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #127 on: February 13, 2009, 10:32:22 PM »
Those pines behind the green evoke haggard golfers making their way back the the clubhouse, the weight of the day upon their shoulders.

Sort of how I look every time I play!
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #128 on: February 13, 2009, 10:46:37 PM »
Funny you say that, Charlie, since 11  (or close-by #14) is a good finishing hole for a twilight round.  And they are, in fact, pointing towards the clubhouse.

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #129 on: February 14, 2009, 01:43:16 AM »
Looks like some of those non-native trees have grown since my last visit.

I am happen to like the 11th hole.  For the modern collegiate golfer, it is probably played as short, nearly drivable par-4.

This hole is unique among the other 17 on the course, the green is exposed on the edge of the hill, it is one of the few down hill shots and the green has enough firmness and movement to make a short birdie try a non-gimmee.

Perhaps the fairway bunkers are a little flat but knowing of the steep drop off past the green, a pitch from the bunker is anything but easy.
"... and I liked the guy ..."

TX Golf

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #130 on: February 14, 2009, 03:30:48 AM »
Charlie,

I have never personally driven the green but have been within the vicinity a few times... When I was younger and went to a few Stanford golf camps (with Jeff Mitchell (the coach) and a few other varsity players)) I saw a few people drive it with ease.

I am by now means a super long hitter. I was probably longer a few years ago when my swing was in sync but it is DEFINITELY drivable by the long guys these days.

A very fun hole and a great lead up to the all so controversial 12th!!!! Which I bye the way LOVE!!!

Robert

Rich Goodale

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #131 on: February 15, 2009, 10:54:04 AM »
I do not doubt that the big hitters can reach than green in two (but they won't be able to if we push the tee 40 yards back down the hill in conjunction with the remodel of 10!).  For a normal person, the short length and pinching bunkers do give options for the tee shot, and as Mike Says, the green has more contours than most.  It's not a Thomas/Bell green, however, and I think I'd prefer playing the course as it was in 1930.  Every course needs at least one seemingly easy par, and that is what 11 was designed to be, IMO.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #132 on: February 17, 2009, 11:01:06 AM »
I just dig the hole because  I have to think a bit about the tee shot because it's pretty darn tight between the bunkers, and also when firm, running through and into the hazard left is a real possibility.  On top of that the green is pretty cool.

Is it a great golf hole? Likely not.  Do I like it and enjoy it just as is?  Sure.


Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #133 on: February 17, 2009, 11:41:37 AM »

... and I think I'd prefer playing the course as it was in 1930.



I didn't know you were enrolled back then ...
"... and I liked the guy ..."

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #134 on: February 17, 2009, 12:33:48 PM »
Once again, another green where Mr. Harbottle added a new back portion that slopes away from the player.  The back right pin is quite difficult.  The green size was increased dramatically from the pre-renovation size of the 1980s and early 1990s.  I don't know whether the green was restored to its original size.

Also, the front of the green used to be more severe before the renovation.

I do not like all the added trees.  They're an eyesore.

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #135 on: February 17, 2009, 03:07:14 PM »
Thanks for the comments, guys.  I can see why some would find this to be a fun hole.  Tom, I hadn't considered the hazard down the left, since I don't think I have the length to reach it off the tee.  That would certainly add interest to the longer hitters.

I would still like to see those fairway bunkers deepened, though. ;)

Tom Huckaby

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #136 on: February 17, 2009, 03:08:41 PM »
Thanks for the comments, guys.  I can see why some would find this to be a fun hole.  Tom, I hadn't considered the hazard down the left, since I don't think I have the length to reach it off the tee.  That would certainly add interest to the longer hitters.

I would still like to see those fairway bunkers deepened, though. ;)

Ian - I never considered it either.... until I hit it in there!  Firm day, downwind, hardpan... whatever, there she went!  I have to believe for truly long hitters (I am not one) it must be a real consideration.

TH

Rich Goodale

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #137 on: February 18, 2009, 03:11:25 AM »

... and I think I'd prefer playing the course as it was in 1930.



I didn't know you were enrolled back then ...

I was a child prodigy.

They wouldn't let me play back then :'(, but I do remember a few decades later before the left hand bunker was put in on the 11th, and the Huckaby Hard Pan Hook Roll down towards the barannca was very much a feature of the hole in those days.

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #11 posted)
« Reply #138 on: February 25, 2009, 01:48:00 PM »
Hole #12 -- Par 5/4

Cardinal: 473yds (par 4)
Black: 427yds (par 4)
White: 446yds (par 5)
Blue: 401yds (par 5)

In 1930: 440yds

Along with #5, another hole that must have been a monster par-4 in 1930. While often called controversial, I have yet to come across someone who openly dislikes the hole.  I think it's the perfect way to prevent 12-13 from feeling like a similar back-and-forth to 10-11.  From the aerial ( http://stanfordmensgolf.org/aerials/aerial12.htm ), you can see that the three trees are in approximately the same positions as 1930.  These trees serve as an excellent combatant of length, as the closer one gets, the harder it is to avoid them on the second shot.  The fairway is by far the widest on the course, giving plenty of choices off the tee.  The more daring player can play down the right edge of the fairway, skirting the creek on the right, giving him a significantly shorter second shot.  Another option is to hit the ball far down the left hand side, hoping to have a clear, although longer, shot from that side (I go left).

The tee shot:


In the soggy winter conditions, I've been hitting 3-wood at the green for my second shot, a dangerous prospect with bunkers all around, and difficult to clear the trees.  The second shot from well back in the fairway:


As you can see from the aerial, the green is very different from its original form.  There also used to be a long, narrow bunker right in front of the green.  This is the current view of the green (from back-left):


Looking back at the hole:



Do any of you dislike this hole?  If so, why?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2009, 01:49:51 PM by Ian_Linford »

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #139 on: February 25, 2009, 01:54:04 PM »
I'm not saying I want the old green restored, but gosh, it does look pretty cool. It would be pretty out of character unless they restored a bunch of the other greens too.

Kevin_Reilly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #140 on: February 25, 2009, 02:12:23 PM »
How long as that first, smaller tree (well short of the other two) been there?  I don't recall it...and it doesn't appear in the overhead map of the course:

"GOLF COURSES SHOULD BE ENJOYED RATHER THAN RATED" - Tom Watson

Will Haskett

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #141 on: February 25, 2009, 02:37:43 PM »
Okay, I'll say it. I really didn't like this hole when I played it.

Now, in the defense of the course, I went off in a shotgun the day I played it and #12 was my finishing hole, so I was a bit more tired than when you would normally get there. I was playing the back tees, and the wind was in my face and right-to-left, the worst for that hole.

The reason I don't like it is because of the trees in the middle of the fairway. Hit a great, controlled drive off the tee and center cut the fairway. My reward? No second shot. Had to punch around the tree and leave a full shot for my 3rd.

Everything about the hole is tremendous. Love the elevated box, great sight lines from the tee, strong bunkering and a good green complex. If the trees weren't there, it might be my favorite hole on the course.

But, I have a problem with trees in the middle of fairways, especially when they can ruin a perfectly good shot.

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #142 on: February 25, 2009, 04:46:34 PM »
Will, I think your problem was that you aimed down the middle of the fairway.  Had you hit that same drive to the right edge, you would have been in perfect position.  I don't necessarily agree that you should be rewarded for a shot down the middle.

Maybe this is a hole that is much more fun with repeated play?  The ideal line isn't clear for the first time player.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #143 on: February 25, 2009, 05:49:20 PM »
We have reached the most controversial hole on the course.

LOTS of people hate this hole.  Center-trees are few golfer's cup of tea.  I shudder to think what Chip Oats might say.

My feeling does not center on absolutes.

Would a course with every hole like this be anything but annoying?  Of course not.

HOWEVER, for this ONE HOLE... I think it works, and works well.  The times I have played Stanford, #12 has served the role that 16 at Cypress does.. that is, it's in your thoughts from the first tee... a potential round-ruiner, chance at glory.... Oh my particularly from the tips it is a VERY hard golf hole, and one can sure get screwed like Will did.

BUT.. there are options, and to me that is cool.  Take out the trees and it's just blast away, keep it straight.  With these trees, it is the hole I describe before.

My one quibble is I wish it were a bit more realistic to go right side.  Given the tree proliferation there (bordering the hazard) as well as the high rough, it just makes not much sense to even try to go right these days, as much as that is the better line into the green - the reward is just not worth the risk.  Remove those trees - heck make it fairway all the way to the hazard edge - or if not that, cut back the right overhang of the last large tree - and then we really have something.

TH

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #144 on: February 25, 2009, 06:08:03 PM »
I'll defer to the others on most points, but I will say that trees are about the only thing (save for very severe fairway contours) that can force the very good player to work the ball. Even then, it only works if it's a fairly long shot. So the trees seem to be an appropriate hazard here.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #145 on: February 26, 2009, 02:54:35 AM »
Nice comments, Tom.  I do agree that opening up the right side would improve the hole.  However, the right side is still an option for very accurate hitters.  I wonder how the varsity team members play this hole...

Rich Goodale

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #146 on: February 26, 2009, 03:06:29 AM »
As Tom says, this holes is what it is, just like Popeye the Sailor Man....

Anybody who stands on the tee, sees the trees in the middle of the fairway and aims his Sunday best straight at them deserves whatever he gets.  For me this is usually somewhere in position A (right semi) or Position B (left semi) as aiming down the middle is sure to find me anywhere but.  The last time I played the course (October) the right hand side didn't look very viable (and didn't really 40 years ago either!).  I too wonder if the elite players even think of going there.  My guess is that they bomb it high left off the tee.

The green seems to have acquired more contour, which I guess is meant to h=make it harder for the really good player.  It's not better, however, and surely not Thomas/Bell, as mentioned above.

The only birdie I have ever seen on the hole was by a non-golfing friend of mine who hit driver, 5-wood, 5-iron straight into the hole.  Ever since I have called any such similar feat a "Gralnek."

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #147 on: February 26, 2009, 03:43:16 AM »
Rich, I talked to one of the pros at Stanford and he said he takes it down the right.  From what I've seen, he's pretty short for a pro (still longer than me), but extremely consistent.  You're probably right that the bombers would take it down the left-hand side.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #148 on: February 26, 2009, 11:10:16 AM »
I now have another life golf - I want to make a Gralnek some day.
Great stuff, gents!

Here's hoping they do some trimming such that right side becomes more viable, for one and all.  But yeah, seems to me darn near all would go left these days.

TH

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Stanford Golf Course -- (Hole #12 posted)
« Reply #149 on: February 26, 2009, 12:32:59 PM »
The scraggly little third tree was added over the winter of 2002-3 as my father became ill.  It replaces the large third tree that had fallen down in the 1960s.  While he convalesced at home, his friends e-mailed him a series of photos showing the selection of the valley oak to be used, and the relocation effort from the right of #13 fairway.

There is a plaque underneath the tree which says "The Bill Kirk Tree".

My father died on Valentine's Day, 2003, and about two weeks later we held a little golf tournament and get together in his honor.  Bill was a great natural athlete, the best in our family.  After playing football, baseball and golf as a young man, Bill gave up golf for about 25 years, playing about once a year.  When I took an interest in golf as a senior in college, Dad started playing again and as a university employee joined the Stanford Golf Club.  Over the next twenty years he won the seniors championship 7 times.  As he described it, he was a "big fish in a small pond".

When it was my turn to speak at the tribute, I told one story...about the last time my father and I ever played basketball together.  It was November 17, 1982, and I was fresh out of college.  I had organized my own recreation league team, and we played in Palo Alto's top level recreation league.  We had nine players on the roster, and were set to play the other best team in the league.  Four of our players were unavailable for various reasons, and my close friend Rich Supan was a game time decision, as his wife Bernadette was very pregnant with their first child.  About two hours before the game, I called Dad, who faithfully attended the games, and suggested he wear his sneakers to the gym.

Fifteen minutes before the game, it was apparent Rich wouldn't make it.  Dad jumped out of the stands and became our fifth player for the night.  The other team objected to using him as a player; I said fine, lodge an official complaint with the league but let's play the game.  Imagine objecting to a 55 year old playing!

Dad and I played lots of basketball together.  It was our favorite sport.  As a young man, he had been a 6'1" center for the Moffett Field Flyers while in the Navy, and though he wasn't a particularly skilled player, he and I shared a keen appreciation for the great team game.

My father played the whole game, guarding larger ex-college players.  He did not score, but got a few rebounds and a couple assists, and regularly passed the ball to the team's great playmaker...me.  One of our forwards caught a real hot streak in the first half, which we rode to a big lead.  We then hung on to tie in regulation, then nipped them by a point or two in overtime.

My best man Rich welcomed his son into the world that evening.  The other team filed a complaint with the league office, which was granted, and the game was counted as a loss in the standings.  The game marked the end and the highlight of our baskeball career together, and the beginning of a twenty year friendship on the golf course.