# 6 on the Enchanted Journey - One of my favorite par 3's in Golf.

[jkinney]

jkinney:
Good point; the main reason I asked Pat the question about NGLA and PV is because he's currently doing detailed posts about the two of them.  But, you pose a good question:  for those who have played Cypress and NGLA (I've played neither), how would you split ten rounds? 

There's no place in the world I'd rather be than on the grounds of The National. And yet I lived in Carmel for 11 months while at language school in Monterey and spent my share of time on the courses along the 17 mile drive and so fully understand their greatness. All in all, between NGLA and Cypress, I'd do it 6-4 in favor of The National. To further refine,
I'd do it 18-17 in favor of The National - because the great letdown at Cypress is it's 18th hole. The National wins, therefore, its 18th being magnificent.

Going back to my statement that Shinny and PV should be the topic of a 10 round split-up, I always go back to Johnny Miller's insistence that the U.S. Open should only alternate between Pebble and Shinny.

[Ed Oden]

Patrick, thanks for another great thread.  I absolutely love the 6th hole.  It is easily my favorite short par 3.  I find it ironic that you have just played 5 holes that are disconcerting because they are blind to some degree.  Then you come to this little hole where suddenly you can see everything, but its no less disconcerting than the preceding blind holes.  What catches your eye (at least for me) is the massive size of the green.  Its almost uncomfortably large for a hole of such minimal length.  That combined with the incredible contours which compartmentalize the green and work like magnets to either pull or repel balls depending on the polarity of its curves.  The word "genius" is, in my opinion, dramatically overused on this site.  But in the case of the 6th green, I can think of no better word to describe it. 

For those of you who have played #6 at NGLA and #17 at Sawgrass, which do you think is the better hole? 

Jim, no comparison.  #17 at Sawgrass is the hot chick whose allure fades once the conquest has been made whereas #6 at NGLA is the woman that becomes more and more beguiling with each encounter.

Ed

[Tony_Muldoon]

these have to be the most eagerly awaited threads on GCA ever.  Thanks again to Pat and everyone else.


Again I'd like to hear more about the inspiration for each hole.  Here is the 4th at Brancaster.  Interesting that the bunker surrond was orignally more of a 'copy' but then MacDonald kept what he wanted and made the idea his own.  The 'original' does not play downhill and allthough the green is large I don't belive it's of a comparable size.

This image is from 1913...


While this one is taken from Ran's profile...

[Rich Goodale]

Pat

I empathize with your love for this hole.

On my only tour there, my 4-ball topped one into the rough, 60 yards short of the front right pin position, one hit into the front left bunker,  one flew it to the extreme back of the green, 60+ feet away, and one ended up 20-ft from the pin on the lowest segment.

A question for you:  what do you think that the median and mean scores were for the four of us from those positions?

Rich

[TEPaul]

Rich:

It has always bothered me (bothered me for you) that you had to play NGLA that one time when the course was obviously all torn up and under an aeration cycle or whatever. If any hole plays really cool and challenging and different with the IMM it is that hole.

[Rich Goodale]

Tom

The course wasn't all torn up, just a little bit soft and slow.  I've played many courses of equal or better pedigree and have never had a problem imagining how the architecture might play under faster and firmer conditions.  The fact is that very few of us get to play great courses in optimal shape.  If we were only allowed to comment on those rare days, this board would be bereft of information.  I could visit NGLA 20 more times and never see it finely tuned, just as you or anyody else on this site could visit Dornoch or Cypress or Sandwich and play them only as they were on the day, not as they might be on some more favorable day.

Given that, what is your bet for the mean and median score of our 4-ball that day?

Cheers

Ricardo the Munificent

[Tom Huckaby]

Putting on my Horshack voice with hand being raised and re-raised...

OH OH OH OH OH!
Can I answer, Mr. Kotter?


 

Tom - I was there with Rich that day - we played aerated greens - the rest of the course was pretty immaculate... I'm sure it wasn't as screaming firm and fast as it can get.... but it wasn't soft and slow like an overwatered course."A bit soft and slow" is close enough.

TH

[TEPaul]

"I've played many courses of equal or better pedigree and have never had a problem imagining how the architecture might play under faster and firmer conditions."


Rich:

I'm very glad to hear you say that, as it's pretty hard to imagine how different that redan plays with F&F throughout. The shot values are completely different than when that hole his soft.

I can tell you that when that hole is really firm and fast throughout and you fly the ball right at that fairway kicker to the right of the green and watch it bounce about five feet in the air it basically makes you take a little leap yourself while standing on the tee watching it.

One of the neatest group shots I ever recall was in a group I guess during the National Singles when the course was really F&F. On the redan we all put our shots right about the same place on the kicker and watched those four balls bounce about 4-5 feet in the air and then start rolling across the kicker and almost run out of steam on the fairway cut but just reach the right side of the green and then start to build up speed as the balls disappeared left and on down towards the pin on the left.

Four times on that tee we were all screaming "Go, Go, GO!!" When we got up there all four balls were surrounding the cup.

Stuff like that is never forgotten in one's life in golf, that's for sure. That's the kind of thing that just makes you fall in love with a golf course and a golf hole!!

And on that tee before we hit our shots it wasn't as if we DIDN'T talk about what we thought we had to do on that tee shot. 

[Bradley Anderson]

Tom

The course wasn't all torn up, just a little bit soft and slow.  I've played many courses of equal or better pedigree and have never had a problem imagining how the architecture might play under faster and firmer conditions.  The fact is that very few of us get to play great courses in optimal shape.  If we were only allowed to comment on those rare days, this board would be bereft of information.  I could visit NGLA 20 more times and never see it finely tuned, just as you or anyody else on this site could visit Dornoch or Cypress or Sandwich and play them only as they were on the day, not as they might be on some more favorable day.

Given that, what is your bet for the mean and median score of our 4-ball that day?

Cheers

Ricardo the Munificent

Rich,

On behalf of all golf course superintendents everywhere, I just want to say thank you for this comment. Have you ever considered working for the BIGCSA or the GCSAA? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich,

I'm going to say 4, to both.

"Although, I can imagine the possibilities.

[Rich Goodale]

Pat

Just to put TEP out of his misery and THuckaby from dying in anticipation, the answer in both cases was 3.00.  We all holed out for par.  What a great day and what a great hole!

Brad

Thanks

We mere players creep in our petty pace from day to day but you are the real heroes.

Rich

[Tom Huckaby]

Pat

Just to put TEP out of his misery and THuckaby from dying in anticipation, the answer in both cases was 3.00.  We all holed out for par.  What a great day and what a great hole!

Thank you Rich.  My arm and my voice were getting tired.

 

Your up and down was pretty incredible.. as was my two putt. The other guys were just boring.

TH

[TEPaul]

Ricardo The Par Genius:

I woulda hazarded a guess on what your group scored on the 4th but the problem is I ain't never figured out the difference between "mean" and "average." And then you go and throw more than two players at me I get really conv, canfus, aaah, CONfused.

[ed_getka]

Rich,
   I would imagine the mean score was 5. The low was 3 and the high was 7.

Of the Shorts I have played (4 I believe) the one at NGLA is head and shoulders above the others. On a 1-100 scale, putting NGLA Short at 100 the next nearest would be at about 40. Most Shorts I have played don't have the donut/volcano, they usually only have a horseshoe. Plus the overall tilt of NGLA Short makes the hole significantly more challenging. When you stand on the tee at NGLA #6 you can clearly see that your actual target is incredibly small and so you try to be so precise that I'm sure it leads to more poor tee shots than at other Shorts. If someone told you you  could have par on #6 if you could just hit the green I bet the GIR would go up significantly. The spectre of 3 or 4-putt is what makes this hole so daunting. And yet it doesn't seem unfair in the slightest IMO.

[ed_getka]

Wow, four 3's from those positions to a front right pin? Did the aerated greens help much, because I can hardly imagine that being possible from those positions?

[Rich Goodale]

Pat

Just to put TEP out of his misery and THuckaby from dying in anticipation, the answer in both cases was 3.00.  We all holed out for par.  What a great day and what a great hole!

Thank you Rich.  My arm and my voice were getting tired.

 

Your up and down was pretty incredible.. as was my two putt. The other guys were just boring.

TH

Agreed, Tom, but what do these lesser mortals know......

[Kyle Henderson]

Mr. Mucci,

Thank you for putting these NGLA threads together.

1 request: It would be useful if you could edit the first post of each hole's thread to include links to the other 17 hole threads for navigation purposes.


I'm very much looking forward to the rest of the series and daydreaming about the chance to play the course myself someday.

Appreciatively,
Kyle

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kyle Henderson,

I'm computer "illiterate" and aren't sure what you're asking and how to do it.

Each hole takes a good deal of time and I'm doing this when my time is limited.

Perhaps when all 18 are done you can let me know how to link them up.

[Bradley Anderson]

http://turf.lib.msu.edu/1920s/1923/2312304.pdf

This is a very good article about the 6th. Apparently the green was originally much smaller.

[Jim Nugent]

http://turf.lib.msu.edu/1920s/1923/2312304.pdf

This is a very good article about the 6th. Apparently the green was originally much smaller.

The article Bradley linked talks about the "putting sward".  I assumed it meant the putting green.  But when I googled "putting sward", I got the following description:

"the putting sward of a 140-yard hole should be smaller than that of a 240-yard hole. "Putting
sward" is used purposely, as the putting green is by definition the area enclosed by a radius of 20 yards from the hole, excluding bunkers. Many putting swards are smaller than this and a few much larger."

Has anyone come across this term before?  First time I've seen it.  Also, I've never seen anyone define "putting green" the way the author did above. 

Bradley's article says they expanded the 6th green to the right and the back.  Did the new section on the right used to be part of the sand trap? 

[Bill_McBride]

jkinney:
Good point; the main reason I asked Pat the question about NGLA and PV is because he's currently doing detailed posts about the two of them.  But, you pose a good question:  for those who have played Cypress and NGLA (I've played neither), how would you split ten rounds? 

I just say bless me for having been able to play two of the greats. and cop out by saying 5 and 5.

[Bradley Anderson]

http://turf.lib.msu.edu/1920s/1923/2312304.pdf

This is a very good article about the 6th. Apparently the green was originally much smaller.

The article Bradley linked talks about the "putting sward".  I assumed it meant the putting green.  But when I googled "putting sward", I got the following description:

"the putting sward of a 140-yard hole should be smaller than that of a 240-yard hole. "Putting
sward" is used purposely, as the putting green is by definition the area enclosed by a radius of 20 yards from the hole, excluding bunkers. Many putting swards are smaller than this and a few much larger."

Has anyone come across this term before?  First time I've seen it.  Also, I've never seen anyone define "putting green" the way the author did above. 

Bradley's article says they expanded the 6th green to the right and the back.  Did the new section on the right used to be part of the sand trap? 

Jim,

I was talking with Ron Prichard and I used the term green complex. Ron pointed out to me that the term "green" includes, the putting sward, the collar, the fill pad, the bunker, the approach, the embankments etc. So when people use the term "green complex" Ron gets, well shall we say, more than mildly annoyed.

The term "putting sward" is in reference to the grass that is cut short for putting on. The "green" would include everything else in this photo set besides the tee, the rough, and the fairway.

Anyone else notice that house off in the distance?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Anyone else notice that house off in the distance?

Bradley,

That house is used as an aiming point as you tee off on # 11, which features a blind tee shot over a ridge.

[Ed Oden]

Bump...in the hope that Pat will resume his NGLA journey.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ed,

I'll try to get back on track soon.