News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Brent Carlson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #50 on: August 27, 2010, 07:25:41 PM »
double post... ;)

Tom Jefferson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #51 on: August 27, 2010, 07:38:34 PM »
The less fine fescue is watered, the more apt it is to take on a 'tawny hue.'

The fast and firm aspect is related most basically to the morphology (growth habit) of the plant, and specifically the blade, which is very fine and weak; i.e., without cellular structure to support, or cause resistance to, a golf ball.  Thus it naturally allows the ball to roll through, and not slow down.  Think of 'sticky' ryegrass and how balls refuse to run out on that turftype; it has a very strong cellular structure and therefore provides resistance to roll.  It also holds balls up in the air, and thereby 'tees up' the ball for an easy strike.

If there is frequent topdressing and a sandy base, coupled with minimal irrigation and minimal nutritional imputs, the fast and firm is accentuated.

Fast and firm here in Bandon.

Tom

ps...........#3 at BT is flat, #5 is about two feet uphill to the front edge, #8 is downhill, and #9 is uphill by just a couple of feet.
the pres

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #52 on: August 27, 2010, 07:53:33 PM »
At Chambers, you walk past the tips on just about every hole.  Even if you happen to be playing the most forward tees of all, you are getting the full 7700 yards of golf course and the extra 100 yds between some holes.    
You do not walk to the very back tees on holes on #3, #4, #5, #10, #11, #12, #14, #15, and #18 at Chambers. The tees you are talking about are Navy and that is about 7100 yards not 7700 yards.

I'm not going to argue with you but I think when you say "very back tees" you are embellishing a little.  I remember walking around a big horseshoe of tee boxes on #3 to get to the "navy."  I remember quite a long walk past a couple of markers going from #3 green to #4 "navy."   I don't see how it's not possible to walk from the 9th green to the 10th tee without crossing by the "tips", additionally.

Same with from #11 green to #12 tee & #14 to #15......but again, I don't care enough to dispute tiny details.

Yer a CB "homer," Richard, no shame in that.......just don't claim #3 at Bandon Trails is uphill  ;)
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--

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #53 on: August 27, 2010, 07:59:40 PM »
Thanks guys, love the passion of being a homer but when it gets to the point of cyberbullying by someone who shall not be named LOL, I'm out.

FWIW.."CB had the ingredients of a links landscape, but not the the sort of details shaped by centuries of wind and rain", CB yardage guide...in essence it was created not found, similar in that way to WS
It's all about the golf!

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #54 on: August 27, 2010, 08:18:01 PM »
Thanks guys, love the passion of being a homer but when it gets to the point of cyberbullying by someone who shall not be named LOL, I'm out.

FWIW.."CB had the ingredients of a links landscape, but not the the sort of details shaped by centuries of wind and rain", CB yardage guide...in essence it was created not found, similar in that way to WS
...
Hey Richard I know I'm a newbie here but you must not remember BT very well or what are you smoking?

Do you get paid by CB directly or indirectly?

Just saying, I do love your passion...

What a bunch of BS!

The landscape was there before CB was built. The landscape was not there before WS was built. Your lack of knowledge and your "cyberbullying" is showing
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #55 on: August 27, 2010, 08:30:27 PM »
Garland, I'm sorry, but you guys are losing it. Can't take a joke about being biased, homer, eg. pay or smoking crack.

I have my facts please present your facts and stop the merry go round, thanks. The loudest voice will not win.

I am a giver, gentleman and a scholar, but this is off the charts for unbiased discussion from biased people.

This is reason #5 why there is no love for CB.

Just saying and I'm not a typist.

Thanks.
It's all about the golf!

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #56 on: August 27, 2010, 08:38:26 PM »
Garland, I'm sorry, but you guys are losing it. Can't take a joke about being biased, homer, eg. pay or smoking crack.

I didn't see a emoticon. When you see Richard telling it like it is and someone says he is biased, it sounds like "cyberbullying" to me.

I have my facts please present your facts and stop the merry go round, thanks. The loudest voice will not win.

Unless I am recalling the wrong person, I presented the facts to you earlier, but you don't seem to understand them. So what are your "facts"?

I am a giver, gentleman and a scholar, but this is off the charts for unbiased discussion from biased people.

Define scholar.

This is reason #5 why there is no love for CB.

There is no love for CB? Didn't you read Tiger's post? Haven't you been around here to see all the love from the very beginning for CB? There's another place you need to get your "facts".

Just saying and I'm not a typist.

Thanks.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #57 on: August 27, 2010, 08:45:08 PM »
Wow, you are not very cool Garland.  Not all golfers are.

Off to camping with my kids to spread the love and share the love. ;)
It's all about the golf!

Les Cordes

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #58 on: August 27, 2010, 09:13:00 PM »
i have only seen CB on TV...it looks artificial and overdone.....architecturally too busy, if you will......especially when compared to traditional links courses i have played thruought ireland, for example....(i am a member of ballyliffin..) .... does it feel this way when playing..??

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2010, 09:15:16 PM »
Garland,

Can you explain why you think the lanscape to start with was different with CB vs WS? Not sure I understand why its so different.

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #60 on: August 27, 2010, 09:16:54 PM »
Richard Choi. Cyberbully. Whodathunk it. :)

Richard Choi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #61 on: August 27, 2010, 10:35:03 PM »
Sigh…

I'm not going to argue with you but I think when you say "very back tees" you are embellishing a little.  I remember walking around a big horseshoe of tee boxes on #3 to get to the "navy."  

Michael, that is because they use Sand tees (shorter than Navy) on both left and right side of the boomerang tee box there. The actual tees that the US Am players are using are about 30 yards south of the boomerang tee box. Trust me, you did not walk on it.

I remember quite a long walk past a couple of markers going from #3 green to #4 "navy."

The tees that US Am players are using are way left and behind from where you enter the #4 tee box. Most people never walk past it.

I don't see how it's not possible to walk from the 9th green to the 10th tee without crossing by the "tips", additionally.

The back tee box for #10 is north of the putting green. Why you would walk all the way up to the putting green while walking to the #10 normal teeing ground is beyond me.

Same with from #11 green to #12 tee

The tee box for #12 is again left and behind (~20 yards) from where you enter the #12 teeing ground. Why would you walk back there if you are not playing there?

& #14 to #15......but again, I don't care enough to dispute tiny details.

#15 tips is located about 80 yards behind and right of the normal teeing ground. There is not even a normal path to that tee box and you have to cross in front of the people teeing on #12 to get to the green.

Look, I am not going to argue that you walk FAR more than 7700 yards because there are some significant walks between green to tee (mostly #3 to #4 and #14 to #15), but you can’t even SEE many of the tee boxes where these Am players are playing let alone you would walk through it during a normal round (I didn't even know the back tee at #11 even existed until Monday). It is just not true.

And if correcting factual errors make me a cyberbully, then so be it.

Yer a CB "homer," Richard, no shame in that.......just don't claim #3 at Bandon Trails is uphill  ;)

I am a proud homer. No shame here. And the fact that the hole is only 100 yards means the elevation changes don’t count, then #7 at CB is flat since most of the elevation change occurs within 50 yards of the green! :)
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 10:45:47 PM by Richard Choi »

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #62 on: August 27, 2010, 10:50:47 PM »
 8) Hold on.. Richard has some points, maybe a little exagerated but not really much..

 When one looks across the topography at BT, the hills are really not that bad, and roughly comparable to CB's if there were no trees


certainly getting up to BT's14 tee is a chug, if they don't have the shuttle running, but that hole is definitely worth it and its pretty easy sailing from there..


even with BT's16 to trudge up.. the BT climbs seemed to me like long ramps


and the final hill at BT18, you just need your gca.com bag, 9 clubs, and 4-5 balls, no real sweat, but it was longer thanthe other resort courses


at CB its really the steepness of only some of the walks, both green to tee and tee to green that gets you, which I've previously called stress tests.  I didn't feel any real stress tests at BT, OM or PD like i did at CB

CB love.. no,  appreaciate, definitely yes
Bandon Love, Definitely YES
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #63 on: August 28, 2010, 12:00:57 AM »
    A difference between the hills at Chambers Bay and Bandon Trails is how obvious they are at Chambers Bay. When you are at the clubhouse you see and anticipate three serious climbs you plan and walk accordingly, at least at my advanced state. 3G-4T at CB is just as strenuous as 13G-14T at BT. Old Macdonald is a better comparison as you crest the dune on #3.
    As I said before I'm getting a better appreciation of Chambers' sideboards and backboards around the green bays. Under firm and fast conditions they are an essential part of the strategy. Too many said I two or three years ago, but I can't come up with a better example in green surrounds.
    If you were going to spend the day spectating at Chambers what one or two places would you go? My choices are at #10 green atop the left dune, or at the 12th green. 12 would probably win out with necessaries and concessions.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #64 on: August 28, 2010, 12:11:16 AM »
Garland,

Can you explain why you think the lanscape to start with was different with CB vs WS? Not sure I understand why its so different.

WS was FLAT. If you look off course you see totally flat farmland. The sand was hauled in to make the landscape.
The hills utilized by CB were there in the remains of the mine. The routing was originally thought out using those hills and remained pretty much intact as the course construction developed. Too bad you missed Jay Blasi's explanation of it all. We had an earlier thread where someone said he had looked at the before pictures and it was all flat. Then someone posted the pictures, and they were mistaken as to where the course had been built. Indeed much of the land available for the original plan to build 36 holes was flat. But RTJ2 said lets just ignore that flat land and build something really special on this end of the property where there is useful contour. Nothing was hauled in to make the landscape.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #65 on: August 28, 2010, 12:19:47 AM »
Wow, you are not very cool Garland.  Not all golfers are.

Off to camping with my kids to spread the love and share the love. ;)

Let's see your description of yourself is "a giver, gentleman, and scholar". Your description of me is "not very cool". When you want to get over the self adulation and name calling and get down to facts, let me know.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #66 on: August 28, 2010, 12:25:34 AM »
i have only seen CB on TV...it looks artificial and overdone.....architecturally too busy, if you will......especially when compared to traditional links courses i have played thruought ireland, for example....(i am a member of ballyliffin..) .... does it feel this way when playing..??

Yes, Les, there is an artificiality to it. It is after all a reclaimed mining site. It would of course been beneficial to have been a naturally occurring links land. I am not sure about overdone. The pictures I have seen of links land can be pretty extreme, and some would say the courses in the extreme dunes are "overdone" or perhaps some near synonym. Carne comes to mind as does Ballybunion Cashen. Although, I have only seen pictures, that is the closest synonyms I can think of at the moment.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Gary Slatter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #67 on: August 28, 2010, 07:31:23 AM »
I've been watching the Am for the last couple of days.  All I can say is wow.  I know there is an additional thread with some discussion about the course, but I can't believe how little attention it is getting from the DG?  Is this another case of designer discrimination? 

Is it simply that no one is watching?  The course is lightning fast and brown as can be.  These kids are not used to anything like this and you can just see their brains being scrambled as the matches progress.  Some of the bounces that the ball is taking are unbelievable.  It's a blast to watch. 

I had a buddy (loves green and lush courses) stop by for a glass of wine last night.  His first comment was "wow, is that ugly, it's brown!"   After watching for about an hour, he was talking about booking a trip our there....he loved it.
I watched a little of this late yesterday and all I can say, also, is "wow!".   It's much more than I had expected.  Big an bold.  I've never been to Kingsbarn, but it strikes me that there are probably some parallels between Chambers Bay and Kingsbarn from everything I've read and been told...

That said, I watched a kid take ELEVEN - yes, ELEVEN - practice swings on the tee of a par 3 yesterday.  WTFIT ?!?  I wanted to puke...
\

From what I can see CB looks like fun, good TV when you can find it.  CB wouldn't be this F&F in June IMHO.   I see no resemblance to KIngsbarns though. 

Gary Slatter
gary.slatter@raffles.com

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #68 on: August 28, 2010, 08:06:39 AM »
I caught a little of the Am on TV the other day. Is there a "rim" around the property that you are climbing up onto multiple times? Obviously no "rim" on the water side. I don't get the elevated tees for the par 3's on a links-style course, how are you supposed to keep the ball out of the wind?
   The course seems much more interesting now that I have seen golfers competing on it and the conditioning issues of the past seem to have been resolved.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #69 on: August 28, 2010, 08:49:09 AM »
The fescue surface looks very good, but I can't believe they dropped the quarterfinal coverage with 3 matches 1-up!
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #70 on: August 28, 2010, 08:54:36 AM »
The fescue surface looks very good, but I can't believe they dropped the quarterfinal coverage with 3 matches 1-up!

Jud:
I was thinking the same thing! Dumb dumb dumb...

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #71 on: August 28, 2010, 11:47:28 AM »
I caught a little of the Am on TV the other day. Is there a "rim" around the property that you are climbing up onto multiple times? Obviously no "rim" on the water side. I don't get the elevated tees for the par 3's on a links-style course, how are you supposed to keep the ball out of the wind?
   The course seems much more interesting now that I have seen golfers competing on it and the conditioning issues of the past seem to have been resolved.

There is a rim on the north and east sides of the course. That is because as a mine, those were the boundaries. There is no rim on the south side, because the mine property extended considerably south of where the course sits.

Since it is not on the actual coast, but on Puget Sound, there is not nearly the wind you would expect on a coastal property. Most of the wind occurs when weather fronts move through which occurs much more often in the winter than in the summer. The wind the other day is quite unusual for this time of year.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #72 on: August 28, 2010, 11:57:46 AM »
...CB wouldn't be this F&F in June IMHO....


I don't know what knowledge you have to derive that conclusion from. Let me tell you what I know. The plot of rain fall in the pacific northwest looks like a sin wave. The max peak is probably in January. The min peak at essentially 0 is probably in July. That means that June and August don't get much rain as they are near the minimum. Therefore, if they don't water the course coming into June, I don't see any reason it would not be as fast and firm the third weekend in June. There might be a little more residual green left over and the rough would be thicker, but I don't see why the course would not be fast and firm.

It might be kind of neat if they did British Open conditions every year through 2 to 3 weeks around The Open Championship and promote it as a way to experience what you would get playing in The Open. Maybe that would be helpful in controlling the possibility of poa ana infestation into their fescue.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #73 on: August 28, 2010, 01:15:57 PM »
Garland,
The weather in the northwest is a sin wave? :) I bow to your expertise on sin waves, but here is a link to average highs and precip amts
http://www.weather.com/outlook/health/fitness/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USWA0463. Expect 1.5" in June, and 2.5"/mo in the lead-in.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay, No Love?
« Reply #74 on: August 28, 2010, 02:12:32 PM »
I caught a little of the Am on TV the other day. Is there a "rim" around the property that you are climbing up onto multiple times? Obviously no "rim" on the water side. I don't get the elevated tees for the par 3's on a links-style course, how are you supposed to keep the ball out of the wind?
   The course seems much more interesting now that I have seen golfers competing on it and the conditioning issues of the past seem to have been resolved.

There is a rim on the north and east sides of the course. That is because as a mine, those were the boundaries. There is no rim on the south side, because the mine property extended considerably south of where the course sits.

Since it is not on the actual coast, but on Puget Sound, there is not nearly the wind you would expect on a coastal property. Most of the wind occurs when weather fronts move through which occurs much more often in the winter than in the summer. The wind the other day is quite unusual for this time of year.

Garland,
   Thanks for the explanation. I didn't realize the sound was so protected from wind. I look forward to seeing more of the Am and the course on TV this afternoon.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back