B. It is entirely immaterial in determining the quality of a golf course whether a club has hosted a national championship or PGA. The Atlanta Athletic Club has had two. Kemper Lakes, Valhalla . . . shall we continue? Any club that derives its sense of worth from hosting a major championship has self-esteem problems and likely an inferiority complex besides. Olympic has turned down the PGA many times and refused to host a U.S. Open between 1966 and 1987 - relenting only when some of the younger members insisted. The entire circus is a horrible inconvenience and while I have enjoyed both 1987 and 1998, it encourages a macho mentality amongst our less circumspect members who cannot understand when rough lines need to be returned to their former boundaries. In fact, there is no relationship whatsoever between the course we play and the Lake under Open conditions. Provided I hit the fairway, I normally hit 4 less clubs into every green because the fairways are rumpled linoleum. As to the Tour Championship, Hell will freeze over before they are allowed to return. The PGA Tour left a bad taste in the mouth of many - having nothing to do with the condition of the course. In fact I thought the Lake played far easier for the Tour Championship than it does for everyday play.
C. We might point out that #1,3,4,5,6,9,10,11,12,14 &17 are absolutely wide-open in front of the green, encouraging a run-up if you so choose. Some, like #9 and #12 have a basin in front of the green and a brilliant grassy knob on either the upslope (#9) or the downslope (#12). Additionally, #2,7,&16 have an entrance ramp that can be accessed provided you are coming in from the correct angle or can work the ball toward the opening. The only forced carries on the golf course are found at #8,13,15&18. The course only plays really long if you cannot work the ball or control your trajectory.
D. Now that our rough lines are closer to correct and the tree encroachment has been improved, it is now possible to use the contours of the ground to direct your ball off the tee - an essential precept of strategic interest. Those who thoughtlessly blast away will often drive through the fairway not because the turn points are in the wrong spot, but because they either chose an incorrect line, were unable to work the ball, or failed to use the natural contours to deflect the ball. Experienced members use the subtle down-slopes to drastically increase the distance of their tee shots. Remember, many of the fairways turn left but tilt right - and visa versa.
E. With the exception of the 1st green, which has quite a bit of internal contour, many of the greens appear a bit flattish to the untrained eye. However, once they are playing at appropriate speed, it becomes obvious how severely pitched they are. As an example, the first half of the third green slopes gently up as an extension of the fairway and then slopes directly away at the midway point. #10 is also an extension of the fairway and looks flat but actually slopes front to back. The 5th hole looks flat until you realize it slopes 4 degrees from right to left. Not as severely as #5 at Merion, but it is not unusual in the summer to have an eight foot break.
F. So what are its flaws? Oh, it has a few. The obvious bone of contention is the infamous Flat-Top tree on the 5th hole. Yes, it is a bit silly, but has become a sort of institution and any hazard that provokes that much argument ought to stay just for the sake of discussion.
The mounds installed by Weiskopf on the 7th hole are an absolute eyesore and totally out of context with the golf course. I do not mind the 3-tier Jones Sr. green, but I think I might have liked the 2-tier green a bit better from the early 1970's.
At the 8th, although tree trimming has brought the right side bunkers back into play, the rear bunker is too far from the back to be a threat and is out of play. The only shot that will find it is a skull out of the front bunker. It needs to be nudged into the back of the putting surface.
The terraced tees at the 12th are just plain wrongo. I can understand that they are functional, but the rounded shape of them in the front is an architectural non-sequitur when compared to the rest of the teeing areas and offends my sensibilities. Squared off would be fine, but they do not fit.
The 14th hole has been completely marginalized because of an arbitrary rough line that extends 40 yards from the left side, dictated by an enormous eucalyptus tree overhanging the corner like a ugly vulture. By examining the arrangement of the bunkers, it is obvious that the most desirable angle into the green is from the left side - which used to necessitate flirting with the creek. Now, it is necessary to hit a tee shot down the right-center and cut a mid-iron into the green, eliminating the strategy of the hole. We’ll get that fixed with a chainsaw and gang mower.
The 15th is junk. Crap. A brainless faux pas on the same order of #13 at SFGC or #12 at GCGC. The green has been modified once and what was a beautifully intimate corner of the property was defaced in 1997 with a tee completely out of proportion with the surrounds and a putting surface with rolls and folds that not only do not tie-in properly to the green complex, but look like they were beamed in from Scottsdale. But let’s not lay this at the feet of Weiskopf, he was taking orders from one of our members who desperately needs to either get a life or develop some aesthetic sensibilities.
On #17, contrary to popular conception, tee shots do not roll from the left side all the way down the hill any more than lipped-out putts on the 18th totter 30 feet to the front of the green. Those are in extraordinary conditions - you did not see it happen during the Tour Championship, did you? As it is, the hole would be better modified into a long par four with the elimination of the left hand bunkers to allow a run-up shot (just opinion mind you) similar to a reverse-Redan strategy. Oneof the weaknesses of the course is that in championship play, long hitter finish with three straight short-irons. Par 35-35-70 would actually flow rather well.
#18 green was rebuilt and although at the time it was completed I thought it was okay, it just does not have enough contour and pitch to it. I’ve seen pictures of it many years ago and it was about as flat as we see it today, but the Lake is a product of evolution and not specific pedigree. The hole was more interesting with a steep green and if the USGA thinks it is too steep then we can temporarily flatten it for the next Open. Otherwise, I liked it better when hitting the green was only half the battle.
But all of this can be rectified fairly easily. The bare bones of a superb routing and endlessly interesting topography are there - and that is perhaps the most important commodity of all.
All things considered, with its twists and turns as it tumbles and writhes through the trees, the Lake never bores me even after 27 years. In the end, that might be the truest measure of a golf course and one that I am awfully proud to call home.