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.


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2011, 02:48:34 PM »
Niall,

I am no expert on the "typical CBM Biarritz" but was more commenting on the inspiration for the original concept. As far the original concept goes, the swale or the dip was before the green, between the first plateau (the "hog's back") and the plateaued green.   I am not sure who came up with the idea that that dip or swale represented the chasm, but I don't think it was CBM.  

Some Biarritz holes play over a "chasm" or water prior to the first plateau (Yale for example) but there is no mention of a chasm in the original description, where the swale was before the green, between the first plateau (hog's back) and the green.   The first few Biarritz holes (Piping Rock and Sleepy Hollow) did not have any sort of chasm carry prior to the first hog back plateau.  (Arguably the first hole influenced by CBM's Biarritz concept was Merion's 17th and it did have a chasm/quarry, but that is another discussion.)

Interestingly, in addition to his Biarritz hole at Sleepy Hollow, CBM also built a green with a perpendicular swale bisecting the green much like many think of as a biarritz green.  But it was on a longer hole, 400 yards.  The hole apparently had a road bisecting it at about the midway point.   Given the green with the swale in the middle, does it bring to mind Hutchinson's description of the 16th at North Berwick and the "burn which often punishes a good drive?"  

Anyway, this green-with-a-perpendicular-swale at Sleepy Hollow was in addition to a Biarritz par three (with a swale before the green) and another double plateau green.  (Same thing at Merion --a double plateau, another double plateau with the swale perpendicular to the line of play, and a long par three with at least some biarritz characteristics.)

So it seems there may have been at least three separate two concepts originally.

1.  A double plateau green.
2.  Another double plateau green but with the swale perpendicular to the line of play, bisecting the green. (What some today would call a Biarritz type green.)
3.  A long par three with a hog back plateau, then large dip or a swale short of the green, then a plateau green.  (The original Biarritz concept.)

I guess we could throw in a fourth concept which involves a shot over a gaping chasm, but while the Chasm at Le Phare was probably among the more visually stunning "chasms" this was hardly a unique concept.  

The other interesting thing is the HJW quote from 1913 where he refers to a Biarritz hole which is new to the US (presumably) which kind of suggests to me that this new hole was a variation of an earlier "Biarritz" design already introduced to the US, or are am I missing something ?

Interesting take on that.   As I said, CBM had first discussed the hole concept in 1906 (at least that is the first reference I have found) but I think that first one he built was at Piping Rock.  That said, while CBM and HJW didn't build Merion, they were heavily involved during the design stage, and Merion's 17th has some characteristics consistent with the early Biarritz concept. While they are contemporaries, Piping Rock opened after Merion East.

[Believe me, I am NOT trying to start another fight about Merion.  Just trying to fill in what I know about the evolution of the Biarritz concept, and given CBM's involvement at Merion shortly after NGLA, it is an extremely important course in the chronology.]
« Last Edit: November 20, 2011, 03:16:28 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2011, 03:51:00 PM »
Niall: you stated "The other interesting thing is the HJW quote from 1913 where he refers to a Biarritz hole which is new to the US (presumably) which kind of suggests to me that this new hole was a variation of an earlier "Biarritz" design already introduced to the US, or are am I missing something ?"

I don't read the HW statement that way      ...... I have never heard about any variation of a Biarritz (hog's-back to swale to green) before CB’s  mention in Scotland's Gift, then at the first version built at Piping Rock. I think he meant the one at Piping Rock would be the new “:introduced” version

The Chasm carry:  there were not many places where Macdonald and later Raynor and Banks cold replicate any sort of a Chasm (Yale and Cypress Point the best examples - and perhaps the only decent example of the original. Instead, they often placed that small center-line bunker usually 170 or so yards short of the beginning of the hog's-back/fairway area, to represent the end of the "Chasm carry." It is a only representation and basically not in play.

There were a number of examples of Biarritz that had no swale - just a single green (Blind Brook comes to mind when I first saw it 15-years ago)

David: the Biarritz at Sleepy is now the 8th on the 9-hole course. There is hardly a swale. The area short of the green (normally referred to as the Hog's-Back area) is not even level to the green but is very downhill making it impossible to make any semblance of a decent Biarritz!  -  believe me I tried. It is the worse Biarritz they eve built; downhill - very short (200 yds) - even with the elevated green the "swale area" is hardly visible from the tee.
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Alfonso Erhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2011, 11:28:22 AM »
This is a photo of the original 12th at Biarritz. Based upon the clothing of the woman driving the hole, I would guess it is 1900-1910.

Curiously, tt does feature a cross bunker short of the green, as George suggests was used at times. Maybe MacDonald did not use that bunker randomly or looking to replace the chasm.....

The hole was the 4th after Colt redid the course in 1925. The chasm hole, however, disappeared in Colt's remodel of the course.



Regards,


Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #28 on: November 21, 2011, 01:06:16 PM »
David/George

Many thanks for your lengthy responses, much appreciated. Just for clarification, what length were Biarritz holes generally and were they intended to be 1 shot holes or 2 shot holes ?

Alfonso,

Fantastic photo. Do you know what length this hole was, and the bunker you refer to, is it not perhaps the continuation of the road which runs to the left of the picture, or am I looking at the wrong bit ?

Niall

Alfonso Erhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #29 on: November 21, 2011, 01:24:34 PM »
Niall,

The hole was 300 yards, according to the 1888 map of the course. Yes, it could be the road (I just happen to see bunkers everywhere!!!)

Regards,

Simon Holt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2011, 02:34:16 PM »
Great pics Alfonso- so I will ask, any pics f the Chasm hole???!!!

I still havent had the chance to ask the greenkeeper at NB about the green at 16 or get in touch with the local historian that swears ours is the original.

I was thinking about this last night.  Is there a vague resemblance of the 16th hole at North Berwick in the 11th hole at NGLA?

The blind tee shot perhaps a doff of the cap to the wall, the road being the burn and the green certainly has the look of a softened version of North Berwick's 16th, albeit at the opposing diagonal angle. (NBs green has the front portion on the right hand side of the fairway, while NGLA has the front portion of the green starting on the left hand side of the fairway roughly.) 

Thoughts?

S
2011 highlights- Royal Aberdeen, Loch Lomond, Moray Old, NGLA (always a pleasure), Muirfield Village, Saucon Valley, watching the new holes coming along at The Renaissance Club.

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #31 on: November 21, 2011, 03:17:32 PM »
As you ask for thougths Simon, and although this has been discused before.

(Adopting authoritative voice) The best book ever written on Golf, A Round of Golf Courses by Patrick Dickinson was published in 1952. There is no mention of this "eccentric" green, something Dickinson would have loved.  Indeed I ask anyone to provide written evidence that it was in this form earlier than...


(Pennink skips from 15 to 17 in his description 1962)

Peter Allen Famous Fairways 1968  “A curious hole...to a green which even Trent Jones would think was eccentric in shape: two little plateaux joined by a narrow neck formed by a deep gully but all mown putting surface; how you putt from one plateau to another I wouldn’t know”  


I'd love to play with the historian
 ;)


« Last Edit: November 21, 2011, 03:19:48 PM by Tony_Muldoon »
Let's make GCA grate again!

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2011, 03:18:37 PM »
Alphanso,

That is a great photo, and that may have been the 12th hole at some point, but it is not the 12th hole marked on the old map.  The 12th hole on the map is left of the visible road in the photo, and well left of the hole in the picture.  The hole in the photo may be a reconfiguration of the the 13th hole, which on the map played at an angle over the road.  The tee for the infamous "Cliff hole" (the 14th on the map) may be visible in this photo over the left corner of the green of the pictured hole.  

I haven't been able to locate a good photo of the 12th hole marked on the map.

_______________________________________

Niall,

George would know best, but I think the length was supposed to be around 210-220 initially, but it may have gotten longer with technology.   It was a one shot hole, but one where only the best and longest shot could carry the putting surface. Most had to hit a running ball short negotiate the pre green swale on the ground.  

______________________________

Simon,

Here is a photo of the Chasm green from December 8, 1899, Golf Illustrated Article by Horace Hutchinson.  Unfortunately, the Chasm Hole had already been seriously compromised.  The green shown in the photo had previously been the approximate location of the tee with the hole playing over the chasm to the left of the photo.  From the article:

"The Chasm Hole is not quite as it used to be.  It used to mean a drive off from a spot near where the putter in the second illustration is addressing his ball, and the hole lay at the other side of the yawning golf which may be understood to beyond the present green.  As things are to-day that putter has approached the green with an iron shot over another and a shorter chasm.  The penalties of a foozled shot are no less heavy that they used to be, but the iron will now reach the hole which the driver would seldom reach before."

One cannot see all ground to the front of the green, but there does not appear to be a swale either on or before the green in this photo.  And this was 1899, well before CBM and HJW toured the hole in 1906.  (Query whether CBM had seen it before then.)

« Last Edit: November 21, 2011, 03:22:04 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2011, 05:25:43 PM »
When considering CBM's concepts, we may do well to take a look at the Lido, because there there he had more of a free hand to create what he wanted rather than having to stick with the contours as they existed. Here is a 1915 image of the plasticine  model of his Biarritz at the Lido.

Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Alfonso Erhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #34 on: November 21, 2011, 05:57:48 PM »
David,

Looking at the road in the map you may be right, but in that case the hole in the picture would neither be 12 or 13. Following your assumptions, the people standing on the left of the photo should be standing on the 13th tee playing away. In that case, the hole must be from a women's course or something like that (which is strange as the women's course was on top of the cliff).

A picture of 14th, Montee de la Falaise



This is a better picture of The Chasm than Tony's



George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #35 on: November 21, 2011, 07:24:27 PM »
Macdonald - Raynor - Banks Biarrirz hole lengths averaged about 225 from the middle of a back tee, offering a few more yards forward and to the rear of the single tee - yes, some were a few yards shorter but there were some, from the 20's, that were near 245 - 250 from the back of the rear tee.

Short ones were Blind Brook and Fishers Island - I think the back tee at FI was a later addition - I'll look at an old aerial

In general there no multiple tees on a Biarritz - forward tees were added later by committees and architects
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #36 on: November 21, 2011, 11:02:13 PM »
David,

Looking at the road in the map you may be right, but in that case the hole in the picture would neither be 12 or 13. Following your assumptions, the people standing on the left of the photo should be standing on the 13th tee playing away. In that case, the hole must be from a women's course or something like that (which is strange as the women's course was on top of the cliff).

Good point.  I didn't notice the other group (I have a similar but much rougher image without the second group.)  The pictured hole couldn't be any of the holes on the old map.  

I think part of the confusion is that holes were added to this lower part:
--  Circa 1899 there were only four holes using the lower section.  The hole playing down was the 11th, then the twelfth along the other side of  the road, then the 13th out to the eastern corner, then the 14th (Cliff hole) up to the top again.  (This is not only the configuration on the map, but also consistent with another Hutchinson (?) from 1899.    
-- By 1909 there were six holes down below.  The 8th hole played down the cliff, and the 13th played up the cliff.  I am not sure of the configuration of Nos. 9 - 12 at this point, or even if the 8th green and 13th tee were in the same place as the previous 11th and 14th.  

So two holes had been added to the number of holes in the lower section.  The pictured hole appears to be one of the added holes.  What makes you think it is the 12th hole?   It looks like it could be, with the next hole the cliff hole.  But it also looks like the course could head back west at that point, with the second group on the next tee.   So I am curious as to why you thought this the 12th?

Any ideas on the date of that photo?  
« Last Edit: November 21, 2011, 11:08:09 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #37 on: November 22, 2011, 01:33:09 AM »
A bit more on the evolution of the holes down in the Chambre d'Amour:
- December 8, 1899. Golf Illustrated. The 11th plays down the cliff, the 14th is the Cliff hole up.   Four holes.
- November 4, 1904. Golf Illustrated ("Piscator.") The 9th hole played down into the Chambre d'Amour (335 yds to a green near the Sea.) The 14th ("Cliff" hole) was an iron shot up the cliff.   Six holes.
- February 2, 1906. Golf Illustrated Pictorial.  The 9th hole still reportedly the hole playing down the cliff.
- February 14, 1908. Golf Illustrated.  The 8th hole reportedly the hole playing down the cliff.  The 13th hole reportedly played out.
- February 26, 1909.  Golf Illustrated.  The 8th hole reportedly the playing down the cliff.  The 13th hole reportedly played out.

So if these reports are correct, then when CBM and HJW visited in the first half of 1906, the 12th hole was down at Sea level in the Chambre d'Amour, but was not the hole immediately before the Cliff hole.

Here is a photo of the what is reportedly the 12th green from the 1904 article and derivative pictorial from 1906.  Unfortunately, it doesn't show too much. 





Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Alfonso Erhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2011, 04:27:58 AM »
David,

I would guess the photo is from the 1900-1910 period, based upon the clothing worn by the lady driving and other photos of Spanish and French golf that I have from those dates.

My initial guess on the hole being the 12th was based on the road on the right, although I hadn't realized that the 1888 plan included two roads. The Colt routing left five holes down in the Chambre D' Amour

The Colt routing:



Tee of the 11th heading down:



Two shots of the  (most probably) 11th green:





Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Old Controversy About The 16th Green at North Berwick
« Reply #39 on: February 21, 2013, 01:27:05 PM »
Ahhh, getting back to the subject of NB's 16th....I noticed on page 50 of In The Wind's Eye, the author states the 16th green was extended to the table to the East - a change to bewilder the golfer for evermore...

This sounds like the 16th we know today and that change was meant to be from the 1895 alterations.  Previously, the hole was "practically an island surrounded by water from a burn.2 - page 15 of same book. This pretty well matches H Hutchinson's description of the hole, except that perhaps the dry ditches flooded at times to create a temporary island.  I would also note that Hutch does hint that there are two plateaux and that the green is on the lesser of the two.  Hutch's British Golf Links was published 1897.  As Hutch's base of living was southern England, it seems entirely plausible that Hutch's description is out of date as the course works occurred in 1895.   

Ciao   
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing