Difference between a Biarritz Hole and a Double Plateau?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Those of you who have played the hole: better if the green includes the swale and "approach" or the other way around? 

On the day that I played, there were three groups waiting on this tee, enjoying the view, the action, and the snack shack. Mow the front, put the flag there, and keep it movin'.

Michael,

Surprisingly and counter intuitively, when scores are kept in competitions, scores average higher when the hole is on the front tier.

I suspect that it's because when the hole is on the back tier, for the most part, the water is out of play, that golfers use longer clubs, but, when the hole is on the front tier, the water is more of a factor on the approach.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Those of you who have played the hole: better if the green includes the swale and "approach" or the other way around? 

On the day that I played, there were three groups waiting on this tee, enjoying the view, the action, and the snack shack. Mow the front, put the flag there, and keep it movin'.

Michael,

Surprisingly and counter intuitively, when scores are kept in competitions, scores average higher when the hole is on the front tier.

I suspect that it's because when the hole is on the back tier, for the most part, the water is out of play, that golfers use longer clubs, but, when the hole is on the front tier, the water is more of a factor on the approach.

I don't know if it's better, but I think it's more fun w/the flag on the rear green. I've only played it a couple dozen times over the same number of years and I'd say I've seen the cup back there no more than 2 or 3 times.

Pat,
A slight mishit to the front tier, something that costs no more that 10% of your normal yardage, and you're in the drink. You can lose 20% of your normal yardage when firing to the back tier and still come up dry.

[DMoriarty]

It is not as if Macdonald and Whigham were silent on the issue.  They both described the concept of the Biarritz Hole, and in their descriptions the actual green is BEYOND the swale, ditch, trench, valley, or whatever you want to call it.  The front plateau/approach/ hog-back had to be negotiated by the golfer looking to run the ball through the swale and onto the actual green.

As for the question posed in the opening post, originally a "Double Plateau" was a green concept, whereas a "Biarritz" was a concept for a approx. 215-230 yard golf hole with a swale or ditch before the green.   They were not the same thing, and even when a swale ran horizontally across the middle of the green, it was not necessarily a Biarritz.. Sleepy Hollow originally had two "double plateau" greens, and one of these had the swale running across it horizontally like we think of as a "biarritz" green. But it wasn't a long par three, and wasn't a Biarritz, and it wasn't called a Biarritz, or confused with a "Biarritz."  If fact, in addition to these two holes Sleepy Hollow also had a "Biarritz" hole which was a long par three, but that hole didn't have much of what we think if as the Biarritz type swale.

When trying to understand CBM's various concepts, I like to keep in mind his creations at Lido, because there there he had more of a free hand to create what he wanted rather than being guided by the contours as they existed. Here is an image of the 1915 plasticine model of his Biarritz at the Lido.



Notice that the first plateau is not a green.

When writing of the Biarritz, Macdonald referred to the first plateau as a "sharp hog-back" which was follows by a 30 yard ditch, valley, or swale. The "hog-back" was to intended to deflect balls not hit true.  Some of these even had two ridges to further deflect offline or poorly struck shots.  

As for Yale,  if the hole was meant to be a "Biarritz Hole" according to CBM's original conception of the hole, then the first plateau would not have been intended to be pinned.  Thus the early descriptions of the hole.

It is possible that as the concept developed that CBM/Raynor (and/or or their clients) decided that pinning the front portion was a good idea (like apparently at Shoreacres,) but if so then this wold have been moving away from the original concept.

[david h. carroll]

not sure if over the course of this thread anyone ever answered Jim "Mr. Hurricane"'s question about pin placement in the swale.  I've seen it done numerous times at Elkridge.  I think he may have too

[Bill Brightly]

not sure if over the course of this thread anyone ever answered Jim "Mr. Hurricane"'s question about pin placement in the swale.  I've seen it done numerous times at Elkridge.  I think he may have too

I think pinning in the swale is fine... on "Greenskeeper's Revenge" days when you want to set the course up in a totally goofy manner. You can also set a pin a foot from the swale and have the nastiest pin position ever created. But setting the pin in the swale for normal play is foolish, IMO.

[Jim Nugent]

It is not as if Macdonald and Whigham were silent on the issue.  They both described the concept of the Biarritz Hole, and in their descriptions the actual green is BEYOND the swale, ditch, trench, valley, or whatever you want to call it.  The front plateau/approach/ hog-back had to be negotiated by the golfer looking to run the ball through the swale and onto the actual green.

As for the question posed in the opening post, originally a "Double Plateau" was a green concept, whereas a "Biarritz" was a concept for a approx. 215-230 yard golf hole with a swale or ditch before the green.   They were not the same thing, and even when a swale ran horizontally across the middle of the green, it was not necessarily a Biarritz..

Did MacRaynor name #9 at Yale "Biarritz?"  

It is possible that as the concept developed that CBM/Raynor (and/or or their clients) decided that pinning the front portion was a good idea (like apparently at Shoreacres,) but if so then this wold have been moving away from the original concept.

And wouldn't they in that case name the hole Double Plateau?

Bill Brightly: David's post tells us what probably happened at SLCC.  The green always contained the swale and the approach, as it does today, and that's why they named it Double Plateau.  Actually, if David is right, and I bet he is, all these holes whose greens contain the swale are misnamed as Biarritz.  At least they are if they want to stay true to MacRaynor's concepts.  

[Bill Brightly]

Jim,

In Scotland's Gift, Yale #9 is listed as Biarritz on the scorecard. I assume Macdonald named it, but the sketch is unsigned. (Interestingly, the clubhouse is drawn to the right of the 9th green, but that is not where it was eventually built.)

I really disagree with what you think happened at St. Louis. I think it was designed as a Biarritz and simply (mis)named as Double Plateau. I have no idea when  the front section was converted to putting surface, but I would be stunned if Macdonald or Raynor were involved with that decision.

I would like to see sketches or photos of Sleepy Hollow's Double Plateau with a horizontal swale. I know the original Biarritz (no longer part of the 18 hole rotation, right?) was a traditional Biarritz.

I've seen what you might say are horizontal swales on MacRaynors but the green remains low on one side. In other words, the back section might play like a Biarritz, but the front section is not a symmetrical pad. The front sections (high on one side, low on the other) were often much wider than the rear section. And these holes are normally par fours, usually with a Principal's Nose bunker. If it is a par 3 with a swale and symmetrical pads, it is a Biarritz. These guys were pretty consistent...

[Patrick_Mucci]

The above photo has been dated 1925-6

I'm trying to confirm the publication and identify the author.

What's clear, despite Bryon Izatt's moronic claim that the hole wasn't originally built as Biarritz, but converted to one subsequent to opening day, is the following.

The structure isn't the issue.
It's clear that the foot-pad was built with two tiers seperated by a swale/trench.

So the critical issue is how were both tiers and the swale/trench maintained ?

And now, the smoking gun.

The charcoal layer.

The charcoal layer is introduced at a depth of about 12 inches, then has 12 inches of green's mix placed on top of it.

Hence, the charcoal layer is an early part of the construction process, and it's ONLY introduced into areas INTENDED to be putting surface.

The charcoal layer, ONLY in existence beneath putting surfaces, is found on both tiers and in the swale.

When combined with the above photo (1925-6) caption, there can be no doubt that the entire area was intended to be putting surface.

Case closed  

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

You are a piece of work - a bully supreme.

Please do tell us when you can confirm the publication and the date of publication and the date of the picture.

That poor Banks fellow, how could he have got the intent of the design of the hole so wrong a mere four years after building it.  Perhaps the charcoal addled his brain.

[Bryan Izatt]

Here's one more captioned picture that I can verify is from before the course opened.  The caption describes the 9th similarly to Banks description from 1930.  The green is only the back portion when the hole was being constructed.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Bryan,

The Banks writings were from the 1925 report I think, pre-opening.... Not 1930...

So there was still the potential for the concept to be changed at some point by architect or construction crew...

Ally

[Jim Nugent]

Jim,

I really disagree with what you think happened at St. Louis. I think it was designed as a Biarritz and simply (mis)named as Double Plateau. I have no idea when  the front section was converted to putting surface, but I would be stunned if Macdonald or Raynor were involved with that decision.

David Moriarty says MacRaynor were clear about the difference between Double Plateau and Biarritz.  The main difference was that in the Biarritz, the swale was not part of the green (and neither was the approach), while the Double Plateau described the green only.  So that says to me that the green at SLCC, as it stands now, is rightly named "Double Plateau."  Actually, any green like that, which contains the swale and approach, should be called Double Plateau, and not Biarritz, if you want to stay true to CBM and Raynor's view.  

Was #2 at SLCC always that way?  Chick Evans, in 1921, said it was a double plateau, with green on both sides of the swale.  After reading his passage again, I think the swale was part of the green as well.  So not that long after the course opened, #2 at SLCC was probably what CBM and Raynor called a double plateau.  And that, in fact, was its name.  

Since the hole is named "Double Plateau," and it fits the MarRaynor criteria for a double plateau green, and we know it was like that not that long after the course opened, it's easy for me to believe that is how the hole was designed.  If Raynor and CBM named the hole, as I suspect, I think it's a done deal.  

[Bill Brightly]

Jim,

Put St. Louis CC aside. Can you name one other MacRaynor with a Double Plateau green on a Par 3?

I don't know how you think David is saying the "main difference" between a Biarritz and a Double Plateau is that the swale is part of the green.

Here are the differences:
Biarritz holes were long par threes designed for a driver, to test a player's ability to hit a straight, running shot.
Biarritz holes had heavily bunkered approaches.
Many of the Biarritz holes had a short, centerline hazard to be carried (either water or sand) like the original Chasm Hole in France.
Double Plateau greens were usually built on par fours, often coupled with a Principal Nose Bunker.
Double Plateaus were built with two offset raised tiers.
The tiers on Biarritz holes were in a straight line from the tee box, not offset.
The "swales" on Double Plateaus were not uniform "trenches" like we find on Biarritz holes. Think of double plateau greens as having three tiers: two raised, one lowered. The challenge is for the player to hit the proper tier.
The "lower tier" on a Double Plateau was always part of the green and pinnable. The groove on a Biarritz was not pinnable.

Here is another thing for you to remember: Macdonald, Raynor and Banks very much adhered to building four template par threes on their courses: Short, Eden, Redan and Biarritz (except NGLA.) In Macdonald's "ideal course" concept, the construction of these holes, each with a precise length, was critical to test the player. If Raynor and Banks did nothing else, they followed CBM's instruction in this regard. The Double Plateau template was NOT used on par threes.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a good bet that it is a duck. But if St. Louis CC wants to call it a Double Plateau, that is fine with me.

[Tim Martin]

not sure if over the course of this thread anyone ever answered Jim "Mr. Hurricane"'s question about pin placement in the swale.  I've seen it done numerous times at Elkridge.  I think he may have too

Yale does not pin in the swale on 9. Scott Ramsay told me that he once did it for a Superintendents Outing but it is not a consideration for every day play or tournaments.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan,

The Banks writings were from the 1925 report I think, pre-opening.... Not 1930...

So there was still the potential for the concept to be changed at some point by architect or construction crew...

Ally

My bad, I was thinking of an earlier post quoting from The Evangelist of Golf that the description was from ca. 1931.  If you have other information that it was from 1925 then I'm good with that.  Can you point me to where I might find the 1925 report?

The picture and quote below are from pre-opening so would be contemporaneous with a 1925 report.  It looks pretty clear to me that the hole as built pre-opening was consistent with both the Banks description and the quote under the picture.  No doubt someone changed it at some point after it was built in 1925, but who knows who and when.

For fun, following is a current picture taken from about the same position.  The mowing patterns for the full current green doesn't create the same shadowing in the groove/swale as the old picture does.  It seems to me that there must have been fairway cut grass in the groove.

[DMoriarty]

Jim Nugent,

I don't really agree with some of what you have attributed to me, so I must have mucked up whatever I said. Sorry for the confusion.

CBM and Whigham were clear about the original Biarritz concept, but I don't know that they ever specifically discussed the double plateau concept.  I think Bill is correct that double plateau greens are found on non-par threes.

My point is simply that with with Biarritz concept as described originally the first plateau or hog's back was not meant to be pinnable, but that may have evolved.    

Bill,  

Unfortunately I don't have a photo of the green with the horizontal swale at Sleepy Hollow.

[Will Lozier]

Where is "The Green Argument" now?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

You are a piece of work - a bully supreme.

I see, when I prove you wrong, I'm a bully, or bully supreme.
You decided to stick your nose into this, claiming amongst other things that the hole wasn't intended or built as a Biarritz, and that it was changed to a Biarritz subsequent to opening day, and when you get proven wrong by me, you claim I'm a bully.

As to being a "piece of work" I won't deny it.  

Please do tell us when you can confirm the publication and the date of publication and the date of the picture.

I gave you the date of the picture.
I have the name of the publication by have to verify it.

That poor Banks fellow, how could he have got the intent of the design of the hole so wrong a mere four years after building it.  
The same way that everyone got the date of Wilson's trip wrong.
It happens, especially in the last year of one's life when their health and memory might not be so sharp.

Perhaps the charcoal addled his brain.

I wouldn't know.
I only speak to CBM and SR when I visit them in Southampton.
I'll be there this weekend and will refresh our discussions.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

The Banks writings were from the 1925 report I think, pre-opening.... Not 1930...

So there was still the potential for the concept to be changed at some point by architect or construction crew...

Ally

With CBM/SR, it's beyond doubtful that a construction crew would take it upon themselves to alter the design of their holes.
In fact, you can almost guarantee it, especially considering the size of that green and the amount of charcoal needed at the sub-surface.

In addition, the charcoal layer is a layer inserted prior to adding green's mix, and we know that the charcoal layer at Yale is only found under putting surfaces, hence the entire footpad of the green was constructed with the charcoal layer, that's indisputable.

The charcoal layer only exists below putting surfaces.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to conclude that the pre-construction intent was that the front tier was intended to be a putting surface.

If Tom Doak was espousing this presentation, the many morons on this site would be drooling at his feet and singing his praises.

Morons like Bryan, Will and others are focused on the author of the premise and not the physical fact pattern.

[Patrick_Mucci]

not sure if over the course of this thread anyone ever answered Jim "Mr. Hurricane"'s question about pin placement in the swale.  I've seen it done numerous times at Elkridge.  I think he may have too

Yale does not pin in the swale on 9. Scott Ramsay told me that he once did it for a Superintendents Outing but it is not a consideration for every day play or tournaments.

Tim,

I've played # 9 at Yale when the hole was cut in the Swale.

Certain swales are broader than others, so I wonder if it's a maintenance issue.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

The Banks writings were from the 1925 report I think, pre-opening.... Not 1930...

So there was still the potential for the concept to be changed at some point by architect or construction crew...

Ally

My bad, I was thinking of an earlier post quoting from The Evangelist of Golf that the description was from ca. 1931.  If you have other information that it was from 1925 then I'm good with that.  Can you point me to where I might find the 1925 report?

The picture and quote below are from pre-opening so would be contemporaneous with a 1925 report.


If the caption is from PRE-OPENING, how would they know how the hole played ?

The caption sounds repititious, as if quoted from another source.

How do you explain the charcoal layer in the front tier if it wasn't intended as putting surface, which, it is today.

Do you think they'd waste all of the money necessary to insert the charcoal layer in the front tier and swale if it had no purpose ?

 It looks pretty clear to me that the hole as built pre-opening was consistent with both the Banks description and the quote under the picture.  No doubt someone changed it at some point after it was built in 1925, but who knows who and when.

For fun, following is a current picture taken from about the same position.  The mowing patterns for the full current green doesn't create the same shadowing in the groove/swale as the old picture does.  It seems to me that there must have been fairway cut grass in the groove.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Where is "The Green Argument" now?

Will,

Have you been in a coma for the last few days ?

Do you still believe that Wilson sailed to the UK in 1910  ?

How do you account for the charcoal layer in the front tier and swale.

Look at the physical facts

Why was the front tier constructed so flat, without the deflecting spines, like so many other Biarritz's ?

Wake up my good man, it's time to think

[Patrick_Mucci]

David Moriarty,

Bill Brightly and I have been engaging in OL discussions on this subject.

Bill's position is that CBM/SR/CB were static, that their architecture never evolved or varied, irrespective of the topography, and that's where I differ.

Certainly, no one could confuse the Biarritz at Fishers Island with the Biarritz at Yale.

Why are they so different ?

My premise is that they did vary their themed templates to fit the terrain and that Yale's terrain offered them a rare and unique opportunity for a variation on their themed templates.

The charcoal layer remains the smoking gun and evidence of their intent.

Hope all is well

[Donnie Beck]

Where is "The Green Argument" now?

Will,

Have you been in a coma for the last few days ?

Do you still believe that Wilson sailed to the UK in 1910  ?

How do you account for the charcoal layer in the front tier and swale.

Look at the physical facts

Why was the front tier constructed so flat, without the deflecting spines, like so many other Biarritz's ?

Wake up my good man, it's time to think

Pat,
You know I love you but OPEN YOUR EYES and look at the construction photo. The front tier is much more sloped than the pool table flat surface that is currently in place. Notice the crown in the center of the approach and the slope both to the left and right? There is no way that was a double green when it was built !!! Let's not forget about the rogue superintendents that have worked there in the past. What happened to the punchbowl I am sure you have heard the stories.

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

Clearly the charcoal has addled your brain as well.  Speaking of charcoal, can you tell us how many core samples were taken and how many were taken from areas that were "approach" areas on the course originally.  They did take some core samples from non-green areas, didn't they?