Difference between a Biarritz Hole and a Double Plateau?

[Patrick_Mucci]

I remember hitting four iron to a front pin (from the tips) and my shot indeed landing on the front tier and running through the swale to the back...and of course having that crazy putt which I am sure I 3-jacked.  I disagree with Pat in that the elevation of the tee relative to the green does NOT take away the option of running the ball to the rear.  

Especially with more club and especially at Yale as I played it in F&F conditions during late fall!  

Will,

The 18th hole at my club is a two tiered par 3 over water.

I've intentionally played it by playing short of the green, onto the water, with the ball bouncing onto the green.

Oh, I forgot to mention, it was December and the pond was frozen.

You stated that you played the 9th in the "late" Fall

I guarantee you that you can't hit a 4-iron from the tips, to the front tier, with the ball running thru the swale and back up onto the back tier in April, May, June, July, August or September.

The betting window is open at your convenience  

Furthermore, with older equipment, I would think this possibility is even more likely.

I feel just the opposite.

Cheers

[Mark McKeever]

I will note that I did take the aerial route and flew a 5 wood to the back left fringe.  I did not take the low route. 

Mark

[Patrick_Mucci]

I will note that I did take the aerial route and flew a 5 wood to the back left fringe.  I did not take the low route. 

Mark,

Recently some us hit 3-woods and rescues and flew it to the back tier.

I'm not positive but I recall the distance to the hole being in the 235 range.

Given the choice, the aerial route seems the more prudent play

[Will Lozier]

I remember hitting four iron to a front pin (from the tips) and my shot indeed landing on the front tier and running through the swale to the back...and of course having that crazy putt which I am sure I 3-jacked.  I disagree with Pat in that the elevation of the tee relative to the green does NOT take away the option of running the ball to the rear.  

Especially with more club and especially at Yale as I played it in F&F conditions during late fall!  

Will,

The 18th hole at my club is a two tiered par 3 over water.

I've intentionally played it by playing short of the green, onto the water, with the ball bouncing onto the green.

Oh, I forgot to mention, it was December and the pond was frozen.

You stated that you played the 9th in the "late" Fall

I guarantee you that you can't hit a 4-iron from the tips, to the front tier, with the ball running thru the swale and back up onto the back tier in April, May, June, July, August or September.

The betting window is open at your convenience  

Furthermore, with older equipment, I would think this possibility is even more likely.

I feel just the opposite.

Cheers

Pat,

You really are starting to sound like a moron!  Truly!

Your "guarantees" are ridiculous.  Buy me a plane ticket from ATL to NYC...and I am in!  

By the way, I've played off of a pond before...which I am sure you would have guaranteed could not be done!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1062987377066&set=t.1099112367&type=3&theater

[Mark McKeever]

Joe's shot that chased back there was a low bullet IIRC.

MM  

[Patrick_Mucci]

You really are starting to sound like a moron!  Truly!

Your "guarantees" are ridiculous.  Buy me a plane ticket from ATL to NYC...and I am in!  

I'm happy to purchase a round trip ticket from ATL to NYC to ATL, but, with the purchase comes heavy wagering.

I'm willing to bet whatever meaningful sum you choose on every shot you hit.
It's one thing to type how you can play the hole, quite another to execute it when significant cash is on the line.

While you'll fly up, I'll drive up, but i'llhave to rent a Brinks truck for the ride home.

The reason I chose to purchase a round trip ticket for you versus the one way ticket from ATL to NYC that you suggested  is that you'll have no funds left with which to purchase a ticket home.

Who says I don't have a heart ? .

By the way, I've played off of a pond before...which I am sure you would have guaranteed could not be done!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1062987377066&set=t.1099112367&type=3&theater

[Joe Bausch]

Joe's shot that chased back there was a low bullet IIRC.

MM  

A groove low for sure.   

[Mark McKeever]

Thin it to win it!

[Will Lozier]

It's one thing to type how you can playED the hole, quite another to execute it when significant cash is on the line.

Yes, I guess it is different?

If you read my post - and we know you don't read real good - I clearly didn't execute my shot very well.  The pin was in the front and I ended up in the back.  I didn't PLAN on running my 4-iron through the swale.  This particular shot actually works in favor of your argument...that pinning front portions creates interest and challenge in trying to hold the ball on the front section with a mid/long iron or even hybrid/wood/driver - especially having to clear a water hazard first and foremost - even if from an elevated tee.  If not, you have that diabolical putt through the swale.  But, of course, you are just trying to be right!

Cheers

[Will Lozier]

You really are starting to sound like a moron!  Truly!

Your "guarantees" are ridiculous.  Buy me a plane ticket from ATL to NYC...and I am in!  

I'm happy to purchase a round trip ticket from ATL to NYC to ATL, but, with the purchase comes heavy wagering.

I'm willing to bet whatever meaningful sum you choose on every shot you hit.
It's one thing to type how you can play the hole, quite another to execute it when significant cash is on the line.

While you'll fly up, I'll drive up, but i'llhave to rent a Brinks truck for the ride home.

The reason I chose to purchase a round trip ticket for you versus the one way ticket from ATL to NYC that you suggested  is that you'll have no funds left with which to purchase a ticket home.

Who says I don't have a heart ? .

By the way, I've played off of a pond before...which I am sure you would have guaranteed could not be done!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1062987377066&set=t.1099112367&type=3&theater

Oh you have a big heart...just a much bigger ego!

Not sure how big a truck you'll need on my teacher's salary!  Or if you'll need one at all?

Cheers


PS - By the way, many of us are seriously interested in hearing you expound on your knowledge of these core samples of which you speak and yet you won't.  Eagerly awaiting here as I have yet to be completely convinced either way on this whole debate.

[Patrick_Mucci]

It's one thing to type how you can playED the hole, quite another to execute it when significant cash is on the line.

Yes, I guess it is different?

If you read my post - and we know you don't read real good (good ? or well ?) -

I clearly didn't execute my shot very well.  The pin was in the front and I ended up in the back.  I didn't PLAN on running my 4-iron through the swale.

So you bladed a 4-iron ?
How many golfers can pull off the bladed 4-iron to a back pin in late November, early December ?  

This particular shot actually works in favor of your argument...that pinning front portions creates interest and challenge in trying to hold the ball on the front section with a mid/long iron or even hybrid/wood/driver - especially having to clear a water hazard first and foremost - even if from an elevated tee.  If not, you have that diabolical putt through the swale.  

A log of competitive rounds indicates that scores are 3/10's of a stroke higher when the hole is cut on the front tier.

With a green 65 yards in depth, the distance from the mid-point of the back tier to the midpoint of the front tier is probably 30-40 yards, or 3-5 club lengths from a highly elevated tee.  That's considerable

But, of course, you are just trying to be right!

Why would I try to be wrong ?
That's something Bryan Izatt specializes in.

Cheers

[Will Lozier]

If you read my post - and we know you don't read real good (good ? or well ?) -

At least you got the joke?!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sadly you continue to misrepresent what I asked. Why do you do that?    If you would stop feeling challenged and respond to the questions asked it would be so much easier to have an intelligent discussion.

You're questions are structured to arrive at your conclusion. 

What I wanted to know was whether whoever took the core samples did it for all 18 greens.  

No, they only did the 9th green because it was rumored to be an old indian campfire site where they buried the embers from the campfires.

Try reading the prior posts.

If they did that would support your assertion that this was a uniform practice across all the greens on the course.

See the response above

I understand that they took core samples from the front of the current 9th green, but that you didn't know if they took core samples from the swale (based on one of your previous posts).

That's not true, reread my replies.

I further wanted to know if they (whoever they are) took core samples from approaches to other greens on the course.  I wasn't sure why they would if they were just trying to determine the profiles of the greens.  

Let me answer your question with a question.

Don't you think that they'd want to know where the greens began and ended ?
Where the charcoal existed and where it didn't exist.

Has some flaming moron broken into your computer and been posting under your name ?


If they did take cores from other approaches, surrounds or fairways and found no charcoal that would support your contention that the charcoal layer was unique to the greens there.  

Thank you

Since you never explained where or why the core samples were taken, I thought I'd ask.  Why is that so offensive to you?  

Because I previously answered/addressed that issue, yet you repeat your questions as if they were never addressed.

You state above that:

"Core samples have been taken from the approaches and the charcoal layer doesn't exist."

Could you expand a little on that statement.  

NO

I'm trying to understand the methodology of whatever they were trying to do with taking the core samples.

You'll have to ponder that.

Since the premise of your argument is based primarily on the finding of the charcoal, it would help to understand how and where the coring was done.

What difference does it make ?
I already answered the above query, didn't you read the answer ?

Would it help if I said I love ya.  

Not unless you were a moron and sitting on a chest near the first tee at Streamsong  
[/quote]

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

I've been asked twice in the last 48 hours to wade into this conversation.

So, since I don't want to read all 8 pages of this argument, please summarize what is going on in 10 words or fewer.

Is this a conversation about which no definitive answer can be determined with the knowledge that is known?

Are semantics and nit-picking of word usage an integral part of the arguments?

Was this thread started and added to because people are bored?

Once this has all been clarified I'll put in my two pence worth and it will in no change anyone's minds. I get the feeling if Seth Raynor rose from the dead and posted, it wouldn't change anyone's mind.

Anthony

[Will Lozier]

I've been asked twice in the last 48 hours to wade into this conversation.

So, since I don't want to read all 8 pages of this argument, please summarize what is going on in 10 words or fewer.

Is this a conversation about which no definitive answer can be determined with the knowledge that is known?

Are semantics and nit-picking of word usage an integral part of the arguments?

Was this thread started and added to because people are bored?

Once this has all been clarified I'll put in my two pence worth and it will in no change anyone's minds. I get the feeling if Seth Raynor rose from the dead and posted, it wouldn't change anyone's mind.

Anthony

1) Probably not.

2) By some.

3) No...I've learned a lot on this thread and on previous ones I've waded through like "The Biarritz Conundrum" to which you contributed a great deal.

Sorry I broke your 10-word quota!  Can you share any knowledge of the alleged core samples?!

Cheers

[Patrick_Mucci]

Anthony,

No need to disturb old Seth, I'll stop by and visit when i'm in Southampton this weekend and discuss the issue with he and Charlie.

Is there anything you want me to ask them ?

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

This is my take on what I think you are talking about.

The only piece I've ever read that definitively states what the ninth at Yale was when built was in the Hartford Courant article, that, as was pointed out to me, might have been written by Charles Banks. The author is credited to as "Special to the Courant," not uncommon at the time. That piece talks about the "approach " and the "green proper," which leads me to believe that the back portion was the putting surface and not the front.

We can surmise all we want about cinder layers, but I've never read anything where Raynor or Banks or Macdonald talks about the use of cinder layers being only applied for greens. I know for a fact that some of the greens on their courses don't have cinder layers.

I also know that errors happen during construction. Maybe the guys building the course thought the approach was going to be green and put down a cinder layer and then somebody said it isn't but leave the cinders.

Thirdly, I'm guessing the green was built from what was or became the Greist Ponn. Maybe Raynor, being the engineer, realized that soil would drain poorly so he had a cinder layer put in on the approach and the green.

I'm inclined to side with Donnie Beck that the approach seems more severe in the early photos.

Also, we know for sure that a longtime superintendent made substantial modifications to greens. We do not know for absolute certainty what he or others in his position did to the original contours of the front plateau.

Here is what we know for sure when it comes to Yale's 9th, these words were written in a newspaper.

"The green proper is behind a deep groove in the approach which is of about the same area as the green. The approach is hunkered heavily on the right and left and the fairway is the lake."

Hartford Courant, Aug. 16, 1925.

Until somebody can give me definitive proof that refutes there was a difference between the "approach" and the "green proper," the only conclusion I can come up with is that the front portion of the 9th was no intended to be green.

[Jim Nugent]

Anthony,

No need to disturb old Seth, I'll stop by and visit when i'm in Southampton this weekend and discuss the issue with he and Charlie.

Is there anything you want me to ask them ?

I have a question for Charlie.  

What exactly did he do at Merion?  

Anthony Pioppi:  excellent post that seems to me best sums up what can be known about #9, with the current facts.  

[Bryan Izatt]

Ally,

Re your post pointing to the 1925 Hartford Courant description of the Biarritz

The quote that I was referring to came from the History of Yale Golf web site at https://webspace.yale.edu/Yale-golf-history/Holes/09_Biarritz.htm  They in turn got the quote from our own George Bahto.

They attribute the following description to Banks circa 1931.  The description from the Courant is similar and more succinct than the 1925 Hartford Courant article that Anthony's reported.  I couldn't find the Mark Bourgeois printout of the full article.  Perhaps the two are different reportings of the same source material.  Anthony and/or George could correct me on that.

Ninth-Hole, Biarritz

The most memorable hole at the Yale Golf Course is the 9th. The name, Biarritz, comes from a course in France, Golf de Biarritz Le Phare, designed in 1888 by the Scotsmen, Tom and Willy Dunn. At Le Phare the 3rd hole Chasm, “required a carry of 150-160 yards, from an 80-ft high cliff over the bay to a 50-ft high cliff on the other side.” After carrying the water “there certainly had to be a long approach through shortish grass on firm ground to produce the roll-up and on type shot,” (1) that is referred to in the 1931 description of Yale’s 9th by Charles Banks [construction supervisor 1924-26].

    “This is the second of the short holes and is planned for a single shot to the green with the driver. There is a 163 yard water carry from the back tee. The green proper is behind a deep trench in the approach. The approach is about the same size as the green itself and is bunkered heavily both right and left with water jutting in on the right front. The ‘fairway’ is the lake [Griest Pond]. The tees are elevated above the lake. The green is heavily battered [tilted] at the back and the right and the whole psychology of the hole is to let out to the limit. The distance however, is not as great as it seems, due to the water, and a moderate stroke with care is safer than a slam. Correct play for this green is to carry to the near edge of the groove or trench and come upon the green with a roll. The disappearance and reappearance of the ball in the groove adds to the interest of the play. The carry for this play is 180 yards from the back tee. This hole has its original on the Biarritz Course at the famous watering place in France of the same name.” [1]

Anthony's quote of the Courant article is:

The green proper is behind a deep groove in the approach which is of about the same area as the green. The approach is hunkered heavily on the right and left and the fairway is the lake.

The picture and caption that I've posted several times has again a similar but not identical description.  The picture and caption are from the Yale Daily News Pictorial Supplement no. 1 published on September 30, 1925.

 


Seems to me that there are these are three separate descriptions published in different publications.  Presumably they all got their descriptions from one source - possibly Banks or Raynor or .......  and that's why they sound similar but are not identical.

 

[Bryan Izatt]

Anthony,

I noticed the picture of the ninth on your blog that you credit Geoffrey Childs with finding.  It is the same one that David posted earlier in the thread that he found at the NYPL.  Yours is much clearer.  I enlarged the green portion and it seems to me that the mowing pattern on the approach section is clearly different than the green.  It's intriguing that there are 12 people in the picture by my count.  Do you suppose it was a sixsome or a foursome with caddies and 4 spectators.  The green looks to be in very good condition which makes it hard to attribute it to 1925 (when the course wasn't even open for play) or maybe even 1926 after the front nine opened.  Do you or Geoffrey have any idea of the date of the photo or whether it was published somewhere that would help date it? The NYPL version says the photographer died in 1929, so it must have been before that.  Some scrolling is required to see the whole enlarged version.

[Jim Nugent]

Question on how to measure the distance of a Biarritz hole.  Say the back plateau and the front plateau are the same length, i.e. the swale is right in the middle.  If all that is putting surface, would you measure the length of the hole to the middle of the swale?  

I've asked a few times, but still don't get a clear answer: in general do you guys prefer the swale before the green, or do you prefer the swale to be part of the green?

Asked another way, should any courses like Fishers make the swale and the approach part of the green?  Should any courses like SLCC cut the swale and approach at fairway height, leaving the green entirely behind the swale?  

Finally, I'm pretty sure the description of Yale #9 in the Yale Weekly was published in 1925, before the course was finished.  That's where they say the green is behind the swale.  

[Donnie Beck]

Jim,

In my opinion it goes completely against the concept of the hole to cut the entire complex at greens height. The only way for the hole to work is have an extremely firm approach that allows the ball to release through the swale. At greens height it is not possible to keep the front section firm enough to release without losing turf. At approach height the grass can survive but I am not sure how many other clubs other than Fishers would be willing to let the turf brown out for the hole to work. Modern equipment has made the concept of the hole obsolete in many cases. Yale for example I routinely hit 7 iron to the front and no more than a 5 iron to the back location. There is no way either of those clubs are going to release and get through the swale no matter how firm the conditions are. In reality, the concept the still only works at fishers due to the firmness and uphill nature of the hole. To truly work as designed a modern version would have to be built in the 275-300 yard range. Unless there are some really neat hole locations in the front, or you want to have some flexibility of yardage on your par 3’s I can not see putting the extra work on the maintenance staff because it is never going to function as intended but rather function as two separate greens divided by a swale.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Regardless of not seeing what he sees regards the construction photo, I agree with what Donnie says above. The swale must come in to play more if the first plateau is left as approach and allowed to firm up... That said, if employed on a GB&I links, it could work very well as either.

[Jim Nugent]

To truly work as designed a modern version would have to be built in the 275-300 yard range.

I think modern courses (some of them) should have some par 3s that long, both Biarritz and otherwise.  As it is, today's top players virtually never have to hit 3-wood to par 3s, and driver is virtually out of the question.  Yet there were plenty such holes in the past.  

Hopefully without sounding like a broken record, this is one way to make courses competitive for top players, yet still playable for average golfers.  Build more long par 3s.  We can easily avoid the 7500+ yard monsters; with the right number and configuration of par 3s, par 4s and par 5s, 6700 yards will give the pro's all they can handle.  

[Bryan Izatt]

A description of the 9th hole was published twice in the Yale Daily News in 1925 - a short version on October 29th and a longer version, as part of a hole-by-hole description on November 19th.  The captioned picture was published on preceded both these arrticles, on September 30.  They are all similar in content.

October 29, 1925





November 19, 1925





November 19, 1925 Enlarged.  Interesting reference to the Biarritz at the Creek Club in the last sentence.