Lake Merced Golf Club (Review and Photo Tour)

[Benjamin Litman]

[Reposting this for those who want some information on the course while watching this weekend's Swinging Skirts LPGA Classic, live on Golf Channel from 6-9 pm ET both tonight and tomorrow.]

Last summer, on my way to Australia, I stopped on the West Coast to see friends and play some golf. While in San Francisco, I was fortunate to play both Harding Park and Lake Merced in the same day. I was underwhelmed by the former--which appears, minus the views, to be the Torrey Pines South of Northern California, maligned by golf-course-architecture junkies but adored by governing golf bodies responsible for hosting large professional events--and overwhelmed by the latter--which I had been dying to play ever since I fell in love with Lydia Ko while watching the LPGA event held at the club last April (and again this April 23-26 in primetime, 6-9 p.m. EST, on Golf Channel). (The course also serves as the backdrop for the Game Golf commercials that run on Golf Channel from time to time.) Ironically, Harding Park runs alongside the actual Lake Merced, which can be seen from several holes at the PGATour darling, whereas Lake Merced the golf club does not.

I know there has been much debate about whether photo tours are better with fewer photos. This time, I have no choice: I played Lake Merced with brand-new friends who had kindly arranged the round, so I spent most of my time being grateful and getting to know them. My pictures are accordingly few, and, in another departure from my usual practice, I've chosen to arrange them not sequentially by hole, but thematically by design or topographical feature. I hope they nonetheless convey the feel of the course, which, despite its difficulty, oozes with charm.

Lake Merced Golf Club
Daly City, CA

An afternoon round at Lake Merced, captured here by the downhill approach at the short par-4 16th, is a glorious affair:


When I composed my Harbour Town review/photo tour, I kept asking myself what other courses I would consider tighter/narrower than Harbour Town--which, as I noted there, is much wider than I had been led to believe. Lake Merced, a refreshingly sub-7000-yard affair from the tips, would be at the top of the list of those I have played. Whereas the land at Harbour Town is flat, it is very hilly at Lake Merced--as it is at Olympic, which I have seen only on TV, but which I understand is similarly, if not more, tight. The topography results in canted fairways that reduce the effective width of a given hole significantly. Even without the cants in the fairways, the actual width of the playing corridors, accounting for the number of low, overhanging trees, is, at least in my memory, much, much narrower than at Harbour Town. Lake Merced's first two holes, tight, twisting par-4s, make abundantly clear to any level golfer that trees will be hit at some point off the tee. Thankfully, the architects--Robert Muir Graves, with recent renovations by Rees Jones--chose not to design many doglegs and certainly none that are sharp; they would be borderline unfair given the severity of the topography. (The Good Doctor, Alistair Mackenzie, redesigned the course in the 1920s, but a highway, which now runs adjacent to the par-5 9th hole and the club's entrance, apparently forced the club to scrap most of his design.)

Lake Merced's tightness and undulations are readily apparent in this view back up the 16th fairway from one of the front greenside bunkers:


The par-5 9th, which returns to the clubhouse, has a left-to-right gently canting fairway emblematic of many at Lake Merced, in that its slope reduces its actual width; the ball in view landed in the rough left of the fairway before feeding back to the short grass:


The massive elevation changes that define Lake Merced--made all the more impressive in relation to the relatively confined, even cramped plot of land on which the course sits--result in wonderfully framed green sites either perched atop a steep slope or sunken at the bottom of one. By contrast, the green surfaces themselves are relatively flat--they have slopes, mostly back to front, but minimal contours--which allows the club to keep them very hard and very fast, yet playable.

The sunken green site at the short par-4 16th is arguably the course's best, replete even with a nice set of fronting bunkers (which, though deep, are in general the course's most bland design feature--certainly a far cry from their Mackenzian predecessors and the artistry on display at nearby San Francisco Golf Club):


The view from behind the 16th green shows off the elevation changes and natural movements in the land that define Lake Merced:


One of the many perched green sites is found at the home hole, a par-5 where gauging the distance on a wedge third is complicated by the steep uphill slope leading from fairway to green (the new clubhouse in the background--though blessed with an excellent locker room, pro shop, and, I hear, food--is a bit too big and austere for the setting and the course, which give off a distinctly intimate vibe):


Although the majority of the holes at Lake Merced feel tight off the tee, the principal aberration is actually the course's hardest hole (at least by handicap), the relatively wide-open, uphill par-4 4th, replete with different trees that confirm its out-of-character nature. A (very) poor man's version of the 10th at Yale (incidentally, it also follows a dramatically downhill par-3, albeit a short one without a Biarritz green), the 4th's tee shot plunges to a sunken fairway and the approach rises to a deep-bunker-fronted perched green, as at the above-pictured 18th, although within a much more open playing corridor at the 4th:


The same shot sequence at the 4th--a downhill tee shot followed by a steeply uphill approach--repeats not only at the 18th, but also at the par-4 13th, in both instances within tighter playing corridors:


What Harding Park lacks in definition (partly because of the much flatter land on which it sits, but also because of the design), Lake Merced supplies in spades. The brown fescue, though rarely coming into play, offers a nice contrast to the green of the course and of the trees. It's not only beautiful to look at, but helpful for gauging depth and distance--critical variables with so much elevation change. These qualities are evident both in the earlier picture of the green site at the par-4 16th and in this view back up the steep slope toward the tee on the short, downhill par-3 3rd hole:


Although the trees at Harding Park and Lake Merced are the same, their grouping and placement is superior at Lake Merced, as seen here in the stand of trees guarding the right side of the downhill sloping 17th fairway (with the green in the distance on the left; on the right is the 12th tee):


The cypress trees even accentuate the land; here, like flower stalks bending toward the sun during photosynthesis, tree branches seemingly grow in parallel with the climbing slope up to the perched par-3 12th green:


Avoid the trees on the right too much and you're likely to find the long sunken bunker on the left of the green, which is one of the more undulating on the course (note both the false front at the otherwise flat front half of the green and the ridge at the back half of the green, creating two distinct, upper-right and lower-left, levels):


The rich and long championship history at Lake Merced (see the "about us" tab on the club's website for details) makes good sense. Blessed with a unique blend of sharply undulating topography and firm, relatively flat greens, the course provides a stern test without being overly penal and, indeed, while still being quite enjoyable--and even fun. Whether I buy paraphernalia after my round is a good indication of how fond my feelings are not only for the course, but the overall experience of a club. At Lake Merced, I bought both a shirt from the sale rack and a new pom-pom head cover for my driver. San Francisco is blessed with so many world-class courses in such a small area--San Francisco Golf Club, California Golf Club, and Olympic being the cream--that Lake Merced often gets overlooked, both by those in the know and certainly by those in the mainstream. (For a comprehensive review and comparison of those courses, including Lake Merced, see Matt Cohn's excellent piece in this site's "In My Opinion" section: http://golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/the-golf-courses-around-lake-merced-by-matt-cohn/.) Thankfully, the LPGA's Swinging Skirts event has brought the club, which has a pleasing two-color logo, back into the public consciousness, where it so richly deserves to be.

[John Kavanaugh]

Beautiful, educational and entertaining.  One of the best photo tours I have ever seen.  I look forward to finding the time to study it fully.

[David_Tepper]

Benjamin -

Thanks for another nice photo tour.

I have played LM a good number of times. The par-4 fourth hole has always been my least favorite, calling for a long 2nd shot off a downhill lie to a sharply uphill green.

I was hoping the renovation of the course done about 15 years ago (by one of the Jones brothers, Rees I think) would make the hole more playable for the lesser golfer. Unfortunately, as shown in your picture, there is now a bunker across the entire front of the green making it impossible to run the ball on to it. A hard shot was made even harder.

DT

[Gary Sato]

Lake Merced Golf Club opened for play in June, 1923 and shortly thereafter Lake Merced hosted an international challenge match between U.S. Open champion Gene Sarazen and the then-reigning British Open champion, Arthur Havers. They battled over 36 holes, through the rain, before Sarazen emerged 3-up.

In the late 1920′s the course was redesigned by the legendary Dr. Alister MacKenzie. His signature “cloud shaped” bunkering style dotted the course as did many intricate strategic choices for every level of player. Naturally, the club was a much-sought out venue for amateur and professional competition.

[John Kavanaugh]

Thank God cooler heads prevailed and did away with this type of "head in the clouds" bunkering.  Wow.

[David_Tepper]

Gary S. -

Sadly, very little, if any, of Dr. Mac's work remains today.

It is interesting that in your aerial photo the front of the green of the 4th hole (the one running left to right across the top of the course) is open to allow run-up shots. Dr. Mac got that one right!  

DT

[Joel_Stewart]

Thank God cooler heads prevailed and did away with this type of "head in the clouds" bunkering.  Wow.

That Mackenzie guy was overrated and Rees Jones thought he could do better. 

Now that Cal Club has restored the Mackenzie work, I wonder if Lake Merced members are thinking twice about letting Rees have his way.

[John Kavanaugh]

The Cal Club looks beautiful but I don't see anything like the extreme left hand corner of the picture.  I don't know how the demographic of today's golfer can climb that hill, hit that shot and rake that bunker.  There were equally nonsensical bunkers left unrestored at Pasa. Mack was dealing with a completely different demographic of golfer.  All the old fat guys were already dead.

[Benjamin Litman]

John: Many thanks for the kind words; I'm glad to have stumbled upon a photo-tour formula that pleases you. I look forward to your feedback.

David: Thanks to you, too, for the kinds words. I have several thoughts about the 4th. As noted in my review, my biggest complaint is that it's out of character with the rest of the course--much more open off the tee than most of the holes and with different trees lining the fairways. I actually played the hole better than most of the others (I hit my best drive of the day, then the green, and two-putted for a par), but I concede that the downhill slope in the landing area is probably too difficult. Even though I had only 145 to the hole, I still had to deal with it. Because I was hitting 9-iron, it was doable, but if I had been farther back, holding the green would have been quite the challenge. As for fronting bunker, I can't say it bothers me from a design perspective. In general, uphill approach shots always call for high/aerial shots; a bunker in front doesn't change that. It actually might make the penalty for coming up short LESS severe--the bunker prevents gravity from taking a too-short approach shot all the way back down the fairway. To take my comparison to the 10th at Yale, imagine how much harder that hole would be without the two fronting bunkers. Anything that didn't carry far enough would roll almost to the bottom of the fairway. What I'm saying is that it's nearly impossible to run up an approach shot to a green perched at the top of a steep slope. That being the case, a bunker doesn't take away any options.

Gary: Thanks for the old-school photo. Do you happen to know how much of the Mackenzie routing and/or design survived the post-highway redesign?

[David_Tepper]

"Even though I had only 145 to the hole, I still had to deal with it. Because I was hitting 9-iron, it was doable, but if I had been farther back, holding the green would have been quite the challenge."

Benjamin -

If you are hitting a 9-iron to the sharply uphill green on #4 from 145 yards away, you are playing a game "with which I (and most of the Lake Merced members) am not familiar!" Even if my tee shot left me that short a distance to the green (which it never has ), I would be hitting a 5-iron or more.

I have always hit a fairway wood or hybrid, off a downhill lie, into that green, even when playing from the white tees.

DT 

[Benjamin Litman]

Understood, David. I was actually agreeing with you about the unfairness/poor design of the downslope in the fairway; if even I had to deal with it with a 9-iron (shouldn't there be a benefit for a good drive?), that proves its deficiency. But putting my performance on the hole aside, what do you think about my comments about the bunker? If I were hitting 5-iron or more, I'd much prefer a bunker there than short grass. Thanks.

[Tim_Weiman]

Benjamin:

I must have missed the discussion about photo tours, but I do want to compliment you on your contribution to the site recently. It is not just that much of the photography has been very enjoyable to see. What is really great is your focus on the golf course, not shots you made or how you played.

[Gib_Papazian]

Despite more than a dozen plays following the most recent remodel, I simply cannot warm up to this particular permutation of Lake Merced. It feels like a golf course drawn up offsite and simply plopped on the ground - with no thought to quirk. charm or a sensation the aesthetic cohesively flows together. Its like the green complexes came out of a prefab cookie-cutter - in same way one would force an incorrect puzzle piece with a hammer and then pretend it fits properly.

The opener is like everything else out there, an “almost” that is neither fish nor particularly foul; it is not deliberately awkward and unsettling - like a film edit that intentionally crosses the stage line to jar the viewer - but a half-assed collection of elements that come off like a lack of attention to the details. The par-3 third could have been something really interesting, but ends up being a snooze and #4 is flat-out architectural malpractice. I wrote years ago Rees took the hardest par-4 in Northern California and made it the worst hole in America. Maybe a stretch, but not by much.

Maybe I’m being a little hard on the Beaver, but their members deserve a better effort than they got - and if the rumor is true they hired Rees to eventually get the U.S. Women’s Open, it was an act of breathtaking short-sightedness. The bones are there for a terrific layout, but pulling it off requires the talents of an artist, not a house painter. Think about #15, can you imagine an enormous Redan hole? Instead, you’ve got a watered down version with absolutely no interest. In truth, I hate it more for what it could be than what it is.

In my opinion, Lake Merced does not measure up to its neighbors - and with Cal Club’s ascension into the ionosphere, the defects in the Rees Jones remodel diminish it even further down the pecking order. Harding Park is a terrible lost opportunity (to quote Ran), but doesn’t feel like a complete miss, just a tepid effort where they set things right on a macro scale, but omitted all the little details that give really good courses intellectual texture. Lake Merced has plenty of texture, but only if you like polyester leisure suits.

I’m not trying to be coarse or nasty - but Lake Merced ought to take a step back and bring in an architect to beat some sex appeal into the golf course. #1,3,4,5,7,8,15.17 all could be drastically improved with some options and visual movement. Straightening out those awful rough lines and losing the vapid Atlantic CC bunker style would be a good start. Most of the members I know over there are terrific guys who frankly know better - but the first step is to admit that monkey you gave a gun ended up shooting the zookeepers.    

            

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks to those who know the course for putting words to the feelings the photos engendered in me.  My, what a potentially *magnificent* course -- the elevation changes and dramatic features seem just ripe for some wonderful transformation. And the more I looked at the photos, the more I thought: if I could bring anyone in today, it wouldn't be (also great) choices like Colt or Dr Mac or C&C etc, it would be Mr. Raynor. I'd ask him to do/find what he did on the east coast here on the west.

Peter

Thanks again, Benjamin.

[Jason Topp]

Benjamin - I am impressed at how you captured at least some of the sense of the hilliness of the land.  I have found pictures rarely capture that sense.

[Matt_Cohn]

Thanks Benjamin. This is an interesting photo tour. At the same time it both captures a very good sense of the land and movement at LMGC yet also focuses on some of the holes that are less typical of the course, like 4 and 16. Did you find these holes more intriguing than the ones that are more typical of LMGC like 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, etc.?

[Benjamin Litman]

Sorry for the delay in responding to several replies. Without further ado:

Tim: Many thanks for your comments. As I've said, I've learned a lot from this site well before I became a member, so my goal now since joining has been and continues to be to pay it back, and forward. I also take pride in both my pictures and my writing, so I'm especially glad you appreciate both.

Gib: Beautifully written, and thorough, as always. Thank you. I agree with pretty much everything you wrote; my review is more positive for the simple reason that, unlike you and many others here, I don't have any basis for comparison, as my round at Lake Merced was my first on the course. (As for its neighbors, I still think Lake Merced outdoes Harding Park, which I found especially boring and undefined, but I'll concede--albeit based on pictures alone--that Cal Club is far superior.) You (and Peter) are quite right that the bones exist for a masterpiece; in fact, despite the current lack of artistry, the greatness of the bones still shines through (to me at least). I'd be curious to see whether simply reworking the bunkers would elevate the course's greatness more; they are, without question, the course's worst design feature, bland, repetitive affairs that are neither good to look at nor fun to play out of. I'd be disinclined to rework the greens themselves, as I think doing so could risk making the course too hard (just as those who think Bethpage Black's greens should be reworked are, to me, misguided).

Peter: You're very welcome. I agree that Lake Merced has incredible potential; but let's not discount what it already is. Your hypothetical choice of Raynor sounds right; as I alluded to in my comments on the 4th hole, I actually was reminded of Yale several times while playing Lake Merced. Obviously, Yale, which is and probably always will be my favorite course, is on a much, much grander scale than Lake Merced, but both share the types of wonderful elevation changes that can only be found, not built.

Jason: Thanks for the comments. I was actually a bit hesitant to post vertically oriented pictures, as almost all golf-course pictures on this site are oriented horizontally. A general rule of thumb I use in photography is to shoot in a format perpendicular to my subject--i.e., vertical format for a horizontal subject, horizontal format for a vertical subject. One principal exception is when I want to accentuate the subject's orientation, in which case I'll shoot in a parallel format. I did that at Lake Merced--shooting in a vertical format to accentuate the vertical fluctuations in the land--and I'm glad that your comments at least imply that it worked.

Matt: Thanks for your comments, too. One simple explanation for my focus is that, as noted, I took far fewer pictures than normal during my round at Lake Merced. But I nonetheless chose to focus on 4 and 16 for a reason--4 because, as noted, I found it to be the hole most out of character with the rest of the course (as seen on this thread, it's apparently a hole that has engendered significant controversy over the years), and 16 because, as noted, it has what I consider to be the best green site on the course and elevation changes that I consider to be emblematic of the course (the light on that hole, which is one of the best looking at Lake Merced, also allowed for better pictures). Thanks again for your great article on the courses in the area; I read it in advance of my rounds there last summer.

[Jason Topp]

Jason: Thanks for the comments. I was actually a bit hesitant to post vertically oriented pictures, as almost all golf-course pictures on this site are oriented horizontally. A general rule of thumb I use in photography is to shoot in a format perpendicular to my subject--i.e., vertical format for a horizontal subject, horizontal format for a vertical subject. One principal exception is when I want to accentuate the subject's orientation, in which case I'll shoot in a parallel format. I did that at Lake Merced--shooting in a vertical format to accentuate the vertical fluctuations in the land--and I'm glad that your comments at least imply that it worked.

Benjamin - you correctly noticed some hedging in my comments but that is due to me never visiting the course.  I have played others in the area and thought your photos captured the feel much more successfully than any others I can recall.  I remember John Mayhugh puzzling over the issue at Painswick where the first hole is about 240 yards but up an extraordinary slope. 

[Benjamin Litman]

As noted above, this week's LPGA event--the Swinging Skirts LPGA Classic--is being staged at Lake Merced, so I figured I would bump this thread in case people have any observations or thoughts about the course. The course looks to be playing even harder than usual today (likely owing to windy conditions). Live coverage is on Golf Channel tonight from 6-9pm ET. The start of a great stretch of golf in San Francisco. Enjoy.