[Mike Sweeney]

Mayday,


They are "Flying the Travis Colors" at Hollywood. Don't be a Flynn sourpuss!! 

[mike_malone]

Hollywood is the epitome of excess. That’s its charm

[John Kavanaugh]

In my opinion, a dramatic improvement and the elimination of a weak spot in an otherwise terrific golf course.  The restoration of the old tunnel through the berm is a really nice touch.

Is this picture photoshopped? I have looked at it from every angle and can not recreate it in reality. I don't understand how you can look through the tunnel and see that tree just over the green. Maybe the tree and the green appearing so close to the tunnel are just optical illusions. If so, sorry.

[Jon Cavalier]

You're trying to line up the wrong tree.  The tree in the photo you reference isn't just off the back of the 17th green, it's the small one on the edge of the copse about halfway down the 7th fairway.  The result is the optical effect of a photo taken with a very long zoom lens shot from about 100 feet away from the tunnel.  You might find the photo below helpful in lining it up.

[John Kavanaugh]

Thanks. The lack of a cart path as in the original picture was throwing me off.

[Kyle Harris]

In my opinion, a dramatic improvement and the elimination of a weak spot in an otherwise terrific golf course.  The restoration of the old tunnel through the berm is a really nice touch.

Is this picture photoshopped? I have looked at it from every angle and can not recreate it in reality. I don't understand how you can look through the tunnel and see that tree just over the green. Maybe the tree and the green appearing so close to the tunnel are just optical illusions. If so, sorry.

Focal length isn't really an optical illusion, nor is depth of field. 

[Jason Thurman]

I mean, if you can't use the word "excess" here, when can you use it?


I like Five Guys, Tobacco Road, amps that go to 11, and driving my wife's roadster. I don't have a problem with excess, but I do like being honest about it.


"Frank discussion" gets really boring if we can't express any resistance to a concept that was designed by an ODG. I get that this is mostly a restoration of the original Travis hole, that it fits in with the rest of Hollywood, and that most of us think it looks pretty rad. But it shouldn't be forbidden to suggest that even a Travis concept might be a little over-the-top, and that some may find this hole more cluttered than attractive. Objectively, there's a whole hell of a lot going on here.

[Kalen Braley]

Jason,

Totally agreed, I feel like it needs another few bunkers, 11 just doesn't seem like enough.  Somewhere up above, Pete Dye is looking down with disapproval.

[Tom_Doak]

Jason,

Totally agreed, I feel like it needs another few bunkers, 11 just doesn't seem like enough.  Somewhere up above, Pete Dye is looking down with disapproval.

I don't have a photo handy, but I have seen Pete Dye holes with way more than 11 little bunkers on them, that did not look anywhere near as good as this.

[Kyle Harris]

Jason,

Totally agreed, I feel like it needs another few bunkers, 11 just doesn't seem like enough.  Somewhere up above, Pete Dye is looking down with disapproval.

I don't have a photo handy, but I have seen Pete Dye holes with way more than 11 little bunkers on them, that did not look anywhere near as good as this.

Maybe we can get Kavanaugh to doctor one up for us! 

[Kalen Braley]

Jason,

Totally agreed, I feel like it needs another few bunkers, 11 just doesn't seem like enough.  Somewhere up above, Pete Dye is looking down with disapproval.

I don't have a photo handy, but I have seen Pete Dye holes with way more than 11 little bunkers on them, that did not look anywhere near as good as this.

My bad Tom, I clearly should have followed Dan Kelly's advice and included a few emoticons...       

P.S.  I like the look of it from ground level even if it fits in the "maximalist" category.  The bunkers on the right remind me a bit of Jim Engh's muscle bunkers.

[Jaeger Kovich]

Jason,

Totally agreed, I feel like it needs another few bunkers, 11 just doesn't seem like enough.  Somewhere up above, Pete Dye is looking down with disapproval.

I don't have a photo handy, but I have seen Pete Dye holes with way more than 11 little bunkers on them, that did not look anywhere near as good as this.

My bad Tom, I clearly should have followed Dan Kelly's advice and included a few emoticons...       

P.S.  I like the look of it from ground level even if it fits in the "maximalist" category.  The bunkers on the right remind me a bit of Jim Engh's muscle bunkers.

Kalen - You don't know it, but you likely just made Schneider's Day/Week/Year with that comment!!!

[Paul Jones]

What great pictures, I can't wait to play the course hopefully this year. I am a big Walter Travis fan.

[Grant Saunders]

I dont know this hole so I am commenting just from the pictures.


Do I see it right that there are 8 bunkers probably at least 20 yards short of the green on a par 3?


Is it possible to have a picture posted of the hole from the tee? I appreciate the photos that are shown are artistically dramatic but I really want to actually see the hole as its played also to be able to interpret whats going on.

[Jon Cavalier]

Taken from the right side of the main tee box.

[Grant Saunders]

Taken from the right side of the main tee box.

Thanks Jon, that helps a lot


The hole doesnt look, to me,  anywhere near as cluttered when you see it at eye level.


Viewing the hole in isolation, I would fall in the camp of believing it to be excessive. I guess if it fits the context of the rest of the course and they (obviously) have the resources to maintain it then I imagine they have achieved exactly what they set out to do

[Mike Sweeney]

It is amazing to say that I have watched the transformation of Hollywood for over 15+ years since I befriended a Member at kids baseball on Randalls Island in NYC back in that era.


Our boys now launch the ball 50-100 yards past us on the golf course now!!


Hollywood has always had fabulous "Travis Greens", and they are now even now better due to Brian's work. The
"Tribute to Travis Bunkering" is simply following the famous aerial on the men's locker room, and thus solidifying Hollywood into lofty status of #2 in New Jersey, for me. (And Steve Lapper, you can take me to your #2 in Jersey course again to emphasize your about to be posted argument!!    )


Hope to see #17 in person soon.


Thanks Jon for your wonderful pics, again. In an era with alot of golf photography, you have a special eye for it.

[Steve Lapper]

Mike,


   As you say HGC now has the "lofty status of #2 in New Jersey for you (sic)." It certainly deserves its place and recognition on the GOLF Magazine US Top 100 list and on yours. Of course, it doesn't even register for those executive dolts at Golf Digest. You know what they don't and I couldn't agree more. Hollywood is a wonderful, challenging yet sporty, and always fun.


   I do identify another course for my second spot. As you know, it has far more considerable land movement, one of the best set of par 3's ever built, and an equally impressive set of genius greens. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it!


 

[Chris_Blakely]

Thank you for all of the pictures and updates.  I have played several Travis courses (not Hollywood) and always thought his bunkering and greens to be some of the most creative and undulating from that period; however, Holllywood looks to be on another level.

[Bill Brightly]

Slapper, there is only one HGC in New Jersey: Hackensack, 1899. 

[Bret Lawrence]

Great pictures Jon!


Here is a photo from 100 years ago showing the berm and tunnel in the background of the 7th hole.


Golf Illustrated, April 1921:

[Kevin Jackson]

I'm curious how the new hole plays... the "old" hole had a back yardage of 195 yards, but with the addition of the fairway short of the green and what appears to be combined tees with No. 5, I would assume it plays longer than 200 yards.  How far does the hole play now? Does anyone have the current yardages from the back tee as well as the main tee?

[Eric LeFante]

I'm curious how the new hole plays... the "old" hole had a back yardage of 195 yards, but with the addition of the fairway short of the green and what appears to be combined tees with No. 5, I would assume it plays longer than 200 yards.  How far does the hole play now? Does anyone have the current yardages from the back tee as well as the main tee?

New back tee yardage is 245 to the center, blue tee is probably 220. I play Hollywood a handful of times per year and it seems to me that 4 always plays into the wind, which means 17 is playing into a hurting/left to right wind.


The fairway isn't real firm yet; they want to get it firm but because of the wind you need to land the ball on the front of the green.

[MCirba]

That old pic of the beautiful Travis contours of the 7th green is wonderful, thanks for sharing.

[MCirba]

The new hole perfectly fits the wonderful, eccentric architecture found at Hollywood.  I havent been there in about 20 years and the improvements in presentation are staggeringly impressive.   The beauty of the 17th is that the more aggressive line you attempt the tougher the penalty for failure.  That being said, there is ample room to play short and safe as befits a half par hole.


I suspect I could study the complex greens for the remainder of my days and get about half of a full education. They are the Rubik's Cube of bewildering internal contour and slope.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()