[Dan Pohl]

This one's primarily for the Aussies out there and relates to the earlier Kingsley Club thread.

Those of you who have played the TWP Ocean course at the National will certainly recall the opening drive, with the stunning views and the split fairway.

If you take a look at the driving line on the opening hole of the Kingsley Club in Michigan you will notice a remarkable similarity - ie the split fairway with a series of bunkers in the middle of a lower left side and higher right side. The fairway shaping and bunker positioning is the spitting image of National Ocean 1st.

Take a look at the the club's web site photo album, I found the similarity incredible.
http://www.kingsleyclub.com/ or the GCA review at http://www.golfclubatlas.com/kingsley1.html

From the look of the course tour on the Kingsley Club web site, it seems Mr DeVries has done a wonderful job routing this course to incorporate the sites most interesting undulation, the greens look fantastic (certainly better than those at Ocean).

I'm not suggesting for one moment that either architect has copied the opening tee shot from the other (Ocean opened 2000 and KGC 2002), the split fairway idea has been tried at plenty of other courses, but no where else have I seen similarities so stark.

Not sure what the rest of you think about the Ocean tee shot but I find the reward for taking the high road nullified by the awful green site, which doesn't accommodate a long chasing approach from the right and wont hold a ball flown over the right side traps.

I'd be particularly interested to hear from those who have played both on whether they noted the similarity or from those who have played Kingsley as to whether that opening tee shot really works.

[Jeff Mingay]

Dan,

I haven't played the National's Ocean course down in Aus., and I know Mike hasn't either. So he certainly didn't copy the idea for Kingsley's 1st from that course. It's a coincidence indeed.

I've played Kingsley, a few times. And I do think the opening tee shot works well.

The hole tends to play into the wind (at least every time I've been there!), which makes the carry to the upper fairway on the right quite intimidating, but far from impossible. In fact, there's a neat opticial illusion there, at the 1st. The scale of the hole is so large that the carry looks a lot farther than it actually is. Which is neat, in my opinion.

From up there on the high side of the fairway, right, you get a really good look at the rest of the hole. (And, Mike tells me, a shot a the green occasionally, particularly on day's the 1st is playing down wind).

Conversely, being down on the low side of the fairway is somewhat awkward, at least in my view. You can't really see the rest of the hole very well from over there on the left. And, there's a grouping of trees at the left margin the fairway that, if you've drvien too far left, force you to play a draw around the corner. I think these trees work well, adding to the challenge after either missing a tee shot intended for the high side, or bailing out left.

On aside, the 1st green at Kingsley is lovely. Tucked between two hills, it's steeply pitched from back to front, with some significant interior contour. The slope of the green really makes golfers think about placing the ball in the correct spot, below the hole, on approach.

Just my .02  

[NAF]

If anything, the drive at #1 at the KC reminds me a bit of Royal Melbourne West #4..This was where Dr. Mac had to route over a hill in order to get you to play the wonderful 5th and 6th.  He put a cluster of bunkers at the top of the hill around 200 yards.  I swear they look further and play an optical illusion with your drive.  While the 1st at the KC doesnt resemble #4 at Royal Mel in that you can see beyond the bunkers at Mike's creation but the similarities Jeff Mingay describes are there..

[Mike_DeVries]

Dan,

Jeff is correct when he states that I have not played TWP Ocean, nor have I seen photos of it, and Kingsley's isn't a copy of any particular hole.  The scale of the hole is very large (110 yards from the left fairway edge to the right fairway edge, including the bunkers in the middle) and with the elevation change, I was looking for something to transition the grade from the high right plateau to the lower left and provide some challenge to the wide open drive.  I would agree with Jeff also about the view from the high right side and the lower left gives a player a bit of a cramped feeling, but it works well and requires the golfer to rethink how aggressive they would like to play, as a longer second shot definitely requires a draw (from a draw lie).  The forward tees are also down and to the left from the regular upper tees -- providing an option for them to still hit up to the upper right plateau, but it is more likely that shorter hitters will play around the bunkers on the left, since it will be 4 or 5 shots for them to reach the green anyway.

The right plateau was created by pushing material down from the higher hill on the right and in order to get a big enough bench to carry to and hold for the majority of players (one of the owners actually pushed me for more space on the plateau and it made us work on it enough to really make it work -- Thanks, Art!).  About half of the course's dirtwork was on the first hole, as the second landing area was a flat, 2 acre gas well site that we also had to recontour.  Enough about the construction.

The wind can blow strong from either of the predominent directions: into your face (S or SW) 60% of the time and with you 35%.  A really big drive can carry the bunkers (I have seen guys carry them (245 yds. from the regular upper tee) into a small wind and then you get a big kick down the hill -- leaving you 250+ uphill into the receptive par 5 green.  I don't think anyone has hit the green in 2 yet, but it won't surprise me when it does happen.  When the clubhouse is built, a new back tee will be built at 600-610 yards, so that may inhibit people getting home in two then.

As difficult as the hole might sound, and I was concerned about that from the beginning of the project, I have found it to be relatively benign for a hole that is playing at 575 yards.  There is plenty of room to really "air it out" off the tee and on the second, while still letting your strategy dictate where you want to be to hedge your bets.  And the approach, although uphill, allows one to work the ball in effectively from the right hillside, where the tight fescue allows the ball to release down to the green.  I am not a big hitter, but with the hard-running fescue, I find myself approaching with anything from a 9-iron to a 4-iron, typically a 7-iron.

Hope that helps to shed some light on the hole!

[Michael Dugger]

Dan Pohl,

Are you the pro player who took Stadler to extra holes in the Masters?  I was pulling for you.  Are you on the senior tour now?  

[RJ_Daley]

If it is Dan P., I used to work with that MS Spartan refugee, Det. Tim Ham_ _ _ _ and he never made good on his intention to take a bunch of us down to the GMO and introduce us to you.  But, he is still a fine fellow.  

PS: Welcome to GCA, even if you are not "The D.P."

[Dan Pohl]

Jeff and Mike,
Many thanks for the insight, it sounds like a terrific starting hole. I certainly didn't mean to imply that you guys had stolen the concept from TWP but instead to point out the incredible likeness which I found especially odd given both are starting holes.

For your interest they moved much less dirt on the Ocean hole, the plateau was natural as was the heavy slope from right to left. The Ocean tee seems move elevated, particularly off the very back, and the hole measures a tad under 500m from the tips (about 550 yards)

Similarly the wind usually blows from the south or north with the hole most often playing with a tailwind (southerly). I like your description of the distance illusion of the right side landing area, the Ocean is a little different with the right side and middle bunkers further to carry from the back tees. Also if you are playing with a strong tail wind you can actually overcook the right side and instead of feeding down the slope, as per Kingsley GC, you will likely run into one of those devilish TWP pot bunkers. It probably wont be the only time a good tee shot is penalised on the course though!

I hope some of the Aussies out there read this and can supply a pic as it would be great for you to see the likeness. I'll look through my archive and see if I can find one somewhere to post.

mdugger and RJ Daley - no not THE Dan Pohl unfortunately, but I do share some similarities, particularly on the curling crunch six footers.

[Justin_Ryan]

At www.nationalgolf.com.au there is a description and photo of the shot under the course tours link.  The aggressive line was promoted as the high right side whilst the lower left level was said by TWP to be the bailout, but in many ways the approach is easier from the left.  Unfortunately, the attraction of the left side as the bailout was diminished by TWPs failure to properly account for the practice fairway in the design process.  It has been squeezed alongside the left of the fairway, with an out of bounds now running alongside the fairway.  This is unfortunate to say the least.  They do look quite similar though in the photos, although the second shots from the left side are quite different.

[RJ_Daley]

Justin, thanks for that great link.  The hole graphics don't look anything like the pictures, and that is a good thing.  The pictures show a remarkable resemblance of the Ocean course at the National complex, with Mike's look at the Kingsley Club, IMO.  That internet web site they have is fantastic.  It is interesting that the two courses have a very similar look in architecture design style, and web sites that are superior to most golf course web pages.  TWP and DeVries must be thinking on some sort of inter-galactic wave length.  

[Mike_DeVries]

Justin,

Thanks for the link -- amazing similarities!

Dan,

We had a very good natural hole (with the exception of the manmade well-site area) and ultimately moved about 10,000 yards on the hole (half of the course's 20,000 yards moved, plus borrowing 10,000 yards for greensmix), which isn't really that much in comparison to other projects.  Thanks for bringing the Ocean's first to our attention -- I look forward to someday seeing it!

Mike DeVries

[Justin_Ryan]

RJ
I'm not sure why the graphics look nothing like the actual holes, they match up pretty well for the other two courses.  I also think you may be a little harsh on Mike by saying he is on the same wavelength as TWP.  The work of TWP has been discussed regularly on this site, usually not favorably, and most recently at http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/YaBB.cgi?board=GD1&action=display&num=1038279162&start=0

I would be pretty sure any similarities between the two courses end after the opening tee shot.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Dick, Yes, Mike is thinking on an intergalatic wavelength, however, this did not help him one iota at the beginning of this last years football season when Michigan lost to the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame 25-23. Was Mike there? Oh you can bet on it! I bet it was a very painful afternoon.

What does this have to do with Golf Course Architecture?

Absolutely nothing.

But it was the one way I had to stick that proverbial knife in and throw some salt into that open wound!:)

Yes, Kingsley Club looks phenmominal. Hopefully so will the Irish next year!:)

(How is that for an architectural/college football tie-in?)

[Mike_DeVries]

Tommy,

Now, I must admit that it hurts to lose to ND, anytime!  And UM could have won the game   (BTW, I was not there).

I just want to ask one question -- who finished out the season better?  OOH, OUCH, that salt really bites, doesn't it?!?  

Always the best, Buddy!  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()