[Mike_Cirba]

The group of fellows I played with last time at Kingsley had some very mixed reactions to #4.   It was generally felt that taking driver wasn't an effective play because under normal F&F conditions, it was never possible to hit and hold that little slice of raised fairway between the two cascading natural bowls on each side, and therefore became a game of pick-your-poison...longer partially blind approach shot from the left, or totally blind shot approach shot from the right.

I'm not sure I'd agree, and think that the smart play may be to lay back, leaving a longer but fully visible approach into a wonderfully flowing large green that permits many more viable options for the type of approach shot one desires to attempt than does the shot from the tee.   

[JNC Lyon]

The group of fellows I played with last time at Kingsley had some very mixed reactions to #4.   It was generally felt that taking driver wasn't an effective play because under normal F&F conditions, it was never possible to hit and hold that little slice of raised fairway between the two cascading natural bowls on each side, and therefore became a game of pick-your-poison...longer partially blind approach shot from the left, or totally blind shot approach shot from the right.

I'm not sure I'd agree, and think that the smart play may be to lay back, leaving a longer but fully visible approach into a wonderfully flowing large green that permits many more viable options for the type of approach shot one desires to attempt than does the shot from the tee.   

It seems like the F&F situation you describe actually adds more options to the hole and creates an extra need for decisions off the tee.  I like that because it makes you think twice about hitting the driver while still not taking it out of the bag altogether.

[Tim Bert]

The group of fellows I played with last time at Kingsley had some very mixed reactions to #4.   It was generally felt that taking driver wasn't an effective play because under normal F&F conditions, it was never possible to hit and hold that little slice of raised fairway between the two cascading natural bowls on each side, and therefore became a game of pick-your-poison...longer partially blind approach shot from the left, or totally blind shot approach shot from the right.

I'm not sure I'd agree, and think that the smart play may be to lay back, leaving a longer but fully visible approach into a wonderfully flowing large green that permits many more viable options for the type of approach shot one desires to attempt than does the shot from the tee.   

The architect instructed us to lay back and he did so himself.  Being one that is prone to barfing all over myself when I try to lay back and do the right thing (two of my worst tee shots ever in Bandon were the result of poorly executed "safe" 6-iron and 5-iron shots), I took the driver out and tried to wallop it.  As a result, I played the hole from the left both times, which proved to be an awkward angle to the back pin.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tim,

It must be another left-handed thing...I know exactly what you mean.

In trying to play smart and "safe", I've hit more shots into trouble than I can possibly tell you.


JNC_Lyon,

I love F&F and love how those conditions accentuate the architecture at Kingsley.   

However, those hot-running conditions also do make certain options less viable because even on medium grades it becomes difficult to stop a ball within a "predictable" general target area.

[JC Jones]

What I love about #4 is that one can birdie it, hitting their second shot from #3 fairway...

Put the ol' cut swing on it.  Nice.

Thats right.  See the discussion immediately after my post re landing a driver on the raised fairway between two bowls.  Not as big of a deal from #3 Fairway....

[Alan Gard]

I don't have much new to say here that hasn't already been covered.  There are a lot of nuances such as navigating the potentially blind approach and convincing oneself of how much club is needed to get to the back that make this one of those great holes where you can score if you focus on executing your shot but rarely manage to do so.  And I love the gigantic green!

[John Kirk]

What I love about #4 is that one can birdie it, hitting their second shot from #3 fairway...

Put the ol' cut swing on it.  Nice.

Thats right.  See the discussion immediately after my post re landing a driver on the raised fairway between two bowls.  Not as big of a deal from #3 Fairway....

Ahhh, I see.  It did not occur to me you would hit it over there on purpose.  It's pretty wide and flat on that part of third fairway, isn't it? 

[Buck Wolter]

The ridge at the front of #4 green that runs across the enitre fairway is one of my favorite landforms(?) at Kingsley -- the way the fairway comes up the hill and then drops down to the green is something I've never seen on an another course -- It reminds me of a bullnose tile. (You can see it in the background of Tim's last picture below). It creates an element of blindness especially to front pins and really makes a precise shot necessary as anything just over the ridge will kick forward. The F&F conditions also create alot of short game options if you end up short of that ridge.

[Mike_Cirba]

I think they need to plant some Hinkle trees between the 4th tee and 3rd fairway. 

[Mike_DeVries]

Kingsley is onviously influenced by the Downs because much of the course is local knowledge around the greens.  I learn something new every time out at Kingsley and I'm into double digits on rounds there and I still learn something new every time out at the Downs and I've probably played 300 or 400 rounds there.  Ask Mike D. the same thing and he would agree regarding both courses.  You're constantly learning.

Brian,
Thanks for the compliment.  Certainly, the Downs has that aspect to its design and I learn something about golf architecture every time I am on the property there.

Kingsley was always meant to be a private club with players having the opportunity learn the nuances of the course over multiple playings.  That way the course is always interesting and players get to try new shots based on their abilities that day in combination with the existing elements.  It is also more about match play and not making a score -- that is the standard that most of us play every round, not medal.  Therefore, there are certain ways to approach the game and trying a certain shot may depend on the current match and / or position of your opponent . . .

The second is an exacting hole but with a short club in your hand.  There are multiple angles of play and I prefer the left side at 138 yards for the back tee -- that is a full wedge or 9-iron for better players -- but it is less visual due to the short donut bunker's lip.  The alignment with the centerline of the green is more direct from the left, whereas the right hand tee (up to 155-162 yards) offers a better view of the approach and green but is on a diagonal to the green centerline, making some of the pins more difficult to hit.  The smart play, no matter where the pin is located, is to the back half of the green, which is 2-2.5 times wider than the front half of the green.  This "safe" concept is applicable to the tee shot as well as recovery plays, but we are often tempted to make the heroic shot to a very tight pin . . .

One of the things that was hard with the routing of the course was how to get out to the "South 40" which is what I call the land from 2 tee to 7 tee (about 40 acres in size).  This is an amazing section of ground with a lot of natural features that were usable in a number of different ways (there are great holes that were never able to be used due to conflicts with other great holes and were thus eliminated).  The general location of the clubhouse became somewhat evident due to entrance and transfer to front and back nines, so one of the problems was "What is the best way to get to the South 40?"  That is really how #1 became a big-scale par 5 to open and then the small hike up to the 2nd tee, where the South 40 and most of the front nine was visible before you.  So the 2nd tee has a big impact on the overall feeling of the golf course and intimacy of the routing right at the start.

Mike

[Mike_DeVries]

Tom,

Hold on.  I was comparing the level of difficulty.  Not whether it was great.  In other words, lost of bunkers ringing the green, movement on the green itself, and even a false front (false right in the case of Kingsley).  Tough up and down in case the trouble comes in.

But I think you answered what I was hoping you would get at ... the need for more options.  So if I'm not mistaken, the penal factor with no room for error is not balancing out the hole enough to make it a great par 3.

Patrick:

You're asking why not?, but you've got to answer why? first.  If a hole is going to be touted as one of the great par-3's in the world, I think it's got to have something going for it besides a small target and very difficult recovery.  (Then again, the Postage Stamp at Troon does not.)

The hole you compared it to at The Rawls Course isn't that similar ... the green is very wide and relatively shallow and there is a lot of internal green contour.  But I would never think of claiming it as one of the great par-3's in the world. 

For that matter, the one par-3 I've built which does sometimes get mentioned, the eleventh at Pacific Dunes, I wouldn't nominate either.  I think the best short 3 we've done is the one at Barnbougle ... a tiny target with nasty trouble, but which gives you one place to opt out if the wind is too severe and you just want to try and make a 4.

So, how many options does a hole have to have to make it great?  I think one of the strong points of Kingsley in general is the plethora of options on most shots.  The second is a demanding short par three that requires a precise shot with a short iron -- I don't think that makes it bad but maybe doesn't make it great.  In comparison with the 7th at Barnbougle, which I like a great deal and think is wonderful, the safe option there into the hollow is no bargain with the severe upslope to the green (I pitched it up and two-putted for 4 but was close to going over into the bunker left -- and this was in a very mild wind) but the green itself is smaller than KC #2's and the bunker left is more severe.  My guess would be that the wind at Barnbougle is regularly stronger than at Kingsley, but I still think the hole works and is great -- it's straightforward appearance from the tee presents the entire hole quite well, whereas Kingsley's is semi-blind to portions -- maybe that is the problem with the (dis)liking of it from some?

One thing that we have adjusted is the regular rough mowing line, which is now higher up on both the 2nd and 9th holes, therefore not everyone rolls to the same general area, improving recovery lies and often giving players a fluffier lie that allows a wedge to slide under and get the ball up softly -- that has been a small change that improves the chance at recovery.

As to my back and forth debacle while playing with Tom -- I selectively erased that from my memory!  That was quite some time ago (5-6 years ago?) -- maybe we need to have a rematch and I can try to do it again, Tom?!!   

Mike

[JC Jones]

I think they need to plant some Hinkle trees between the 4th tee and 3rd fairway. 

Hey now

[JC Jones]

What I love about #4 is that one can birdie it, hitting their second shot from #3 fairway...

Put the ol' cut swing on it.  Nice.

Thats right.  See the discussion immediately after my post re landing a driver on the raised fairway between two bowls.  Not as big of a deal from #3 Fairway....

Ahhh, I see.  It did not occur to me you would hit it over there on purpose.  It's pretty wide and flat on that part of third fairway, isn't it? 

Its only "on purpose" when you hit your second shot to 5 feet and make the putt....

[Mike_DeVries]

Some great debate on #2 by Tom, Josh, Patrick and others -- did I answer all of the questions or does someone have something else to ask / add?

Mike

[JC Jones]

One of the things that was hard with the routing of the course was how to get out to the "South 40" which is what I call the land from 2 tee to 7 tee (about 40 acres in size).  This is an amazing section of ground with a lot of natural features that were usable in a number of different ways (there are great holes that were never able to be used due to conflicts with other great holes and were thus eliminated).  The general location of the clubhouse became somewhat evident due to entrance and transfer to front and back nines, so one of the problems was "What is the best way to get to the South 40?"  That is really how #1 became a big-scale par 5 to open and then the small hike up to the 2nd tee, where the South 40 and most of the front nine was visible before you.  So the 2nd tee has a big impact on the overall feeling of the golf course and intimacy of the routing right at the start.

Mike

This proves exactly how great of a job I think you did out there.  I would have thought that 2-7 was the easy find and getting from 13 green to 18 tee was "hard to find."  I would have never thought (from the one time I've played it) that it was hard to get to 2-7 (and back).

[Mike_DeVries]

One of the things that was hard with the routing of the course was how to get out to the "South 40" which is what I call the land from 2 tee to 7 tee (about 40 acres in size).  This is an amazing section of ground with a lot of natural features that were usable in a number of different ways (there are great holes that were never able to be used due to conflicts with other great holes and were thus eliminated).  The general location of the clubhouse became somewhat evident due to entrance and transfer to front and back nines, so one of the problems was "What is the best way to get to the South 40?"  That is really how #1 became a big-scale par 5 to open and then the small hike up to the 2nd tee, where the South 40 and most of the front nine was visible before you.  So the 2nd tee has a big impact on the overall feeling of the golf course and intimacy of the routing right at the start.

Mike

This proves exactly how great of a job I think you did out there.  I would have thought that 2-7 was the easy find and getting from 13 green to 18 tee was "hard to find."  I would have never thought (from the one time I've played it) that it was hard to get to 2-7 (and back).

JC,
It is easy to get from point A to B, it is hard to make it good and to flow properly in the process of doing it.  In the case of getting to 2T, I had a number of ways of going about it, but two short par 4's didn't work very well and then added another hole to the front nine.  There is a large wetland to the left of the first hole in the middle of the property and I didn't want to be close to that for a number of reasons, so it came about in the form of the long 5 first, which has good shot value and options on all three full shots and a fun green setting, plus it allows for the player to swing away on the first and be contrasted with the exacting 2nd.  Somehow it all worked out very well.
Mike

[David Neveux]

Although I doubt this had much to do with the why and how of number 2 but, I really like the contrast between holes 1 and 2.  One has a wide-open look, feel and playability to it.  Which makes for some interesting angles and variety about how to navigate around, but also makes you feel like you can kind of miss your way to at least A G.I.R.  Then two is more of a do or die type hole, and has completely the opposite feel.  It's small, constricted, and there is no room to miss. 

[Mike_DeVries]

The green is indeed HUGE and I'm not sure we can tell if that's just because of the lay of the land.

However, could there be another reason for why this green is so big?

I'm just wondering if Mike wanted to give the blind shot a better chance at the green from down the left side of the fairway.
 

Patrick,
When building the green, I thought about having the green just be the right side of the green, which would be an adequate, although smaller, target.  Problem was -- it just didn't have the variety and options available that the entire finished green did, so it became the entire landform and almost 11,000 sq. ft., but with two very different sides and attack modes.  All of the basic green surface was intact, with the exception that I broadened and slightly raised the ridge to help shift running approaches around to the right half of the green for those not wanting to fire at it aerially past the bunkers and deep bowl and it works very well for that play.

The comments on the drive are all very good and accurate.  Depending on which tee you are playing and the length of your normal drives, the very wide yet undulating fairway presents a number of issues, making it more difficult to choose the best line that will give you visibility and a decent angle of attack for your approach shot.  The tee is slightly higher than the green in elevation (5 ft.) but the hole is essentially flat from tee to green along the spine, with 10-15' bowls folding off of each side, providing players with a play that is variably blind but playable.

The green has lots of room to the left and back for "safe" plays away from the bowl and bunkers and deep is often a good play for pins in the back center bowl that flows away from the line of play.  Front pins are delicate if you get too fancy and try to get really close, often ending in the bowl to the right, whereas a play a little to the left will often come back down towards the pin or allow for a good approach putt, even though it is downhill.

Give me 200 acres of this type of land and you will have a great golf course -- it is really fine golfing terrain.

Cheers,
Mike

[Mike_DeVries]

Quite frankly, and I say this fully understanding I will be in the VAST minority, I prefer Kingsley slightly to CD. I think they are both outstanding.  One of my playing partners at Kingsley shared my opinion, so there are at least to of us that walk the Earth. This opinion is equal portions design and course presentation. Full kudos are due to the grounds crew. More on that throughout.   

Tim,

It must be a left-handed thing because I'm in complete agreement.  It's in my top 5 Modern courses I've played.

Funny you say that because the other person that shares my view plays left-handed as well. 

Hey, my dad and brother are lefties -- maybe I just have a soft spot for southpaws!   
Mike

Mike,

Then you're dad and brother would likely agree with my assertion that not only are we more creative, we're better looking too.   

HUH??!!? . . . . . . Nice try, Buddy!   

[Mike_DeVries]

That looks like an amazing piece of ground that Mr. DeVries molded. I love the fairway contours and the manner in which they flow directly into the greens. None of those artificially raised putting surfaces.

Thanks for the thread, Tim!

Kyle,
I didn't mold anything there except for the bunkers -- the ground was there like that and I just tried to not screw it up!
Mike

[JC Jones]

That looks like an amazing piece of ground that Mr. DeVries molded. I love the fairway contours and the manner in which they flow directly into the greens. None of those artificially raised putting surfaces.

Thanks for the thread, Tim!

Kyle,
I didn't mold anything there except for the bunkers -- the ground was there like that and I just tried to not screw it up!
Mike

I thought the same thing when I read that.  Although, maybe he's right, maybe it was as flat as a run way and the whole thing was created by the hand of man

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

Your dad and brother would no doubt strongly agree with my well-stated and self-obvious assertion.  

Now, back to the golf course discussion...  

[JC Jones]

Mike

How big is the 4th green?  To me it seemed larger than the 3rd but maybe that is because it "feels" more accessible being in line w/ the fairway as opposed to #3.

Thanks

Jason

[Mike_DeVries]

JNC Lyon:  Hopefully Mike DeVries will see your comment and my response and post, but I would be willing to bet that the positioning of the fourth hole was really conceived first as a way to get from #3 green to #5 tee, and then he found a cool place for a landing area, instead of the landing area for #4 being one of the first things he zeroed in on in the routing.

I know from my own routings that a lot of the cool subtle stuff comes on the second pass ... you find bigger things first, but then it happens that you find a cool subtle feature in between and figure out how to use that, and it becomes one of the best holes on the property when you never saw it to begin with.

I've mentioned before that this is also true of the 13th hole at High Pointe ... I had seen the green site from the beginning, but the hole is just a necessary connection after I found #12 and #14.  And it turned out to be my favorite hole in the bunch.

The greensite was always high on my radar list from the first walking of the site -- this might be because it was a little more open and primarily brambles instead of 10-year-old regrowth from a clearcut operation, but it was always a really cool feature.  In figuring out holes in the beginning, there was a tee from left of the middle of the 3rd hole that played across the 4th green and 2nd hole to the back tee on the 6th -- a wild ride of a short par 5 that would have been a heckuva hole -- only problem is, it didn't work well with the other good holes and got thrown out.  So how to use this amazing double bowl feature that is the 4th green?  I toyed with the green as either the front or back of the green, considering safety margins with the other holes, shots, etc. and finally decided to use the whole area again, similar to #3G, because of the different shots required into it and ability to attack via the ground or aerially. 

The greensite was always very good, so how to fit it in with other good holes and have a great sequence of holes?  Tom is right, in that I had to find what would make an interesting drive and transition for that green, in this case from #2 through #5, even to #7T, where you get a variety of glimpses of the various greens, fairways, bunkers, and landforms throughout your journey around the South 40.  There is a very good tee further to the left, down near the big rock behind the 6th green that opens up to the left side of the fairway, lengthens the hole a bit, and has the drive hitting into the ridge more -- I chose not to put this tee in due to its distance from the 3rd green but the owner likes it and keeps talking about having me build it, and maybe we will someday . . . the one thing about this angle is that the ridge isn't as much of a factor on the drive as a landing area but the view from the tee is more open and visually friendlier than the somewhat hidden aspect of the current tees.

Mike

[Mike_DeVries]

Mike

How big is the 4th green?  To me it seemed larger than the 3rd but maybe that is because it "feels" more accessible being in line w/ the fairway as opposed to #3.

Thanks

Jason

JC,
12,300 sq ft.  #13 is slightly larger than that.  9 of the greens on the course are less than 5000, with #15 the smallest at 3750.
Mike

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()