Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Mark Bourgeois on May 31, 2007, 04:52:37 PM
-
Photos taken at worst time of day, photogenically: tilt and contours are more severe than appear. Would you like to dine on these greens? More likely they will dine on you...
1, from left approach
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030754.jpg)
2, from front and right
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030759.jpg)
3, from 220 yards
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030765.jpg)
4, from extreme-left approach
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030777.jpg)
5, approach: flag is back on a green that is raised and angled from front-left to back-right. Note how many holes, such as this one, allow ground game option: maintenance enables run ups; dryness + hardness = big, disheartening bounces, unless golfer thinks through how ball will behave after initial contact with earth
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030789.jpg)
6, level with and right of green -- note three "waves"
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030798.jpg)
7, approach
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030805.jpg)
8, right and short -- note golfer for scale of rise to green: a terrifying shot, and not the only one out there!
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030812.jpg)
9, left-center, i.e., from the entry to green
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030832.jpg)
10, rear half, from left of green
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030838.jpg)
11, from the tee: one of very few uninspiring greens out there
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030842.jpg)
12, from 200 yards out
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030854.jpg)
13, 50 yards in front
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030870.jpg)
14, left of green. "Sitwell Park job": proper line for ball near bunker is 9-10 feet left of hole, and barely struck
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030874.jpg)
15, from right of green. Note "prow" to the left: approach along ground fraught with peril for front pin position. Awesome green that is one of several certifiably "#2 style"!
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030880.jpg)
16, approach 130 yards extreme left (back portion of green obscured)
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030886.jpg)
17, from right-side approach
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030897.jpg)
18, from back right of green
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030905.jpg)
Mark
-
I can name that course in one note, Johnny. ;D
PB Dye Golf Club in Ijamsville, MD.
Over the top in places, but also a thrill ride that would be a wonderful match-play venue.
-
I must have a high tolerance for these things but I didn't find it over the top. Of course, lots of bunkers have been grassed in.
What they figured out that's smart is "tee tricking" golfers: blue plays to a rating of 70.6 and slope 130 (or something like that), yet is under 6,300 yards. Then the golds play to 6,600 yards. The "professional" tees on the card did not appear anywhere on the course. You pick your color, then shoot what you would on a "regulation" length course from that color.
This is a great example of how to build an interesting, fun, challenging course that's not overly long. For example, the par 5s play as par four-and-a-halves. Fun fun fun.
The over the top bits might be the forced carries and blind shots, but if you're playing the right set of tees...
And it's so dry out there they were watering in the middle of the day, and still the ball takes ginormous bounces!
-
Good God, I hate the look of that. Is there anything more contrived than a frikin' railroad tie? How completely unnatural and out of place. Heaven forbid a designer use his brain when he can just bury a million railroad ties. Makes me want to puke.
Steve
-
I agree on the trees, but I suspect they were added as part of a "softening" campaign: some greens out there are skyline and they must freak out a lot of golfers not used to it.
Re the ties, I don't care for them on the par 3 2nd and the par 3 11th; however, on the par 4 16 strangely enough I liked them. I dunno, maybe it's a Westward Ho! thing.
Tee shot, 16: something about having to carry 220 over a waste bunker and those ties, yet not bailing out into a bunker. If you can land your drive on the fairway you are rewarded by a massive kick-n-run down the fairway, to the right; the more risk you take, the greater your reward.
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030884.jpg)
Bunkers right of 16 fairway: real hazards
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030887.jpg)
As to the bunkers left and right along the par 5 (par 4.5) 3rd, they're not superfluous; if you boom a drive near the end of the fairway on this dogleg left hole, this is what you see:
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030766.jpg)
Carry or skirt? Here's what you get for a skirt -- let's go foozling (That's a real bunker in front of that tucked pin, and let's face it, only a dolt would not just run it up to the left):
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030767.jpg)
Reaching the green, the fun is just beginning:
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030774.jpg)
Consider that as part of the softening, they've grassed in some bunkers, for example several on the right of the landing area for a short tee shot on 3. Here's one:
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030763.jpg)
-
I'm a big fan of railroad ties.
-
Mark,
Based on the photos it looks like a neat golf course.
I agree that the framing trees should go.
Was there a function that the RR ties or planking performed that's not apparent from the photos ?
-
Damn, talk about having a tough pin location when its back left here! You'd have to be a hell of a player to get it close, but that slope there offers the possibility if you hit a hard draw into it. I'd really love to drop a bucket of balls from where this photo is taken and see what I could come up with!
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030854.jpg)
-
Mark,
Glad to see some folks enjoying your pics and I'd recommend the course to anyone.
My "over the top" comments related to some things that have likely been softened since I played there last. For instance, the 13th? at the time I played it had a pond that run to the right front edge of the narrow green. If you went left of that green however, you would be about 20feet below the level of the green in a bunker. Almost sadistically humorous in its severity and penality...but I sort of loved it anyway.
I was just letting others who might be a little more feint of heart that you'll likely see a few things that give pause out there...
As regards the railroad ties, they were a really cool feature when Pete Dye first brought them back from Prestwick, et.al., and did them so well at The Golf Club, Crooked Stick, etc., but they were overdone in the intervening years.
Still, given how many of them that both Pete and PB did during their careers, I have no qualms with them employing sleepers at courses that bear their name.
-
Very cool post Mark.
I've stated on here many times over the years how much more open minded I've become about golf course architecture mostly because of what I have learned on GCA.com.
I must confess however that I damn near missed the excellent architectural features of this golf course because of the damn trees. They look like those little plastic trees that my Dad glued on to my Lionel electric train board when I was a kid.
The railroad ties.... well.. a Dye trademark I guess, maybe some of them have some structural function as Pat alluded to, and IMHO nobody has contributed more to the actual construction techniques of modern golf courses than Pete Dye, Harbor Town was 1969 if memory serves and until then who the hell ever built a golf course in a salt marsh, never mind an excellent golf course.
Personal preference apparently runs deep as I think I would have trouble keeping those awful looking, symetrically planted aberations out of my mind while playing the golf course. Hole after hole I would be thinking why are those goddamn things here? What happens as they grow, shade, air circulation, pruning costs, hand trimming around them, man hours, blah,blah. I guess I really haven't learned as much as I thought.
-
At the end of the day I can't believe I didn't get out to see this course in seven years, even going twice - twice! - to Whiskey Creek in that time. Clearly they have marketing issues, as the word of mouth is not great on the course. It deserves better, and those who are fans of Tom Doak and Mike Strantz owe it to themselves to see this place.
The key to unlocking the fun is playing up one set of tees (which the mgt has done already for you via tee tricking). That may be the secret formula to discovering fun yet challenging courses: under 6,300 yards, slope 134.
Playing up one set of tees of course is "right answer" for many courses, notably those of the mad genius Strantz, and those who ignore or refuse such common sense only prove the adage that "common sense" is sense that's held in common.
And thus: Mike, that hole is the 4th, and I shudder to think of hitting to that green with anything more than a 9 iron!
Although: the bunkers to the left all have been grassed in, and the surrounding rough prevents many balls from running too far astray. Additionally, the enormous size of many greens out there give the thinking golfer a way to play every hole.
Sean,
That bunker on the left forces you to deal with the center bunker if you hit down the hill on your tee shot. Very few will be able to carry it, leaving the rest of us to decide how much to challenge it, as we surely are not so foolish as to go at that center bunker. The other bunker over there I agree could go. The bunker on the right on the other hand is there I think to frustrate the short drive.
You really should see how many of those bunkers have been grassed in - your kind of place!
Doug, I will try to post a few more pics of that hole this weekend, it's quite a ride from front to back - a five-foot swale plus who knows how much total front to back elevation change! But I would love to see those banks shaved down. And notice how that front bunker has a thick "protective" collar: do you want the bunker there or not!?
Patrick,
The ties behind 2 green, who knows? The ties on 11 green, maybe as a bulkhead (water is really low in pic). So I could do without those, and a number of others out there.
16 is a different story, as they lie directly in the path of the intended play. They provide a psychological "do or die" intimidation similar to water, but with a milder result. I whiffed my approach and it hit a tie fronting the green, and bounced a few feet back into rough between bunkers. It didn't go far at all; I think the ties literally have been softened, too!
I just love the use of the ties on the drive, the angle and play of the fairway. Combined with the waste area front and the bunkers back, this is an "eye of the needle" hole, yet one allowing dispensation of recovery.
And looking at that view from the tee, isn't it neat to see a hole that calls for a certain shot shape, does it without a tree or water, and provides a bailout option? And given its angle to the right, isn't it great for a slice-prone golfer to experience the thrill of successfully executing a demanding tee shot?
Some may say the ties provide a framing, but as they are in play and theaten a legitimate punishment for the hubristic, not to mention skinnying up that fairway (pucker up!), why not?
Mark
-
Funny comments, Ed.
I'm anti-tree, too. How's this: you can see many, many holes from the clubhouse!
Although...well, there is one incredibly stupid hole out there: the 10th. The hole would play awesome - the "tempting" kind of awesome - except for a copse of trees DIRECTLY IN THE LINE OF PLAY OFF THE TEE!
Stepping onto the tee gives one a WTF moment. The hole would be so so much better with a chainsaw. I will try to post pics of the view...
-
The green contours at PB Dye are cool and he did learn that part well from Pete - but the design of some of the holes I find questionable and the railroad ties and the waterfalls have to go.
-
Mark
A concept which requires the word "forces" to describe it should be used sparingly in architecture and if used should make the hole rather special.
Sean, if an architects presentation is a THOROUGH examination of a golfers game, shouldn't there be "forced" shots ?
Forced carries ? Forced Draws ? Forced Fades ? Forced long irons, forces short irons, etc., etc.. ?
When I think of a Redan, Biarritz or Road hole configuration, I think of forced shots, shots dictated by the architect.
Too often we get hung up on the concept of "forced shots" as if it's a bad thing.
Isn't every par 3 a forced shot ?[/color]
-
The key to unlocking the fun is playing up one set of tees (which the mgt has done already for you via tee tricking). That may be the secret formula to discovering fun yet challenging courses: under 6,300 yards, slope 134.
Playing up one set of tees of course is "right answer" for many courses, notably those of the mad genius Strantz, and those who ignore or refuse such common sense only prove the adage that "common sense" is sense that's held in common.
Is there a specific skill, talent or "knack" involved in designing courses where moving up one set of tees can make an interesting course very much more playable and fun rather than just rendering many of its challenges rather toothless? Some of the courses I'm most fond of have that characteristic: the Ocean Course, Tobacco Road and Spyglass Hill are three that come to mind.
One way that can play out is to build a course that from the up tees becomes a "second shot course" (which I've always taken to mean having greens that repel balls from unfavorable approach angles/distances) but with some additional tee-shot challenges in play as you move back. That is certainly the way the Ocean Course works, I found it extremely playable (not to say easy to score well on) from just over 6,000 yards in the cold and/or rain even for a bogey golfer. Yet move back two set of tees and there are some tee shots that most single-digit handicappers will view with a dry mouth and tense shoulders.
-
Although...well, there is one incredibly stupid hole out there: the 10th. The hole would play awesome - the "tempting" kind of awesome - except for a copse of trees DIRECTLY IN THE LINE OF PLAY OFF THE TEE!
Heh, great minds and all that. Go back and see the last thread on this course Mark. I agee with you--this could actually be a very good hole, which it is not at this point.
Also, re 16--I whined pretty good about the rr ties on #2 as well as the ones surrounding 16 green. I think they look awful and add nothing to the playability. But the tee shot on 16 is tres cool for the reasons you mention.
Sean, the green you said looked 'awesome'--not sure if anyone mentioned it or not, but its a par 3 and the fellow in green has missed short and right. Maybe 190 uphill (distance might be a little off either direction). I find it harder to hit than it should be.
There has been a conscious effort to soften this course, both the greens and the surrounds. It hurts to say, but some of what I and presumably many of you find attractive or fun or interesting about this course are what cause area golfers to go to MD National or Whiskey Creek. They are OK courses, but I do not believe they are of the quality of PB Dye.
-
Damn, talk about having a tough pin location when its back left here! You'd have to be a hell of a player to get it close, but that slope there offers the possibility if you hit a hard draw into it. I'd really love to drop a bucket of balls from where this photo is taken and see what I could come up with!
Doug, you have zeroed in on what I consider maybe the most interesting green on the course. We did once spend some time chipping and putting around this green. Mark mentioned Sitwell Park referring to another green but I made that same connection with this green.
To make matters more interesting, this is a very hard hole to lay up on. You can't see it, but there is some small watery filth crossing the fairway at the bottom of the hill maybe 80 yards from the green. If you lay up short of it you have a horrid downhill lie.
The picture does not convery it well, but the rise in this green is likely at least 4-5 feet. Its quite dramatic the way the slope and countours of the green can move the ball this way and that.
-
This is a disaster of design, IMHO. It is cluttered, has the overdone and trite ties bounding down into rocks and water, and has an ugly green complex and shape. I think it is an ugly mark on Dye's reputation and is a parody of his repetoire.
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030842.jpg)
-
Dick, try to imagine the water level being quite a bit higher, to the point where almost all the rocks and the bank in front are submerged. I think the normal view is the rr ties, then maybe a foot or two of bank then water. We have not had much rain for many months.
Not to say you'd like the hole any better, just a comment on the esthetics. ;)
-
When I think of a Redan, Biarritz or Road hole configuration, I think of forced shots, shots dictated by the architect.
Sean, I'd go further and ask exactly what shot(s) is forced by the architect on say the Road Hole?
-
AHughes,
Shall we start with a drive with sufficient height.
If you can't see the forced nature of the shots required at
# 17 on TOC, that's your problem.
-
The green contours at PB Dye are cool and he did learn that part well from Pete - but the design of some of the holes I find questionable and the railroad ties and the waterfalls have to go.
Jerry, there's too much gardening out there, the waterfall is stupid -- but dry a few days ago! -- and the bridges out there have ropes for handrails -- a bizarre nautical theme miles and miles from any ocean or large body of water!
Brent, what's in the slope formula besides distance? The course has plenty of cross and side hazards, several blind shots, downhill, uphill, and sidehill lies, plus shots to fallaway greens. Also, the size of the greens are enormous; it's three-putt land out there, save for the relative slowness of the greens.
Something that may be different from what others have experienced is the recent firmness of the course. This spate of dry weather, combined with a number of downhill tee shots, makes for superball, dispiriting bounces -- boing!
RJ, enough complaining: how would you fix this hole?
-
AHughes,
Shall we start with a drive with sufficient height.
If you can't see the forced nature of the shots required at
# 17 on TOC, that's your problem.
Patrick, I have lots of problems, what's one more?
The tee shot at the Road Hole only requires sufficient height if you choose certain lines off the tee (setting aside that players can hit that shot with a fade or a draw or straight). Other lines off the tee are available and do not require the height you are suggesting. Do you disagree? Beyond that, which shots are forced?
-
Andy: You and I are going to have to play PB Dye together and discuss some of the holes as I am not the fan of it that you are. For example: The second par 5 on the front, I believe it is 8, makes no sense to me - somewhat similar to the 2nd at the Golden Horseshoe (Which was changed)- as I remember it at PBD -tee shot followed by short iron layup followed by downhill lie short iron to green. Number 10 seems to be his way to somehow get you from the clubhouse to number 11 without using much thought. Don't get me wrong, I do like some holes such as the 5th? - the long par 4 with the downhill second shot to the bunkerless green - very well done with interesting recovery shots. Shoot me a PM with your schedule.
-
Jerry, the par 5 is number 7. Short iron layup? I've never actually played it that way (in 3 or 4 rounds) even when a layup would have been the prudent play. If you say it is kludgy that way, I believe you--just distance-wise I can certainly see it being two short irons.
I'll send you an PM. I even have an extra coupon from Jonathon's magazine ;)
-
Maybe it's down to dry conditions, but i think a good drive on the 7th should put you right in the throw-up zone of go or lay up? this is due to downhill nature plus a turboboost you get. lay up does mean two wedges...
-
P.B. was always one of the most creative people in the business, and if you'd told me twenty years ago that this would be his most famous solo work, I would have been shocked. Obviously, his health issues have held back his career, and so has the burden of trying to outdo his dad, which is just impossible. But, I'm sure there is a lot of cool stuff to find on nearly any one of his courses.
I learned a lot from P.B., as did Bobby Weed; and I believe that Mike Strantz had one or two shapers who got their start with P.B. at The Legends in Myrtle Beach.
-
AHughes,
Shall we start with a drive with sufficient height.
If you can't see the forced nature of the shots required at
# 17 on TOC, that's your problem.
Patrick, I have lots of problems, what's one more?
The tee shot at the Road Hole only requires sufficient height if you choose certain lines off the tee
You can hit it left of the sheds, but then you're in deep rough.[/color]
(setting aside that players can hit that shot with a fade or a draw or straight).
Wait a second. They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ? You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.[/color]
Other lines off the tee are available and do not require the height you are suggesting. Do you disagree?
Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.
If you go in the deep rough left, you're forced to hit back to the fairway, toward the OB to give you the best angle of attack into the green.[/color]
Beyond that, which shots are forced ?
The ones I listed above.[/color]
-
As promised, more pics of the 12th green:
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030855.jpg)
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030857.jpg)
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030856.jpg)
And...a miss:
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030833.jpg)
Did they actually finish this hole? The trees take away the idiot / bomber route. Without them, you'd end up playing too far right, probably, especially given the green orientation favors a drive hit down center-left. It's a better view from there, but many will be tempted by the prospect of a shorter shot into a green whose rear half falls away.
Even better / worse, the direct-route-to-green line probably would entice more fools than this does. I gave it a whack and you can carry the junk on the dolt tiger line, but the green was impossible.
Seriously, who's got a Stihl?
Mark
-
That course is PB Dye? Wow, at first I thought it was abroad.
I guess I'd have to say I knew Pete and Alice better than PB but whenever PB's name comes up I can only think of the funniest day I ever had on a golf course and by a mile.
We were playing in the Florida International years ago at the Palm Beach Polo club on a course that PB built. We were paired with Davis Sezna (who later built Hartefeld) and PB both of who we knew.
Davis Sezna is funnier than 75% of the professional comedians in this world and PB isn't far behind.
This was a pretty serious tournament but PB was racing around in his cart apparently checking for problems on the course particularly grassing.
On the second hole things started out with a bang when PB went racing off the side of a fairway and flipped his cart right into a hidden bunker on a parallel hole on the other side. He was lucky he didn't kill himself and that he could still play with his clubs.
Anyway I've never laughed that hard and that much on a golf course. It seemed like we never stopped and on something like the 15th hole my partner and I fell down and rolled around on the fairway we were laughing so hard.
Somehow both groups managed to play some pretty good golf and turn in some decent scores.
If I put together all the laughing I've done on golf courses in my entire life there's no way it would exceed that day. The irony is back then I didn't care a whit about golf course architecture.
-
Interesting...
Strantz, Stonehouse (8th? a par 3)
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/Stonehouse/CIMG0502.jpg)
PB Dye, 12th
(http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k204/MSBIII/PB%20Dye/L1030857.jpg)
Mark
-
Patrick, I have lots of problems, what's one more?
The tee shot at the Road Hole only requires sufficient height if you choose certain lines off the tee
You can hit it left of the sheds, but then you're in deep rough.
(setting aside that players can hit that shot with a fade or a draw or straight).
Other lines off the tee are available and do not require the height you are suggesting. Do you disagree?
If you go in the deep rough left, you're forced to hit back to the fairway, toward the OB to give you the best angle of attack into the green.
Beyond that, which shots are forced ?
The ones I listed above.
Patrick, I can only assume we are not talking about the same course when you say 'TOC'. I am referring to the Old Course in St Andrews. And by Road Hole, I mean the 17th hole. What course and hole are you referring to? I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form. You have choices upon choices. I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.
Wait a second. They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ? You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.
Who said some random player wasn't good enough to hit a fade or a draw? I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left. It might be better if you restricted your comments to courses you have played ;)
Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.
Err, no. You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings. Needs a fade but certainly quite doable. Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.
Really, your comments here are quite off the mark.
-
In the original thread on the courses built in the past 10 years in the area west of Baltimore and DC, someone asked us to rank the courses in order of preference.
With the passage of time, and even with the planting of just some horrendous trees (is it a crime to kill trees that are only 10 feet tall so far?), I'd list them with my "Doak Scale" ratings as follows;
PB Dye - 6.5
Maryland National - 5
Worthington Manor - 5
Whiskey Creek - 4
Muskrat Ridge - 3
That should bring my Maryland architecture-arch-nemesis (Rob Waldron) out of the woodwork. ;D
-
Mark, that par 3 is the eighth at Stonehouse and those pictures surely do have more than a passing resemblance. I don't know the actual square footage of either green, but somehow the PB Dye green has a much 'bigger' feel to it, a sense of vastness and depth. Also, I seem to recall the slopes being more pronounced and the change of elevation being much greater at PB Dye. Lastly, the Strantz is clearly a poorer hole because my opponent hit some flare that landed very close to where your pic was taken and somehow bounced off the hill to within 10' of the hole. ::)
Guess it's no coincidence that courses with similar greens like that would both be very high on my personal list.
(PS Stonehouse is better than everyone gives it credit for! Yeah, there are some issues.)
-
P.B. was always one of the most creative people in the business, and if you'd told me twenty years ago that this would be his most famous solo work, I would have been shocked.
I didn't realize this was his most famous course. Seems hard to believe considering its lukewarm-at-best reception by the locals. TomD or anyone else who has seen enough, is it also his best course?
-
Mark, that par 3 is the eighth at Stonehouse and those pictures surely do have more than a passing resemblance. I don't know the actual square footage of either green, but somehow the PB Dye green has a much 'bigger' feel to it, a sense of vastness and depth. Also, I seem to recall the slopes being more pronounced and the change of elevation being much greater at PB Dye.
It could just be down to Stonehouse being a par 3 whereas PB Dye is a par 5 / 4.5 and the look is from 220 yards, downhill. Also, PB's is banked into a hillside whereas I recall Stonehouse not only does not back into a hill but has a road behind it, presenting less of a "theater" look. Thus, PB's views and scale may appear much "grander."
For even though I can't recall, judging by the flagsticks Stonehouse's back shelf looks higher, doesn't it? Is that the case?
Mark
-
[quote author=AHughes link=board=1;threadid=29538;start=0#msg572167
Patrick, I can only assume we are not talking about the same course when you say 'TOC'. I am referring to the Old Course in St Andrews. And by Road Hole, I mean the 17th hole.
What course and hole are you referring to?
The same one.
I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form.
You already admited that the tee shot was forced.
You have to get sufficient elevation and carry on the drive, and playing left puts you in the left rough, not a desirable location by anyone's reconing.
My position isn't based solely on my experiences at TOC.
I relied on James Anderson's views with respect to how to best play the hole and going over the sheds is the prefered line, if you can execute a drive with sufficient height and distance. He indicated that playing left, into the rough is not a viable option. In addition, TOC narrowed their fairways for the last Open making the left rough bigger.
I suppose you could also play down # 2 or back up # 16, down # 2, and over to # 17 if you were so inclined.[/color]
You have choices upon choices.
But, none of them are viable, and that's critical[/color]
I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.
The issue ISN'T the rest of the golf course, it's the DRIVE on
# 17. Please stick to the issue.[/color]
Wait a second. They're not good enough to hit it over the sheds, but, they're good enough to hit the drive with a fade or straight ? You can't have it both ways. And, a draw would only take them deeper into the rough.
Who said some random player wasn't good enough to hit a fade or a draw?
Let's see, he's not good enough to get sufficient height and distance, but this phantom golfer of of yours can now fade and draw the ball at will.
Please, keep the discussion within the realm of reality.[/color]
I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
A "choice" is only available if the golfer can execute the shot.
If a golfer can't hit a fade or hook, then those aren't viable options, rather, figments of your imagination.[/color]
And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left.
If your golfer can't get the height and distance to get over the sheds, how's he going to hit a draw that starts out over the sheds ? You're contradicting yourself.[/color]
It might be better if you restricted your comments to courses you have played ;)
I've played TOC.[/color]
Yes, they'e really not viable shots that will position the ball in the fairway.
Err, no. You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings. Needs a fade but certainly quite doable.
So, your golfer, who can't drive the ball with sufficient height and distance can now hit a fade at will ? You're living in a fantasy world.[/color]
Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.
I don't know any golfers that willingly and gladly drive the ball into deep rough on the left, rough that will leave them in a difficult position to finish the hole.
If they're in the deep left rough, they're FORCED to hit it back to the fairway, toward the OB, unless your golfers prefer to continue to play the ball down the left rough, barely finishing before dark.[/color]
Really, your comments here are quite off the mark.
I stand by them.
What was the lowest handicap you ever maintained ?[/color]
-
I am utterly baffled you would consider that shot forced in any way shape or form.
You already admited that the tee shot was forced.
If we interpret me saying the tee shot is anything but forced as 'admitting it is forced', than yes, I have admitted such. Conversely, if we let my words mean something along the normal accepted meanings then no, no such luck.
You have to get sufficient elevation and carry on the drive, and playing left puts you in the left rough, not a desirable location by anyone's reconing.
Wrong on several levels. Believe it or not, playing left is a desirable location for some. I know I intentionally played left into the wind. Was it the garden spot with the absolute best angle into the green? Nope, but it gave me the safest and best way for me to get into the hole in the fewest strokes.
My position isn't based solely on my experiences at TOC.
I relied on James Anderson's views with respect to how to best play the hole and going over the sheds is the prefered line, if you can execute a drive with sufficient height and distance. He indicated that playing left, into the rough is not a viable option. In addition, TOC narrowed their fairways for the last Open making the left rough bigger.
As previously noted, it is not only viable but preferred at times.
Also please note, you said it was 'preferred'. That implies options.
I suppose you could also play down # 2 or back up # 16, down # 2, and over to # 17 if you were so inclined.
Or you could play left and then layup either right of the green or left of the Road Hole Bunker.
You have choices upon choices.
But, none of them are viable, and that's critical
Again, if you mean we should ignore all the options present and just accept your one shot on one particular line as the only viable option then you'd be on to something. But I am shocked you can't see what else is going on both left and right in the context of both good, average and poor players.
I can't think of another course I have played that is actually less forced.
The issue ISN'T the rest of the golf course, it's the DRIVE on
# 17. Please stick to the issue.
Actually, you are wrong about that. The issue was the Road Hole itself. You happened to incorrectly claim the tee shot only had one option and then punted when asked about the variety of shots that follow on the hole. The fact that you declined to stand by your comment surely does not mean this was only about the tee shot. Also, this does seem to be a tendency of late--suddenly changing the subject and trying to call someone on it when they don't pivot with you.
Let's see, he's not good enough to get sufficient height and distance, but this phantom golfer of of yours can now fade and draw the ball at will.
Please, keep the discussion within the realm of reality.
I am not at all sure where you have invented some golfer I said was not good enough to hit over the sheds but can hit controlled draws and fades at will. I never said that--I suspect we had a miscommunication. Or something else?
I am referring to the choice being available, with no comment at all about anyone's particular abilities.
A "choice" is only available if the golfer can execute the shot.
If a golfer can't hit a fade or hook, then those aren't viable options, rather, figments of your imagination.
As we are not speaking of any particular golfer, how are we to know which shots or options are available? Not sure how you arrived there. As we are discussing the hole and not one particular player, it makes sense to see what options generally are available.
Of course, if a golfer is incapable of hitting a draw then a drawing shot is not a viable option for that golfer.
And a draw would end up in the rough only if you start it too far left.
If your golfer can't get the height and distance to get over the sheds, how's he going to hit a draw that starts out over the sheds ? You're contradicting yourself.
???
I am not sure where you are coming up with all this? I truly do not recall specifically saying anything about one particular golfer who was incapable of carrying the sheds but could hit a draw over the sheds. I was under the impression the hole itself was the issue, and the variety of options were the topic. Either you have badly misinterpretted something I have typed, or I have typed quite badly.
I mentioned that a draw over the sheds is certainly an option, and one that you have incorrectly said would have to end up in thick rough. I am not referring to someone who could not hit the ball high enough to hit over the sheds. That would be kinda silly. I will certainly stick with my contention that a draw over the buildings is a very clear option.
Err, no. You can hit it in the fairway without hitting it over any buildings. Needs a fade but certainly quite doable.
So, your golfer, who can't drive the ball with sufficient height and distance can now hit a fade at will ? You're living in a fantasy world.
'My golfer'? Who is 'my golfer'? Concentrate on the particular shot I mentioned--a fade left of the sheds that can end up in the fairway. That is all. No particular golfer who can or can't hit over the sheds.
I am not sure why you insist on going down the 'my golfer' path. I am mentioning particular shots and options that shows your contention that the Road Hole forces you to play a particular shot was erroneous.
Also, open your mind a bit--a number of people willingly and gladly play left of the fairway as the best option for them at that time.
I don't know any golfers that willingly and gladly drive the ball into deep rough on the left, rough that will leave them in a difficult position to finish the hole.
Sure you do, me. And lots of others. Also, the rough left is often not nearly the impenetrable jungle you keep making it out to be.
What was the lowest handicap you ever maintained ?
Whether it was a 1 or a 18 would have no bearing on this. It happened to be low single digits but that means nothing. Or is the implication that I am not a good enough golfer to understand what shots are available?
-
It could just be down to Stonehouse being a par 3 whereas PB Dye is a par 5 / 4.5 and the look is from 220 yards, downhill. Also, PB's is banked into a hillside whereas I recall Stonehouse not only does not back into a hill but has a road behind it, presenting less of a "theater" look. Thus, PB's views and scale may appear much "grander."
For even though I can't recall, judging by the flagsticks Stonehouse's back shelf looks higher, doesn't it? Is that the case?
That's a good point Mark--Dye's setting for 12 does lend itself to greater drama.
You know, I would not swear to it, but I don't remember Stonehouse's back shelf being higher. But it was only two plays and the pin wasn't back there and neither was I so I could well be wrong. The pics you found sure do make it look like it though.
-
Patrick, Ron Whitten said about the Road Hole:
The dreaded Road Hole at St. Andrews is a 455-yard, straightaway par 4 that many play as a double dogleg. The bold drive is blind over a corner of the Old Course Hotel property, and the smart approach is at the right-front edge of the diagonal green.
Thought you might like an overhead of the hole: tee upper left, green lower right:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/ahughes584/Random%20Golf/RoadHole.jpg)