Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Jeff Fortson on February 03, 2005, 02:05:35 AM
-
#10 at Riviera is a much talked about short par-4. At 315 yards it is reachable by many longer players today. However, trying to drive the putting surface isn't always the smartest play. For those of you that have never been to Riviera or seen the hole, I hope this gives you a better idea of why some think so highly of it.
First of all lets take a look at a view of the hole from the clubhouse...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10fromabove.jpg)
With my disturbingly bad painting skills I have painted numerous different shot possibilities from this view. Green=good, Yellow=playable, and Red=little if no chance.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10fromabovedemo2.jpg)
As you can see you want to keep the ball out of the hazards first. Secondly, any drive that ends up in the right rough is in big trouble. Ideally, a tee shot that can be placed on the putiing surface, just left of the putting surface, or over the back left of the putting surface is ideal. The safest, most prudent tee shot, ala Weir, is down the left side of the fairway just short of the long bunker left. This shot is generally played with a 2-iron or 3-wood for the scratch player.
Here are what the angles look like for different tee shots...
This is a safe, layup tee shot played toward the green but well short (approx. 100 yards). Not ideal, but playable.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Tommy_Naccarato/Riviera-10-019.jpg)
This is a Tee shot missed into the right rough. As you can see with a shallow green sloping away from you, you have little chance of holding the green, even with a wedge.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Tommy_Naccarato/Riviera-10-004.jpg)
This is a tee shot missed into the bunker made famous by Charles Howell that fronts the alternate green well right of the regular green. The shot he hit out of this trap would have gone down in LA Open history had he made the putt. They would have put a plaque in that bunker for him.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Tommy_Naccarato/Riviera-10-005.jpg)
This is a layed up tee shot placed in perfect position. This is where Weir hits his tee shot. Look at how much smarter it is to play left with a lay up shot.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10Perfectlayupleftsidefairway.jpg)
Here is the view of a perfectly driven tee shot with a driver that doesn't make the putting surface.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10perfectteeshot.jpg)
Here is a drive that goes a little past the green over the left side. This is another great spot to drive it if you can pull it off, as you are now chipping or pitching back into the slope.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10Justoverleftsideofgreen.jpg)
Here is a view from the back right of the green looking back toward the front of the green to give a different perspective. Look at how narrow this green is. It is truly a pleasure to be challenged with a hole like this on a daily basis.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Riviera10behindgreen.jpg)
Here I am hitting a tee shot on #10. Just another ass shot. As you can see I hit driver. I made par from 5 yards short of the green. It's a tough pitch shot from there.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/fortsonator/Fortson10.jpg)
I hope this helps those of you that have never seen the hole understand it a little better.
Remember, these are my opinions and others may feel differently about the strategy of the hole. That's what makes the hole so great..... OPTIONS!!!
Jeff F.
-
Thanks for the great pictures Jeff. For someone who has not played the hole, you have really brought it to life. It is only, however, when you see the two pictures of the green taken from the left that you appreciate how small it is, and the slope - and then everything falls into place!
-
Jeff:
In 2001 I went to the west coast and did a number of things but my primary reason to go was just to see that hole. In my opinion, it might be the best example of a perfect man-made architectural arrangement "in play" in the world. And to think it's on basically a smallish, naturally featureless landform.
To think that such a short hole has, not only such a wide variety of tee shot options, but all the 3-4 tee shot options seem to remain in such a perfect balance or equilibrium in relation to one another. That alone, makes the hole almost a perfect enigma through the years. But how could that be? Probably because each of those tee shot options never really seems to end up in any kind of consistently identifiable result when one is done with the hole day after day. So the risk and reward relationship of each option must be nearly ideal too!
I have a tape of the final group in the 1998 La Open (Woods, Love, and (I forget the name of the third)) all basically tied with one another and they all used a very different tee shot option with fascinating results that one would never have expected. But at the end of the line it's probably the temptation of that green right there so seemingly reachable that makes it!
Again, if someone asked me to pick what I would consider to be the most perfect man-made architectural arrangement in both concept and in fact in the world it would be this hole every time.
The only possible drawback I could say about Riviera's #10 is the green is so small that eventually it necessitated that alternate green to its right. I wish it didn't have to be there but it's a lot better they did that then change that original green in any way. That probably would have wrecked the incredibly balanced optional arrangement of the entire hole.
Geo Thomas very well may've been the true conceptual genius in the annals of golf architecture and this hole may be the proof of it!
-
How do visitors get to play Riviera which, I assume, is private?
-
Jeff,
Could be up for the most informative, architectural post of the year on GCA? Excellent work and one I thoroughly enjoyed reading.
I have studied this hole at some length when we were shown around by Matt Morton and this is clearly a great example of a green which dictates the smart play off the tee, which would be refreshingly welcome in today's world of architecture. As Tom said, for a flat hole that has been strategically considered from tee to green or green to tee - this hole must be a contender for confusion experience of the year. I would add though that in my opinion, the hole is a greater conundrum for the better player..
-
" I would add though that in my opinion, the hole is a greater conundrum for the better player."
James:
That's a fine point. If a golfer doesn't have the ability of some really good length off the tee, the most transfixing option of all on that hole really isn't available to him.
I guess that's a great example and probably proof that any golf hole can never be all things to all people!
However, there is a way, I believe, that that particular hole alone overcomes even that. More on that and why that may be later!
-
Thank you, Jeff for posting these detailed photographs and explaining the hole in a way, short of being there with you, that gets to the heart of the design.
What I simply fail to understand is why this hole is not conceptually copied in modern golf designs. It is so good, and yes more of a mental test for better players which in my opinion is great because their ability to hit the shots they want is a tighter spectrum than golfers with less ability so it tests the better player's strategy and ability to pull it off.
If I were building a new golf course, I would inisist on creating a conceptual version of this hole. Talk about templates, this is one that should've been replicated! Did Thomas do other versions of this concept elsewhere? Is this a great example where this hole actually got better with technology since the added distance added more permutations to the decision making? How did this hole play for the better player in the Golden Age? They didn't have the same options as they do today, do they? Maybe without irrigation, the ground game was more into play. How is the hole maintained vis a vis maintenance meld?
Sorry for so many questions. But this is the top of the pyramid in golf architecture--at least from this 3000 mile vantage point.
-
Matter of fact, I've mentioned Riviera's #10 so many times on here over the years as a really great example of architecture, I think I'm just going to say, in my opinion, it IS the greatest example of architecture in the world.
I may be different than most on here, though, in how I actually define "architecture". To me "golf architecture" is that which is man-made---not that which is inherently interesting about a landform in a natural sense. I may be very different than most in looking at it that way, but anyway....
But since I look at "architecture" that way and since the pre-existing landform of Riviera's #10 was so bland and lacking in "interesting natural aspect" I'd say this hole is the best example in the world of great golf architecture.
Nature didn't have much of anything to do with this one---it was pretty much all George Thomas!
-
Is it the camera angle, or does the tee really orient to the far left of the fairway?
-
There are many versions of this hole out there if you look, however, the hardest part to duplicate is the green because it is so small and narrow. I've played Riviera many times and because of its small size, it is sometimes out of play (resting) while the other green is used. The same goes for the famous #16 hole. The first thing I always ask when I go there is, "Are they playing the original greens"?
The tee is aligned to the left. Also, just because you can't drive the green (of all golfers, very few can) doesn't mean strategy is taken out of the hole. There are still numerous options available for the shorter hitter. One of the most intriguing aspects is that often the best play is "away" from the green to the left. It is very hard for most golfers to purposely play away from their target. It doesn't sit well with the ego. If the pin is middle or back and you are not coming in from the left hand side, you are all but dead!
This hole always has been one of my favorites because it is so simple yet so complex.
Mark
-
Jeff F, and all;
But here's the real architectural question about that hole and its fascinating architectural arrangement and the real question when one gets into asking whether or not it should be more often completely replicated or whether only it's basic concept should be;
Could that hole maintain the entire spectrum of it's enigmatic optional arrangement if one were to remove all the bunkering on it's fairway?
Personally, I believe it could with the possible exception of the fairway bunker long left. But even that one I wonder about, and here's why. If it weren't there obviously the left side on the tee shot would not be so intense and that would allow golfers to drive the ball with longer clubs from the tee down the left side instead of having to decide whether to lay up in front of that bunker or carry over it off the tee.
From a lay-up before the left bunker it's sort of a full SW in but if that bunker weren't there more golfers could drive the ball to the bunker's position or just beyond it. And what's a more difficult approach shot to a green like that---a full 100 yd SW or some finesse shot from 50-75 yards? I think, there's little question the latter is more difficult.
-
"There are many versions of this hole out there if you look, however, the hardest part to duplicate is the green because it is so small and narrow. "
For an uninitiated, could you please mention a few versions so that I know where to look? Are these others by Thomas or are they also by other architects?
-
Jeff,
Great job. I told Will before he was out with you the other day that it is my favourite short par in the world. I love that he went for it and missed, it shows its beauty all the more...
I love the pin in the "view from the back right of the green", is that the toughest pin? I know it is from the right side of the fairway, because your options are to hole it, or hit the pin.
-
Wayne,
I knew you would ask :) If I can, I'll try to develop a list and post it. I'm sure others can chime in in the meantime. For now, one example would be Weiskopf as he loves the short par four and always includes at least one in his designs. His inspiration is #10 at Riviera. C& C love this hole as well and it's philosophy and strategy plays a role in many of their short fours. Montgomery did one at Carton House that reflects the temptation and strategy of #10.
If you think about it, the hole is relatively simple but yet so complex. That said, a template of the design and its strategies is not hard to replicate. I think architects tend to substitute different hazards compared to what Thomas used (and not always a full cross bunker) so the "duplicates" are sometimes harder to recognize. However, they design their hole to have similar risk/reward playing strategies.
If Tom Doak is on he might comment about this. His course at Riverfront (if I remember correctly it is #7) has some similar playing characteristics in that it is a short par four that tempts a driver but depending on the pin location, a shot to the right away from the hole affords a better angle of approach. The green is smaller and narrower than it appears due to the severe contours. Angle of play is key to getting the ball close which is an important aspect of #10 at Riviera. The hole is also well bunkered creating tempting options off the tee.
Again, the biggest difference on most of these holes is the green size. The green is so small at Riviera you can't believe it. It wouldn't last a month on most courses that get a lot of play (which is why the alternative green was needed).
Mark
-
I just emailed GeoffShac to see if he'll join in this discussion because he probably knows the hole and Riviera as well as anyone. I'll email Dan Wexler and Lynn too.
If I recall correctly from Geoff, originally Thomas had the hole with no bunker at all green-side right and he decided to add it later. I think GeoffShac felt without it the hole would probably be just as good.
And here's probably why. Apparently, it's not just that the green is oriented in such an interesting way on a real diagonal as well as being so narrow in the back (the back is a mere 7 steps across) but it's the fact that the green tilts so well from right to left.
I see from Jeff Forston's lines and colored dots on one of those photos that playing the ball anywhere to the right of center on that fairway is not a smart play at all---obviously because trying to hit anything from that angle at that green over that bunker and down the tilt of the green is virtually impossible to do. But what if that right greenside bunker wasn't there as Thomas originally designed the hole? Would that actually INCREASE the availale options on the tee shot and approach shot to some degree?
I remember in that final group of the 1998 La Open "what's his name?" went well left with an iron for an approach right into the orientation of the green and birdied, Woods went into middle of the fairway with an iron and parred and Love took out driver and tried to drive the green. His tee shot ended up right in front of that right greenside bunker just slightly to the right of the green and I believe he muttered on the tee "I'm dead"! Love hit a perfect soft little 15-20 yard flop shot to the back pin but his ball went right over anyway into the left greenside bunker from where he made a pretty nice par putt of about 10 ft!!
-
Wayne:
For starters, the 12th at Rustic Canyon is supposed to be basically a take-off on the same basic concept of this hole although it doesn't look like it. The thought on #12 Rustic though was to forego the fairway bunkering to see if golfers could figure out that they probably needed to place the ball on the correct spot on the large unencumbered fairway anyway in relation to the various pin positions on the green---that was supposed to dictate various tee shot placements!
-
Jeff, thanks for what might be the best pictorial ever on GCA. Good stuff!
For another example of this hole style, with a tight driving area left to boot, check out #5 at Cuscowilla. The huge central bunker forces a tee shot either into the "Elysian Fields," a huge area right, or a very narrow neck of land left. The approach shot, usually with SW, from the right, is extremely difficult to a tiny crowned green. Bogies are common, birdies are rare.
From the left, the green looks just like #10 Riviera from the left, open and inviting. I've played Cuscowilla six or seven times now and only hit it left once. I'll never hit it right again!
-
Jeff,
This is the type of stuff that gets lost after a week. It is a great post and you should send it to Ran as a In My Opinion.
-
Montgomery did one at Carton House that reflects the temptation and strategy of #10.
Mark F,
Do you mean the 13th at Montgomerie (Stan Eby) at Carton House? It played to 340 yards and I really cannot see the similarites. Are you referring to the diagonal green? The thing about Riviera's is that from the right side the player is dead because of the angle. I think too few architects are willing to punish the golfer in such a way. In the following picture of the hole at Carton House, if you are right of where I took this picture, you have a bit of a backboard on the left side of the green.
(http://www.golfti.com/carton/montgomerie/pics/Med/13.jpg)
-
Jeff F:
MikeS is right, you should do that. But wait a while first to see if hopefully Shackelford, Shackelford and Wexler get on here.
-
"This is a shameless little harlot that sits at the end of the bar in her mesh stockings and winks at you."
-- LA Times golf writer Jim Murray, describing the 10th at Riviera
-
Bill,
That hole at Cuscowilla, #5 is another good example. Tom I also agree with you about #12 at Rustic. I know Gil has been inspired by #10 at Riviera and uses many of its strategies in his short fours.
Ben,
The 13th hole is the one I was talking about at Carton. It has some similarities and the 10th at Riviera was part of the inspiration. It is Colin's favorite hole on the property.
As I stated, you just can't make the green as small and as narrow as what exists now at Riviera without adding an alternate green. If the 13th green at Carton was that small it would be dead in weeks with the amout of play that course gets. Montgomerie had to make it larger, but frankly that is one of the best holes out there and there are many good ones. When the pros come to play it this spring for the Irish Open, you will see all kinds of plays off the tee. I love it when the Pro reaches for their driver than changes their mind and reaches for a five iron then goes back again. Now the architect is in the player's head and all kinds of interesting things can happen. That is the sign of a great strategic golf hole and that is what happens at #10. The Montgomerie Course at Carton House will play hard and fast and players will have to think their way around that design this May. #13 will baffle many of them as they won't be able to avoid the temptation to go straight at it.
Mark
-
How about the man himself? Did Thomas have other renditions of this hole on other courses? Did he recognize this hole as one of his great achievements?
-
Jeff,
What happened to the Ben Hogan hat from KPIII? Of any club, I would think it's appropriate at Riviera.
-
Another example of a hole at Riviera that I don't think could be improved upon.
I had no idea how incredible this place was until a few days ago.
If Geoff's vision of restoration was adapted, Riviera would be DRAMATICALLY improved.
-
When did the club realize this hole could not be played everyday by the membership.....I would think for a hole to be truly great it would have to be able to be played. This hole reminds me of Lido...great in theory and reputation but who gives a damn if it can't be played..
-
Fantastic stuff Jeff - many thanks for taking the time. Pictures do speak many words, but when you add knowledgeable words to great pictures, well then there you have it, a wonderful learning experience.
And 10 Riv remains a fantastic golf hole, due to all of the options and the temptation. Would anyone here agree that it might be BETTER with today's equipment, making driving the green that much more doable for that many more golfers... upping the temptation ante? When I played it as a high-schooler, driving the green was not an issue... so our options were just directional, and keeping it as left as possible was the only play. Of course the bunker complicated things. But even we were smart enough to see that shorter and lefter was better than closer to the green on the right. ;D
And Bill M., re Cuscowilla #5, it's easy to SAY you'll go left every time - hell yes the angle in is a lot better from up there - but that is a damn hard shot to pull off, particularly from the back tees! To me it's not so cut and dried... I ponder whether the risk is worth the reward... It's pretty easy to hit a 200 yard shot out there to the right and have a full wedge in (not that I ever did that myself, but I saw it done by the smart golfers kicking my sorry butt). Going left means a very bad miss long, short, right... a lot of risk in my book. I'm not convinced it's the better play, even with the superior angle - because having that shot several times, well... it ain't exactly easy, even if you're damn close to the green! That green is so narrow it's very easy to miss on the sides, even from up on the left.
(My apologies to Jeff if this causes a thread-jack. The similarities and differences between these two great holes just invite discussions of each).
TH
-
Jeff
That is one of the best posts I've ever seen here on GCA. THANK YOU.
The textbooks should copy your post as an example of a picture worth 1000 words. I will be copying them for my collection.
Riviera is truly a magnificent golf course.
Geoffrey
-
JakaBS
Another brilliant contribution ::) Thanks so much for your insight.
-
Jeff, You have outdone yourself. This is great work. thank you
-
JakaBS
Another brilliant contribution ::) Thanks so much for your insight.
Geoff,
When I saw your name the great sadly recently dead architect Phillip Johnson came to mind....Do you think his glass house near your beloved Yale is a great design for a house....It is a great design without question...but it's not liveable. The 10th hole at Riveria is a great design without question...but it is not playable by the members of the course on a day to day basis. It is an artistic achievement tragically flawed in the real world. Thats nice for the one time visitor but a bitch for the long term occupant..
-
Wow! Thanks for all the nice remarks and comments guys. I was simply doing this to share the hole with those that have never been there. The ensuing discussion on the merits of the strategy are great and I'll gladly contribute. More pictures will follow later this evening. I'll get some different angles to show different shots.
Ok, I'll try to answer some questions.....
TEPaul,
A little known fact is that the 10th green had NO bunkers around it originally. I've seen pictures of it and it still looks hard because of the green's cant away from the player, especially from the right side.
As for your question about how the hole would play with no fairway bunkers. I do think it would still hold up. THe only difference being that with the bunkers I feel the golfer is tempted to either play at the green or WELL left of the fairway bunkers when ideally you want to be just short of the bunker far left which one must take a leap of faith and play over the front fairway bunker. Basically, Thomas hid the perfect location visually by intimidating you with a forced carry and then another bunker there to grab your ball if you hit it too long. Genius.
JakaB,
Unfortunately, the hole is played to an alternate green once or twice a week. I think it's fine. The only time it stinks is when there is someone playing that won't get a chance to come back. Doesn't the Old Course get every Sunday off? Don't most "private clubs" back east get Mondays off? Why should Riviera be held to any other standard? I see nothing wrong with closing the green occasionally to preserve it's integrity and conditioning.
Wayne,
Geoff Shackelford, Daniel Wexler, or Tommy N. could probably answer those questions better. I can't think of a hole Thomas did that is similar to it.
Brian,
I still wear my Tam O'Shanters. Just not all the time. I need to get some new ones. Thanks for reminding me!
Jeff F.
-
JakaBS
I will not polute this discussion further. I thought you were just a stupid clown trying to stir things up for the hell of it. However, if you actually believe the crap you type on GCA then you do need to seek some medical advice and I truly believe that.
-
Jeff:
Whaddya think about my postulation that the hole might be better today than ever before, because with today's equipment reaching the green or getting very close to it becomes realistic for so many more people, thus adding to the temptation and upping the ante re choices?
TH
-
John B;
If you and the membership of your course had Riviera's #10 on it you should all consider yourselves lucky if the club only let you all play it once a year!!
:)
-
Jeff,
Is Riveria open 7 days a week....I've never heard of such a thing at a top notch club. I thought the 10th green was closed much more than just 2 days a week...if so I am wrong again and apologize to all offended.
-
Jeff (or anyone):
How far is the carry over the fairway bunkers, especially to the left?
Great stuff!
Jeff Goldman
-
Jeff Fortson,
Most recognize the inherent architectural and playability values in the hole.
But, what was the club's thinking behind creating another green ?
I don't mean in the sense of giving # 10 green a rest, but in terms of the architectural and shot values that they wanted to create.
-
JakaB,
The club is only closed on December 25th. The 10th hole plays to an alternate usually on Monday and maybe Tuesday. This week it has been open the entire time. Some weeks they may close it on wednesday too. The course needs rest like all other great clubs. Instead of closing the course, we close a couple of the greens that really need it and play to alternate ones. I think it's a testament to Riviera that it can handle so much play, year round. What other big-time private courses can boast that?
Jeff F.
-
Didn't they do it to ease traffic on the green, like PV #8?
Thanks so much for the photos - I look forward to the other pictorials on the other 17 holes. :)
Hope the little guy is doing well - isn't it about time to say Happy 1st Birthday?
-
Jeff,
Thanks very much for the pictoral and your analysis. At one time I had questioned its placement as the 10th hole and if a similar hole would be better placed elsewhere in the round. However, after more thought it gives the membership a great 19th hole or nighttime hole. And you're so right, what an office view!
Some questions I have: Is the front right bunker a decent play off the tee? How does this depend on pin position? I know that is a favorite play for some pros on driveable 4s but wonder if the green shape and contours prevents this from being a good play. Maybe its a yellow dot?
Thanks,
Pete
-
Jeff,
A great thread.
As for the dots, my option was the shortest and safest, the green dot on the extreme left. Wedge in, looking straight up the green.
There was no alternate green when I was a member and I cannot remember the course being closed on ANY day of the week.
-
Jeff F.
Excellent pictures but for those who haven't played it, the little colored lines were the best.
Many questions and as a 15 year member and the father of the former club historian, maybe I can put in my two cents.
Tom Paul probably knows the hole better than most on the left coast and he is stuck to his computer somewhere in suburban Philly. Pretty impressive.
Tom H. may have a good point. With today's long hitting the hole is just as good and may be even better. In year's past almost all tour players just dropped a ball and hit their two iron 200 yards left and had SW to the green. Only Daly, much to the cheering crowds would pull out driver. I saw him make 5 doing so. Russ Cochran made a 7 there. I know don't how he did it.
Just think how interesting the hole must have been when it opened, no green side bunkers and no kikuyu. This would have really brought in the ground game. They added the green side bunkers for the Los Angeles Open of either 29 or 30. Billy Bell may have consulted on the construction, but they don't have the "Bell look." They have evolved into severe bunkers. They work well.
On why isn't it duplicated more:
The 12th at Rustic Canyon adopts its strategy in a reverse direction. Procter and Axland, like most, adore the hole and attempted to bring in its strategy in a hole at Wildhorse (the 14th?). It baffles the locals there.
Once Geoff spoke with a slide show to the Architects Society and mentioned that he was surprised the hole wasn't duplicated more. My only thought is today's architect is reluctant to use so much acreage for such a short hole.
What you don't see from the pictures, but is a great great feature on the hole. You think your second shot to the green is to a green sloping back to front. Actually with the slope of the green it is actually flat, maybe even sloping away from you. This really adds importance to having the right angle.
The size of the green is a tiny 2,300 square feet. This scares today's architect, but I believe the green could keep its strategy if built on another course.
At the Nissan (I still prefer LA Open) they always use the back of the green for "Sunday's hole placement." Actually there is a location front left, just before the green slopes down and away that is frightening.
I will be forever convinced that Ernie Els lost his first major at the 10th. He lead for 3 days in the 95 PGA. It was his tournament. On Sunday the PGA put the flag up front. The temptation standing on the tee was too much for the inexperienced Els. After laying up short for three days, his pulled his driver. Can't remember if he may 4 or 5, but he seemed deflated after that disappointment of not making 3.
Ron Forse built the temporary green. The priority was that it would not affect the regular green or the play of the hole. It has fulfilled that goal. They play charity events on Mondays. Folks pay $500 to play Riviera and always have the temp to play on #10. With about 60,000 rounds a year, the regular 10th could be okay, but the club errors on the side of making sure the greens are good for the Nissan. This is at the expense of member play.
When Jack Nicklaus did his best 18 holes in championship golf, the 10th at Riviera made the list, appropriately so.
Actually it is pretty playable for all. Hit it 170 yards left off the tee and you have an interesting 130 yard shot.
Finally, a guest standing on the 10th tee said, "why can't I just drive it straight at the green?" A member I know replied "well you have to play it about 50 times and then you will go left and safe."
A
-
I meant to say the slope of the canyon actually makes the green flat or sloping away from you.
-
I am sure someone has probably said this in the many posts but wouldn't tree removal give the green a fighting chance for survival? Trying to judge from the sun angles in the pictures, it seems that the green lacks morning sun.
Lynn,
I do not think the amount of area is a primary reason why this concept is not implemented. If you look at many courses there is a lot of room along that line of charm that just simply is not incorporated into the design of holes. So, I think the powers in architecture simply don't believe in or do not feel compelled to explore the line of charm in their designs.
-
Kelly, there did exist a sun and tree issue. Before the Senior Open, Paul Latshaw, who was brought in, did significant tree removal. The green doesn't get a lot of early morning sun, but it is now adequate.
I don't quite understand your thoughts on land and line of charm. Sorry.
-
Except for the usual moronic rantings of the GCA clown this is probably the best thread I've ever seen on GCA. Thanks, Jeff, for sharing it and thanks everyone else for adding their insight.
-
Lynn -
I think Kelly is trying to say that one of the keys to the hole is that hazards are placed in spots where one might wish to go, as opposed to the more common practice of hazards being placed in penal areas that one would be avoiding anyway.
It's nice to hear that the alternate green is not used too much, but it would make me madder than heck to pay $500 for a charity event and end up playing the alternate green.
-
The hole by some could simply have been designed to be a short doglegged right hole. However, what I called the line of charm maybe more correctly was called the line of instinct by Behr would be the direct line to the green from the tee as indicated by the yellow line on one of the photos. Often times I see that direct line to the green, and the land that falls between the tee and the green not being used in the design. It is simply rough, or maybe even wooded.
MacKenzie said it in his book TSoSA
"Some of us would even go further, and say that no hole is a good one unless it has one or more hazards in a direct line to the hole. Max Behr, who is one of the best American golf architects, states that the direct line to the hole is the line of instinct, and that to make a good hole you must break up that direct line in order to create the line of charm."
It seems the 10th embodies this concept and more because much is written here about more detailed elements like green size orientation and slope, but I rarely see golf couses that embody the aforementioned concept on any hole, and therefore you see many opportunites where this concept could be employed, the land is there but either the vision, the belief, possibly the construction or maintenance budget did not allow it to happen, but the land is definately there.
Saying that a 2500 sf green does not get a lot of morning sun does not sound adequte to me. I mean it seems you need more than adequate sun given the green size and type of shots coming in, and you need full sun starting first thing in the morning which in my understanding that is the most important light, but your there and I am in the snowbound land of the about to be new superbowl champions so my insight is without weight.
-
Jeff:
This is a textbook tutorial on hole design/strategy. For the amateur architecture afficianado like me that's just learning, this is a classic post.
Maybe Ran would consider adding a section to this site - something like "My Favorite Hole." Your post could be the template.
Andy
-
Nice one Jeff.
It reminds me a lot of the opening hole at an earlier course, MacKenzie's Sitwell Park (1913). The fairway bunkering's a lot simpler there - just a couple on what Kelly described as the line of instinct. But the small angled green and greenside bunkering appears very similar.
There's OB left and you have to drive quite close to it to set up the best angle for the approach.
Unfortunately some saplings have been planted to the right of the fairway bunkers so in a few years it will become one of those conventional doglegged right holes. Sorry, no pics.
-
Lynn:
We see a lot of Ron Forse these days and I think I heard him mention that he did that right green. Did I heard that correctly? Also, was the right green added before soft-spikes were required on that golf course or afterwards?
-
Tom H.,
I think you could make a very storng argument that modern technology has opened the door to more options in this case. Great point.
Pat,
Re: alternate green... I'm not sure why it was created. One of the Shackelford's would probably be a better person to ask. I assume it was to limit traffic on the regular green.
In regards to the strategy, there is some but not nearly as much as the normal green. You could theoretically try to drive the alternate green but a tee shot put in any part of the fairway works great. It is a semi-blind approach as Howell's Bunker blocks the view of the bottom of all hole locations.
Forgive me for forgetting who brought it up but I wanted to address the option of driving your tee shot into the greenside bunker. It really depends where the pin is. There are certain hole locations that would receive a bunker shot perfectly. There are others where the bunker shot would be a nightmare. The strategy of driving the ball into the front bunker changes daily.
Basically, I try to stay out of it at all costs. The perfect tee shot played with a driver for me is just left of the green or just over the left edge. Obviously, driving it on the putting surface is the most ideal, but rarely attainable. I have played the hole about 100 times and been on the green off my first shot once. Out of the 100 times I have played the hole I have hit driver about 45 times.
More pictures will be added later. I'm going out for a shoot in an hour or two so more should be posted this evening when I get home.
Again, thanks for all the kind words.
Jeff F.
-
Jeff: cool. Interesting in that we have a rare occurrence in this game where modern technology seemingly helps instead of hurts....
TH
-
Wayne and others,
Sorry for getting into the conversation kind of late here.
The 10th is just some magnificent stuff. It breaks a lot of rules and there are others that use a lot of its inspiration. Hopefully I can get Brian Curley to comment on what the hole is meant to both he and Lee Schmidt as far as inspiration because they have built several excellent golf holes inspired by the 10th, and they are a kick to play. In fact, I would say that right now they are some of the best holes in the Cochella Valley. Add Goose Creek's 10th in there too. While htey aren't exact renditions, you could surely see the inspriation.
Getting back to Thomas, Wayne asks if he actually built other renditions of the hole, and I think I've have found one where the strategy was similar--but not exact. The 13th at Ojai and it's framework can still be seen, although the hole has been--like most of all of Thomas' great works--tampered with to the point of almost non-existence. One day with Lynn and Jim Wagner, I made sure I pointed it out to them that I think I had found an old green site, when in fact, after obtaining the 1929 aerial, found out it was the old left side bunker. Here is the snippet of the old hole. Now mind you my pithy artwork isn't showing how the finger of ravine extends into the 11th fairway. None the less, the strategies are similar as the 10th at Riviera.
(http://home.earthlink.net/~tommy_n/13-Ojai.jpg)
So much more can be said about this hole--so much more, and we aren't even to the tournament yet!
-
When did the club realize this hole could not be played everyday by the membership.....I would think for a hole to be truly great it would have to be able to be played. This hole reminds me of Lido...great in theory and reputation but who gives a damn if it can't be played..
The hole demands of the average member that they be on or around the green complex in three shots, and find a way to make a 5 to nett par the hole, 4 to make a triumphant nett birdie, or 6 for nett bogey. Added to that is the fact that at no point does it require the average golfer to need a sleeve of balls to finish the hole, 'nor take 25 minutes to play it in a fourball. I cannot fathom how if the green on a short hole is tough to hit in regulation, it can be deemed to be a hole that cannot be played by the membership. If desired, a beginner could play the hole with any club in the bag.
-
Kelly Blake:
Interesting that you were speaking of Behr's "Line of Charm" and in the context of Riviera's #10.
First of all, since I've studied Behr so much it seems that his concept that was referred to as Behr's "Line of Charm" has been sort of misconstrued generally at least the name of it has but you got it absolutely right and basically, in my opinion, that quote and reference to it by Mackenzie is the only thing I've ever seen that explains it correctly.
Most people think the "Line of charm" is the taking away of that spot where a golfer instinctively wants to hit the ball with something like a bunker---eg generally right at an ultimate target whether it be a green or another specific target.
But what most people call the "line of charm" really is (as Mackenzie said, and you said) the "line of instinct". That is what needs to be taken away from the player as an option by a bunker feature or some other obstacle feature. Only by removing it can an architect then create a "line of charm". I do think this has been misunderstood because what MacKenzie (and Behr) should've more properly said is taking away the "line of instinct" by placing a obstacle feature on it creates lineS of charm---in other words, removing the "line of instinct" logically should create two, three or even four additional "lines" or options! This is obvious because then a golfer if given the room (fairway) could choose to play short of it, left or right of it or directly over it!
It may sound like a relatively simple concept once explained but it was developed by Behr apparently and it's one of the reasons he believed so strongly in width and also very minimal use of rough, generally speaking.
Behr's "lineS of charm" concept and the luxury of width sort of go hand in hand, as does his ideas of putting thinks like some bunkering completely INSIDE fairway lines!
-
Thanks Jeff for helping us all understand why this hole is so
great! It is interesting that for a hole that is so universally
applauded, no one can come up with other holes that copy its'
merits. Tommy's right that Schmidt/Curley have done a few
that copy the disruption of the line of instinct and force
players to play to the edge of a generous fairway to get the
best angle; #8 on the Marriott's Shadowridge course comes
to mind. But none of these holes are as effective as the 10th
because they don't have a green that slopes away from the
golfer. This seems to be the real genious of #10; even with a
wedge in hand golfers cannot get close from the wrong angle.
Why do modern architects refuse to build greens which slope
away from the golfer, like #6 at TOC? Wasn't this one of
Ran's 10 Greatest Sins of Modern Architecture essay from the
Golfer magazine?
-
Tony Titheridge -
I think Bar-Bar (as my friend's son used to call the purple dinosaur) is referring to the fact that because the green is so small on Riviera #10, they have another one tucked back there somewhere to give the first one some rest every now and then.
I have to agree with him on this one.
-
Here's a view of another good Schmidt/Curley driveable par 4
(in the middle, going up), #1 at Oak Quarry in Riverside, CA,
275 yards uphill. I have a pic from the tee at home, but it's
not ready to post:
(http://image.globexplorer.com/gexservlets/gex?encrypt=eXRtPCwwMDYvNTI5ODY1NTk2OTUneHRtPDI1LzEyMzgyNjIwNjA5J3ltczwsMDA2LzUyMTIwNDc4NTA5J3htczwyNS8xMzYwMTIzMTIxNCd0aGU8MDI2MzknaGk8MjMxJ2h2PDUxMSdtcjwwJ2JsZTxobGBmZCdoZTwzMDIzMTExOTEwJ2BxcWhlPDEzMTAxMVYndXI8MDAxNjU3NzQ2Mjk3Ng==)
-
Kelly:
But now that you've mentioned Behr's "line of Charm" in relation to Riviera's #10, and now that I know what you really mean is the "line of instinct", let's look to see how the "line of instinct" works on Riv's #10!
As you said, the "line of instinct" from the tee on Riv's #10 is to hit the tee shot right at the green. Did Thomas remove that "line of instinct" right at the green as an option by placing a bunker or obstacle feature on it? Not at all. If you look at the photos above it looks almost like a straight fairway corridor right at the green (line of instinct). How inviting does that look to a player from the tee who may not be that aware of all the endless nuances of that hole? Pretty inviting and tempting, I'd say.
But the truth is, as Jeff F has said (and with his lines and colored dots as the places to drive the ball or not) above and every player and long player (like Davis Love) who knows that hole well knows, if a long ball hitter strays even a yard right of about the direct line from the tee to the left side of that right greenside bunker (which definitely looks like the ideal "line of Instinct") basically you're dead, particularly if the pin is in the back.
So Thomas didn't actually take the "line of instinct" away from the player by placing an obstacle feature on it he merely took away everything even a yard right of that line of instinct from the player as a possible second shot option! How cool and sophisticated a "line of instinct" (lines of charm) use is that?
Lynn:
That's very interesting the green may actually slope slightly from front to back. I did not know that at all! The reason I know that hole so well is one morning starting very early (day break) I walked that course but since seeing Riviera's #10 is really why I went west, I did spend over an hour that morning looking at everything about that hole from every angle, measuring everything etc. But I didn't pick up on that slight front to back tilt on the green, though, and now the other thing I don't really remember is----does the front of the green slope right to left as much as the back---or more or less? For some reason I can't remember that part.
Lynn, the other thing about Riviera that I've said on here many times that really did strike me, is how despite the golf course being within that canyon which anyone can see is pretty confining and even despite the fact that the course probably has too many trees (far more than in Thomas's time) it just doesn't feel confined for some odd reason when you on any hole. How or why can that be? But it is!
Frankly, the thing I really took away from that trip to SoCal is the unbelievable uniqueness of what one might term "Canyon Golf" in Southern California. I sure never saw anything like it before or since.
-
Tony Titheridge -
I think Bar-Bar (as my friend's son used to call the purple dinosaur) is referring to the fact that because the green is so small on Riviera #10, they have another one tucked back there somewhere to give the first one some rest every now and then.
I have to agree with him on this one.
I take the point. I guess the Lido reference and saying "able to be" played lead me to believe that the post was aimed at the ability of the less gifted rather than the traffic.
-
The reason the alterative green was built was due to agronimic reasons. Given the amount of play the course recieves some 75,000 rounds per year on greens that avarage a little over 3000sqft per green it not hard to understand why the need for an alterative green. This concept started back in the late 1980's with the first alterative green being bulit for #16. Most of the problems found at Riviera occur in the winter time when the soil temperatures drop significantly resulting in a drastic reduction in growth and abilty to withstand heavy play. This was particularly a problem down on holes 5,6 and 16. I remember soil temperatures down in the lower 40's was not that uncommon. Soil temperatures and lack of direct sunlight on #10 were not as much of a problem as was the size of the green and pinable locations for the amount of traffic.
Sean
-
I think Thomas did take away at least part of the line of instinct by putting in the cross bunker. In 1930, I doubt everyone was simply pulling out driver.
Has technology made this hole less interesting for pros, but more interesting for everyone else?
-
George, The hole is still provocative as ever--I think.
Most of them are so tempted to take it to the hole yet few succeed and when they return in succeeding days, you can still see them wanting to go for it again and again--Most are lucky not to walk away wtih bogie or worse after it happens!
This is what makes the Jim Murray comment even more interesting.
Screw with it, and its going to cost you! :)
-
Interesting question, George.
Why would it be less interesting for pros today?
Remember it is 315 to the middle, so say 310 to the left front edge. There aren't many, if any, pros for whom that's not a driver.
I'd say the temptation for them is even greater today, as so many more can reach that front edge, and not with some herculean shot... Not too many years ago, it was out of reach for damn near all of them, so the choice was simple, as a few have explained here - just plunk down a 2iron and try to stay left.
What's your thinking here?
TH
-
Last year, many were going for the green only to push the ball on the right side, then forced with the reality of having to flop a shot out of Kikuya rough and get the ball to stop on that sliver of a green. It's an almost impossible task.
Many who are just off of the front can then try to chip on, and that's where it becomes even more frustrating because it too is slick and hard to stop, then takes the usual turn for the left and then can run right off of the green. This all sounds so difficult, and the length is what makes it that much more enticing to go for it.
From the Riviera yardage book that Geoff wrote that is unfortunately no longer sold in the pro shop--its one of the greatest souvenir yardage books I have ever seen:
Many consider this to be the best short par - 4 in all of golf! Why? Because of all of the various playing options from the tee. The smart play is to keep the ball left of the tee despite the urge to take the short cut to the hole.
If you want to be a bit more daring, aim at the palm trees that sit just behind the bunker some 250 yards from the tee. From the left side, the small and well bunkered green is most accessible for the second shot, whereas on the right side it is difficult to hit the ball close to the pin. Watch the steep drop-off on the left front of the green. Also note that your yardages to the back of the green as this is the deepst putting surface on the course. Use the same strategy for the alternate green, but add 20 yards for your approach shot.
-
Remember it is 315 to the middle, so say 310 to the left front edge. There aren't many, if any, pros for whom that's not a driver.
Funny, last night I replayed my Tivo copy of the Masters final round...Mickelson hit a 3 wood off the 18th tee. Tee shot went 305 yds, leaving him 160 to the pin.
-
How important is it that this hole is #10? (especially to tournament play)
How important is it to the experience that this hole come at the start of the back nine?
Does this seem considered?
-
"How important is it that this hole is #10? (especially to tournament play)
How important is it to the experience that this hole come at the start of the back nine?
Does this seem considered?"
Adam:
In my opinion, and apparently in the opinions of those who really know this course (GeoffShac et al) this is huge---and probably totally psychological.
Ever felt when you lost ground on a front nine and when you total up what you shot, you feel when you step to the tee on the 10th---the next nine---it's like the next set in tennis---like a new beginning, or like a new chance to really go after it and make up lost ground?
Do you think a super tempting/high risk/reward hole like Riv's #10 plays into that psychology? I think it does bigtime!
-
Jeff,
Are your red lines places where birdie is very hard or where it will be hard to actually par the thing? Like for example if you put it in the right rough going for the right green, you say there isn't much chance of holding that green, and it sure looks like that to me. So you can try to get cute with it and risk dumping it in the bunker, or make sure you are over the bunker and likely go long. How hard is the up and down from the rough over the green if you go long from right of the green, and how hard would the up and down be from that right bunker?
What I'm getting at is that for someone like me, who is long but not the best wedge player (understatement of 2005 so far) doing a layup to 100 yards I'm probably not going to make many birdies anyway, so my main criteria in deciding to go for it would be avoiding places where making a par is difficult, and I'm not sure if there really are any. The only way I get to a place where there's a good chance of a birdie is probably to drive it on or just short of that green, but failing to do so doesn't put me in much worse of a position score-wise than if I laid up to leave a 100 yard shot in.
So its probably more of a decision hole for top players who have the ability to drive it there, but also have a good chance of making a birdie with the layup. The risk of getting into a spot where they make 4 is a real one. But beyond those guys you got the long hitter who doesn't have the super sharp 100 yard wedge game, and the shorter hitter who has no option because he can't get home (so he'll lay up whether or not his 100 yard wedge gives me good birdie chances) IMHO those guys have one correct play from the tee and don't get all those options the plus handicaps and pros do.
-
Ah OK, Peter's post answers my question. There seems to be quite a good chance of failing to make par from that right rough after all!
-
Ah OK, Peter's post answers my question. There seems to be quite a good chance of failing to make par from that right rough after all!
Doug,
From my post above:
Last year, many were going for the green only to push the ball on the right side, then forced with the reality of having to flop a shot out of Kikuya rough and get the ball to stop on that sliver of a green. It's an almost impossible task.
-
TommyN:
The tilt of the green right to left is quite something coming from the right side of the hole on the approach. The depth of what you are shooting at from over there is so shallow as to be virtually impossible. Do you really think it's a good thing that everything right of the direct line from tee to that green is basically taken away as viable or do you think it should be a bit more doable? Otherwise why isn't that hole basically about half as wide as it's always been (basically from the direct line left)? Do you think, as some might suspect, that the hole could be even better than it already is if that right greenside bunker just wasn't there as Thomas originally designed that hole? If that bunker was not there the approach would be very difficult from right of center for the very reasons of the greens shallowness from that angle and the tilt of the green from over on the right and from the tee with no bunker greenside right there would be a less a obvious target to aim at---eg no farther right than the left side of that right greenside bunker.
What do you think? Was the hole even better the way Thomas originally had it with no right greenside bunker?
Maybe the left greenside bunker wasn't there either but that's not so much of an issue.
-
Remember it is 315 to the middle, so say 310 to the left front edge. There aren't many, if any, pros for whom that's not a driver.
Funny, last night I replayed my Tivo copy of the Masters final round...Mickelson hit a 3 wood off the 18th tee. Tee shot went 305 yds, leaving him 160 to the pin.
So the argument is that most pros would go for the green on #10 Riv with something less than driver? That the hole is two short now, as a one-shotter, for all of them?
I don't buy it. Oh, I'm sure at times Lefty and others CAN get a 3wood to roll out 305, on ultra-fast fairways such as Augusta. I sincerely doubt he could do the same thing in early February at Riv. And even if he could.. I'm just not seeing this as the norm, such that the hole is so "short" that it's less interesting for the pros than it once was. If that was the case, every single one of them would be lofting it up to the green with a 3wood and you just don't see that. If anything today's technology just makes it seem more doable, so way more try for it, and usually suffer the consequences... and even the astute ones, who know the higher percentage play, sometimes can't help the temptation. Compare this to the day when NO ONE besides the huge hitters like George Bayer, etc. could even think of getting close to the green, and thus damn near every player just hit a 200 yard shot out there and a wedge in, and well... it simply must be more interesting, with more choices, today.
TH
-
Tom Paul,
In my view of things, the bunker was just one of those "added" touch-ups that any course needs to make the strategy even more defined. It was really needed for the better player, not so much the everyday guy who had better options going left. But the thought of running a chip onto a sloped bank and then letting it trickle on there to the pin would be another aspect for the Less talented driver/Excellent short game player. The kind of guy that is going to let his game speak not in length, but in short irons and putting. You know, guys like YOU! ;)
-
Tommy Naccarato & Jeff Fortson,
How much of a negative influence has the L-wedge had on the play of the hole and it's architectural values ?
Did the creation of the L-wedge permit better players to try to get as close to the green as possible ?
-
Ah OK, Peter's post answers my question. There seems to be quite a good chance of failing to make par from that right rough after all!
Doug,
From my post above:
Last year, many were going for the green only to push the ball on the right side, then forced with the reality of having to flop a shot out of Kikuya rough and get the ball to stop on that sliver of a green. It's an almost impossible task.
Well, that statement of yours wasn't strong enough I guess, it didn't make it clear to me that a par would be a great score from there. If I can't stop the ball on the green because its shallow from that angle and tilted away from me then it goes long, fine. If I'm left with an uphill chip from the rough (if I'm assuming that greenside rough is reasonable stuff) a bit over the green 20' from the hole I can probably make par fairly often. But Peter was talking about taking 4 to get over the bunker -- that must be some really damn serious rough over there!
-
Pat I don't think the L wedge has changed things much. Out of kikuyu rough, nothing grabs on the green. And any good sand wedge from the kikuyu fairway has always grabbed. The thing is the look. It appears you need to land the wedge shot onto the top of your car's hood. As Johnny Miller would say, "it will tighten your fanny."
If you are coming in from the right or for than matter over any bunker, you cannot hold any wedge within 5 feet of it landing spot.
This is even more true as you get closer to the green.
-
Pat,
One time at #3, I played for short of the right greenside bunker, thinking that because I failed to get my drive to the left side of the fairway, I would have just play the hole as a three-shotter and try to make par from there with a one putt.
I pulled out my trusty, tried and true Callaway Hi Lob Hickory Stick, and hit about as high of a flop as humanly possible. This thing went sky-high, and it looked like I nailed the distance perfectly.
It then took-off like the charge of the light brigade and ran almost off of the back of the green. This was as high of a lob as possible! Mind you its going down canyon which does make a difference at Riv.
And I did make the putt too by the way. About a 16 footer, my first ever par there on a hole Lynn will attest gave me nothing but problems the first time I ever played it.
Doug, Well your response just isn't strong enough either! ;)
For today's player, the "L" wedge or Hi Lob club is an important one at Riviera. All the more reason to understand how the technology has sort of misplaced the importance of the architecture. Still, try getting one of those "L" wedges thru about 3-4 inches of Kikuya rough and tell me the truth if you didn't strain or break your wrist! Huckaby will tell you how that feels!
Also, in the US Senior Open, I saw Dave Stockton hit his ball from the green side Kikuya rough at #18, and the ball popped-up about two inches and then settled even deeper into it, right in the same exact spot. He wasn't even able to take a divot! To think of someone trying to hit a high-lob from the right side of #10 and then try to hold it is close to impossible. You might be able to do it if the pin is more towards the rear, but as far as the front 2/3rds of the green--fahgidaboudit!
"Those sausage & peppers? Fahgidaboudit!"
-
"Tom Paul,
In my view of things, the bunker was just one of those "added" touch-ups that any course needs to make the strategy even more defined. It was really needed for the better player, not so much the everyday guy who had better options going left."
TommyN:
I agree. I think on the tee shot alone that right greenside bunker absolutely and specifically "defines" the line for the long driver attempting to go right at and near or on the green. He knows (as Love did in 1998) he really can't stray even a yard right of the line from the tee to the left side of that right greenside bunker. And that is "defining" that strategy for him. Is "defining" a strategy more what's needed? Not in my book! I prefer a philosophy of "anti-definition". I think it serves to make strategies appear to the golfer through both continuous play and experience, not just visuals.
-
Tom,
In contrast, thinking of the way Rustic Canyon #12 came out, you will someday see what the hole is actually like without the bunker, or at least you'll be able to understand it much better. (Not that the 12th was a copy or emulation. More of an inspiration)
I've seen mroe guys try to drive that hole only to end up way too long and way to right because of the way the balls feeds off of the slope. the ball gets on that green and looks like its on its way to Oxnard.
-
TommyN:
That's exactly what I mean. Rustic Canyon's #12 is the same basic concept as Riviera's #10 with at least one very different wrinkle. Or at least that was the idea before it got built.
Obviously at Riv's #10 there are a number of different options from the tee that makes the hole so good and those options appear to be in a fairly steady "balance" or "equilibrium" over the years, in that they all seem to be used indiscriminately by even very good players. In other words, it seems that no one ever seems to settle on one way or the best way to play it. But Riv's #10 has a considerable amount of fairway bunkering on an enormous fairway and always has had. That bunkering does dictate tee shot decisions to a large extent.
At Rustic's #12 the concept discussed was to do that or how to do that with no bunkering on an enormously wide fairway while at the same time getting players to figure out both why and how it really did make a difference where you placed your ball on that tee shot---obviously depending on where the pin was.
Some of what was discussed out there was the idea that if an arrangement could be created that could eventually get players to understand that despite that huge unencumbered fairway (no bunkers at all on it unlike Riv #10) that the hole might really be sophisticated because it would basically force players to think more in "whole hole" strategic way instead of the more common way of overcoming the problem on a tee shot frist and after that was done then beginning to consider and overcome the problems on the approach shot.
They wanted the players to notice the green and it's particular pin before deciding what to do on the tee shot. That was what it was all about---and that's why it was decided that no bunkering should go on the fairway. At least that's my recollection.
Riviera's #10 was probably mentioned at some point but there certainly was no attempt made to actually copy the look of it--just the same basic multi-optional tee shot and a green that could kick strategy all the way back to the tee shot.
GeoffShac sent me a whole bunch of really good photos of it from all kinds of angles but I've never seen it in person. We all did discuss the fact that doing such a big fairway with no bunkering at all on it could be a bit risky in that it might have been that most players simply didn't see the point of it and might just criticize the tee shot for being too easy.
All I said to Geoff and Jim is that obviously with that arrangement the green itself sure did have to kick back a ton of actual strategy to the tee. I said that had to happen by making a player realize over time that even if he thought he hit a good tee shot without thinking about where on that fairway it was that green was going to have to make him really pay on the approach shot if he happened to hit what he thought was a good tee ball but into the wrong place on that big unencumbered fairway.
I can't really remember that well now but I think I might've been visualizing a green that had a ridge running from front left to back right that would dictate the best place to come from on that fairway depending on the pin. I don't remember if I mentioned a green formation like that only that the green had to make players pay for being in the wrong place without realizing it.
I'm certainly not talking about removing the right greenside bunker on Riviera's #10---this to me is simply a discussion of a concept and how it would work best in play.
-
TE Paul,
I got a bit confused with your response but I beleive we agree about the importance of the line of instinct and that it is not intended to take away an option. In fact I think the line of instinct recognizes the importance of bringing into play the direct line between the tee and the green. It seems it is a distinct design concept from the doglegged hole. There are many courses with one or two holes that could be vastly improved had the line of instinct been brought into the design. On every routing I draw the lines of instinct and examine them in the field to see how they can be brought into the desing of the hole. On a well bunkered hole like the 10th at Riviera it seems you have a doglegged hole if you follow the layout to the left and then back right to the green, a doglegged right hole, but the line of instinct has opened up another avenue, and added more avenues of play between the traditional far left line that makes it a doglegged hole, and the line of instinct, as Jeff's diagram shows there are many avenues of play between these two lines, so I think the line of instinct concept is a much richer, more exciting advancement on the typical doglegged hole.
One other thing it seems that the recognition of the line of instinct in design may get diminished because of the preceived threat to holes by the increase in distance from the new technology. in otherwords some may fear opening up the direct line between the tee and the green because it makes the hole "shorter" for some. That would be one unfortunate tragedy to come from advanced technology in equipment. Forcing everyone to play along the longest line of play from tee to green would diminish the quality of golf.
-
Interesting question, George.
Why would it be less interesting for pros today?
Remember it is 315 to the middle, so say 310 to the left front edge. There aren't many, if any, pros for whom that's not a driver.
I'd say the temptation for them is even greater today, as so many more can reach that front edge, and not with some herculean shot... Not too many years ago, it was out of reach for damn near all of them, so the choice was simple, as a few have explained here - just plunk down a 2iron and try to stay left.
What's your thinking here?
TH
Just seems like we're approaching the point of just pull out the driver and hit it.
I read a book a long time ago called Through the Green (I think) that detailed the '92 LA Open as seen through the eyes of DLIII, who ended up losing in a playoff to Freddie. He goes through an agonizing process each day trying to decide whether or not to layup. I think he went for it more often than he laid up, usually to his detriment.
Now, back then DLIII was enough longer than the average Tour player that he was probably faced with a decision the rest weren't. But the distances have increased so much that I wonder if the "just plunk a 2 iron" hasn't changed to "just hit driver".
This is not to say it isn't still one of the best, maybe the absolute best, hole that the big boys face all year. It just shows how fine the lines are.
As an aside, in the book I referenced, Davis describes an area near the green as the barranca, an unkempt area that was marked as a hazard (important because it ended up being part of a ruling where someone accused him of grounding his club - he was absolved). Where is this barranca?
-
Just seems like we're approaching the point of just pull out the driver and hit it.
I read a book a long time ago called Through the Green (I think) that detailed the '92 LA Open as seen through the eyes of DLIII, who ended up losing in a playoff to Freddie. He goes through an agonizing process each day trying to decide whether or not to layup. I think he went for it more often than he laid up, usually to his detriment.
Now, back then DLIII was enough longer than the average Tour player that he was probably faced with a decision the rest weren't. But the distances have increased so much that I wonder if the "just plunk a 2 iron" hasn't changed to "just hit driver".
This is not to say it isn't still one of the best, maybe the absolute best, hole that the big boys face all year. It just shows how fine the lines are.
As an aside, in the book I referenced, Davis describes an area near the green as the barranca, an unkempt area that was marked as a hazard (important because it ended up being part of a ruling where someone accused him of grounding his club - he was absolved). Where is this barranca?
That's not the case at all, George. Watch the tourney this week. If anything there's way more thought today. Not many still do go for the green - just a heck of a lot more than ever have, that's all.
I know of no hazard on 1o... there's such on 11... maybe that's what Davis was describing?
TH
-
It's an amazing hole.
How receptive does the green have to be kept, to give at least a fighting chance of holding the green from the right hand side?
It's hole that could only have been designed inland IMO.
-
It's an amazing hole.
How receptive does the green have to be kept, to give at least a fighting chance of holding the green from the right hand side?
It's hole that could only have been designed inland IMO.
Paul
Why do you make that last statement? I can think of at least one great links hole which could be made greater, using a few of the principles of Riviera #10.
BTW........
This IS one of the great GCA threads, despite the occasional and unfortunately typical mindless Barney bashing. Great job Jeff! And, yes, this format should be a feature of this site. There is more real GCA in Jeff's first post than a month of the rest of us combined rabbiting on self-importantly........
-
shiv:
Fair and sincere question: you hit the ball as long or longer than most pros. If trying to reach the green was your goal, would you sincerely do it with anything less than driver? And IF you were playing this in serious competition, would it be "just pull out the driver and hit it" as George says? That is, that driving it is so doable, with so little risk, that the options really aren't there for the big hitter other than to just fire away.
Note I'm not asking "playing for the hell of it, hole by hole, just caring about making birdies" shivas. I'm asking the "competitive, needs to think carefully" shivas that is still in there and does come out from time to time when need be. ;)
I don't see it this way, but George is very astute and has me questioning a bit my original thought that it's more interesting today than it ever has been, because so many more people can now think of getting close to the green....in the old days most couldn't reach anyway, so that temptation didn't exist.
Whaddya think?
TH
-
Fair and sincere question: you hit the ball as long or longer than most pros. If trying to reach the green was your goal, would you sincerely do it with anything less than driver?
Tom -
I think the issue of driver or not depends on the design features of the hole and the playing conditions.
Use #3 at Rustic as an example. I by know means am a long driver and I was on the green twice with driver. Someone of Shivas length could very easily get there with 3-wood because of the fairway firmness. Ditto the 15th or 16th at TPC Scottsdale.
Mike
-
Mike:
I get that, without a doubt. Re #3 Rustic, hell I reached that with a freakin' 3iron down-gale. I also can definitely reach that with a driver with no wind, due to the slight downhill nature and firm and fast conditions you usually have there. So for shivas, it's a 3wood or 2iron, the equivalent of my driver. No problem there.
But that ain't #10 Riv...
Which is, as I understand it and remember it, 310 to the front edge, rarely if ever has a helping wind, is if anything completely flat, and doesn't get NEARLY the roll you'd get at Rustic or TPC Scottsdale, particularly in early February.
With that as a basis, please do take another stab at my question... is 310 with basically no help really a ROUTINE driver or 3-wood, such that it's so in range the choice NOT to try it seems non-existent?
It seems to me that's what George is saying, and I just can't buy it.
But I am a short-knocker, often out of touch with how far the big hitters really do hit the ball. Thus my question.
TH
-
Lordy, Huck, anyone who takes what I say from 3000 miles away should be banned! ;D
I don't honestly know the specifics of this hole (perhaps my-all-time-favorite-having-never-played hole :)). I simple asked if for pros it had become a simple matter of "pull driver and hit it".
Still hoping Tommy or Lynn can answer my question about the barranca....
-
shivas:
Many thanks, great stuff. I believe I have this correct - you reaffirm my thinking, anyway.
Just one other thing though: I didn't mean the first question to be anything other than specific to #10 Riviera. Hell, there are par 4's out there you can likely reach with 5iron given enough helping variables. That's not the question. What I want to know is on THAT GOLF HOLE - #10 Riv - at 310 with no help and not much chance of roll - is that ever gonna be less than driver for you?
TH
TH
-
George: it is a very valid question! I'm just trying to see if I am out of touch with how far the big hitters do hit it these days. 310, no help, not much roll... if that's less than driver, then I know I am very out of touch.
As for barranca, I really think he was talking about a different hole. I'd be shocked if there was ever any barranca on 10... it's just not part of the landscape...
TH
-
Shivas: many thanks. I am often out of touch with reality re golf and life, but this just REALLY sounded wrong to me.
So if reaching the green is the choice taken, it's gonna be driver, and it damn well better be hit well, and straight. Look at the pic... that's not a very big target. Jeff explains PERFECTLY where the good and bad misses are... it really seems to me there are more bad than good - anything right is dead, in the front bunker isn't exactly great, left rough isn't a horrid place but not nice... long is ok, short and left is ok..
I just can't see it being a thoughtless bang away, as George postulated. But George, as I say, you did get me thinking. No harm, no foul.
And dammit this remains a great golf hole. Tommy and Jeff and those who love it are right... the more you think about it, the better it gets.
TH
-
The reason that I asked the question is drawn largely from the differnce is a 40 yard pitch and a 20 yard chip. In the latter, even a hack like me can hope reasonably for birdie or at least par. It the former, anything goes.
I hope that for time immemorial, Riviera #10 remains an anything goes hole. I fear that it will not. That's why I asked the question.
Still hoping for Tommy, Lynn or Geoff to chime in on the barranca. Can't be that my memory is that bad.... :)
-
George:
Gotcha. Just remember that the pros don't like 40 yard pitches any more than you do, really, and in fact most actively try to avoid them. Getting to the 20 yard chip zone really isn't worth the risk for the most part...
And sure, don't trust me re the barranca. But if I were a betting man, and I am - I'd give 7 to 1 there has never been any semblance of barranca on this golf hole - at least when DLIII played it - and your memory is therefore faulty, on this one issue.
;D
-
George,
I've been to Riviera many times to watch the LA Open and have played it once. There is no barranca anywhere on 10. There is one on 11, which must be carried with your second shot on the par 5. Don't really know what is behind the hedge at the back of the green. It is pretty gnarly to the right of the green; you'll see quite a few pros playing from there next weekend.
-
Thanks, Pete. I TRIED[/i] to tell him the barranca was on 11, but nooooooo.... don't trust me......
;D
TH
ps - you coming to Stevinson for TKPIV?
-
Although I'd rather play Riviera ;), I'll be coming, work schedule permitting. I am hoping things firm up soon and will commit then.
-
Re: the barranca on 10, this is my recollectin from the book, read maybe 7-8 years ago:
One of the days DLIII chose to go for the green. He hit it into a hazard, hit out, and then was challenged a few holes later as to whether or not he had grounded his club in the hazard. The ruling was that he hadn't.
I actually taped the Golf Channel rebroadcast of the highlights of this event, but, sadly, as is my way, I haven't even found the time to watch said rebroadcast to see if it's in there.
BUT THE LAST THING I WILL DO IS TAKE HUCK'S WORD FOR IT! ;D
How cool would the hole be if the entire right side were a lateral hazard unkempt area like PV of the past?!? That is what I was picturing in my mind.
Huck, at 300-305-315 from an elevated tee, the only guy faced with a 40 yard pitch is past champ Corey Pavin. Even I would have a chip if I caught it clean (maybe a 5% chance, granted :)). That is the essence of my question.
-
It's an amazing hole.
How receptive does the green have to be kept, to give at least a fighting chance of holding the green from the right hand side?
It's hole that could only have been designed inland IMO.
Paul
Why do you make that last statement? I can think of at least one great links hole which could be made greater, using a few of the principles of Riviera #10.
BTW........
This IS one of the great GCA threads, despite the occasional and unfortunately typical mindless Barney bashing. Great job Jeff! And, yes, this format should be a feature of this site. There is more real GCA in Jeff's first post than a month of the rest of us combined rabbiting on self-importantly........
Rich
Principles, yes I agree. Like the 6th at Pacific Dunes.
But an exact replica of this hole wouldn't work on links. How could you hold such a skinny green from the short angle with really firm greens in the summer? Plus the wind.
Which is why you never really see this type of arrangement on the old links...unplayable in the summer.
-
THe only difference being that with the bunkers I feel the golfer is tempted to either play at the green or WELL left of the fairway bunkers when ideally you want to be just short of the bunker far left which one must take a leap of faith and play over the front fairway bunker. Basically, Thomas hid the perfect location visually by intimidating you with a forced carry and then another bunker there to grab your ball if you hit it too long. Genius.
I believe this is the true strength of the hole and what renders comparisons with Rustic Canyon's 12th marginal. If Plan A is to drive the green or left edge, Plan B appears to be a lay-up fitted between the area pinched by the bunkers - Jeff's middle green dot. It would be oh so easy to push an iron off the tee and gravitate toward that large and deep expanse of fairway in which Jeff's yellow dot is located. An apparent sucker-spot, especially for yours truly. On the other hand, any lay-up slightly pulled looks like it could easily run out of real estate as the fairway pinches in from that side.
Contrast this with the wide open fairway of Rustic's 12th and any comparison is invalidated, in my opinion.
I have never seen a hole that had so many ingenious features that are intertwined. Notably, I had no idea that the left-hand side of the green, which looks pretty safe and inviting from most angles on the television falls away toward the rear so dramatically.
Question: Are the options visually apparent from the tee at ground level, or does it just get more perplexing?
MIke
-
Re: the barranca on 10, this is my recollectin from the book, read maybe 7-8 years ago:
One of the days DLIII chose to go for the green. He hit it into a hazard, hit out, and then was challenged a few holes later as to whether or not he had grounded his club in the hazard. The ruling was that he hadn't.
I actually taped the Golf Channel rebroadcast of the highlights of this event, but, sadly, as is my way, I haven't even found the time to watch said rebroadcast to see if it's in there.
BUT THE LAST THING I WILL DO IS TAKE HUCK'S WORD FOR IT! ;D
How cool would the hole be if the entire right side were a lateral hazard unkempt area like PV of the past?!? That is what I was picturing in my mind.
Huck, at 300-305-315 from an elevated tee, the only guy faced with a 40 yard pitch is past champ Corey Pavin. Even I would have a chip if I caught it clean (maybe a 5% chance, granted :)). That is the essence of my question.
George, I understand fully the nature of your question. You're just dead wrong, that's all. Watch the coverage. Watch how few of them hit drivers.
The tee is raised - slightly - but it realy doesn't give much help at all. The hole is effectively flat. You also don't get much roll - not in February anyway. With all that in mind, you're talking a ball that has to CARRY about 285-290 to reach the green... and remember also getting it to where one has an effective chip just isn't worth the risk! It's a pretty darn small area to get to, and it takes a very long shot. Listen to shivas about the realities of carrying the ball 290+ - the man knows.
Oh, more can get there today than ever before - that's why the hole is more interesting than it ever has been. But has it gotten so short such that most pros and long hitters just bang away with no thought, as you contend? No way, not even close. The misses are too penal, the reward is still very small, and it remains a damn long shot with this in mind.
BTW, re the mythical barranca, how you want your crow - roasted, grilled or fricasseed?
;D ;D
-
The barranca is not on #10 never has been. The barranca is in play on holes 1,2,7,8,11,12,13 and before the flood in front of the #6 green.
-
.
-
Another bump.
I think Jeff did a long series on Riviera that was excellent, but I can't seem to find it. If anyone else has any luck, please bump it.
-
Thanks for bumping, George.
I can't wait for the 5am alarms this weekend to watch the tournament down here in Aus.
It's a pity some of Jeff's pictures have expired. Here is one of the approach from pretty well between the green and yellow shot lines nearest the green in Jeff's graphic from p1 of this thread (pis is also a link to a thread full of pics of the course).
(http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/9734/pa240485.jpg) (http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46313.0.html)