[Jason Topp]

From this tour it appears that the bunkers start at 225 from the middle of the green and laying up short of the final cross bunkers leaves you 150 yards.  There would be a significant incentive to carry them all if possible.

http://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/cherryhillscc/aerial.htm#

[Tommy Naccarato]

If Rees designed one he'd be crucified

Jeff, This is a question, because I don't know. Has Rees ever designed a HHA?  Also, if he hasn't how do we know he would be crucified if he didn't try?  I know for a fact, I'd love to see him get out of his normal comfort zone and design one. But this would mean less uniformity in a style that he seemingly relies on quite often.

As far as being the slower lesser players, I know for a fact that I would love having that element of blindness and degree of naturalness that a HHA usually brings, as well as the exciting thrill of the carry. But that's me.  For instance, at Rustic Canyon's 10th, the HHA is sometimes an excellent warning for me to check my alignment, because the angle favors a push into the same hazard that runs up the right side of fairway towards and short right of the green.

To some extent, I also look at the 14th at Rustic to be of a similar HHA nature, when carrying the sandy, scrub creek bed. This shot off of the tee is my undoing of many a round at Rustic Canyon, yet, I look forward to trying to conquer it each and every time I play there. I want to accept the challenge and beat the hole.

From the aesthetics standpoint, the beautiful nature, with its sandy scrub, mounds and shapes of sandy interest speaks volumes to me in the art of the architecture, which I think is also most very important.

[Michael Marzec]

Running a little late to the party, but here is another Tillie HHA hole - No. 6 at Lakewood Country Club in Westlake, Ohio - that fits the earlier description of a hazard that is not much in play for the better golfer who finds the fairway. But hit it in the rough or short off the tee and you are certainly laying up, leaving nearly 200 yards into a small, well-bukered green. If you decide to take it on, more often than not, you will be hitting from the sand or off an awkward lie on one of the grass "islands" in the hazard, which is considered a waste bunker.

Here is a shot taken from the landing area of a solid tee shot. The hole only plays about 525, so you are about 250-275 from green, and 150-175 to clear the hazard. Given the flatness of the property, the carry looks a little less intimidating than it really is. But there is another 80 yards of fairway on the other side, so you can take plenty of extra club to carry it.



Here is a shot from the right rough taken during the Cleveland Open event earlier this year.



You can see the aerial view here:

http://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/lakewoodcc2/aerial.htm

The hazard was restored a few years ago to bring it back closer to Tillie's original plan. They did a pretty good job. In the below shot of the revised study, the HHA is at the top of the course, just under Tillie's title.

 

[archie_struthers]

 


Tommy speaks of architectural beauty and challenge. There is no doubt that the original  HHA at Pine Valley is special!  I'm not even sure that it is an original concept of Crump's , as he may have borrowed it from somewhere in the Emerald Isles. Likewise the concept works aesthetically at Bayonne and I'm sure at Rustic .

As to the question if it works?   I might say in very limited circumstances. It has to flow naturally out of the site, and not just get stuck in for effect. i guess that's what sometimes messes with me re: template holes.  Realizing that no idea is unique, it's still not good to look to force pieces into,the jigsaw puzzle, even if you can cut and paste them .

[jeffwarne]

If Rees designed one he'd be crucified

Jeff, This is a question, because I don't know. Has Rees ever designed a HHA?  Also, if he hasn't how do we know he would be crucified if he didn't try?  I know for a fact, I'd love to see him get out of his normal comfort zone and design one. But this would mean less uniformity in a style that he seemingly relies on quite often.

As far as being the slower lesser players, I know for a fact that I would love having that element of blindness and degree of naturalness that a HHA usually brings, as well as the exciting thrill of the carry. But that's me.  For instance, at Rustic Canyon's 10th, the HHA is sometimes an excellent warning for me to check my alignment, because the angle favors a push into the same hazard that runs up the right side of fairway towards and short right of the green.

To some extent, I also look at the 14th at Rustic to be of a similar HHA nature, when carrying the sandy, scrub creek bed. This shot off of the tee is my undoing of many a round at Rustic Canyon, yet, I look forward to trying to conquer it each and every time I play there. I want to accept the challenge and beat the hole.

From the aesthetics standpoint, the beautiful nature, with its sandy scrub, mounds and shapes of sandy interest speaks volumes to me in the art of the architecture, which I think is also most very important.

There is no argument here by me against cross or diagonal hazards, or even bunkers "inspired by HHA"
I'm talking about a true half acre of sandy scrub such as the size and conditions of PV's.

I'm saying a HHA with a 95 yard area 300 yrads off the tee, or say 180 off the tee from an extreme front tee, that must be carried may be a decent one off at Pine Valley, but would make little sense routinely employed.
If it's 180 from the forward tee, a player who drives it 120-140 (many/most women) has to hit a 30-60 yard layup, followed by a 100-130 yard CARRY with a fairway wood (depending on perfection of layup)
Rarely will such a player execute that, and the crap that has been allowed to grow/infest PV's HHA(even after cleaning) would make recovery all but impossible for such a player.

and there's hope Tommy-Rees was involved in a blind punchbowish  green running AWAY from the player (well sort've involved)

[Mark Bourgeois]

Jeff,

PV's HHA is NOT a "true" half-acre!! It is more than an entire acre.

[BCowan]

I have only played one HHA (#17 at Dormie).  My guess is it is a 50 yard carry, but it is all uphill.  Is it unique in that aspect with it being uphill for a HHA?  From a difficulty standpoint, is PV hole with a HHA more difficult than Dormie's HHA for the 18+ handi?  Elevation is a big problem for weaker players. 

[Jim Sherma]

I'm saying a HHA with a 95 yard area 300 yrads off the tee, or say 180 off the tee from an extreme front tee, that must be carried may be a decent one off at Pine Valley, but would make little sense routinely employed.
If it's 180 from the forward tee, a player who drives it 120-140 (many/most women) has to hit a 30-60 yard layup, followed by a 100-130 yard CARRY with a fairway wood (depending on perfection of layup)
Rarely will such a player execute that, and the crap that has been allowed to grow/infest PV's HHA(even after cleaning) would make recovery all but impossible for such a player.

I'm not sure how the player described here would have even gotten to HHA. The second shot on 2 and the tee shots on 3, 5 and 6 would all probably convince them that they were on the wrong course. Not all courses need to be playable for all players.

A HHA that adds complexity after missing the fairway on the drive is a good strategy on courses that are meant to challenge better players.

[John Percival]

A variation, and a brutal one at that, is the sixth at PB. The long hill past the tee shot is rough covered and blind for the third. Any tee ball in the left bunkers is SERIOUSLY challenged. That said, shorter hitters, even from the fairway, will likely not be able to carry the distance. Thus the question, 'good or bad?'
Interesting note: in an older yardage book, a pic from the 20's seems to show the 6th with the fairway extending uninterrupted the length of the hole. Why the change, especially if shots failing to gain the upper shelf are left with the awkward lie and blindness?

[Mark_Fine]

Thanks Jason for finding that chronology of #17 at Cherry Hills.  If you look at the evolution of that golf hole, you can see how all the interest and strategy was sucked out of it over the years.  I remember walking that hole with Tim Moraghan from the USGA prior to the Women’s Open in 2005.  I remember him stating (in front of a lot of members who were walking with us I might add) that he thought the hole, as is, was a zero and if we could get the trees taken down on the island as we wanted and restore the fairway hazards, we could make #17 one of the most exciting and pivotal holes in the 2005 Women's championship!  We tried and we had a lot of supporters within the club to help us to make that happen but as Tom Doak will tell you, things don’t move too quickly at Cherry Hills (decisions there need a lot of meetings and committee consideration).  We did get a few willows out on that hole that were awful prior to the tournament, but the rest of the work got put on hold until a few years later.  

You can see in our MP rendering, we allowed room and an added line of play on the left of the center fairway hazards.  Tom elected to go full cross hazards when the work was actually done.  You can also see the close resemblance to Pine Valley’s #7.  Yes Flynn's version at Cherry Hills was a little more tame (at least in the HHA) but trust me, there was a lot of trouble in that center fairway area.  In addition, Flynn's green was surrounded by water and Pine Valley's is surrounded by sand.  In some ways, Flynn’s version offered more strategy (and this showed at the BMW) as depending on which tees they used, some of the longer hitters could carry the first line of bunkers and have a mid to long iron into the green.  Those who couldn’t carry the hazard, but could get close to it, were in that go no go range where they had to think about laying up or trying to knock it on.  Temptation was brought back into the equation and to me, that is one of the aspects of great golf holes!  

Jason,
To answer your question about why the hole was changed and dumbed down over the years; I could spend days going through all kinds of reasons why and how golf holes/courses evolve.  What I can tell you for sure is that when I presented that #17 chronology to the membership at Cherry Hills, jaws dropped and eyes were opened.  Very few, if any, knew what Flynn had originally envisioned and built for #17.  It put the wheels in motion at the club to allow the restoration to happen!  From what Tom Doak said, it sounds like it still might need a few more tweaks and maybe they will move to more of what we had proposed in our MP version as that opens up a line of play.  

To Jim and others,
One of the great aspects of Pine Valley's HHA is that while unpredictable, a recovery shot is eminently playable.  Remember, HHA is mostly sand and you can hit into HHA and almost always have a shot (even many times with a long iron, hybrid or wood) and be just fine.  If HHA were a pond, it would be a different story    

[Mark_Fine]

John,
Another excellent example of a version of HHA put into practice.  It works great at Pebble on #6 and obviously every level of golfer on the plant  can deal with it. 
Mark

[Joe Zucker]

Running a little late to the party, but here is another Tillie HHA hole - No. 6 at Lakewood Country Club in Westlake, Ohio - that fits the earlier description of a hazard that is not much in play for the better golfer who finds the fairway. But hit it in the rough or short off the tee and you are certainly laying up, leaving nearly 200 yards into a small, well-bukered green. If you decide to take it on, more often than not, you will be hitting from the sand or off an awkward lie on one of the grass "islands" in the hazard, which is considered a waste bunker.

Here is a shot taken from the landing area of a solid tee shot. The hole only plays about 525, so you are about 250-275 from green, and 150-175 to clear the hazard. Given the flatness of the property, the carry looks a little less intimidating than it really is. But there is another 80 yards of fairway on the other side, so you can take plenty of extra club to carry it.

I was thinking of this hole when reading the discussion.  When I played it, the carry was not a problem at all.  But it was tricky for my Dad because he is a short hitter and its in an awkward spot for him.  Maybe he is playing from the wrong tees, either way its a tough shot for him.

Back to the question, does it work today? I'm not sure what is gained by having a large area of bunkers over just one cross bunker at the right spot/distance.  It makes the carry shorter (giving short hitters more options because they can lay up closer to it), but still forces a big carry for the longer hitters trying to get close to the green.  And I would guess HHA is unplayable for a substantial percentage of women. 

While a cool design feature, in today's world a few cross bunkers are probably more playable and palatable.

[Mark_Fine]

Key point to make about hazards - if they were all designed to accommodate the abilities of the average golfer, golf courses would be pretty darn bland!  As long as features are not overused, what are sometimes perceived as extreme or I really even dread using the word "unfair" hazards, present the most exciting and memorable shots/experiences in the game!  Do you know how many balls find the green on #17 at the TPC at Sawgrass in regulation from the "average" foursome?  Your guess is probably high!  But what a thrill for a shot that lands on the green and stays dry

Just like HHA, I wouldn't recommend using that island green feature often, but I sure wouldn't want to see the water removed and the hazard softened just because most players either choke or can't make the 120 yard carry!

[Jason Topp]

Key point to make about hazards - if they were all designed to accommodate the abilities of the average golfer, golf courses would be pretty darn bland!  As long as features are not overused, what are sometimes perceived as extreme or I really even dread using the word "unfair" hazards, present the most exciting and memorable shots/experiences in the game!  Do you know hope many balls find the green on #17 at the TPC at Sawgrass in regulation from the "average" foursome?  Your guess is probably high!  But what a thrill for a shot that lands on the green and stays dry

Just like HHA, I wouldn't recommend using that island green feature often, but I sure wouldn't want to see the water removed and the hazard softened just because most players either choke or can't make the 120 yard carry!

Great example Mark.  Recall, however that Pete Dye then had to build a number of identical holes due to client demand.  On those versions, the hole loses its originality and still results in a number of lost balls.   

[Mark McKeever]

Philadelphia Cricket Club has a HHA hazard on the 7th hole.  I think it works well as long as the player is hitting from the correct tee box.   If they play the hole too far up and miss the fairway, most will have a go over the hazard if they are far enough up.  Most who hit the shot from the rough will succeed if they play the hole too short.

But from the farther back tees its a different story.  A missed fairway off the tee creates a much more difficult shot with a long iron or FW, which really brings the half acre into play.

The last few of the HHA bunkers is about 160-170 out from the green, so if you don't make the carry, you still have a chance at par...though it's certainly an outside chance.

MM

[Kevin Lynch]

I have only played one HHA (#17 at Dormie).  My guess is it is a 50 yard carry, but it is all uphill.  Is it unique in that aspect with it being uphill for a HHA?  From a difficulty standpoint, is PV hole with a HHA more difficult than Dormie's HHA for the 18+ handi?  Elevation is a big problem for weaker players. 

Ben,

I don't think Dormie's 17th is remotely similar to HHA, simply because the hazard is so much closer to the green.  In Tilly's concept of the Great Hazard, you should not be able to reach the green in regulation on a three-shotter unless you are able to clear the Great Hazard with your second shot (which usually demands a formidable tee shot).

http://www.tillinghast.net/Tillinghast/The_Great_Hazard.html


Comparing PV #7 to Dormie's 17th, you see the difference (estimated yardages from Google Earth):

PV Drive Zone to front of green:  Assuming a "perfect" drive just at end of fairway, it looks like a 265 yard carry to front.  Thus, this would meet Tillinghast's ideal that you cannot get home in 3 unless you cross the hazard (don't think he envisioned 270+ yard 4 woods)

PV End of Fairway before HHA to beginning of fairway after HHA: Roughly 110 yards down middle (about 5-10 yards shorter/longer on left/right)

PV Beginning of Fairway just past HHA to middle of green: Roughly 170 yards.  The landing area for the 2nd shot is around 110-120 yards long, so you can have wide variety of 3rd shots.

For comparison, at Dormie, a layup just short of the hazard leaves roughly 115 yards (very uphill), while clearing it leaves <60 yards.  The hazard at Dormie isn't as wide, but it appears more formidable because you hit straight uphill to clear it. 


Clearing the hazard at Dormie (with two formidable shots) will leave a little pitch in, rather than a full iron, but laying up short of the hazard isn't nearly the punishment that Tillinghast envisioned.  Unlike Tillie's template which demands two formidable shots, you can actually get away with hitting a paid of hybrids on Dormie's 17th and still be within easy range of the green, even if you ignore the Hazard.  It's a good hole, but really not similar to Pine Valley's 7th (or other Great Hazard examples) in terms of strategy.


Now, if they moved the tees up 100 yards and pushed the green back 100 yards, then this bunker may have been a Great Hazard.

[jeffwarne]

I'm saying a HHA with a 95 yard area 300 yrads off the tee, or say 180 off the tee from an extreme front tee, that must be carried may be a decent one off at Pine Valley, but would make little sense routinely employed.
If it's 180 from the forward tee, a player who drives it 120-140 (many/most women) has to hit a 30-60 yard layup, followed by a 100-130 yard CARRY with a fairway wood (depending on perfection of layup)
Rarely will such a player execute that, and the crap that has been allowed to grow/infest PV's HHA(even after cleaning) would make recovery all but impossible for such a player.

I'm not sure how the player described here would have even gotten to HHA. The second shot on 2 and the tee shots on 3, 5 and 6 would all probably convince them that they were on the wrong course. Not all courses need to be playable for all players.

A HHA that adds complexity after missing the fairway on the drive is a good strategy on courses that are meant to challenge better players.

Jim,
I would agree with both statements.
which is why I think PV is  overrated and outside my top 10, despite the fact that it suits my game rather nicely.

[archie_struthers]

 


Hey Jeff , if you don't think that Pine Valley is one of the best  golf courses on the planet , doesn't even "sniff it". , you need to spend more time there. Every hole is interesting , every green is really exceptional , and it is a wonderful test of golf for all skill levels save the hack from the daily tees. It has stood the test of time and all the advancement in equipment and is still relevant .

Now I don't know what lens you are looking thru , but architecturally , it is a masterpiece. Not the perfect members course for everyday play, but a brilliantly designed test that has all the attributes of greatness in architecture thru-out .  Hello ??

[jeffwarne]

Archie,
my commments were a bit harsh.
I wouldn't put it in MY top 10, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't rank it 1 or whatever.
I appreciate PV, it's just not in my top 10-but to be fair I played it just once 20+ years ago
By overrated I should have clarified-it's a great course that many rate #1-since I have it outside my top 10 that's my reason for saying overrated.
and frankly because my impression was that it was a bit one dimensional and that of courses is a taste issue.
sniff was definitely too strong a word

you're 100% right -especially about the part about needing to spend more time there

[Tommy Naccarato]

Jeff, I think you and Archie are both right; that WE have to spend much more time there! (I just love including myself, the golf course whore that I am!)

[Jeff_Brauer]

While I can see the occasional use, where naturally occurring, I was thinking this morning again and comparing it to a pond vs a stream.  If you have a stream crossing, it can guard any particular distance (or if on an angle, a multitude of distances at different angles) just as effectively as the far end of the pond, without the terror to average golfers. 

Ditto HHA.  If you want to make the second a do or die carry, you can do it at whatever distance you want with a thin strip bunker crossing the fairway.  Now, I like the visuals of HHA as much as anyone, but then, I rarely hit the grounder up the middle.

I don't think selecting and designing the best hazards at accommodating all levels of players necessarily equates to reduced drama in the hands of a creative designer.

[Mark_Fine]

Jeff B,
Even a "creative designer” can’t accommodate all levels of ability all the time.  Can it be done, maybe?  But rarely, in fact I can’t think of any truly great golf course that accommodates ALL levels of golfers equally on every hole.  Wasn’t it MacKenzie who said all his holes should be playable with a putter?  Nice thought, but try to play #15 and #16 at Cypress Point with a putter (just to name a few of his holes).  It is an admirable statement, but good luck carrying it out.  Of course you can add extra tees on holes that end up taking most or all of the interesting/challenging hazards out of play, but if you do that, is it really the same hole??   

Just take a moment to think about many of the greatest golf holes in the world as well as many of the greatest and most dramatic hazards in the world.  Many of them present a real struggle for the average golfer.  #8 at Pebble Beach, #16 at Cypress Point, #11 at Shinnecock Hills, #5 at Mid Ocean, #12 at Augusta, #17 at The Old Course, #16 at Merion, #5 at Lahinch, #3 at Prestwick, #18 at Olympic, #17 at TPC Sawgrass, #8 at St. George’s Hill, and of course #7 at Pine Valley.  Yes you can be creative and lessen the challenge with added tees (maybe you put a tee just in front of HHA as an example) but even with different tees, the hazards on these holes still present major challenges for many golfers to finish the hole in single digits.

Mark

[Bill_McBride]

If Rees designed one he'd be crucified

Jeff, This is a question, because I don't know. Has Rees ever designed a HHA?  Also, if he hasn't how do we know he would be crucified if he didn't try?  I know for a fact, I'd love to see him get out of his normal comfort zone and design one. But this would mean less uniformity in a style that he seemingly relies on quite often.

As far as being the slower lesser players, I know for a fact that I would love having that element of blindness and degree of naturalness that a HHA usually brings, as well as the exciting thrill of the carry. But that's me.  For instance, at Rustic Canyon's 10th, the HHA is sometimes an excellent warning for me to check my alignment, because the angle favors a push into the same hazard that runs up the right side of fairway towards and short right of the green.

To some extent, I also look at the 14th at Rustic to be of a similar HHA nature, when carrying the sandy, scrub creek bed. This shot off of the tee is my undoing of many a round at Rustic Canyon, yet, I look forward to trying to conquer it each and every time I play there. I want to accept the challenge and beat the hole.

From the aesthetics standpoint, the beautiful nature, with its sandy scrub, mounds and shapes of sandy interest speaks volumes to me in the art of the architecture, which I think is also most very important.

With regard to 14 at Rustic Canyon, there are angles where you can shorten the carry distance in exchange for a longer second.  That strategic design doesn't work at the HHA, because the carry is the same for every shot that challenges the hazard.  I greatly prefer the angled options. 

[JESII]

I don't think selecting and designing the best hazards at accommodating all levels of players necessarily equates to reduced drama in the hands of a creative designer.

Jeff,

Can you think of a single example of a hazard that "accomodates" all levels of players that also includes any drama?

Forget all levels...give me a range from 0 to 18 handicaps.

Obviously, my opinion is that for a hazard to accomodate an 18 it must be nuetered in the eyes of the scratch...and that a dramatic hazard for the scratch is likely death for the 18...

[Jason Topp]

I don't think selecting and designing the best hazards at accommodating all levels of players necessarily equates to reduced drama in the hands of a creative designer.

Jeff,

Can you think of a single example of a hazard that "accomodates" all levels of players that also includes any drama?

Forget all levels...give me a range from 0 to 18 handicaps.

Obviously, my opinion is that for a hazard to accomodate an 18 it must be nuetered in the eyes of the scratch...and that a dramatic hazard for the scratch is likely death for the 18...

Jim - the examples are countless:

- Almost every hole at the Old Course but particularly the stream on 1, the 11th, the 12th, the 14th (hell bunker), 16th, 17th and 18th.
- Pebble Beach 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 18
- Augusta National - almost every hole.  15 is an exception.  12 may be an exception but I do not think so.  An 18 handicap has hope on that tee
- TPC Sawgrass - nearly every hole
- Royal Dornoch - every hole
- Sand Hills - I cannot think of a single hole that does not give the 18 handicapper a good chance
- Royal Melboune West - the entire course
- pretty much every CB Macdonald/Raynor Template
- Crystal Downs - Every single hole

Need I continue? 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()