Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Tom_Doak on August 11, 2020, 07:08:16 AM
-
Did anyone notice what was the main feature
if of the 16th at Harding Park?
Of course, if that big cypress tree ever dies, it's a different hole, and no one has to hit a fade on demand. But the tree has been a pretty good obstacle for at least the 40 years since I first saw it. You couldn't drive it back then, but you sure couldn't miss right, either.
-
I played Cherry Valley in Garden City yesterday.
It struck me that even though they have done significant/massive tree clearing, they left key trees which allowed thenm to fit a lot of holes into a tight space that play longer/more strategic .
I paticulalrly noticed this after drawing a 5 wood around the corner(or so I thought) on #2, only to find I was completely blocked and my next play was a 9 iron over a massive tree...making me realize the proper play was a tee shot out to the right side of the fairway, AND/or longer.
An absence of trees would've totally neutered that hole and several others on the front nine that required precise(as in distance struck and/or proper line) tee shots and course knowledge.
Such holes would be neutered without having those trees as the holes were originally designed on a much smaller scale, and maintaining a few trees creates driving strategies and decisions, without compromising turf health and air flow.
Another MET area gem that never gets discussed on here. Despite the fact it was 90 degrees, the course evoked many feelings of UK courses. (maybe i was the borrowed pull cart I was using)
4 difficult par 3's(made 4 pars), and 4 interesting par 5's(played them 4 over in a round of 5 over) that required course knowledge and of course....execution
-
My experienced base rule of thumb is, if I build a hole around a tree, that tree inevitably dies. That said, I kept a strategic tree on the second hole at Sand Creek Station in Kansas, and it has made it a dozen years or more now.
Many species don't do well when you change the environment, i.e., take away forest floor litter and add much more than natural irrigation. For that matter, any grading or even the soil prep process can change things for the poor tree, including, as I mentioned recently, the natural tendency for dozer operators to park under such convenient trees to eat lunch, thereby compacting the soil....and even changing the soil level a few inches can affect water uptake from the fine root fibers usually near the surface. And, if you use an arborist, you nearly always find that the mature trees you want to keep aren't as healthy as they look on the outside.
Probably told this old story as well, but on a master plan, there was a huge oak that made a particular hole we wanted to save. As we were in the area, we noticed the base of the tree was a den of water mocs. The super gets a blow torch to flush out the snakes, which slithered away fast, but a few seconds later, the tree was on fire, with the flames shooting up the hollow center core and shooting out the top. Quite a sight to see, LOL. Had to add some bunkers to replace it. The design criteria for that hole literally "went up in smoke."
Harding has lasted at least 40 years, probably a record of some sort. Reminds me of the old Sam Snead story encouraging a competitor to fly a tree, like he did when he was a kid. Shot fails, and then Sam says, "Of course, when I was a kid, the tree was only 15 feet tall."
-
Jeff,
Great story!
Jay Mickle would disagree, but I will be saddened if the tree on Mid Pined 4 were ever to meet its demise.
Ira
-
Tom Doak -
You're own Golf.com posted this article a few weeks ago on Keller Golf Course: [size=78%]https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/ (https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/)[/size]
The "famous" hole is the par-3 4th which is about a 150 yard par three that plays over a giant (oak?) tree. You can run it under the tree as well but hitting a mid-iron over works better. The tree has been there pretty much since day one of the course 100+ years ago. I'm no tree hugger but it is kind of a fun hole.
The other hole there that has a tree in the middle of fairway is the par-4 17th, which would be a much better hole without the tree 80 yards short of the green.
-
Harding has lasted at least 40 years, probably a record of some sort.
Monterey cypresses can live into their hundreds, maybe up to 250-300 years. Those trees were planted in the 1920's, so there's a good chance they'll still be around for a while!
-
Harding has lasted at least 40 years, probably a record of some sort.
Monterey cypresses can live into their hundreds, maybe up to 250-300 years. Those trees were planted in the 1920's, so there's a good chance they'll still be around for a while!
Matt,
I was going to ask if the trees were pre-existing and they cut a course thru them. So if that's the case, it looks like 16 wasn't built around a tree, even if it could have been somewhat deduced how much it would come into play several decades later..
-
Of course, one of the more interesting holes is the 13th at Morfontaine with a tree in the middle of the par three fairway.
Number 17 at the CC of Woodmore outside DC, has a tree that juts out into the fairway on the inside of the the dogleg par four. It narrows the fairway considerably. The player must drive it past the tree or he will be blocked out. I hated the hole when I was a member because I either was in the rough left or trees right. I never seemed to hit a good tee shot there.
-
This seems an example of the difference between/preference for what we *can* do vs what we *should* do -- a distinction that's come ever more to the fore with the modern age and the advent/increased use of heavy equipment. Yes, we now *can* uproot trees, even old and majestic ones, in order to create a golf hole or design (what we think is) a better one -- and then debate the choice and its merits and the quality of the resulting golf hole for years afterwards; but if we somehow all agreed that what we *should* do is leave old/majestic trees in place and happily accept the need to design & work around them, as a matter of principle, then the resulting golf hole would simply be what it *is*, a 'natural' result of what naturally existed and needed to be made part of the architecture. That's how & why the 'quirk' on those old classic courses that we love came to be, no? Why should building a so-called 'better' golf hole be more important-more valued than creating a 'necessary' one? And why shouldn't we at least question a value-system that celebrates the former as better in the first place?
-
The 10th at Kelly Blake Moran's Lederach GC in Harleysvile, PA
(http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/mediafiles/l48.jpg/)
http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/pages/page_46.html? (http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/pages/page_46.html?)
http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/pages/page_48.html? (http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/pages/page_48.html?)
(http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Lederach/mediafiles/l46.jpg/)
-
Of course, one of the more interesting holes is the 13th at Morfontaine with a tree in the middle of the par three fairway.
I only think it gets described as “interesting” because it’s somewhere exclusive.
-
Of course, one of the more interesting holes is the 13th at Morfontaine with a tree in the middle of the par three fairway.
I only think it gets described as “interesting” because it’s somewhere exclusive.
I have to admit it is one of the odder par threes in the world.
-
Tom Doak -
You're own Golf.com posted this article a few weeks ago on Keller Golf Course: [size=78%]https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/ (https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/)[/size]
The "famous" hole is the par-3 4th which is about a 150 yard par three that plays over a giant (oak?) tree. You can run it under the tree as well but hitting a mid-iron over works better. The tree has been there pretty much since day one of the course 100+ years ago. I'm no tree hugger but it is kind of a fun hole.
Pat:
I haven't been affiliated with GOLF Magazine for twenty years now?
I have not been to Keller but have seen photos of the hole you describe. There is [or was] a similar hole at Blythefield CC in Michigan. Those, and even the hole at Morfontaine, are just weird to me. I would never build a hole where you HAD TO hit over a tree to go for the green in regulation.
But I very much like the hole at Harding Park which TEMPTS YOU to go over or around the tree to shave a stroke off par. It's entirely up to you whether to take the risk.
-
if we somehow all agreed that what we *should* do is leave old/majestic trees in place and happily accept the need to design & work around them, as a matter of principle, then the resulting golf hole would simply be what it *is*, a 'natural' result of what naturally existed and needed to be made part of the architecture. That's how & why the 'quirk' on those old classic courses that we love came to be, no? Why should building a so-called 'better' golf hole be more important-more valued than creating a 'necessary' one? And why shouldn't we at least question a value-system that celebrates the former as better in the first place?
Peter:
I am not sure anyone thinks the hole in question would be "better" without the tree. (I sure don't.) I think Jeff's point is that the tree may die someday and then the hole is undefended, but that is no reason just to kill the tree up front.
My guess is that Jeff would not do that, either . . . he would leave the tree and just build his hole far enough away from it that it didn't matter much, so that the hole does not become neutered by its death, and not incidentally, the architect doesn't get blamed for its loss. Many architects would do the same.
My feeling is different . . . I don't expect my golf holes to all last forever. Indeed, it's funny that Mark F and Jeff are two of the first to point out that golf holes are always changing and can never stay the same, yet that can't accept that, when it comes to working with a tree in play.
There is no telling whether the tree on the 16th at Harding Park will live another fifty years, or whether it will be struck by lightning tomorrow. But it lasted long enough to play its role last weekend, and that mattered, and if the green was another sixty feet left to keep it from playing the same role, the golf tournament would have been lesser for it. Not to mention the lives of the 52,000 other people who played there in the last year.
-
As Tom knows, I have some experience with this issue. The 18th hole at my home course, Briarwood in Deerfield, Il. was modified from the original Alison design by RB Harris many years ago to create a modest practice facility. He created a mid-length dogleg par 4 with a huge sloping green. It is guarded about 15 yards in front by an American Elm which we have kept alive although it is beginning to show decline. It is the most controversial feature on our course, Our good friend Judge Terry Lavin has called it "the worst tree in the Chicago District". Brad Klein, among others, has suggested that we should not touch it. Many members, even those who are tree huggers, hate it. Why? In part because this quirky feature is on the 18th hole which magnifies its importance. Second, because it is ideally placed to obstruct the typical second shot, even for the very low handicapper who is likely hitting a wedge. But the tree branches high enough to allow a player to manufacture a shot under the canopy if a shot over the tree or one that avoids the tree is impossible. Moreover, if the tree is removed or dies, the hole will be defenseless and will probably have to be remodeled. Finally, it is consistent with a prior comment from Tom in which he indicated that a tree near a green, assuming no problem with shade and/or roots, was an effective way to limit the aerial game. In short an interesting study in somewhat unconventional architecture which is for the most part misunderstood.
-
During one of the renovations at Cog Hill #4, they built an alternative par-3 second hole to the right of #1 green. It's most distinctive feature was a large tree which had to be negotiated from whichever tee was being played. The thought was that the alternative hole could periodically be placed in the rotation post-renovation. Alas, fairly shortly after the renovation was completed, lightning struck. Now, there's a never (rarely?) used par-3 to the right of #1 green. . .
-
Bethpage Red has no fewer than 7 holes where a tree on the inside of the dogleg is the main strategic factor of the hole, most times forcing you to play further to the outside of the dogleg than you normally might consider — or forcing your attempt to bomb it past the corner to be near-perfect. It sounds like overkill, or at least repetitive, but goddamn if it doesn’t work really well. I think the tree on the inside forces players to think about their shot far more than a bunker would. And I kinda feel dirty saying that.
-
Bethpage Red has no fewer than 7 holes where a tree on the inside of the dogleg is the main strategic factor of the hole, most times forcing you to play further to the outside of the dogleg than you normally might consider — or forcing your attempt to bomb it past the corner to be near-perfect. It sounds like overkill, or at least repetitive, but goddamn if it doesn’t work really well. I think the tree on the inside forces players to think about their shot far more than a bunker would. And I kinda feel dirty saying that.
Number 17 on Pine Needles has both a tree and bunker on inside corner. My least favorite hole on the course.
What do people think of Number 13 on the River Course at Koehler?
Ira
-
What do people think of Number 13 on the River Course at Koehler?
Ira
I hate that hole. I have usually played it at 200 yards. The trees on the left don't allow for much bailout. The hole would be tough enough without them.
-
I surprised any of you buy a dog. Being a member of a club where I have been a member now for 52 years my relationships with trees who are now gone haunt me every round. Even the go for it tree on a par 5 is but a stump. I can't imagine anyone would prefer a great tree never existed anymore than a loving pet.
-
Doesn't Pete Dye in his book Bury Me in A Pot Bunker say something along the lines of he never builds a hole around a tree because if the tree got hit with lightning or disease and taken out, it would ruin the strategy he hoped for?
Cheers,
James
-
While trees grow taller and wider with age golfers hit the ball lower as they get older.
There’s a Sam Snead story about the 13th at ANGC. Apparently later in his career in a practice match with some younger generation players he stood on the 13th tee and told them that when he was their age he could hit his tee shot over some trees on the corner of the dogleg.
His younger players took on his implied challenge and all promptly hit the trees with their tee shots. SJS then pointed out to them with presumably a large grin that back in the days when he hit his tee shots on that line the trees hadn’t grown so tall. :)
Atb
-
Doesn't Pete Dye in his book Bury Me in A Pot Bunker say something along the lines of he never builds a hole around a tree because if the tree got hit with lightning or disease and taken out, it would ruin the strategy he hoped for?
Cheers,
James
Doesn't it seem ironic that he would have designed #13 at Blackwolf Run River Course? Of course the hole isn't relying on one tree but a grove of them. no?
Ken
-
Tom Doak -
You're own Golf.com posted this article a few weeks ago on Keller Golf Course: [size=78%]https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/ (https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/)[/size]
The "famous" hole is the par-3 4th which is about a 150 yard par three that plays over a giant (oak?) tree. You can run it under the tree as well but hitting a mid-iron over works better. The tree has been there pretty much since day one of the course 100+ years ago. I'm no tree hugger but it is kind of a fun hole.
The other hole there that has a tree in the middle of fairway is the par-4 17th, which would be a much better hole without the tree 80 yards short of the green.
Pat
I have played Keller since 1958. Back then and for many years subsequent it was a fun unique hole.
Today it is not just a tree, it is a wall.
Most golfers have no chance of flying the ball over it.
Jeff is correct, when designing a hole with a “strategic” tree - keep in mind it will grow and also eventually die.
I never could understand why Richard didn’t deal with it in the renovation.
Yes, 17 would be much better without the tree.
-
Doesn't Pete Dye in his book Bury Me in A Pot Bunker say something along the lines of he never builds a hole around a tree because if the tree got hit with lightning or disease and taken out, it would ruin the strategy he hoped for?
Cheers,
James
Doesn't it seem ironic that the would have designed #13 at Blackwolf Run River Course? Of course the hole isn't relying on one tree but a grove of them. no?
Ken
And a river!
-
1. #13 "Tall Timber" on River Course at Black Wolf Run - Pete Dye - those damn trees have outsized impact on that hole.
2. #17 at CPC - that silly grove of trees, ringed by bunkers, that is in the middle of the fairway and the landing area, dictates all that happens on that hole.
-
Tom Doak -
You're own Golf.com posted this article a few weeks ago on Keller Golf Course: [size=78%]https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/ (https://golf.com/travel/trees-middle-golf-course-fairway/)[/size]
The "famous" hole is the par-3 4th which is about a 150 yard par three that plays over a giant (oak?) tree. You can run it under the tree as well but hitting a mid-iron over works better. The tree has been there pretty much since day one of the course 100+ years ago. I'm no tree hugger but it is kind of a fun hole.
Pat:
I haven't been affiliated with GOLF Magazine for twenty years now?
I have not been to Keller but have seen photos of the hole you describe. There is [or was] a similar hole at Blythefield CC in Michigan. Those, and even the hole at Morfontaine, are just weird to me. I would never build a hole where you HAD TO hit over a tree to go for the green in regulation.
But I very much like the hole at Harding Park which TEMPTS YOU to go over or around the tree to shave a stroke off par. It's entirely up to you whether to take the risk.
Tom -
I only made that comment as your a panelist for them. Not necessarily on the payroll.
You don't technically HAVE to go over the tree...it's pretty easy to bump one under it.
When Richard Mandell was rebuilding the hole, I believe he assumed everyone would want to remove it, but in fact all the locals there really wanted to keep it. My thought would have been to cut it down and replant/transplant a much smaller version to make it more playable given that a tree has always been planted since day 1.
It's too bad the "signature" 4th at Keller gets talked about so much because there are a ton of more interesting and fun holes out there.
-
The 12th hole at the Country Club of Charleston has a huge tree that tempts you to take it on in order to shave a potential stroke.
Seth Raynor thought the tree would be a detriment to the hole as he planned it, but after compromising with the Olmsted Brothers, the tree remained, became a hazard and is still there today.
https://www.loc.gov/resource/mss52571.mss52571-02-360_0415_0492/?sp=65&r=-0.011,-0.087,1.053,1.048,0 (https://www.loc.gov/resource/mss52571.mss52571-02-360_0415_0492/?sp=65&r=-0.011,-0.087,1.053,1.048,0)