Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: David_Tepper on April 22, 2022, 05:02:13 PM
-
A recent Fried Egg podcast discusses, among other things about Pasatiempo, an announcement that all the greens on the course will be rebuilt, with Jim Urbina doing the work.
https://thefriedegg.com/fried-egg-podcast/pasatiempo-is-so-so-good/
-
Work on the front nine begins next year.
-
I think very highly of Jim Urbina and his approach in being respectful of classical values while moving the ball forward to the present. Pasatiempo is not among my favorite MacK courses primarily because the green complexes don't work well with modern speeds, IMO. Course knowledge is at a premium here- I once played with the then head pro and he made six birdies on the front nine while I struggled to 18 putts. I remember the King Putter crowd gathering on the 18th delighting in watching their fellows three and four putting to a front-right hole location (I missed my second putt, an 18 incher to win my match from just left and above the hole; fortunately, my opponent was an exceedingly good sport and conceded my two-footer coming back for a tie, otherwise the four-putt green would have caused quite a commotion). It's been a long while, and this new work will likely encourage a return visit.
-
Called it. Bout time.
-
Having just watched the recording of the intercollegiate event there, I had to wonder whatinhell made people so fond of the place. I love greens and green complexes that give players migraine headaches, but some of those greens =were almost unplayable, even for that level of talent.
Where I play people routinely bitch "unfair" greens...and our most unreasonable green wouldn't seem crazy at Pasatiempo.
-
Was Urbina part of the team that just finished the most recent renovation?
-
I love Pasatiempo--one of my favorite courses. 15 very good holes--I'd x-out/redo 6, 7 and 8--but the others are great.
But I do agree that the greens need some work. My experience is that they are susceptible to the "macho green speed" syndrome, where they sometimes believe that they need absurdly fast greens to show how manly they are. At times this can make the greens almost unplayable. Moderating the rolls a bit maybe--and slowing the greens down a bit--will make a great course even greater.
-
After listening to TFE podcast I wonder - is removing sand splash and slowing the greens down an option? I admire the greens at Pasa and hope the slopes are not changed. Based on everything I've heard from Jim Urbina in the "Feed The Ball" podcast I feel nobody would know better than him.
-
Having just watched the recording of the intercollegiate event there, I had to wonder whatinhell made people so fond of the place.
Playing it.
-
I think the TFE podcast addressed most of the comments in the previous posts, along with the challenges Mr. Urbina faces.
Jim Hoak doesn't like 6-8. If it's because there are too many trees, I agree with Jim. Urbina points out that they were all originally designed to share a common fairway, but the trees were planted after someone was killed on #8 green by an errant tee shot. That's a hard problem to fix!
Lou Duran said, very correctly, that the green complexes don't work, given modern green speeds. Ken Mourn alludes to the same. I agree with both of you. Urbina asks the question as to whether the course can restore the green as originally designed but lower the speeds, or whether the upscale market to which Pasatiempo belongs will shun a course with greens that stimp at <10 because doing so will allow them to place holes as Dr. MacKenzie intended 90 years ago.
Where do you plant your flag? Personally, I'd prefer Pasatiempo with its existing green contours at slower speeds. I don't enjoy having play a chip shot in between putts any more than anyone else!
-
Yes, the trees on 6-8 are atrocious. But I also wonder how all those homes on #6 got placed 5 yards off the edge of the fairway in the first place. Anyway, it would be a shame if they put in some softened version of what Mackenzie built instead of just playing them at 10 instead of 11.
-
Let's keep making them faster and flatter!
When we reach linoleum speed we can make them flatter than Twiggy.. (Bad 60s reference)
::)
-
Having just watched the recording of the intercollegiate event there, I had to wonder whatinhell made people so fond of the place.
Playing it.
Brevity is the soul of...wisdom?
Given my inclination to think that "unfair" golf courses are fun, I have to accept your logic.
-
What's stopping us from having 0.5% of slope in greens (at most) and having them 19 on the stimp?
-
I too just recently watched the Western Intercollegiate at Pasatiempo. It was brutal watching the kids try to negotiate those greens. It's been awhile since I've played there, maybe a dozen times since 1972, but I don't remember the greens being that severe in the old days. I would expect the renovation to address some of that. Hopefully, they will still get to play the Western there again next year.
-
I played Pasa two days before the start of the Western. The course was dried out (firm) and the greens were rock hard and fast. I thought it was fun, but for sure there were a few holes where things could go horribly wrong for you on the greens. The sand build-up around bunker edges is easy to see.
Will be interesting to see how things go on the front nine next year.
-
I have played Pasa many times. Love the course. Not so sure about some of the greens however. Many interesting hole locations are lost because of green speed - some are used anyway :(
I don’t know how much the contours of these greens have changed over the years but I am sure they have. Regular play, sand splash from bunkers and top dressing/varied maintenance practices change green contours - that is a fact. But this is the bottomline, old greens like these were never meant for these high green speeds. WE ALL know this so it shouldn’t be a surprise that something has to change and I doubt we are going back to speeds of 5-6. Some of those greens even at 8 or 9 are brutal for a very good player let alone the average golfer. No one likes giving up after four or five putts.
It will be interesting what is done but I trust it will look and play great (likely much better).
-
An honest question: if many interesting hole locations have truly been lost because of modern green speeds, which hole locations were the collegians playing to recently?
In other words: maybe as important as the hole locations that have been 'lost' are the many hole locations that are 'left', ie that are still there and still available despite the modern green speeds -- and there must indeed be many of those left for Pasatiempo to be able to host the Western Collegiate, or to have countless daily fee golfers (including those from this board) playing and praising the course so highly.
All of which is to ask again: if tens of thousands of golfers can still happily play the course each and every year, what's wrong with leaving the greens just as they are, since many hole locations obviously remain? Conversely, if some of those hole locations in common use today are actually dull/unsatisfying or problematic despite still being playable at modern speeds, doesn't the problem lie more with the original design than it does with modern green speeds?
Are we simply assuming that Dr. Mac could never go wrong, and that every green on every set of greens his genius ever designed were perfect, ie with 5, 6 and 7 interesting and challenging and playable hole locations, if only they were maintained at the 'appropriate' speed?
-
Peter,
Someone here who was at the tournament and/or knows the course better then I can comment/answer your questions. No one likes to rebuild an old set of greens especially on an excellent historic golf course. First tact is always to expand them fully (most shrink over time) to the edges of the filpads. I am sure Tom did that when the last renovation work was done. Obviously you also try to get the course/club to lower the green speeds but sometimes that recommendation doesn’t go over well. Next you might try to further expand certain problem greens to gain more usable putting areas/hole locations. Lastly you might have to modify the most severe offenders. We just had to do that on two of my projects as a few of the greens had become almost unplayable (it is challenging to maintain greens at different mowing heights even though it sounds like a simple solution).
I am not sure what will be done at Pasa but all I am saying is that some of those greens are beyond severe and while many of us purists might not want to touch them, they HAVE changed from what they once were and play very differently then Mackenzie ever intended.
-
Lots of good questions here. Despite living in Chicago, I had several cases in the Bay area plus some conferences so I was lucky enough to play Pasatiempo about 20 times. I even was on site when Tom Doak was there doing some work with Jim Urbina. I understand the various criticisms, particularly those relating to the narrowing of holes due to the construction of the practice range and for safety reasons. I also recognize the severity of the greens as accentuated by modern agronomy and green speeds and I understand the embarrassment of tournament players who fail to cope with those speeds. I note, parenthetically, that if you leave approach shots in the correct places the greens, while difficult are manageable. That said, the course is as much fun as almost anyplace that I have played. The routing takes tremendous advantage of a difficult, albeit beautiful, property. The use of the elevation changes makes 6500 yards a lot to handle. While it is a difficult walk, the routing explores the property in a very natural way. There are memorable shots on more holes than I have time to describe. I understand a membership/management's desire to remain relevant and thus I realize the suggestion to lower green speeds is unrealistic. I have seen Jim Urbina's restoration work and it is impressive including his research and work on my back yard at Bob O' Linc. I trust that he will do his best to preserve the course but I recognize that none of us on the Board are owners. I am certain that Jim will be an active voice supporting the integrity of the course in a way that many others might not.
-
When I first read the thread title I assumed that all hell was about to break loose in the same way it did over the changes to 7th/11th green at TOC, but apparently not. I'm a bit surprised I have to admit.
That said, I have played the course once about 5 years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. No doubt the green speeds were for normal play but I don't recall the green contours being over the top. The only one that sticks in my mind as being "wild" was the par 3 5th (?) with what seemed at the time to be a horseshoe shaped green, but in looking at the google maps aerial I realise it only appeared like that because of the contours. When I played it the hole was placed front left and my tee-shot landed pin-high on the right on the edge of the green. I ran a 7 iron across the green well above the hole position to watch it turn and trickle down to 2 feet, and then sank the putt. If I'd hit a tee shot to just below the hole and sank the putt for a 2 I doubt I'd have had as much satisfaction and pleasure as I had with that scrambled par. But I'm just a recreational golfer.
For the really good players, and presumably a lot of the guys playing in the Western Intercollegiate have aspirations to turn professional, should they be guaranteed at least a 2 putt if they manage to hit the green ? Shouldn't they have to hit "defensive" putts now and again, and isn't getting your ball into the right location on the green for your putts not one way of separating the wheat from the chaff ? It strikes me that that is what they try to do at Augusta and no-one seems to complain about it there.
Niall
-
When I first read the thread title I assumed that all hell was about to break loose in the same way it did over the changes to 7th/11th green at TOC, but apparently not. I'm a bit surprised I have to admit.
It did on twitter with the Pasa twitter account & others.
-
I didn't listen to the podcast. What was the driving force to rebuild the greens? I doubt it was Jim's suggestion. I also doubt he would take the job if he didn't agree with it. All (most of us) have walked away from projects we don't agree with.
-
I criticized holes 6-8, but I hate to focus on that, because I truly love the course and rate it very highly over all.
#6 doesn't appeal to me because of the homes on the left--as has been said. But I also don't like the green complex there. It looks manufactured and uninteresting. #7, my problem is the trees as has also been said. It looks like a bowling alley. #8, my issue is the green. Maybe of all those mentioned for redo--or slowing down--this would be first. I've played there when the #8 green was like miniature golf, where the ball came back to our feet--and there was no way to stop it anywhere around the hole.
I hope there is a way to soften some of the greens without taking out the wonderfully creative rolls put in when greens were running at 6-8 Stimp readings. It would be a shame to lose this part of history, but something needs to be done to increase the joy of playing the course. Maybe slowing the greens to 10-11 would be enough?
-
I have had the privilege of playing Pasatiempo only once but share Jim’s and others’ love for the course. The red flag that went off for me is the Pasa official twitter post that it was time to convert the greens to USGA specs. Restoring them to original size and dealing with sand splash and other build up is one thing, but the USGA reference sounds as if speed might take prominence over contour. As others have noted, that would be a shame. But the point about the project being in the hands of Jim Urbina does offer hope.
Other than being above the hole at 16 (third shot) and 18 (tee shot), I did not find the greens on a normal play day 5 years ago particularly daunting, and I am not a good putter. I agree that 6 is not a very good hole relative to the rest of the course. But I thought the mounding at the green on 7 more than made up for the trees, and I will chalk a positive view about 8 to a good pin placement (and a lucky two putt).
And perhaps because it was such a wonderful day of golf, I did not find it a difficult walk or a overly challenging course for my mediocre game. As has been noted many times before, the routing of the back nine is among the best nines I have played, and 1 through 5 pretty darn good.
Ira
-
Ira, I agree that the mounding and overall green complex on #7 is terrific, and may make up for the overly-treed fairway.
-
Is it sacrilegious to suggest that Jim Urbina can design & build greens better suited to today's game and modern maintenance practices and this generation of top golfers than Dr Mac ever could (or at least did)? If the greens are to be rebuilt and Jim has been hired to do it, I say give him a completely free hand and be done with it.
-
Jim H,
You are a far better golfer than I, but that knob short left at 7 played havoc with what was a pretty well struck second shot. Five years ago; still remember it.
Peter,
By all accounts, Jim Urbina is a terrific architect and restoration expert. But I do hope that his mandate is to recreate history rather than reimagine it. I have not played as many great courses as many posters, but I have been fortunate to play several. I am hard pressed to think of many green complexes/greens better than Pasatiempo. Somerset Hills, PH2 and maybe Woking and Ballyneal. Pasatiempo's are that good.
Ira
-
In the last year alone I have played I believe five of what most consider Top 100 courses (several were Top 25 courses) on the planet all with rebuilt greens? Who else has done the same? Is this becoming a new trend?
-
And still, not one peep about the 11th green at Crystal Downs.
-
Joe,
Can you elaborate about the 11th hole?
An architect named Maxwell (he was pretty good at designing greens 😉) did a course called Southern Hills. Any comments about those greens?
-
I'm not sure how fast Pasatiempo keeps the greens on a day-to-day basis, but wouldn't it be prudent to play the course for a year with green speeds at 9 on the stimp and see how things go? It costs nothing, restores lost hole locations, speeds up play and doesn't mess with the internal contours of Mackenzie's greens.
I believe Doak re-worked the 11th green at Pasatiempo many years ago, keeping the character of the green, but taking some of the tilt out of it. I am confident Jim Urbina will do a wonderful job and he has a lot of respect for the history of the course. If winter ever ends in Manitoba, I hope to speak to Jim about the project in the near future while he is working here.
Tyler
-
I've played it in non-tournament conditions and I thought that the greens played fine. I don't remember thinking they were unfair in any way.
-
And still, not one peep about the 11th green at Crystal Downs.
I would say you just “peeped” with that comment so why not tell us how you really feel about it?
-
And still, not one peep about the 11th green at Crystal Downs.
I would say you just “peeped” with that comment so why not tell us how you really feel about it?
In the context of this thread about whether, or not, to touch old greens on great courses due to increasing green speeds, I wondered aloud why CD#11 hasn’t been questioned in the same way that Pasatiempo is. I don’t love what was done on #11 at CD. It used to be a slightly rumpled, but simple plane green surface that tilted hard back to front. It has become increasingly difficult to play due to green speeds. The solution that was implemented includes a very definite shelf in the middle of the green, which seems very flat. The same problem exists if you get behind the hole, in that you cannot stop your putt from rolling off the front. It is very noticeably out of character with what used to be there. Full disclosure, I’ve only played it once since the work was done.
-
I think most of us think rebuilding greens should be a last resort! Rebuilding a green is an expensive and a major undertaking especially on a historic/classic golf course. And unlike an old bunker or grass hollow which for the most part can be restored to its original look and playing characteristics, once an original green is rebuilt, it is changed forever. That said, almost every old green has been changed/modified/altered just from routine play and maintenance. But still, the process of converting, for example, an old push up green to a USGA spec is dramatic and very different then rebuilding an old bunker. There are a lot of courses either considering, planning, or already have taken this course of action - rebuilding one or more if not all of their original greens. What drives clubs/courses to take this last resort to determine this is the best course of action?
One other thing I will note is that while it is not easy, especially in the middle of a round trying to maintain pace of play, I wonder how many people really study greens/green complexes when they play them especially if they only play or see the course one time? My guess is very few! How many actually putt to multiple locations on each green to see how the ball reacts. I wonder how many study how and where water drains and look for example for catch basins (to me catch basins around greens are a crutch as they generally can be eliminated with careful and thoughtful grading). How many look to see what happens to balls rolling off false fronts on greens or how well approaches are integrated into green surfaces. Most play a green to the hole location of the day and judge it based on that. If you don’t really study much more then just that day’s hole location by actually testing some different green sections etc, can you really make any kind of strong judgements about the greens? Sadly many still do. Green speeds can change from day to day, week to week on many courses as well.
-
I don't claim to have any knowledge regarding the subsurface of the Pasatiempo greens. My understanding is that the main reason for installing USGA greens is to improve drainage while creating a perched water table. At our club in the Chicago area, built on clay soil based pushed up greens many dating to 1921, we installed XGD drainage about 10 years ago after an aggressive program of drill and fill. It has worked beautifully and we did not have to alter our Alison greens.
-
I have played Pasatiempo twice within the past few years (pre-Covid, I guess). The first time was just a day or so before a tournament of some kind (a member tournament as I recall, not the Western or anything like that). I played with a member and he told me that the greens were particularly firm and fast in anticipation of the event. True to form, between it being my first time around and the greens being turned up, I got absolutely ejected around the green complexes.
Played again a year later on a "normal" day and the greens were notably softer and a bit slower and it made all the difference. The first time around, every putt felt scary and defensive. On the "normal" day, you still very much didn't want to be above the hole, but if you put the ball in the right spot and were below the hole, you could make a semi-aggressive stroke. Chipping and pitching around the green was also not so fraught.
The lesson to me is that when they turn the greens up, that's when the greens get a bit silly.
As to Crystal Downs, I think the answer is pretty simply. Pasatiempo is hosting collegiate events (and may be interested in hosting other events given that they are converting to USGA greens). CD isn't looking to please anyone but their members, so if the members aren't petitioning to change the 11th green, then why should they?