[George Freeman]

Ok, I thought I would get this thread going again since many more GCAers have seen the course and subsequently have seen the new changes on #17. 

During our brief conversation of the changes, it seemed like there were more than a few people who weren't ready to make a difinitive thumbs up or thumbs down.  I'd like to hear more opinions on it.

As stated earlier, I've liked the changes all along.  Making a hole tie into the course as a whole better and creating more options are never bad things IMO.  Unfortunately I never got a chance to play from the left fairway (surprise surprise given my banana slice ball flight), and in hindsight really wish I would have...

When I first saw the changes last summer, I didn't recall there being the big patch of long fescue and rough behind the centerline bunkers and I believe Mike said that was something rather new.  I think this works wonderfully b/c now even if you are long enough to carry the middle bunkers, your ball will still get caught in the long rough past them if you go directly over.  I think this negates the concerns people had in which the "Nevs" of the world can just stand on the tee and hit gorilla balls anywhere in a 100 yd wide strip and get to the bottom.  I don't know how long you would have to hit it from the back tees to get all the way across the new long grass beyond, but I can tell you most guys that can do it are playing on some tour.

After all my rounds there, I'm still not sure if it's better to be up top or down below.  If you can manage to get a flat lie (or even uphill magically), I think down below is best...however, the most common lie is a downhill lie to an elevated green 180ish yds away; no easy feat.  And then there is the left side which I hope someone else will comment on. 

8-10 rounds on this beauty and I still don't know the best play (along with about 10 other holes), how much more can you ask for???

John M., can you post your pic of 17 looking back down the fairway?  Any other pics from this past weekend are welcome.

[Mike Boehm]

I enjoyed the 17th.  I never had a chance to play it prior to this weekend, but it seemed to me that without the left fairway, the hole would have felt significantly tighter than anything else on the course and felt somewhat out of context.  I played it to the top of the hill to the right of the bunkers twice and down to the bottom of the hill once, so I never got to see the hole from the left side of the bunkers.  I could not figure out what the strategic advantage would be going to one side versus the other.  Perhaps a slightly shorter carry to get to bottom from the left side?

I liked that even if you get the tee shot over the hill, you ran the risk of having an awkward downhill lie at the bottom of the hill for the severly elevated approach shot.  The approach from the top of the hill is a welcoming view by comparison, however, the chance to just be hitting a mid-iron and maybe getting decent lie at the bottom would get me to go for clearing the hill every time.  Great green - the nasty from left pin on Saturday afternoon put putting off the green significantly into play for any approaches hit above the hole.  Fun stuff.

[Dan_Lucas]

One of the advantages to the left side is that there are more manageable (less downhill) lies at the bottom. And yes, you can take it over the top with less carry (20-30 yds.) than the right side.

[JC Jones]

I didnt get the chance to experience the newer route this weekend, mainly because I never got a drive airborne on that tee, but it seemed to me from walking that there may be a slight increase in distance if you head left, especially way left.  How much "longer" is it to take the left route?

[Michael J. Moss]

On Sunday, I made it almost to the bottom of the hill taking the left line (the turf is a tad softer on the left than the firmer right side).  I was left with a ball slightly above my feet and still a bit downhill.  The shot required a draw. The green is guarded by “bunker hill” pinching in from the left, short of the green, and a mixture of tall fescue, wild flowers and assorted vegetables on the right. Not an easy shot, but still only about 215 yards away to the elevated green. The temptation was strong to go for it.  But I made a mess of it, hitting into the crap and then pitching back a bit too strong setting up the mandatory 3-putt.

With the added width, green is now in full view and more inviting. For me it now requires more discipline than I possess when considering whether to lay up or go for it. With my short game, I should always keep the green in front of me and play it as a three-shotter. That said, it’s terrific!

[George Freeman]

Are there any pin positions (maybe far right front or back) that are more excessible or where one gains an advantage from the left side, whether it be up top or down below?

[Mike Hendren]

I'd like to see the fairways joined beyond the bunkers at the crest of the hill rather than at the bottom.  Anyone directly carrying those centerline bunkers should also be rewarded with a turbo boost. 

[Mike_DeVries]

Dan is correct about the lie and distance required from the tee to reach the bottom on the left route. 

The overall distance is not that much more going left versus right (I haven't measured it and not sure if anyone has yet?), especially if you are trying to go to the bottom and have a mid-to-long iron into the green. 

Mike is right in that the left is still softer than the right and therefore not quite as much run-out with drive, but the lie is preferable on the left, less downhill, even uphill for super long hitters that go past the drain at the bottom and have a short iron, uphill to the pin. 

As to angles to pins, I guess that can depend on your shot shape, but the back right pin wouldn't have to carry the 3 bunkers right of the green like a right angle approach.  In general, the green slopes back to front, with the severe drop-off to the front level and back right pin.  Also, a left approach will have a better chance of bouncing onto the green if hit short, whereas the right approach is all carry to the green.

[Mike_DeVries]

I'd like to see the fairways joined beyond the bunkers at the crest of the hill rather than at the bottom.  Anyone directly carrying those centerline bunkers should also be rewarded with a turbo boost. 

Bogey,
We had the fairway up higher initially, but the idea that some precision should be demanded of the bombers (as mentioned above) prevailed in the end.
Mike

[Jason Topp]

Mike:

I have a question about #17.  You noted that you want the bombers to have to show at least some accuracy.  Did you consider placing a small bunker down at the bottom of the slope on the right side of the fairway where a tee shot played way to the right side of the fairway would roll down into?  So that if you played your tee shot too far to the right, it'd roll down into a bunker below?  That'd mean that you'd have to hug the centerline bunker off the tee (and not bail too far right off the tee) to avoid having your tee shot roll down into the bunker down below...

It seems to me that left creates its own dillema on the second shot, having to play over the knob.  So I think that works.  But there is an aweful lot of room in that right side of the fairway, so the long hitter will likely play there.  If there was something to think about if he strays too far right (the possibility that his tee shot goes down the hill and into the bunker down below), that might cause more long hitters to be more aggressive in challenging the center line bunker off the tee.  



A less devious method to get the long hitters thinking might be to pinch in the fairway down at the bottom a little, so a ball that clears the hill way on the right side rolls down into the rough, so the player is going for the green in two from a flyer or less certain lie....

I actually had a similar thought.  I am sure people would howl over a hidden bunker on the right so other alternatives such as rough ground or even tightening the right side with an additional bunker at the top of the hill would create a bit more risk.

The tee shot reminds me of one on my course where if a player can clear a ridge, it is a pretty straightforward tee ball to a huge fairway.  For me - the tee shot is my favorite on the course becuse I need to hit a perfect ball.  For someone who hits it a long way, the tee ball is easy - a hybrid or 3 wood to a 50 yard fairway.   For a short hitter it is impossible because they bang it into the hill and it rolls back.

17 strikes me the same way.  If one can make the carry one gets a 70 yard target (or 2 35 yard targets) and a turbo boost.  I like the solution of pinching the target somehow rather than just moving the tee back.  Keep the thrill of clearing the hill but force accuracy for those that try the shot.

[Mike_DeVries]

Mike:

I have a question about #17.  You noted that you want the bombers to have to show at least some accuracy.  Did you consider placing a small bunker down at the bottom of the slope on the right side of the fairway where a tee shot played way to the right side of the fairway would roll down into?  So that if you played your tee shot too far to the right, it'd roll down into a bunker below?  That'd mean that you'd have to hug the centerline bunker off the tee (and not bail too far right off the tee) to avoid having your tee shot roll down into the bunker down below...

It seems to me that left creates its own dillema on the second shot, having to play over the knob.  So I think that works.  But there is an aweful lot of room in that right side of the fairway, so the long hitter will likely play there.  If there was something to think about if he strays too far right (the possibility that his tee shot goes down the hill and into the bunker down below), that might cause more long hitters to be more aggressive in challenging the center line bunker off the tee.  



A less devious method to get the long hitters thinking might be to pinch in the fairway down at the bottom a little, so a ball that clears the hill way on the right side rolls down into the rough, so the player is going for the green in two from a flyer or less certain lie....

I actually had a similar thought.  I am sure people would howl over a hidden bunker on the right so other alternatives such as rough ground or even tightening the right side with an additional bunker at the top of the hill would create a bit more risk.

The tee shot reminds me of one on my course where if a player can clear a ridge, it is a pretty straightforward tee ball to a huge fairway.  For me - the tee shot is my favorite on the course becuse I need to hit a perfect ball.  For someone who hits it a long way, the tee ball is easy - a hybrid or 3 wood to a 50 yard fairway.   For a short hitter it is impossible because they bang it into the hill and it rolls back.

17 strikes me the same way.  If one can make the carry one gets a 70 yard target (or 2 35 yard targets) and a turbo boost.  I like the solution of pinching the target somehow rather than just moving the tee back.  Keep the thrill of clearing the hill but force accuracy for those that try the shot.

The upper right is about 35-40 yards wide, depending on where you land the ball.  The left side gap is 25-30 yards between the bunkers.  I think the middle section of long grass does what you guys are referring to by keeping / forcing the big hitter to think about where his ball is going to finish.  As you can see in the photo, the right side on the hill (left as we are viewing it) has been swept in a fair amount, about 6-9 yards from its former position, thus the right avenue is tighter than it was before the expansion.  The left avenue gives a better lie at the bottom of the hill although the view is partially blind.  I don't think a bunker at the bottom is a good idea -- we have enough bunkers, I don't think it is a good substitute in that situation, and there are issues with maintenance (erosion, water runoff, mowing turning, etc.) to contend with.

[Bart Bradley]

I went to Kingsley this May for a 4 round extravaganza.  What a great time.

On all 4 of our rounds, there was a significant (25-30mph) headwind on 17 tee.  Mike, is that the prevailing wind?  In our 4 rounds, I was the only one to hit down the hill on the drive and I only did it on our first trip around.  I came close one other time but the other 3 guys were never all that close.  My first ball went just right of the bunker and went all the way to the bottom and stayed happily in the fairway.

My whole group really appreciated the hole just as it is now.  If you are on top you have lots and lots of options of how and where to lay up...It is a fun hole.  It fits Kingsley Club well.  I remember one of my playing partners say "you know, that hole is really cool and different".  I agree!

Bart

[Stu Grant]

Finally had time to figure out how to post pictures, here are the ones I took of #17 on Sunday morning:

View of #17 from in front of the tee



View from the top of the hill


View of Jason Topp in the bunker short-left of the green.  You can just barely see the top of the flagstick.


Lookback on the 17th


I played Kingsley once before, in 2005.  Interesting to see how the 17th went from being the tightest hole on the course to the most wide-open in my opinion. 

The first time this weekend that I played the hole (from the Gold tees) I hit a big tee shot and had 170 yards to the centre of the green from a downhill lie to an uphill green.  From there I incorrectly chose my 175-180 club (7 iron) which, delofted because of the downhill lie, shot over the green into the fescue behind the green.  From there I knocked my chip down the hill and made bogey!!  I was ready for a swig of Jameson's after that.

Very enjoyable to play the 17th with the changes that have been made to it.  The drive really suits my eye but to hit the green in two requires a savvy approach shot.  Like much of the course, I think this hole plays easier once you've experienced it at least a couple of times.   

[Mike_DeVries]

On all 4 of our rounds, there was a significant (25-30mph) headwind on 17 tee.  Mike, is that the prevailing wind? 

Bart,
The most common wind (60-65%) would be from the SW, helping on #17 (plays S to N).  The next most common would be from the N-NW (30-35%).  Both winds can be strong and frequently are 10-25 mph, so a little breeze is uncommon and not really wind.  It blows at Crystal Downs and Arcadia Bluffs as the wind howls across Lake Michigan, and Kingsley is inland, away from the lake, but at a higher elevation than the land around it, and combined with the openness, creates windy conditions just a little less mph than CD or AB.

Mike

[Jason Topp]

View of Jason Topp in the bunker short-left of the green.  You can just barely see the top of the flagstick.

I know that chicken wing swing. 

No wonder I skulled it over the green.

[Steve Lang]

  jason, i don't remember you in the sand very much on saturday pm.. 

Having played the old 17th once for a par, in a boring, trouble avoidance manner (hit 2 wood to top of hill, hit to bottom of green hill, lofted iron on, 2 putt) , I definitely liked the changes seen there last saturday..  primarily the tease of the new width, the choice..

I tried to go left on purpose and ended up in the junk next to the fairway center traps.  Looking over the lay of the land, I liked the flatter fairway look to the left.. a hack out of the long stuff and there I was, about 150 or so out, looking up at that hill pinching in from the left and the left front pin.. but a relatively flat lie.. a punched 5 iron hit the front of the green and was seen bouncing up in the air.. I thought it'd be at the back of the green but it ended up about 12 feet below the hole.. a close miss putt and another par on 17..

So a hacker like me can lay claim to two relatively easy pars there, old and new layouts.. but the play is secondary.   With all the "apparent width" , the need to route the ball over the hill to the relatively small left or right alleys is enticing.. or does one just lay up and play boring golf.. i guess it depends

[Mac Plumart]

bump.


This is simply to good a thread.  Practical application of what we talk about on this site day in and day out.

[George Freeman]

Bump - in connection to the discussion going on in the other Kingsley Club thread about #17.

[Jud_T]

Looking back toward the hill on 17 this weekend. (Jackson Chen's photo).  You can see the grow-in on the right side (left from the tee)

[George Freeman]

 

[Dan_Lucas]

The consensus was that very few players were using the left side on purpose. The original tee shot required on that hole was one of the toughest on the golf course. With the double fairway it was one of the easiest. We thought at that point in the round, more should be required of the golfer than to just reach back and rip it, hoping to miss the center bunker complex.

Once we saw JC, aiming for the right side, hit a 60 yard duck snipe land in the left side and make birdie, we knew we had to make a change.

[Chris_Hufnagel]

Dan, thanks for the background on the decision...

I think this is a really interesting development and I am really looking forward to playing it this summer.

I didn't have the opportunity to play the hole as it was originally designed - I have only seen it with the split fairway, centerline bunkers, and trees removed.

While I like the hole, it is probably one of my least favorite on the course and the one where I had to "think" the least - it was usually (hopefully) just a big tee shot aimed just right of the bunkers and catching (again hopefully) the speed slope down the valley...from there it was a pretty difficult uphill approach to the green, but for me the upside in trying to reach the green was far greater than simply laying up to a wedge yardage into the green.  For me, the fun really began on the green - that is one difficult green to putt, especially above the hole.  It doesn't have some of the wild undulations that others have at Kingsley, but it is certainly one of the more demanding in my opinion...

I think the revised hole will be much more challenging - especially from the back tee. A premium will once again be placed on the accuracy of the drive - especially once the native grass grows in on the left fairway.  From the back tee, I think carrying down to the flat is too much for me - so I can actually see the changes taking driver out of my hands on this hole to ensure I hit the fairway.  From the top of the ridge, then the challenge will be to play to the right yardage to come into the green on the third shot.

They could make the hole a little easier for me by removing some of the trees up by the sprinkler box on the right hand side of the fairway though...more times than I prefer to remember I have marked the landing spot of my tee shot something like - "4 yards right of the box" or "just short of the box"

Having never played the originally hole, I assume this will play easier given all the tree removal - but I think it ill certainly be more demanding then how I have seen it for the past two years.  I need to go back to Tim Bert's definitive thread on Kingsley and see if Mike DeVries made any comments on the #17 and his thoughts on its evolution since the course opened.

I am excited to see it in person in two weeks and excited that Dan/Mike and team are continually looking to improve our course...

[Howard Riefs]

Having never played the originally hole, I assume this will play easier given all the tree removal - but I think it ill certainly be more demanding then how I have seen it for the past two years.  I need to go back to Tim Bert's definitive thread on Kingsley and see if Mike DeVries made any comments on the #17 and his thoughts on its evolution since the course opened.

Via pg. 22 of Tim’s epic Kingsley thread…

I am really surprised to hear that #17 is really that much more "narrow" than #1.  I'm not sure how, but I wonder if the fact that the left half wasn't quite mown down to fairway length distorted the view.  I would have bet money it was wider than you said, so thanks for saving me some cash!

Tim,

I was out at Kingsley with Dan Lucas today, looking at the fairway cut and bunker finishing for the left side of the fairway . . . and a correction is in order.  From right to left, the right fairway is 40 yards wide at the landing area just short of the ridge, in line with the middle bunkers, then 20 yards of bunkers and rough, then 25 yards to the left bunker.  If you go back a little closer to the tee, it is 38 yards of fairway, 20 yards of bunker/rough, then 40-45 yards of fairway, with a complete width of about 105-110 yards between the outer native rough areas.  Short of the middle bunkers it is probably 85-90 yards of fairway -- I didn't pace that section.

Down the hill, it is 80-85 yards wide at the bottom and pinching in tighter as you get closer to the bunker short of the approach.  I didn't pace the section just short of the bunker, probably about 50 yards wide.

Mike

I'm already on record as being very skeptical of this change, because I feel the long ball hitter gains an enormous advantage with the change.  Big boys can just swing for the fences and play it driver, 6-iron, though the approach from the left will still be a tougher angle.

Crafty experienced players like myself will still be stuck short of the bunkers, playing driver, mid-iron, wedge.

There's nothing wrong with a hole that greatly benefits the long player, but both #14 and #15 also do that.

I liked it the way it was before, so I'm counting on Mike DeVries to have made the right call here.

John,

No problem with you being skeptical -- I appreciate your frankness and look forward to your thoughts on it as you play it more and more.

I don't think it will be a big advantage to the bigger hitters, particularly when all the tees, besides the back, are moved to the left and re-aligned with the expanded fairway.  The angle from the back tee is narrower for the left side gap and there are bunkers looming over there, so it is not a gimme by any means -- in fact, I think the guys that were hitting it over from the back tee will still be doing so, but they still have to manage their game since it isn't the type of shot where they just bomb it over the top of the ridge (I have never witnessed a ball clearing the bunkers and hitting the downslope of the big hill (not saying it hasn't happened, just isn't common).  If that becomes the standard for the big hitters, we also have the opportunity of easily adding another back tee about 25-30 yards behind and to the right of the current tee -- that has been available for when necessary and/or desired.  By contrast, shifting the other tees to the left provides better separation with #16 and gives a better choice of the two sides to play for -- this was left out in the construction last year due to time constraints, cost, and impact to play areas.  I am very excited about how this has turned out and it will be fun to see how people play it.

As to #14 and #15, I think 14 definitely is a big advantage for the big hitters, but it is not unreachable for average hitters to get there in two if they get it on the right hillside with a running trajectory that bounds the ball down further -- I am not a big hitter by any standard but have made it to the green (or pin high) on several occasions.  Also, with the new back tee, the big boys will have to give a little more and the angle is not as receptive for where they are starting, so maybe that will alter it somewhat.  On 15, it is really hard, no matter what, and a good recovery game around the green is the important issue.  Certainly, if you can bomb it, it helps, but they also have a much narrower slot to hit to, as the balls over the ridge kick right and can be in or blocked by the trees -- at the Opening of the course, a friend in my foursome is long and he complained that he got blocked out by the trees, even though he was in the fairway and hit it 50+ yards past everyone else in the group!     Tough luck, Buddy -- next time shape the shot better or play down a club . . .  I like it when they have to think a bit, instead of just killing the ball.

Cheers,
Mike

[Chris_Hufnagel]

Thanks Howard...very interesting to see the thoughts and opinions on this hole...especially from Mike and Dan since they know it better than anyone else...

[George Freeman]

Although I will hold final judgment until I play the new iteration, I'm just not sure I can get on board with it (not that my opinion has any weight at all!).

The reason I liked the two-fairway version so much is that if you played the proper tee box, you were forced to choose which side of the centerline bunkers you wanted to go.  Only the REALLY long hitters (or people playing from a tee box that is too short for them) could just grip it and rip it, knowing that they had the distance to clear the bunkers AND long grass behind the bunkers if they actually hit it straight.  The long grass behind the centerline bunkers extending down the slope worked perfectly IMO.  From the old back tee, I have the length to get down the hill, but not enough length to clear the bunkers and the long grass, which meant I needed to pick one side or the other.  It was easier (shorter) to reach the speed slot on the left, but you wouldn't roll out quite as much and your angle most likely wasn't as good.  The addition of the new back back tee meant even the longest hitters would need to make a decision off the tee.  Also, I would imagine the different fairways fit people's eyes differently, depending on preferred shot shape, etc.  I'm a fan of options (and, admittedly, width) and to me this equals less options.

At the end of the day, the tree clearing was a good thing whether or not there are two fairways or one.  Even with one fairway, it will still "feel" like the rest of the course, whereas the original 17th felt out of character.

**I will add that if this was a cost/benefit decision it would be a different argument altogether.  I have no idea how much it cost to maintain the second fairway, and if the club didn't think enough players were utilizing it to warrant keeping it as fairway I could understand completely.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()