News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


John Moore II

To me , Flynn's genius is setting up recovery shots to well designed green complexes. Trees PLANTED along the sides of fairways ruins this wonderful design concept.

Mike-While I agree with you that it likely would have been better without the added trees, I can see the practical reason for doing it. They were added between holes 1 and 6, 3 and 5, 5 and 6 and a few along the road on 9, 15 and 18. In all cases, it would seem those trees were added for safety. It is fairly easy to hit into the adjacent fairways on those holes; some guys hit from the 1st tee into the 6th fairway as I was playing along, I played with a guy who near shanked one into the 5th fairway from the 6th tee and I hit some shots from the 5th tee that might have ended up in the 3rd fairway if not for the trees. So, architecturally they might not be the best, they are better from a safety perspective.

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
 Flynn didn't do his job if trees are needed for safety.
AKA Mayday

John Moore II

Mike-does it occur to you that the safety concerns of today are probably far different than the concerns of 85 years ago?

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
 Flynn spoke of courses being 7500 yards some day. He should know that this would mean balls going farther off line then 80 years ago.
AKA Mayday

John Moore II

Flynn spoke of courses being 7500 yards some day. He should know that this would mean balls going farther off line then 80 years ago.

Something else to think of about this course, that I did not think of before I went back and looked at an aerial just now and remembering the rounds I played, it would seem they may have added in some new back tees which would have forced the 'average' landing area farther back or forward depending on the length of hitter, making the new landing area in a spot that is not as wide as the intended landing area. Given the land constraints, if they did in fact build new tees, the only way to make the new landing areas safer would be to add trees to deflect high shots. After all, bunkers would prevent balls from ROLLING into the next fairway while trees would prevent balls from FLYING into the next fairway, and I don't think I've heard of any serious injuries from balls striking people after rolling for 20 yards; flying balls injure people quite often.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
John

Thanks for the tour.  Mayday is right, rip out loads of trees (I have never been one to believe that trees make golf safer) and there looks to be a lovely course there. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Fraserburgh, Turnberry, Isle of Harris, Benbecula, Askernish, Traigh, Minehead, St Medan, Hankley Common, Ashridge, Gog Magog Old & Cruden Bay St Olaf

John Moore II

John

Thanks for the tour.  Mayday is right, rip out loads of trees (I have never been one to believe that trees make golf safer) and there looks to be a lovely course there. 

Ciao

Sean-You are correct, there are many trees that need to be removed. On the back nine it is actually possible to see a 'sun line' in the turf where bermuda can't grow on a certain side of this line because it doesn't get enough sun. Pretty much every hole on the back nine could stand some serious removal. The front is a different story. The trees are not generally intrusive on the front nine, #1 and #8 probably have the thickest stands of trees and both those holes have playing corridors of 80+ yards.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back