No Longer Tempting, Still Interesting

First, let's get the Faldo-Nantz question out of the way. During Sunday's telecast, they apparently asked why architects can't build holes like the 10th at Riviera anymore.

I wish Jim had asked me earlier in the week. The answer is so simple!

Most of today's architects haven't got a clue what makes No. 10 work, which makes it kind of hard to design a hole like it. Sorry boys. Your ordinary short par-4 portfolios back me up on this one.

Okay, now that we settled that, let's consider about what happened this year.  

The tiny little green was firmer and faster than ever. A positive change was made by Tom Marzolf (to offset the really lousy ones) when the bunker face in the back left was lowered, bringing the green and fringe right up to the bunker, making the right side that much more daunting.

Yet, for the first time in the governing bodies-failing-the-game-on-distance era, nearly everyone in the field believes the only play is to drive the 10th. Even Jose Maria Olazabal was doing it.  

Mickelson approaches No. 10 in the 2007 Nissan Open playoff from an odd angle (click to enlarge)I asked Phil Mickelson in his post-Sunday round session why he doesn't consider the lay-up optoin, which seemed to startle him based on the unusual pause before answering.

Q.    Can you talk about your playing strategy on 10 and why you don't lay up, what's your approach to that [hole]?

PHIL MICKELSON:  The only way to play that hole is to get past the hole. The real question why didn't I hit driver and get it for sure past the hole.  I thought with a little bit of help, 3 wood would be enough.  You can't hold that section of the green, short of the pin.  There is no way.  It's was too firm and it's angled six or seven degrees away from you, it's just not possible.

Final round ShotLink data for No. 10. Note how few layed up. (click to enlarge)The concept of laying up left and having a wedge in? Not even in the cards anymore.

And that's not just for a long hitter like Mickelson.

Consider eventual winner Charles Howell's comments:

Q.    Charles, during the ride past on the playoff on the tenth hole, Jim Nantz and Nick Faldo were talking about world ten what's the history with that whole number?

CHARLES HOWELL III:  We've had a love/hate relationship, I think it's one of the greatest par4's that we play and it was different this year, and I think you saw more guys go at that green off the tee because the green was so hard.  In the years passed here, that green has been so soft with all of the rain you can lay the ball up to the left and hit a wedge in there and hold it.  I saw a lot of great wedge shots this week land on the green and end up in the bunker.  With the greens being as firm as it was, around the green, as to why we don't have more, I don't know.  Because that one there is every bit as nerve-racking and exciting as we need.

Q.    Where are you trying to play it on 10 when you are playing?

CHARLES HOWELL III:  Anything.  Anything at this front edge of the green or just left of it and pinhigh.  So the reason that hole is so good is that the golf ball is going so far now that a driver actually gets past that and you end up chipping back this way.   So Phil hit a 3wood, I hit 3wood, we've got to hit those 3woods pretty darn good to carry that last bunker to left.  So it's really hard to get that ball pinhigh left.  Like I said with that green firm, that front right bunker is no bargain. 

So I'm not sure if this is a statement about the (lack of) confidence Tour players have from 110-75 yards, or simply a statement about the sheer ignorance of the world's greats.

I'm still not convinced that driving the green is the percentage play, when, as Steve Elkington told a few of us earlier in the week: laying up all four days, he'll never take more than 16 for the week on No. 10, and he'll probably play it 2 under.

Either way, one thing became clear.

The tempting quality of the hole that Jim Murray so beautiful described years ago has become a casualty of unharnessed distance.

This does not make it a lesser hole, just a little less interesting and a whole lot different than just a few years ago. 

Calling In The Shinto Priest

Illustration and insight from John Strege's Local Knowledge in the latest Golf World:

Those participating in this week's Nissan Open might notice that two stately redwood trees on the bank left of the 18th fairway at the Riviera CC are no longer there. They weren't removed without considerable consternation, either. In Japanese culture trees are thought to have souls, and to ensure the redwoods were dealt with properly, Riviera owner Noboru Watanabe summoned a Shinto priest to perform the ritual ceremony. A small temporary shrine was erected in front of the green. The ceremony included traditional chants on behalf of the souls embedded in the trees. The proceedings also reportedly included an O Harahi purification ceremony to cleanse the souls of those wielding the chainsaws that brought down the two trees, which were part of Riviera's landscape for about 50 years. The trees were removed in conjunction with the installation of a new irrigation system. The trees rarely came into play, and their removal is not thought to have altered the character of the course in any fashion.

Revising Riviera

Golfobserver.com has posted my 2005 series on the changes to Riviera. Sad to say, the destruction has continued. With the white bunker sand, sterilization and Orlando whale tails added everywhere, it feels more Florida than Pacific Palisades.

Golfonline's Joe Passov takes a look at George Thomas's design work in the area and reviews the remaining public courses that he designed.

The Hogan Memorial Rock

The great places in golf subtly point out their history, if they do it at all.

Naturally, that means at Riviera they purchase a headstone rock, slap a bronze plaque on it and for that classiest of touches, embellish it with some lillies. Just as Ben Hogan would have wanted!

 

Targets on The Driving Range

Riviera's Renovated Range (Click to enlarge)I had an enjoyable chat and stroll around Riviera Tuesday with Mike Clayton and Steve Wenzloff, the PGA Tour's VP of Design Services. Among other topics, I pointed out Riviera's redesign of the driving range landing area. It mostly consisted of taking some nice (albeit in need of freshening) targets, and leveling the landing area into a boring patch of flags and green grass.

Wenzloff said that in his polling of PGA Tour players, the overwhelming majority would rather hit to a flat, boring field than one with really interesting target greens guarded by bunkering.

Am I alone in preferring targets that reflect what you would hit to on the course?

Taking Options Out Of An Option Hole

Rough Where There Used To Be Short Grass (Click to enlarge)Greatest option par-4 in golf? Yes, many would vote for Riviera's 10th, which was recently discussed and celebrated in Links Magazine (yours truly was a contributor, no link available).

But as we all know, options can lead to birdies, and we know that can't happen! So in their on-going attempt to do something to Riviera, Tom Marzolf and gang have made two almost mind-bogglingly poor change to the great 10th. Almost, because, well, they've made others in recent years.

The first I knew about and lament as I see it in person this week. The aiming bunker that the smart player goes out to the left, has been expanded toward the green to cut down on the number of drives going for the green (because you know, that's so boring to watch!).


Rear view of No. 10 lost approach (click to enlarge)The other change is subtle but far more egregious.  A good portion of the left approach and lefthand drop off area, mown as fairway from 1993 to 2006, have been converted to light rough. This keeps missed approaches or attempts to drive the green closer to the putting surface. (This in the second photo you can see the outline of the old fairway area that ran balls well away from the green.)

Yes, this is one of those minor things that us architecture junkies howl about, but this short grass area was precisely the type of element that makes No. 10 such a playing and spectating joy.  The short grass added dimensions to the decision-making process and were left with all sorts o of weird shots, particuarly to the back hole locations.

Now balls will stay closer to the green and the hole should play easier. But worse than that, the growing of rough were there was once short stuff will eliminate options around the green, making it less interesting to watch or play.

Riviera's 6th, Then And Now

 The lower photo shows the "restoration" of 2006 based on the old photographs. The 1929 image above shows the look left behind by George Thomas and Billy Bell. I don't know about you, but I see a resemblance...to Bethpage!

   

Latest Riviera Changes: No. 3

Saving the worse for last, here are a few photos of the new hole location added to Riviera's wonderful third green.

3rd at Riviera (click to enlarge)Feeling Nicklaus-esque with its sunken-quadrant, circa 1991 Sherwood feel when Jack would throw a tier in just about any old place no matter how badly it fit, the apparent thought process behind the "restoration" of this hole location was George Thomas's original sketch. 

It showed a hole location in exactly the spot where one has been restored. Unfortunately, we also know that Thomas's sketches did not bear much resemblance to what was actually built. He tinkered in the field, or Bill Bell did. The result was a better course. Unfortunately, architects who rely on plans and who do restorations, seem to not be aware of the in-the-field methodology and it has led to a disappointing addition to Riviera's third.

Aerials do not show such a pronounced hole location, nor do photos indicate the funky tiering that is now in the once wickely subtle third.
Rear view 3 (click to enlarge)

Besides enlarging a green that was nice because of its fairly small square footage (and yet, number of versatile hole locations), the addition is fasinating because it seems to eliminate some of the deceptive qualities that have long made No. 3 unique.

Whether that deception crept into the design intentionally or through the evolution of the fronting bunker is debatable, but either way the real charm of this approach was the slight angle that the fronting bunker sat at, making goes at right side hole locations a bit daring (in the way that #12 at Augusta works, only with sand in this case).

And like the added hole locations on 8, 9, 12 and 13, the new work looks exactly that: like new, modern design ideas added to really nice old architecture.

Riviera's 7th Then and Now

The old barranca/hazard on Riviera's 7th then and now. Note the subtle but significant change to the fairway edge caused by the late 30s flood. Oh, and the cool bridge.

 

Latest Riviera Changes: No. 12

Riviera's lengthy and character-rich par-4 12th was the recipient of a green enlargement prior to this year's Nissan Open. Like with the 9th hole work detailed here, the results leave a lot to be desired.

Notice the historic photo with No. 12 to the left. In the distance is the Riviera par-3 course (today's range) and clubhouse.

The spectators below are encircling the old green floor.

The photo below that shows the newly enlarged green, which has lost the "long, thin" character of the old green and actually appears to be larger than the original. There were also changes to the fronting bunker (now less deep and less intimidating than it was before...).

It's debatable whether this green really needed expansion.

The enlargement work shares the same problem as the expansion on No. 9: the new green falls away from the primary surface, making it debatable whether a hole location can be cut on the new area because of its slope.

Looking at it today with Geoff Ogilvy, he felt it was dicey if the greens were fast. 

Since the idea was to restore a purportedly lost hole location (if it every existed, which appears iffy), the goal of this work doesn't make sense. Nor does it bode well for this summer's expanstion of other greens).

And once again, the expansion of the 12th green makes shots missing this surface so much different and easier than in the old configuration. Once arguably the most difficult up and down on the back side, the larger green should make recoveries simpler. Because in effect, they are no longer recoveries, but instead, birdie putts.

Note this photo of PGA Tour pro John Riegger putting on the 12th during the practice round. Last year he would have faced a devilish lob recovery shot from this spot. Today it's a relatively easy two putt. 

That would be fine if the new hole location added some strategic enhancement. But both of those questions are up for serious debate, especially with a 25-yard wide fairway that makes it impossible for someone to flirt with the O.B. by driving down the left side to open up the best angle of attack.

Instead, the new green seems to be an addition designed to offer an inaccessible "Sunday" hole location.

But with the bunker made more shallow, it actually becomes relatively harmless since and up-and-down isn't too difficult (whereas before it was deadly.)

None of this adds up to reflecting Captain Thomas's style.  

No. 16 Then and Now

The short par-3 16th at Riviera in the late 1920s and today...

 

Latest Riviera Changes: No. 9

Riviera has long served as a classroom for those interested in golf architecture.

It continues to serve as a place for study, though at the current pace, study of a different kind.

Namely, how not to "restore."

As Thomas Bonk outlined in the LA Times, Riviera management, superintendent Matt Morton and Tom Fazio's firm have overseen the expansion of three greens: No. 3, No. 9 and No. 12. The changes have been described as a restoration of the original George Thomas-Billy Bell design.

While the idea of expanding greens back to their original size is nearly always a great idea on older courses, Riviera is sadly serving as a case study in how not to go about it.

In their defense, the problem is extremely complicated: trying to add green space onto existing USGA spec greens. It's a bit like trying to expand an aquarium while keeping the tank full. In this case they are attempting to tie into a sand substructure while also working into the surrounding terrain.

As difficult as the task is, it is manageable.

The current expansions of No. 3, No. 9 and No. 12--a precursor of even more changes to come this summer--was ultimately unsuccessful because of the failure to account for the nearly 80 years of top dressing build up that elevated the green floors above the surrounds.

Ah, but for those of you whose eyes haven't glazed over at this point, you might be saying, "the greens were rebuilt in 1993, how can their be topdressing build up?"

When the greens were rebuilt, they were not lowered the 4-5 inches that would have taken the greens down to their original height. A mistake? Perhaps, but Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw were not attempting to restore the greens to their original sizes. They were adding some lost hole locations, but in general, trying to not disturb the evolved course.

Therefore, today you have the original green areas (slightly expanded in '93), and then these newly "restored" areas that are sloping down and away from the elevated, primary green space. The effect is Donald Ross/Pinehurst-like. Unfortunately, Thomas-Bell were not into the crowned green look (and Donald Ross wasn't either if you look closely at the evolution of Pinehurst).

Now, all of this would seem to be a minor technicality except that nearly all of the "restored" green space on No. 9 and No. 12 does not tie-in with the primary green, and worse, is unpinnable in tournament conditions because of the noticeable tilt away from the main green floor. 

(Well, unless Tom Meeks was handling the setup, then this quibbling is all irrelevant!)

The approach to No. 9's front hole location has long been extremely difficult. But the expanded putting surface should make the shot much easier with such an inviting target and less difficult recovery pitches for those missing the green.

Most noticeable is the front expansion on No. 9, which will help players landing short of the green. (Before, the chip shot over kikuyu to the small green surface was incredibly demanding...now those misses will be putting.)

In this historic photo of No. 9 taken from the third tee, notice how the green in the front area has a backstop of sorts (the approach comes into this green from about 2 o'clock in the photo).

Also notice how that banking has changed to today's look (above), which is a false drop off. Then look at the photos taken today where you can see the border of the old green, and the new surface in the lighter shade. That entire "restored" area of new surface falls off gently toward the left of this photo.

With a bit more attention to this type of detail, I suspect that these green expansions could have tied in better with the existing green and served to restore the original design.

Unfortunately the green expansions appear to do a disservice to the original design.

They fail to add more hole locations, while also not adding any strategic interest, which was always the number one priority for Captain Thomas.

Bonk On Riviera Changes

Thomas Bonk writes about Riviera's latest changes.

The greens on three par-four holes — the third, ninth and 12th — have been brought back to their original size and shape, all of them slightly enlarged to take away the encroachment of the Kikuyu over the years and to come up with pin placements that had been lost since the club opened in 1926.

It opened on June 24, 1927, but hey, no worries.

"We're restoring them to recover the flexibility that Riviera had in the very beginning," said Michael Yamaki, the club's general manager. "Mother Nature has been the one who kind of grabbed those greens. We fought back."

Mother Nature? We fought back?  Hopefully Captain Thomas doesn't get the L.A. Times where he is now.

Tom Fazio, the architect who oversaw Riviera's previous round of changes in 2003, which basically involved the lengthening of the course, was again at the head of this latest project with the greens.

A half-day visit en route to the desert constitutes heading a project? Poor Tom Marzolf does all of the work and gets no ink. Then again, looking at the 7th, 8th, and 15th holes, maybe that's not such a bad thing.

Todd Yoshitake, Riviera's head pro, said the pin placements now reflect what was available in the past.

"We're getting back to our heritage," he said.

The insights you glean in the Times!

Looking through club archives and maps of the layout and studying aerial views of the course from the 1930s helped Fazio discover the original shapes of the greens that Yamaki targeted for restoration. Computer enhancement of the aerial photographs provided nearly precise dimensions of the greens. In their research, the revisionists discovered that the Kikuyu had moved in more than three inches on the greens.

The revisionists discovered that the Kikuyu had moved in more than three inches.

Priceless.

Riviera History Overview

MikeWeir.com's Chris Cook does a nice job sharing key historical information from the Riviera club history to preview the Nissan Open.

Riviera Wants 2009 Presidents Cup

Doug Ferguson reports that Riviera is begging interested in hosting the 2009 Presidents Cup.

"They're keenly interested in taking a look at this," said Michael Bodney, senior vice president of championship management for the PGA Tour. "It's all very preliminary, but they unsolicited wrote us a letter to host it."

"One thing they don't utilize are those lower tennis courts. There's a lot of room down there, and there seems to be enough room for a good TV compound."

One other issue was local interest. The gallery was noticeably thin during the '95 PGA Championship.

"You wonder about the L.A. market," Bodney said. "You've seen what's happened the last two majors, and that causes you to stand back a little bit."

Update on 2006-02-01 16:37 by Geoff

Quotes in Thomas Bonk's LA Times story would indicate that this is a non-story.

Bodney said Riviera is big enough to handle the staging issues of a big-time event, such as corporate hospitality areas and a television compound, but he said he was concerned that the market wouldn't respond.

"I can take this event to 10 or 15 places and I know for sure 25,000 or 30,000 people will show up. I don't know if that's going to happen in L.A.," Bodney said. "We can't afford to have a dud. We can go to a lot of places and I know it's not going to be a dud."