scottdc52, on 13 March 2012 - 09:56 PM, said:
According to the proposal, he is also making the 15th green a penninsula........almost an island. It will definitely toughen that hole up a little. I'm unsure if there is any way to see the proposal online, but it is in last week's Sports Illustrated.
A few more changes including adding 80 yards to the 1st hole, re-doing the range, which will push the 10th tee forward, and he's moving the 10th green to make it the same distance it is now. From the sketch, the water won't be immediately left of the 10th green, which might make that hole easier, which kind of stinks. He's going to change the bunker on 11 to make the decision off the tee more important. Not a lot of change to the rest of the back 9, and apparently, he's not touching 18, except for re-doing the green (along with the other 17 greens). I guess they are just resurfacing them, and planting mini-verde. The biggest changes on the front seem to be the 1st hole, and from the sketch, it looked like he's adding a tee box on number 9 to get some longer distances there. scott c.
Thanks. I took a look at the sketch, and Hanse's descriptions. My early impression is I'm disappointed. There's simply not enough of a change, and some of them are negative, notably 10.
There's nowhere else the range can go, with a road to its right, so I understand the need to extend the range to the left and cut into the area of the 10th tee. But moving that tee box forward and to the left without expanding the water really weakens that hole. You'll have more options off the tee but the water won't be in play on the second shot, minus a severe pull. Keep in mind 10 runs the same direction as 1 so if the hole is downwind that tee shot will be pummeled over the corner of the water, leaving a short second shot and essentially nullifying the lengthening of 1. Right now 10 plays longer than it should only because pros can't cut the corner and lay up off the tee with a 3 wood, hybrid, or even iron. Virtually nobody hits driver off that tee. Then they take the angle over the water on the long second shot. This change will allow the driver and chop 80-100 yards off the second shot for the bombers. That's not an exaggeration at all and I think it's something Hanse and Trump are overlooking. The second shot for the big hitters will be short and boring, a comparative cupcake, with no water to worry about. There's currently an open marshy area where the new green is projected to be. I can't believe they aren't extending the pond to match the new location of the green.
Otherwise, it looks like the first green will be moved back behind the tiny creek, to the area where the forward 2nd tee now sits. That's a sensible change. I hope they keep the creek and widen it a little bit. The second tee will be crammed left of the first green, shortening that second hole and making it potentially driveable when downwind, along with straightening the hole somewhat. It currently plays as a slight dogleg right.
I don't see any other changes of note to the front nine. I was hoping for restoration of dense shrubs and reeds to the right of 3 near the water, like the old days. Big hitters don't fear that area now and cut the corner of the water. If they had vegetation to worry about they'd naturally bail out left, bringing those trees, and potentially water, into play, and restoring the old angles, which supposedly was Hanse's goal.
Number 5 through 7 are similar bland par 4s and at least one of them should be revamped. I've played and spectated at Doral for 40+ years yet sometimes confuse 6 and 7 in my mind.
Looks like a back tee might be built on 9, a good idea.
Number 11 is a weak hole and I'm astonished they aren't making more of a change. Amateurs enjoy the unique aspect of a split fairway and tend to overrate that hole but it's blah for the pros. Of all the areas at Doral, that point of the course has the most free room to maneuver. That's why Hanse can move the 10th green back 70 yards. It should similarly allow a fresh creative 11th hole but for whatever reason they aren't doing it.
The sketch of 15 and 16 gives me no indication the water will actually be in play on either hole. Certainly not on 16. You could do the scatter plot of every tee shot for decades and I doubt more than a handful would be in the water, even where Hanse has extended it. I'm more stunned than disappointed by that aspect. Luckily it's early enough to adjust plans. I'm certainly going to write a letter to Hanse/Trump with my points of view. At least it looks like the tee box maintains the same angle.
Number 15 currently has plenty of room for spectators behind the green. That may not be the case if water rings the green. I can't tell from the sketch where the spectator viewing area will be. Perhaps right of the green, maybe elevated. If the spectator viewing area stays the same but water is merely tighter to the green on all sides, it's not a worthwhile alteration. Pros don't miss target from 160 yards by the margin required to find that water.
0
