Golden Horseshoe Golf Club (Gold)-Williamsburg, VA

This older Robert Trent Jones design features many of the design ideas that made Mr. Jones famous. Aircraft Carrier/Runway tees. Solid par three's. Forcing the player to work the ball both ways. Mr. Jones takes heat in some circles due to his later work, much done by associates, but his earlier work where he was most involved is generally very high quality. That is certainly the case here.

Ranking:

Variety of Design: Very good. Great variety in yardage for all holes. Par three's range from well over 200 yards to 169 yards playing significantly downhill. Par five's from from the reachable sixth playing 485 yards to the fifteenth playing 634 yards. Par four's are also solid, ranging fron the 466 yards tenth to the 337 yard eighth. Directional variety is perfect at six right, six left, and six straight. The course also does a great job routing the course up and down the hills. The only negative is that all the par 3's play over water. 8 1/4 out of 10

Flow of the Course: This course does little to really invigorate the golfer on the front nine. The holes are solid, but there is just "something" missing. On the back, the course keeps plugging along, nothing bad, until one gets to the fifteenth tee. From there, the course builds to a very good finish. Fifteen is a very difficult long par 5, followed by a short par 3 to an island green. The view from the sixteenth tee of the green below the player and the seventeenth fairway spanning up the hill in the distance is extraordinary. From here the player is faced with two difficult par 4's to finish out the round. So the finish is top tier, but the rest of the course lacks a bit. 7 out of 10

Course Conditioning: The course was maintained very well. Played in mid-March on the winter rye overseeding, the fairways were solid throughout and not overly damp. The night before play, there had been a large rain storm pass over, but the course still played rather firm and fast. The greens were also as firm as could be expected given the rain and ran nicely fast and true. 7  1/4 out of 10, likely 1/2 point or so better in peak season

Ease of Walking: This course gets downgraded on walking due to the hilly nature of the site and also the small size of the site results in some odd transitions. But for a person of reasonable fitness, this course should not be difficult to walk. 6 out of 10

Atmosphere: Very good atmosphere here. The course is old and traditional and seeing horse drawn carriages on the way in gives it a slight boost. The reasonably high ranking of the course also does not hurt, being top 50 public according to Golf Digest. 4 1/2 out of 10

Total: 70 3/4

Holes to Note

Hole #1: Par 4, 402 yards

This hole is not an exceptionally difficult opener, but it's no cake walk either. The hole doglegs to the right and the player can choose either side of the fairway, depending on the second shot he desires. The play down the right side will leave a shorter approach over a greenside bunker while the play down the left will yeild a slightly longer shot but will open up a longer angle of the green and allow for a possible run-up shot, depending on conditions. Solid opening hole.

From the tee, the player may be tempted to go over the tall trees in the distance. While it would be possible to carry these trees, there is little value to be had in that with additional trees lining the fairway beyond that. The RTJ aircraft carrier tee is visible here.



This player chose to play down the right side for the shorter shot. The opening left of the bunker is visible and flat enough to accept running shots, should the player decide that is the best option for him.

Hole #2: Par 5, 498 yards

This hole gives the player a chance to make a birdie early in the round. 498 yards is very reachable even for modest hitters and with the hole doglegging to the right, some of that can be cut off. The best play for all golfers, going for the green in two or otherwise, is down the right side or the fairway.

From the tee, the player is again confronted by trees down the side of the fairway. The best play is to hit the tee shot as closely to them as possible and even perhaps attempt to fade the ball around the corner a bit.

In a perfect world, the golfer can end up here. This will leave roughly 200 yards to the green. As you can see, that is over water. The shot is also complicated by being played off a downhill lie. Players had better have full confidence in the shot before pulling the trigger here.

Hole #7: Par 3, 206 yards

Mr. Jones seems to have learned from his early partner, Stanley Thompson, how to work par three's into the routing. Mr. Thompson is known to have said he liked picking the par three sites first and working the course from there. That certainly seems to be what Mr. Jones did here. This is a fantastic par three playing over water, though the water should not come into play being 60 or 70 yards short of the green, to a generous green. Depending on the hole location, the player may be able to play conservatively towards the center of the green and fade or draw the ball either way in order to avoid the bunkers fronting the green.

Hole #12: Par 3, 188 yards
Another fantastic par 3. This one truly plays over the water out to a green and angles left to right away from the player. This hole simply gives the player limited options to make an aggressive play because poor execution will result in another shot over the water only slightly shorter than the one before.

Hole #15: Par 5, 634 yards
By far the longest par 5 on the course and the only one not reachable in two shots. Two bunkers flank the fairway in the landing area. From the tee, the player simply needs to hit the fairway. No attempt to the green in two shots is possible (even Bubba Watson would have great difficulty cover 634 yards in two shots) but the player will find himself at a significant disadvantage is playing his second shot from the rough. The second shot needs to be played down the right side of the fairway in order to open up the length of the green and take the green side bunkers out of play as much as possible.

From the tee, there is little that can not be seen. Simply play the tee shot down within the confines of the fairway and move along.

Obviously this player did not know how to play a shot to the fairway. From the bunker it becomes difficult to advance the ball down the fairway far enough to leave a short to mid-iron into the green.

This shot is coming into the green from the preferred angle, but from the rough. The two front greenside bunkers are visible here. This is a very difficult hole and the start to a difficult closing stretch.

Hole #16: Par 3, 169 yards

This hole is one of the earlier island green designs, being done before later designers turned the hole into a cliche. The green is large and well defended with bunkers. In truth, the bunkers likely as as much to save the player from finding the water with slight misses and hazards. This hole certainly allows the player to attempt something aggressive and make a birdie. The seventeenth hole works it's way up the hill in the center of the image below.

Hole #17: Par 4, 435 yards
From the tee, the hole does not appear to work uphill as much as was evident in the view from the sixteenth tee. The best play off the tee is up the right side of the fairway. The hills that are visible in the right side of the image below can be used as kick-slopes if the player desires. From the right side, the length of the green is open to the player. This hole will not give the player any breaks on the incoming stretch, he will need his best here.

From the tee, the green is visible in the distance and the hole looks decievingly flat. The best play is up the right, possibly using the hills to propel the tee shot forward.

From the fairway, the uphill nature of the hole is more evident. There is a small opening between the bunkers if the player wished to run the ball onto the green, but that is likely not the desired option for players who are playing the correct tees.

Hole #18: Par 4, 444 yards

The closing hole here plays level off the tee then downhill to the green and doglegs significantly to the left. The player can choose to play right or left off the tee. The play to the left will open up the length of the green, but the green is not very wide and any shot missing the green left will quite likely result in a ball in the water. Playing right off the tee leaves the player with a longer approach to the green, but gives more directional cushioning.



From the tee, the fairway spreads out in front of the player nicely. He must choose between right or left depending on what he desires to leave for his second shot.

This player chose to play down the right side. From the right-center of the fairway, the green angles away from the player left to right and the steep hill long of the green will filter balls down to the pond between the green and clubhouse. Very solid closing hole with potential for great play and disaster.

Overall, this course gets off to an average start. Though the holes themselves are very solid, there is little flow, little excitement, early in the round. However, the stellar finish makes up for that somewhat and in the end you have a very, very solid golf course here. 6 out of 10.

Internal Contouring vs. External Contouring

This ties back to another article written here about the "ground game" versus "target golf." Certainly it is the belief here that all golf is target golf and the supposed ground game is merely an additional variable that needs be considered once the ball reaches it's intended target. A standard biarritz hole was used in that article to show different possibilities of using ground features to work the ball closer to the hole. Of course, with that hole, there exists the option to land the ball short of the green and roll the ball onto the green. But are ground features inside the green itself just as good as ground features that are outside the green? Do they both cause the player to give thought to the shot, to take a potentially conservative play and work it into something great?

For another standard example, let's look at the Redan hole:

This hole is open in the front with a right to left slope in the green. There is also a significant slope in the top right corner of the green. These features allow the golfer the option to take a conservative route to the hole, which might be positioned back-left, and not challenge the deep bunkers. The golfer can land the ball short of the green, in the approach grass and run the ball on from there. He can also attempt to hit a draw into the front portion of the green and filter it back. And he can fly the ball into the slope and have it kick down to the hole from there.

There is also the Biarritz where the area in front of the depression is maintained as green:

This is the same hole used on the previous post, only from a different angle. All the options remain the same, some being easier to execute and more conservative than others. Land the ball short of the green, land the ball on the front portion, or fly the ball all the way to the hole. This hole, as with the one above, has roll-out options available for balls struck both on the green and off.

But what about holes that only offer one option or the other?

Some holes offer the roll-out option only for shots landing short, like this version of the biarritz:

This biarritz has the front portion of the hole, between the bunkers, maintained as approach/fairway turf. This means the only option for players wanting to land the ball on the green is a lofted shot that will stop near by where is lands. The only run-up option that exists is for the player to land the ball short of the green, run it through the depression that is also maintained at fairway height, and have it filter back to the hole. This hole still has the run-up option, just not as many variations as the biarritz above.

 

What about holes that offer only the run-up option for balls hitting the green?

 

 This hole, #16 at Augusta National Golf Club, has the short-of-the-green run-up option removed due to the bunker. When playing to a back-left hole location, typically seen on Sunday during the Masters, the player must take the aggressive line directly at the flag, bringing the front bunker into play or play the ball out to the right, center of the green, and allow the internal contouring to bring the ball closer to the hole, as seen in the illustration.

 

Certainly the holes that have both options are likely to be better, all other things being equal. But are holes that offer the player the option to work the ball towards the hole using contours, either internal or external, better than those that merely require an aerial play to the green? In most cases, they certainly are. Of course, they answer to that question is not "always" because if we compare the eighth hole at Tobacco Road, where the green has numerous contours that allow the player to funnel balls to multiple locations, to the twelfth hole at Augusta National, where there are no ground contours to utilize, only a delusional individual would say the hole at Tobacco Road is better.

 

When comparing these holes, internal and external contours, option generators, if you will, should be viewed equally. Both of these options give players the chance to pick a target and calculate ball movement after it arrives at the target. It also gives them the chance to make a conservative play and still get the ball close to the hole. Of course there are potential consequences at play. On either of the biarritz holes, a shot played low that does not make it through the depression will leave the player a difficult second shot. That second shot will be easier on the hole that has the depression and approach maintained as fairway, but it will still not be easy. On the redan, if a ball it hit too high, it may stop on the front of the green, leaving the player a very long putt. At Augusta National, viewers are able to see every year the consequences of the conservative play when professionals wind up with putts that have 5-6 feet of movement in them.

 

But all of these options and outcomes give the player more possibilities and options to consider during the play of the hole. At no time is having more options available a bad thing. Internal and External Contouring are both equal and both equally good.

Golf Course Epiphanies

It is very rare that you play a course that really works to change your whole perception of other courses. Peachtree was one of those. But how did it make such an impact? This goes beyond the whole club atmosphere and to the heart of the course itself. It showed how good Robert Trent Jones could be at designing golf courses when he handled the work himself rather than letting his associates do the work. The course shows how to test all clubs in the better player's bag while still remaining playable for the lesser player. And the course shows how fairway bunkers are not needed in all spots and huge numbers on order for the course to be challenging.

First, this design shows just how good Mr. Jones could be when he did the work himself. The routing of the course is outstanding. There are a few long walks today due to new tees being built to lengthen the course, but aside from the transition from 16 to 17, the course has no long walks between holes. The course also has an outstanding set of greens. The internal movement is subtle in some places and bold in others. At all times, the contouring fits the shot being played into the green. But the real magic of the course is how it flows through the round. From difficult, to easy, holes to play safe, holes to attack, holes with options to do both, the course takes the player on a fantastic ride from start to finish. Mr. Jones knew how to tell a story on the golf course. Sadly, his later work, especially the course on the RTJ Trail in Alabama, don't reflect much of this. This happened as he began to let his associates take over the day to day design work and lending his name to the courses. Mr. Rulewich, who did all of the courses in Alabama, seems to know how to design holes like Mr. Jones, but what the courses seem to lack is real flow and certainly lack even a serviceable routing. No, Mr. Jones could do fantastic work all around when he did the courses himself. His name has been tarnished over the years due to his associates, however.

Second, the course is a virtual template for how to test every club in the better player's bag while staying playable and fun for the average player. The course does this by using fairway width coupled with green size and contouring. Approach angle is important here due to the size of the greens and the movement within them. This gives the better player something to think about as he plans his shots. But these same things also make it fun for the average player, giving them the chance to find the fairway and green with semi-regularity. Obviously these features make the course more expensive to maintain and that is why many average courses cannot and do not look like this. But overall, size and angling make the course challenging for the better player and playable for the average one.

Finally, the course shows how to be challenging without use of fairway bunkering. Peachtree has five total fairway bunkers, two on the first hole, two on the ninth, and one on the eighteenth; not included are the 4 bunkers that exist within 75 yards of the green on three of the par 5's. Compare this to the best modern course this writer has played (excluding the Bandon courses), Eagle Point. Eagle Point has 37 fairway bunkers. Yet, sadly, at least half of those serve no purpose other than simply being there, and more still do little to enhance the strategy of the course. Even though Mr. Jones began to use more bunkers in some of his later work, he still used fewer than many modern designers. No, with proper width and greens, tying into the second point, fairway bunkers are not always necessary to retain great strategic interest in holes. Mr. Jones figured that out at Peachtree.

So in these ways, Peachtree opened this writers eyes to things relating to golf. However, there is another part to the equation when it comes to these design features is cost. Is it more cost effective in the long run for courses to maintain fairway turf and green turf rather than maintaining bunkers in order to have strategy. The answer to that question is not known to this writer. Logic would suggest, however, that it is more expensive long term to maintain fairway and green space, especially green space. As such, courses wind up having to manufacture strategy with fairway bunkering and giving the players boring greens.

But here, on this course, Mr. Jones did a fantastic job of bring all of his design skills to the table and crafting a great golf course. This course is one of those rare places that may cause a golfer to reevaluate how he views golf courses and their features. Fantastic and thought provoking. What more can a course really be?