Do you think that Valderrama might be considered in that category also?
It’s narrow. When we did Valderrama, I did the marking for the tree clearing. We do clearing in two phases. We clear the center lines which are about 40-50 yards wide, and basically all those trees have to go out. We’re told if there’s anything special in that line and we’ll leave it for a second look. And then I go on and mark the outer limits for the second phase where we mark tree by tree. To me it’s very important as the wooded areas give fairways a different shape - you can’t just do it on paper. Well you can but then it has no personal feeling about it. And I marked all the trees for the second phase and Mr. Jones came over with the developer and looked at the markings. We had marked the trees with buckets of white wash and painted a vertical stripe on the tree which meant it was to be cut. The developer was a ‘tree hugger’, and rightly so, they were beautiful trees! But he kept saying ‘Mr. Jones we’re not going to cut that tree.’ They’d argue about it some and finally it was decided not to cut it. So we had to change them, adding two more stripes on the tree to make an N for no, don’t cut it! These marks stayed on there for about two years until the tree eventually went or the white wash came off! Valderrama has very few fairway bunkers because of that. The fairways were so narrow, and now after 25 or 30 years they’ve gotten narrower. The cork trees grow very slowly, but they not only go up, they go sideways. I think that’s what makes Valderrama difficult.
We changed a few holes when Jaime bought it. Probably the biggest changes were lowering the landing area on what is now number 4, The Cascade. We had a double green there because it was felt that playing the third shot across a lake was going to be too difficult for a lot of the players. So short of the lake on the right side we built an alternate green. That was the thing about fairness. It’s a great hole, but originally you couldn’t see the green from the tee. We moved the green on what is now the par 5, 11th to make it a little longer, and of course there have been many changes to the 17th to make an Augusta like finishing effect. We originally had the green on the banking where everybody now sits, but there was no water and no drama. So yes, again a course doesn’t have to be that long if they are narrow or have other aspects to it. It’s not really a short course, but it’s windy and the trees do create some difficult situations. I mean the 18th is not the longest hole, but next to the 18th at Augusta it is one of the most difficult driving holes in tournament golf.
If you try and cut the corner you can get stuck on the left. If you hit it straight you can go right through and get stranded behind a tree like Seve did a few years ago. Put it right and you’re in the trees. And length is reasonably important on the drive because it’s a pretty decent second shot. But you’ve got to be spot on in the middle of the fairway to have a clear shot at the green. The tee is in kind of a cut with spectators looking down on you in very close proximity; you’re really in a cauldron there. Standing on the 18th tee with a tournament on the line it’s a pretty tough shot!
The 18th at Augusta is also that way because it’s so narrow. They’ve moved that tee way back now, around 50 yards, and it’s difficult to get around the corner. For a finishing hole, those two to me are the most challenging tee shots in tournament golf, which is good. Neither are excessively long but you can make holes difficult in any number of ways.
My courses down here have a lot of bunkers, in part because there are few trees. I like the visual contrast, and one of the things about my bunkers is that I always like to see the sand.
Again that comes back to Mr. Jones. He always wanted to see an obstacle, and he never liked blind water hazards, blind bunkers etc. He liked to see the white faces of the bunkers. The strongest visual contrast on a golf course is the sand and the grass. They kind of make a picture. People often say that bunkers should always be in a strategic place, and for the most part I would agree with them. But there are other uses for bunkers, one of which is for me that they are used to complete the given beauty of a golf hole.
Without doubt you have achieved that at La Reserva...
I think that’s my training as a landscape architect and looking at things and seeing balance and asymmetry. I hate symmetry because it’s something that you don’t find in nature. On the other hand you look at some of the bunkers at Carnoustie, it is very symmetrical. But that’s part of links land golf.
For me golf holes should be inviting, and by that I mean they should be pretty. There is nothing which says that a good hole can’t be pretty, or shouldn’t be pretty. Sometimes that means an extra bunker to define a space, to direct your eyes. And I do rely on that, and yes La Reserva is possibly a typical example of how I try and use it. Again at Valderrama, with all the trees there was little chance of using that, albeit the bunkering around the green settings makes them pretty. People do complain to me about the cost of maintaining my bunkers, but I’m not trying to build the cheapest courses to maintain. I shouldn’t say that but it’s true! I don’t think that people hire me to build a ‘ho-hum’ golf course, and I try not to give them one!
Stay tuned for Part 2 of the interview with Cabell B. Robinson
in our next issue.
