Hot Topics »St. George's  |  RBC Canadian Open  |  Tiger Woods  |  Mike Weir  |  Sean Foley   ...more topics »

Going for the Green

Robert Thompson's comments, criticism and opinion on the world of golf.

13 responses to “Review: St. George’s Preps for Canadian Open”

  1. Jeff Mingay

    Interesting video, Rob.

    Looks like the green had just been aerated and topdressed, too, which is amazing! That surface will really be something at “Tour speed”, during the Canadian Open!

  2. Nick

    Hey Rob,

    Is it just me, or the eleventh seems to be totally transformed with new bunkers and what appear to be a break in the fairway about 100 yards from the green?

    The two new tiny bunkers on the left side of the fairway appear lost in a sea of bluegrass…. What a shame, the hole now looks like a maze of bunkers and bluegrass. It looked so good before…. How did the previous architect react to these changes?

    Nick

  3. KC

    Robert is doing a Dave Pelz imitation in the video?

  4. phil

    i agree with Nick – restore in 2002 and then ANOTHER set of changes? and did those changes include some sexy white sand too?? wow.

  5. Zokol

    Regarding your video Rob and as Mingay pointed out its clear the 3rd green had just been aerated and top-dressed. To be fair you really should add in for your readers benefit that all greens have less surface friction after top-dressing and as such can be significantly faster at that point. It’s unreasonable to think the 3rd green will be “that” speed indicated on your video during the 2010 RBCCO.
    Having too much slope on putting surfaces for anything above 11 on the stimpmeter to work effectively is not an unusual problem for many courses in PGA Tour events…. the first 80% of the 18th green at Southern Hills comes to mind which has a far more significant slope than the 3rd at St. Georges needed to be slowed down in order to make it work effectively. St. Georges’s greenkeeper is with out a doubt on top of this and PGA Tour officials will not allow it to get out-of-hand.
    The average percentage of slope of the 3rd green at St. Georges is higher than 3%. The powers that be will simply make that green whatever speed needed to make it work… there shouldn’t be any significant problem at all.
    Regards,
    Zoke

  6. eppix

    That video is a joke. I’ve seen 90 year old men and women stick the 3rd green numerous times. Sorry you had a bad round at St. Georges Robert and decided you would post a video that shows a green that is obviously heavily topdressed.

  7. dsl

    My immediate reaction was – wow, it’s that fast AND it’s been aerated and top-dressed. After reading subsequent comments, it appears that my own personal experience with aerated greens might differ from those who play at (extremely) high-end facilities.

    In my neck of the woods, aeration and top-dressing means shaggy, pock-marked greens and a ball & putter face covered in sand. Needless to say, it can be difficult to get downhill putts to the hole in those conditions.

  8. C. W.

    St. George’s is a great golf course, that is for sure but the new bunkering is much too chaotic in my opinion. The golf course is built on a fine piece of property that it doesn’t need nor suit such complicated and exagerated bunkers. The updated 11th hole is garish by comparison with the 2002 version.

  9. phil

    wait RT – i’m confused.

    your photo caption says “The 11th as it was after the 2002 restoration.” Key on AFTER. or was this actually BEFORE?

  10. C. W.

    Yes, garish as in “tastelessly showy or flashy”. I found them overdone and needlessly busy. As far as Stanley Thompson being the original architect… I don’t think who originally designed the bunkers or who ultimately updated them has anything to do with my point. The bunkers stick out like a sore thumb where I would like to see them blended in to the hole more. There is no subtlety in the first picture of hole #11. Just lots of white sand.

  11. phil

    RT: thanks – i haven’t been there since umm.. 1992 (?) so my memory is not that good… it looks though that at least 2 or 3 MORE bunkers were added after the initial 2002 restoration – i’m thinking the 3 down the left side – 2 at the turning point, and then 1 bigger one post cart path crossing…

    were these original thompson locations? if so, why weren’t they added in the 2002 restore?

    they’ve obviously replaced the sand too… the white IS garish, i hate to admit. i find the white sand makes everything look very flat, while the near-natives (ie/ the 2002 pic) look a bit more subtle, perhaps adding a bit more depth and texture. aesthetics, sure, but thats part of the battle whether we like it or not.

Leave a comment