COLONIAL COUNTRY CLUB, the site of this week’s Crowne Plaza Invitational, ain’t what it used to be. Not by a long shot, or an average J.B. Holmes drive you might say.
The historic layout where Ben Hogan recorded five victories is less than 7000 yards and plays to a par 70. That’s pitch-and-putt length by current PGA Tour standards. Today’s bombers can drive over the doglegs and spin their short irons on the small greens. As John Hawkins said the other night on the Golf Channel, pros are hitting wedges into greens to which Hogan hit 4-irons.
Yet when Colonial first opened in the early 1940s and later began hosting the Colonial Invitational, it was considered one of the toughest courses anywhere. Texan Jackie Burke Jr. said, “If you’re told to just go out and shoot par on a golf course, Colonial is the last one you’d try it on.”
Not coincidentally, Colonial was built for a fade, Hogan’s trademark ball flight. Of Colonial’s 14 par-four holes, nine favored a controlled fade off the tee. “A straight ball will get you in more trouble at Colonial than any course I know,” Hogan once remarked.
One of the better players during Hogan’s heyday, 1951 winner Cary Middlecoff called Colonial the toughest par-70 in the world. This is how Middlecoff once described playing the 466-yard par-four 5th hole:
“First, I pull out two brand-new Wilson balls and throw them into the Trinity River. Then I throw up. Then I go ahead and hit my tee shot into the river.”
Phil Mickelson is the 36-hole leader at seven under.
−The Armchair Golfer
I really enjoyed this post. It puts into perspective perfectly the massive changes that advances in club technology have brought to golf over the decades.
I’m trying to see an upside to these changes but I really don’t. Isn’t it better to have smaller courses that play like bigger courses, than bigger courses that play like small ones. Am I missing something or are we all just victims of modern club technology.
I love Cary Middlecoff quote, BTW.
Great post – I love golf history!
It is sad when great courses that have staged memorable championships are more or less obsolete. For the pros, the technology changes have moved the game from skilled and versatile shotmaking to, for the most part, sheer power.
Some of the legends I’ve talked to say the technology advances are great for the amateur but have diminished the pro game by “leveling the playing field” and removing creativity from the long (and short) game.
There’s a sameness on tour, a kind of equality (except for the guy at the top), that probably has a lot to do with the equipment as well as the large sums of money available without ever winning.