9th hole, 435 yards: Built into the slope of a hill, the sweeping green on the 9th is the best on the course, old or new.
13th hole, 520 yards: While playing the hole, the authors had little idea that this straightaway, uphill three-shotter was originally a dog-leg right two-shotter (the old 4th), for the 13th plays quite well, with its blind second over a hill to the well-bunkered green below.
15th hole, 356 yards: The authors’ favorite hole on the course, the 15th is the most dramatic and dangerous. The narrow green is perched on top of a hill with deep bunkers left and right. After seeing this hole, the 16th at PGA West (Stadium) seems tame!
In an interview on this site, Liddy himself described his task at Harrison Hills as ‘very intimidating.’ His approach: ‘I wanted the project to feel like it had been built at one time, and look like Langford had completed the entire job. I wanted it to look like I had never been there.’
How successful, then, was Liddy with his charge? Quite. In their first round at Harrison Hills, the authors had to scratch their heads much more than expected to determine which were the original holes and which were Liddy’s creation. While it was evident, because of the terrain, that holes 3-9 are new, holes 10-12 left the authors puzzled. Those three holes are set among mature trees and easily ‘look’ as though they could be originals. Standing on the 12th tee, a one-shotter through the thickest part of these trees, the authors were completely convinced that it had to be a Langford hole. When they reached the green, the turf itself looked new, but the authors were still convinced it was an original hole and that perhaps Liddy had been asked to expand/rebuild the green because of poor circulation in the trees. The authors knew that one hole (the 3rd) had been destroyed for the course, and they suspected that the 10th and 11th holes were new – could the old 3rd have taken them from the 2nd green to the (new) 12th tee? No, for the 12th is one of Liddy’s holes. This debate over the 12th emphasized that the overall design ‘style’ of the two parts of the course is close – that the main difference lies in the terrain (flat v. rolling) and trees (mature v. non-existent), not in the architects.