Matthew:
You ask if holes 9-12 at NGLA are really that spectacular. Other than #9, I think they are! Exactly why takes some looking possibly but it's there in spades when you find it. In my opinion, those holes are spectacular because of their green-ends, greens and parts of their surrounds. The first 2/3 of #10 is very straight forward but when you get to the last 1/3 of the hole (with its semi-blindess) #10 becomes totally brilliant in both unique architecture and strategic ramifications. The enormous bail-out area right is a very subtle offering and the fact that it's so large, I think, enters a good player's head as a real sense of security! It is almost a "reverse temptation" offering and may be one of the best I've ever seen in that way--may be even one of the only ones I've seen with that particular conscious impact. To use it, though, to a front pin position (which would be the most likely time to use it) requires some real work chipping or pitching to a front pin with the narrowness of the front of the green, a gentle upslope and the bunker on the left! Really brilliant stuff. And the new expanded green is 50yds long, by the way. One could play back there for safety to a front pin but putting back to that front pin is not easy at all!
The greens and green-ends of #11 and #12 speak for themselves and are just some more examples of NGLA's "greens within a green". I don't know which green is tougher that way but if you find yourself on either green and in the wrong place you do feel two putting is one of the best recoveries you could hope for!
#9 however, definitely is the weakest and most unchallenging hole at NGLA, although I hate to call it weak and I don't think it is at all, only in comparison to its seventeen brothers! Even the green on #9 is far more complex (but very subtely so) both to approach and putt on than most realize! It is very hard to tell where the pin is on #9 depth-wise and actually quite hard to imagine what kind of shot to hit to get it to the pin (either short or long). This is obviously because the whole green-end is so low profile and standing on the fairway one gets no feel at all for the depth of the green and the gradual mid to back slope-away, particularly on the left, just can't be seen. I can't tell you how many times I've hit third shots to that green that I thought would be perfect for the particular pin only to find I'm short to a back pin or long to a front pin.
There is also something about putting that green I've never been able to figure out. It's mysterious to me just like #9 at Maidstone is. As well as I know both I just can't understand either and always feel uncomfortable putting on them. Maybe #9 NGLA is just so big and gradually sloping with not much else to it is what throws me off. I've hit a lot of long putts on that green that felt right only to have them way long or way short.
But otherwise, #9 doesn't have anywhere near the whole hole interest of the others. I do like the sort of alternate tongue on the right on the drive and I love those blind bunkers on the left. Have you ever seen more interesting bunker shapes and such in one large set? I haven't.
The cross feature on the midsection of the hole really doesn't do much for any golfer anymore. It might slow down a real long hitter (whatever that's worth) and it doesn't come close to challenging anyone on the second shot. The fairway on the second part of the hole is extremely accomodating and this might be the part of the hole that makes the hole the weakest. It's original, though, and I sure wouldn't recommend anything new be done to it at this point.
But if I was out there with C.B in the beginning and he asked for my advice on the second fairway of #9 I would tell him that a cross feature (maybe bunkering or low mounds) would be the ideal thing. I would connect them across the fairway starting from the bunker on the left near the green to the bunker on the right farther from the green. There is about 40-50yds of "down the hole" distance there and would be perfect for a gently snaking diagonal cross feature at about 45 degrees across the entire second half fairway. With an engineering genius like Raynor you could even mess with the top profile heights of the feature to make the whole thing look like it was set almost on a perpendicular to the golfer approaching it.
This would be very deceptive to a first time golfer but with experience one would know that you could play well up the left side without having to cross it or challenge it. But if you wanted to challenge it you could take the short route up the right or anything longer would be progressively challenging as you went towards the center or the left side over it.
To me, doing something like that is no more really than a variation of a Max Behr "line of charm" concept because by doing this you would be sort of taking the center away from the golfer (about the only thing he focuses on now the way the hole is) and make him decide shorter left (not challenging the feature) or challenging it progressively from the right to the center and on to the long left! And of course if any mistake was made with this feature you would have a problem with your third shot in to the green, something you certainly don't have right now anywhere on this broad expanse of fairway!
In a way, this is just about the same concept as the one I think would make the green-end of Gil Hanse's #10 Applebrook much more interesting and challenging if the green fronting bunker scheme was rearranged on the right and taken back to the short bunker (100yds out) on the right thus connecting the two sets to form a really good diagonal that would make the golfer choose something other than the center lay-up on #10 Applebrook.