[Ben C. Dewar]

Dan Kelly brought this up in the Lackluster thread.

What great courses end on a particularly high/low note.

High:
Oakmont, Seminole, Pebble
Low: (Unseen)
Augusta, Cypress?

How does this affect the overall feeling of the course, can it make a difference.

[Matt_Davenport]

Ben,
I'm not sure that I would agree with your low opinion of the finishing hole at Augusta National GC.  Masters Tournaments have been won and lost at the finishing hole.  Sandy Lyle's 7-iron from the fairway bunker leading to a birdie and win...  Greg Norman blocking his approach beyond the gallery to the right to fritter away another one down the stretch...  I'm not sure how the changes made to the hole will effect the outcome in the future but the hole that is etched into my mind has an incredibly difficult green for greenside recovery shots (don't use the putter, DLIII!)  Putting from the upper level to the lower level requires the golfing equivalent of an advanced degree in Pelzian geometry.  I'm anxious to see the changes made to the course.  Let me ask you this...  What about the existing 18th hole at Congressional.  A par three that was used as the finishing hole (for the U.S. Open)versus the old concept of the 17th (long par-four with water at the green) becoming the 18th in major tournament play.  I would vote Congressional.  If Congressional gets a vote, how about East Lake?  Par threes to finish, no matter how long, lower my opinion of these courses (as a whole)...

[Gib_Papazian]

Every golf course has its own unique cadence and I do not understand why many golfers feel a golf course must have a spectacular finish.

Look at North Berwick, Prestwick and St. Andrews. All of these courses finish with a hole of similar difficulty (not) but I do not find that quality detracts from the overall.

Rather than a big finale - as if golf courses are an action movie - I liken a round of golf to a long jog through nature.

A "warm down" is nice in that it sort of gently slides you off the golf course.

I'd rather have a wicked 17th hole and a leisurely finish that doesn't break your back.

Or a reachable par-5 where a birdie is possible with risk, but a par - if frankly sought - is pretty easy.

This is good for match play particularly.

I also see no reason why a golf course should not finish with a par-3. Garden City and Pasatiempo work well.

Maybe the important thing is that the golf course flow with the natural rolls, folds and contours of the property. If it comes out that the last hole is a cream-puff, so be it!

Spyglass is an interesting example of a course that presents its most striking holes right off the bat and then meanders through
the forest. Is the 18th a letdown? Perhaps, but it still flows together without seeming contrived.

Imagine if every course was designed to achieve a big finish first and foremost. Generally, these are the most contrived layouts.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ben C Dewar,

You've obviously contracted a strain of the
EGAN syndrome, please call Dr. Katz at once.

The 18th hole at Augusta National is anything but lackluster or weak.

It is a challenging hole.

Don't be mislead by how it is played by the greatest players in the world, playing their best golf when you see them play # 18 at ANGC

[Ran Morrissett]

Ben,

North Berwick would fare better in the rankings if it ended with a tough, conventional two shot Home hole (like at 18 at Lundin) as opposed to its sub 300 yard driveable one. Somehow, such brute a brute of a hole might validate it as being more than "holiday" golf. Again, this thinking only applies to those who are stroke minded as 18 at North Berwick is certainly a tricky 3 to capture.

Also, Machrihanish's Home hole, when coupled with its 17th, is bad enough to the point where it is a genuine struggle to consider it a world top 100 course. With any kind of a decent finish, Machrihnish would be a lock for such honors.

Conversely, 18 at Lundin Links outside of St. Andrews is such a good Home hole of 450 some yards that it convinces the golfer that the course is indeed worthy of much praise.

Cheers,

[Craig_Rokke]

I'm undecided on par 3 finishers. If the hole is a good par 3 such as the 18th at the Cascades, then I suppose it works well. In tournament play, however, I think a hole
that presents multiple options, some perhaps
risky, can torque up the drama.

[Gene Greco]

Couldn't agree with you more, Ran. I played  Machrahanish last week alone (my foursome chose not to make the drive from Turnberry) and was miffed that my tour of Scotland's best ended on such a poor note. The rest of the golf course was a fairtale come true.

[Ben C. Dewar]

My reasoning for Augusta (I noted that I have not played it, so maybe my opinion is off) is that the hole is does not offer a supreme test.  

Before the bunkers we added, the driving area was just into the next fairway.  From there the approach is to an obviously undulating green.  With the length they keep adding, I am sure it is challenging just not particularly interesting.

Patrick, after I took your side against EGAN on the tenth at Seminole, how could you betray me..  
Seriously though, I did not say it was weak, just not as impressive as the rest of the course.

Matt,
I was not basing it solely on Masters memories, but there are some great ones.
As for par threes I do not mind par threes as a finisher, so long as they are solid holes.  Craig noted the 18th at the Cascades and I liked that finish.  With a par three 18th you know the architect was not forcing anything.

I think the reasons finishers are important is that inevitably they are your closing memory of the course (literally.)

Ran,
I have not been to Scotland, so I have not seen any of the three courses you mentioned.  Soon though..

Does the 18th hole affect how you look at a course though?  Are you at all soured by a bad 18th, or does it not come into play any more than a weak 11th hole?

[TEPaul]

How do you all who have played it think #18 Inniscrone would be considered if the rear tee was moved forward about 30-40yds really bringing the cross bunkering (they are done well for a driveable option) into play for a drive over by really long hitters and taking the quarry more out of play for everyone and making a lay up in front of the bunkers more reasonable for the short hitter?

This way the hole would be eminently birdieable, but so what? Gil told me in the beginning #17 & #18 were designed to have the same basic flow of #17 & #18 TOC--a very hard #17 and a very birdieable #18.

[Ran Morrissett]

Ben,

A relatively "weak" 18th hole doesn't worry me too much because

a) I only play match play and most matches are done by then (i.e. best not to save the best holes for last).
b) if you are embroiled in some stroke event with bets etc. the 18th hole is going to have its own drama, regardless of the merits of the particular hole.
c) a weak 18th COULD mean that the architect seized opportunities elsewhere on the course as he let the land dictate where the best holes would be
d) the architect could have been forced into a so-so 18th if he had no input into where the clubhouse was to be located and was made to finish it underneath the clubhouse window (ie. the 18th at LA North).

Basically, any weak hole is a bother but a  weak 18th doesn't worry me very much more than a weak 6th or 12th or whatever.

[Ben C. Dewar]

Ran,
Thanks that was exactly what I was looking for.

I guess you are certainly right in terms of match play, less interest must lie in the final holes.  

Thanks.

[Tim_Weiman]

Ben:

I always felt the 18th hole at Cypress Point was a perfect fit.  The preceeding holes offer such an emotional high, that something to "warm down" hardly detracts.

In other words, the course doesn't need a "supreme test" to finish.  A pleasant way to come back to earth works just fine.

[Ben C. Dewar]

Tim,
Note the question mark, I am happy to hear your opinions.

I have not seen Cypress, possibly this February when I make it to the Peninsula for the first time.  

I only mentioned it to get opinions, a good friend who has played Cypress a few times said 18 was not as bad as it was made out to be.  

Thanks for your insight.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ben C Dewar,

You too, had recognized that Mr. Egan had voluntarily, and without the consent of
Dr. Katz, reduced his medication.

Your thoughts on # 18 at Augusta may be tainted by what you see on TV.

The 18th at Augusta looses a lot through the TV cameras.

It's difficult to appreciate how uphill it is, how awkward the tee shot is, how difficult the uphill second shot is with the cavernous bunker staring you in the face, and the golfers difficult task of getting his weight back to his left side on the side hill lie.

The bunkers you mention, I believe were put in for the Nicklaus's of the world.  For the long Hitter they certainly add an element of risk to a difficult tee shot.

Remember, whey you watch the tournament, you don't get to see how the guys who missed the cut played the hole, you usually get to see the guys who are at the top of their game playing the hole, and that can distort perspective too.

We are also witnessing golfers hitting the ball so far that they have sand wedges into the green.

Greg Norman might not agree with you.  
Also recall that Norman elected to hit an easy 4-iron rather than a hard 5-iron because of the lie, and left it right, bogieing the hole.

If Norman hit 4-iron, what might others hit ?

[Ben C. Dewar]

Patrick,
When Norman hit 4-iron it was 1986, I have to believe that technology has changed that a bit even for amateurs.

But I do not dispute that I do not get a real feel for the holes greatness.  I have watched lots of first and second rounds of the Masters and seen a variety of finishes on 18.  The other things is while we may see players at their best, we also see shots like Norman's in 86, which clearly was not his best.

I will believe you if you say it is better then what I can observe through the television though.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ben C Dewar,

Like many of us I've been watching the Masters for decades. We've gained a sense of familiarity with the golf course over all these years.  Yet, despite hundreds of hours of viewing, I was not prepared for what I saw when I visited and played Augusta.

The elevation changes were dramatic,
other than the first hole their may not be a flat lie on the golf course, the cant of the greens, with nary a flat putting surface, even on the upper tiers on # 13 and # 16, the uncomfortable set up at # 11 and # 18 tee, all combine to provide an enhanced understanding of the holes and play of the course.

For whatever reason, holes that I thought were easy, proved to be more difficult, and holes that I thought were difficult proved to be easier.

Seeing the front nine on TV in the future will be good, since there are some very good holes where the outcome of the tournament can be determined.  I know, the tournament begins on the back nine Sunday.  But, some golfers play themselves out of the opportunity to be there Sunday afternoon.

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Patrick,
Well written.  I hope I get to see it and then I will be more informed in this discussion.
Regards
Ben

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()