News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Brian_Gracely

Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« on: April 03, 2004, 04:37:12 PM »
Not much length there...would it provide you enough challenge?  Logistics aside, I think I could enjoy playing this collection on a daily basis.

1 - #1 at Prestwick (par4)
2 - #9 at MPCC Dunes (par5)
3 - #3 at Pinehurst #2 (par4)
4 - #3 at ANGC (par4)
5 - #8 at Royal Troon (par3)
6 - #7 at Sand Hills (par4)
7 - #7 at Pebble Beach (par3)
8 - #8 at CPC (par4)
9 - #9 at CPC (par4)
10 - #10 at Riviera (par4)
11 - #1 at NGLA (par4)
12 - #12 at ANGC (par3)
13 - #13 at ANGC (old tee, par5)
14 - #5 at Royal Dornoch (par4)
15 - #2 at Royal County Down (par4)
16 - #10 at PVGC (par3)
17 - #18 at Olympic Club (par4)
18 - #18 at TOC (par4)

If yes, which holes would you keep and which would you substitute?
« Last Edit: April 04, 2004, 12:44:51 PM by Brian_Gracely »

Jeff_Mingay

Re:Those old 6000yd, par70 courses...
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2004, 05:01:23 PM »
Off the top of my head, Brian. I'd throw 13 at Kingsley in there. It's a short two-shot hole that can be played a variety of ways. Infinite fun.

I teased with Mike DeVries before, saying wouldn't it be fun to come out there, to 13, and continually play it with superintendent Dan Lucas changing the hole location each time. (Not sure Dan would agree to play that role for us though!)

Honestly, you could play 13 for hours in such a circumstance.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2004, 05:02:01 PM by Jeff_Mingay »
jeffmingay.com

A_Clay_Man

Re:Those old 6000yd, par70 courses...
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2004, 05:38:56 PM »
Brian, considering the time it would take to golf that course you've composed, why not just go to pacific grove? 5954yds. par 70. I'm told you can get around in less than 4 hrs, too.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2004, 05:39:24 PM by Adam Clayman »

Thomas_Brown

Re:Those old 6000yd, par70 courses...
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2004, 11:33:13 PM »
Would you enjoy a round at this course?

Strategic of you to choose holes at ANGC that have not been Fazio-ed.  Are you one of the GCA cognoscenti?

My fav. par 4 at RCD is #7, so I would substitute that.
Likewise I would have included #4 at RCD.



Brian_Gracely

Re:Those old 6000yd, par70 courses...
« Reply #4 on: April 04, 2004, 08:33:17 AM »
Would you enjoy a round at this course?

Strategic of you to choose holes at ANGC that have not been Fazio-ed.  Are you one of the GCA cognoscenti?

My fav. par 4 at RCD is #7, so I would substitute that.
Likewise I would have included #4 at RCD.


Tom,

I supppose I could have chosen #7 at ANGC over #3, but I believe #3 is a more interesting hole.  As far as being cognoscenti, I'm pleading the 5th....never used the word, don't know what it means....don't know if I fit the category.
But as we discussed at RC, I'm definitely one of the ANGC supporters on the board.  

And with regards to #4 at RCD....maybe you didn't notice, but it would be a little too long to fit into the theme of the rest of the course, no??  ;)
« Last Edit: April 04, 2004, 11:00:30 AM by Brian_Gracely »

Thomas_Brown

Re:Those old 6000yd, par70 courses...
« Reply #5 on: April 04, 2004, 10:38:57 AM »
http://www.royalcountydown.org/geninfo2.htm

I think I forgot the course a bit.
I meant to say #6 was my fav. short par 4.

#4 is 210 yards, right?
I guess you're right - too long.

Tom



ed_getka

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #6 on: April 04, 2004, 01:05:59 PM »
I would drop Olympic #18 in favor of #13 Kingsley. I would find room for #14 Sand Hills, by dropping MPCC #9. Otherwise I would have great fun going round on that course.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

RJ_Daley

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #7 on: April 04, 2004, 01:19:55 PM »
I'd stick 15 Wild Horse (par4) in this theme of great short holes for their par.  But, having not played the great majority of the holes you cited, I'm not sure which holes I'd drop off the list.  And, 3 at Rustic went way up my list this past week of short potentially drivable holes (at least down wind for me) even perhaps over 12 at RC.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Gib_Papazian

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2004, 01:34:35 PM »
I'm sorry, your eclectic collection is invalidated due to omission of representatives from Lahinch and North Berwick.

With the *possible* exception of County Down and Prestwick, those remain my favorite courses in the British Isles. . . . . actually, I am not sure that those two aren't tied as my 2nd favorite courses in the world. (after the place with the windmill) ;)
« Last Edit: April 04, 2004, 01:35:07 PM by Gib_Papazian »

Tom_Doak

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2004, 05:34:35 PM »
There are lots of better short par-4's than the 18th at Olympic or the 1st at Prestwick.

ForkaB

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #10 on: April 04, 2004, 06:18:51 PM »
Brian

Yes.  And.......

....before you changed the title, I thought this was a great concept--show how great a course can be that is under 6000 yards.  The one you choose very much is.

Tom D

You are picking nits.  BG didn't say that 1 Prestwick and 18 Olympic were the best short 4's in the world, just that they would be great bookends to the fantasy course he was postulating.  I fully agree with him.  ( I also think that each are world class golf holes.  Can't think of any short 4's that are demonstrably "better".....)

PS--I don't think too many of us on this website could break 80 at Brain's "course." ;)

Andrew Summerell

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #11 on: April 04, 2004, 09:21:49 PM »
Coming from Australia, I would have to add 5w at Royal Melbourne (176y par 3) in place of the postage stamp. I would also add 14 at NSW in there as a short, bunkerless, wind effected par 4.

Brian_Gracely

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #12 on: April 04, 2004, 09:33:13 PM »
There are lots of better short par-4's than the 18th at Olympic or the 1st at Prestwick.

Tom,

I agree, I'm just not worldly enough to make a better list.  Hence the reason I asked for substitutions.  What would you add?  

And is there really a better short par4 opener than Prestwick, considering the history and setting?

Doug Siebert

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #13 on: April 04, 2004, 11:59:55 PM »
I'd definitely toss in #12 TOC.  If the buzz is to be believed, #1 Painswick belongs in that list as well :)
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Jonathan Cummings

Re:Would you enjoy a round at this course?
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2004, 07:18:47 AM »
The words short and challenge define PVGC's #8 which just might be the scariest short approach in golf - and that's in no wind!  Could you imagine that shot if PVGC were magically transported to a windy environment?  This hole would then be scary on steriods!

JC

Tags: