What opening hole (on a great course) shouldn't be an opening hole?

[Evan_Green]

My vote for an opening hole on a great course that shouldnt be the first hole (at least in its current state) is Pasatiempo #1 - a downright scary drive like that isnt the way a round ought to begin. I think it would be a better hole if it werent the first. Someone correct me if i'm wrong, but I doubt Mackenzie put the driving range where it is and put OB that close to the fairway (the driving range) on the opening tee shot.

From the pictures I've seen of Pasatiempo in the old days, the entire course was wide open and that drive would not have been nearly so claustrophobic. Also I wouldnt be surprised if that hole was a par 5 in the old days ( I think I remember reading somewhere that Pasa used to be Par 74 in the 20s).

Every time I play there, I am relieved not to make 6 on the first hole (which is not the way to inspire confidence!)

[Bill_McBride]

You're right, Evan, #1 Pasa was a par 5 until relatively recently.  I'm not sure exactly when it was changed, but I think sometime in the last 20 years. Starting with that downhill par 5 was a good opener to a tough course.  Hitting a long iron or more on that starter is pretty difficult as you suggest.

It's also my understanding that #2 was originally a par 5.  

You're also right about the growth of trees into the playing corridors at Pasatiempo.  #1 is a good example, #7 is better yet.   But the course is still one of every classic course fan's favorites.

[ian]

Are we talking match play or medal play, because I would give you a completely different answer for both.

Prestwick's first is probably the hardest shot you have to face there all day (just my opinion), but it wouldn't be the same course without that opening hole.

Other than a severe initial forced carry, I have never wished for an opener to be a different hole.

[Willie_Dow]

Sorry Ian, I disagree with your comment.

For example, the original Flynn design at Philladelphia CC was a very forgiving drive, even from the back tee.  But he next par three was a big problem.  How relaxed were you after your first encounter?

The first engagement in match play sets the stage, does it not?

Willie

[Willie_Dow]

Sorry again, Ian!

You're totally right!  After a reread my thoughts were rearranged.

Will

[ian]

Willie,

You bring up a great point about "two hole" openings. There is no question in my mind that Riviera's opening two have to be discussed together. The back to back par 4 1/2's impact your approach to the opening two holes.

With Philly, I am sure that the second hole has an impact on your approach to the first.

Good point about thinking about openings rather than a single hole.

Ian

[Gerry B]

Oak Hill East's opening hole is the #1 stroke hole on the course - if #2 and #1 were reversed - might make for an easier start. Ben Hogan once said that #1 on the East was the toughest opening hole in golf.

There is a course in Toronto called Lionhead that has an opening par 4 where one can post a big number right out of the gate. It is followed by a benign par 4 - they should have been reversed - but i suppose available land made the designers to opt for a kick in the teeth opening hole.

[THuckaby2]

At Pasatiempo, the driving range didn't exist in MacKenzie's time, nor did any of the trees between 1 and 9.  It was one big wide open meadow consisting of the two holes, both par fives.  The range was put in at some point, trees planted... trees grow... voila - you have a situation completely outside of what MacKenzie intended.  Oh well, shit happens over time, especially in a litigious society.  But just think how cool it would be with no trees and no range....

As for it being a par four, that change occurred in the last couple years and all it entailed was re-printing the scorecard.  Well, they did remove a big tree that was near the front left of the green, making reaching the green in two shots much more doable, but other than that, the distance didn't change at all, with the exception that they seem to have closed forever the rarely-used, but fun, old back tee (on top of the cart barn).

As for it being a poor opening hole, well, it wasn't as MacKenzie intended!  But as it is today, yes it's a very difficult hole to make a 4 on.  So here's a secret - screw the scorecard - hit an iron off the tee, then anothe careful iron toward the green, then voila - it's pretty easy to make a 5.  Just tell yourself you made par and move to the next hole.  Which also once was a par 5, btw, but that's enough of what was and should be and might be at this bastardized, but still incredibly great, golf course.

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

As I've detailed before, Pinon Hill's current opener is completely out of place and therefore disrupts the flow to such an extent to make it STUPID.

An amazing modern course, that in it's totality is greater than the sum of it's parts. Subtle design elements are being ignored, such as: the return towards the first tee, to golf the second, allowing late-comers to easily reach the third. Also  neither nine is an over-the-top strong nine holes, but again, in totality better than most modern course built anywhere near the year 1990.

[THuckaby2]

Adam - whaddya think of reversing the nines at Spyglass?  I played it in that fashion earlier this year and man it worked really well... kind of a long jaunt from 18 green down to 1 tee, but to me the good outweighed the bad.  Now I love #1 - it is a fantastic golf hole in so many ways - but having it as #10, and then all those duney holes at the end rather than the beginning... well... it was pretty cool.

But I'm sure we've discussed this before... I just want your take (again, to remind me), because the first thing I thought of when seeing this thread title was Spyglass... and you are the best expert on the Glass that I've yet read!

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom- Personally, I can only extrapolate what switching the nines might entail. ( I think I only saw it once in reverse)Thinking out loud, the 8th and 9th would certainly make for great (stronger)finishers. And having those dunesland holes later, will certainly give the golfer a more satisfied(spiritual) feeling upon leaving.  But, as I've noted before, most of the resort golfers, that I have surveyed, prefer the tree lined holes. It's my own theory, that the reason they think that, is mainly due to the reminder of their home course.

On the negative side, there ain't much, save for that opener on #10. The narrowness, and shot demands, are pretty high for an opener. (not that the par 5 current opener is a slouch) And, golfing the marvelous one shot 12th, as the third hole of the day, maybe too demanding.

The transition of styles between the two terrains, is so great, that getting that transition out of the way early, may be the right choice, designwise, allowing the golfer some chance at continuity, and the course to flow as the round progresses. Going in and out, and back into the forest again, would certainly test the ability to adapt, more than just the one time, as is current. However it, may take away from the flow of the entirety.

 Is this a good thing? I'm don't feel qualified to answer. But the difference is likely very subtle.


Here's one: How about making the first the last?

[THuckaby2]

Adam:  Great stuff, makes sense to me.  Hell, it's a wonderful golf course and works however they do it  It just was enlightening playing the back nine first... maybe the fun was in the difference, I don't know, but it was pretty cool.  Still all you write makes perfect sense to me.

And your last line gave me a "whoa......" That is, that's one hell of a good thought.  Obviously the logistics of that are bad, but man would the current #1 make for a dramatic finisher, as more folks then try to go for it in two.... very interesting idea....

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Huck- What made me think of the first, as the last, was the feeling one gets when on approach to that green. Maybe it's the transition from forest ,to feeling the different micro climate, but for whatever reason, that awesomeness isn't really repeated elsewhere on the course.
The good news is the company still has 12 years to decide what to do. With the possible addition of the Forest Course,I would hope they wouldn't make the mistakes others in the resort industry have. Maybe by then they will realize what values lie in reverence for the cradle, and not just how to get throngs along expedietly.

[RJ_Daley]

#1 on Pine Needles is a relatively easy par 5 with handicap of 11.  I'm not sure, but I think the course was rerouted and I am too lazy to look that issue up.  But, I am also not that sure that it shouldn't be the opener because it is a relatively easy opening hole.  The thing is, it is reachable in 2 and causes folks to stand around waiting for the green to clear, right at the begining of the round, so get-away time is reduced.  Couple that with the next long par 4 is the toughest hole on the PN course.

[Tom_Doak]

The first at Pine Valley is a TERRIFIC golf hole which rarely gets a mention because it is just a brutal opening hole.  I guess it sets the tone for the rest of Pine Valley, but if it were the 13th hole just about anywhere else, it would be much more famous.

By the way, I'm the one who "changed" the first hole at Pasatiempo.  As Tom H. suggests, all I did was abandon the back tee and return the hole to the length MacKenzie originally had it, so no one would be killed between the chipping green and the first tee ... but at 465 yards they call that a par-4 today, instead of a par five.  Sadly, I can't convince them to abandon the driving range and widen out the hole to where it used to be.

[THuckaby2]

By the way, I'm the one who "changed" the first hole at Pasatiempo.  As Tom H. suggests, all I did was abandon the back tee and return the hole to the length MacKenzie originally had it, so no one would be killed between the chipping green and the first tee ... but at 465 yards they call that a par-4 today, instead of a par five.  Sadly, I can't convince them to abandon the driving range and widen out the hole to where it used to be.

Tom - now THERE is a fight worth fighting.  Jeez, that range is no great shakes anyway... man it seems returning the first hole to it's former greatness would trump the need for a short little range.  Fight the fight!  Never give up!  

Then the next thing I want is for you to sneak out with chain saw and cut down every damn last tree between 1 and 9.  Then while you're at it, serpentine your way over to #9 tee and cut down the trees behind that, and in front of #2 tee, so we can put a back tee for #2 on the back of #9 tee, reinstating the over-the-road tee shot.  Hell, call that a par 4 or 5, I won't care.   Then wind your way over to #15 and trim back all those monsters to the right of the tee.

I don't ask for much, just miracles.

And one more thing:  don't let David Moriarty or anyone else talk you into taking that saw over to #10 and #17.  Both of those holes are the rare animals that work better with trees.  There remain exceptions to every rule, no matter how good the rule is in principle.

 

[JNC Lyon]

Gerry B:

   It would be extremely hard to reverse #'s 1 and 2 at OHCC.
There is no room for a longer second tee, and the first approach would be all carry to the green.

[Gerry B]

JNC Lyon:

I am aware of that fact - was just making the point that the course starts with the #1 stroke hole out of the gate.