"Great" holes that didn't catch your eye?

[Brian_Gracely]

Some holes that are considered "great" are practically impossible to miss, like #16 at CPC or #9 at RCD.  But some of these "great" holes pass by in a round and may not go noticed.  Maybe this is caused by surrounding holes or the previously surrounding land...not sure.  For me, #6 at Royal Portrush is one such hole.  I played the course twice, in different winds, and don't remember it being much more than a basic 5 or 6iron Par3.  But I read about others that rave about the challenge of the hole.  Maybe #4-5 at Portrush just overwhelmed me by comparison

Which "great" holes have you missed, or needed to have pointed out to you before/after the hole?

[THuckaby2]

Very good question, topical for me personally.

I don't get the greatness of #10 Winged Foot West.  Oh, it is a very tough golf hole, and I'd hate to have to make a living trying to make threes on it... But it's so often mentioned with the world's greatest par threes... and well, I don't get it.  Tough hole, yes.  All-world great hole?  That I don't see.

Interesting side-note:  #6 Portush Dunluce and #10WFWest are somewhat similar golf holes... out and over a hollow, severe falloffs on the sides....

TH

[Bill_McBride]

I think I remember that Billy Casper deliberately played short of #10 WFW when he won the 1959 Open, layed up and chipped close for par each time.  Seeing photos of those deep bunkers on both sides, seems like a great play.  Like Mike Young said at Cuscowilla, keep the ball on line and in front of the pin to score well.  Good advice!

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Very good question, topical for me personally.

I don't get the greatness of #10 Winged Foot West.  Oh, it is a very tough golf hole, and I'd hate to have to make a living trying to make threes on it... But it's so often mentioned with the world's greatest par threes... and well, I don't get it.  Tough hole, yes.  All-world great hole?  That I don't see.

Interesting side-note:  #6 Portush Dunluce and #10WFWest are somewhat similar golf holes... out and over a hollow, severe falloffs on the sides....

TH

Huck,
Its been a long time since I got to scream blasphemy in this Discussion Group, so here goes...........

BLASPHEMY!

[Cliff Hamm]

Will always remember the '97 PGA more for the 10th than the rainbow.  Had just gotten to Winged Foot on Sunday.  Standing in the hollow.  Els on the tee.  First swing I saw that day and he holes it.  Usual emotional response.  Club in the air and a grin.  

[Matt_Ward]

Bill McBride:

Billy C played short of the par-3 4th at WF / West and then proceeded to make par from a postion just short of the green.

Huck:

The 10th at WF / West deserves its great reputation for a host of reasons. Try getting close to the pin -- particularly when the placement is back right or left. Even in the front you're faced with a slippery downhill sidehill putt if you err too strong.

Let me also mention that the rear OB is most certainly in play for those who are bit frisky.

As an FYI -- Hogan was fond of saying that the 10th at WF / West was like landing a ball in someone's kitchen (paraphrased).

To use a Moriarty-ism you need to play the hole more than once to get a clear sense of why it gets the reputation it has.

[TEPaul]

I guess I'd have to say that the 5th hole at Merion East, as beautiful as it is, didn't catch my eye at first. Back then the reason may've been it just might be one of the really great holes in the world with the least amount of man-made architecture to it, particularly that awesome sloped green. Talk about the ultimate in just raw natural landform for a golf hole---that one might take the cake.

[cary lichtenstein]

Maybe if the great hole didn't catch your eye, it is not a WOW great hole, with loads of eye candy, but a stragetic hole.

[redanman]

OK guys, after two errors, it was the third, par 3 216 yards at WFW that Casper laid up, chipped on and made par 4 times.  Its name is Pinnacle.

As for the par 3 10th's greatness - as with any great par three it's the green.  

Huck, shame on you you hit it in a place where you had an easier shot and you did not look at the green complex, the recovery possibilities and the death that surrounds misses at that green.
 

Great?

Didn't get it?  

Not a hole, but basically, the second nine at SFGC........ sure, # 12 is really great and # 10's pretty good, but where's the beef?  Two holes on one nine don't make a top 15 golf course.  I can think of no better clubhouse to play dominoes, however, even the CalClub.

(I'm sure I'll hear about this one......)

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Redanman gets it......

A completely evil green complex. It's possessed. It reminds me of the old Haunted Shack at Knott's Berry Farm where they have water running uphill and you can sit on a chair that is clearly being supported by only one leg.

If that isn't one of the 25 greatest putting surfaces in this game, then I'm a Tuskeegee Airman.




 

[THuckaby2]

Gentlemen:

Shame on me?  Shame on you, for assuming I didn't get a proper look at the golf hole.  Believe me, I did.  I had plenty of time to do so, as I struggled over two very difficult pitch shots from short right, and waited for Mr. Sweeney to retrieve his ball from the netherlands long left.

It is a VERY difficult golf hole.  The green complex is a nice one indeed.  But hell, it's not even the best green on the course, nor is it really the best par 3 (I prefer #3 and #7 myself).  It's a fine example of a difficult hit the green or else par 3, and to that end it is a very good hole... but among the world's greats?  No way.  The green is nice but it's not THAT great.  Hell #1 green puts it to shame... as does #2.... I could go on.

My point remains that it is a fine golf hole, for sure.  I just refuse to put it with the world's best... and you have yet to give me any evidence to the contrary.

So teach me.  And do so without assumptions about what I did or didn't do, thank you.

 

TH

ps - assessing the golf course as a whole, well... I was suitably blown away and remain in complete awe of the greens as a whole.  I'm trying to make sense of how it fits in with all the courses I've seen but it rises to the very top, believe me.  It's a pure championship test of golf on all levels... and achieves a certain perfection in that.  I just refuse to put #10 up with the world's great par 3s, even as the course as a hole rises to the very top in the world, as I see things.  

[Neil Regan]

Redanman gets it......

A completely evil green complex. It's possessed. It reminds me of the old Haunted Shack at Knott's Berry Farm where they have water running uphill and you can sit on a chair that is clearly being supported by only one leg.

If that isn't one of the 25 greatest putting surfaces in this game, then I'm a Tuskeegee Airman.

Tommy,

   In your honor.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pride cometh before the fall........... (Or something like that.)

Its simply one of the most excitingly wicked putting surfaces that make this game what it is. Looking at Neil's excellent photo from when the course was in grow-in and the sand wasn't even in the bunkers, it just looks terrfying as it sits.

Yes, the 3rd is a tremendously difficult golf hole. So is the 7th. But the classiest of them all is the 10th. It has substance and style.  

Its got game.

[Brian_Gracely]

Looking at Neil's picture, and if you removed that front hump, does this greeen not look alot (shape, slope) like the 3rd at Pine Valley?

And I'm surprised that Neil hasn't posted a picture of Portrush #6 to straighten me out there

[TEPaul]

That photo of that hole at WFW I'm assuming is in the final stages of construction. I'd love to see some photos of the hole after the course matured to compare that photo to the way it eventually came to "look".

Here's why. That hole, the way it was conceived and constructed obviously plays remarkably well, exciting, intense, all the good and exemplary things about how golf architecture should best play.

However, the look of the hole in the context of an attempt at naturalism---the way it sits on apparently flat land and just basically pops out of the ground in and of itself is an example of architectural engineering in it most blatant form, in my opinion. The actual "lines" of the entire green and surrounds are attractive lines in a natural sense but what do those lines match or tie into in that setting? Nothing that I can see.

A green and architecture like that in that natural setting to which it does not seem to remotely match (looking like it was simply airlifted and dropped onto that site) is probably a very good example of two interesting ideas and practices of that earlier time---first, the whole theory and practice of the so-called "scientific" application in golf architecture at that time, and, second, the increasing controversy of using plasticine models to create architecture!

In my mind "scientific" architecture of that time was probably mostly an American concpetion utilized by the likes of Tillinghast, Wilson, Flynn, Macdonald and Raynor and a number of the other early great ones for the purpose of placing and arranging features in an architectural sense to best create truly interesting and challenging strategies for all. And in that sense "scientific" architecture was probably a remarkable breakthrough in the evolution of golf architecture.

Athough many of those early architects spoke of their strivings for naturalism in architecture, the way some carried it off and others didn't is a very wide spectrum, in my opinion, and that photo (even if the hole was in the final stages of construction) is some of the best proof of that I think I've ever seen.

This is not to say that holes like that do not play remarkably well---they've proven they do but the way they look in a natural sense is another matter altogether, and that's obviously why the use of plasticine models in design became so controversial.

What this says to me, again, is that Alister Mackenzie (probably due to the finer points of his ideas of camouflage in golf architecture---eg completely tying in his archtiectural "lines" to the natural pre-exisitng "lines" of  natural settings) took the art of great strategic design AND the APPLICATION of a highly NATURAL look as well to a whole new level, perhaps not matched at any pervious time.

This may be additional testimony of how and why Cypress Point G.C. really was the complete pinnacle of the Golden Age!

[Mike_Sweeney]

Tom,

Neil probably has what you want, but I believe he is tied up this week. Here is from Fall 2003, post Fazio grow in:

[BCrosby]

The 6th at Seminole. Hogan's favorite.

The 14th (Foxy) at Royal Dornoch.

Both good holes. But great....?

Bob

[THuckaby2]

Neil's photo is cool and all, but has as much relevance to how the hole is today as I do to the starting lineup of the Philadelphia Eagles.  No offense.  

Mike's photo shows how the golf hole is today, and if anything kinda flattens the look, as photos do.  In reality the banks are higher raised than they look in this photo.  The valley leading to the green is also significantly more below the tee than it looks in this pic.  If anything the golf hole is BETTER than this pic makes it look.

And gents, it remains a very fine golf hole.  It remains a very difficult golf hole.

But I believe that photo proves my case.  Among the world's greats?  No way.  I'm standing firm on this one.  3 and 7 remain better golf holes than 10.  At least in terms of standing among the world's greats, 10 is one Hogan comment to give it hype, not enough true substance to make it truly great.  Yes it has game, and yes it is a tough hole on which to make a par.  But among the world's greats?   Shame on all of you for falling for the hype.

 

Now tell me #3 is among the world's greats and I'll nod my head and quietly agree.  #3 has game.  #10 has hype.

TH

[SPDB]

I think it also depends on how you played the hole. If, for instance, you sort of get lucky and hit everything on the screws, and one putt, you might be inclined to say to yourself, "what's the big deal?" I think, invariably, people are more inclined to respect a hole if it kicks their ass then if they tamed it.

An example I can think of from personal experience is PVGC #13, which I birdied on my first go around. Subsequent trips in different conditions made me think otherwise, but the first go around the greatness of the hole never occurred to me.

[THuckaby2]

SPDB:

I'd agree that that would have some effect on one's assessment, in general.

WF #10 kicked my ass sideways.

I still don't find it one of the world's greatest par threes.

I've been fortunate to make par three out of the four times
I've played Cypress #16.

I find it to be the greatest par three on the planet.

So yes, in general this might have an effect.

Just not always.

 

[redanman]

Huckaby

#16 CPC is beautiful and clever and was always there.
Favorite, or best?

You're a dead straight hitter of the ball.

What's the green like at CPC #16?  
Compare it to #10 WFW.

What's the scenery like at #16 CPC?
What's it like on WFW #10?

Best on the planet?  How is it to have
played them all?
Chacon a son gout or is it game?

[THuckaby2]

Dr. redanman:

#16 CPC is my favorite AND the best.  It combines challenge with beauty better than any golf hole I have seen or heard of.

The green at WFW#10 is way, way more interesting than the flat saucer that makes up #16 Cypress.  But #16 Cypress requires such an intimidating shot to reach the green, making the green anything but flat would be complete overkill.  #10 WFW needs a wild green to make it interesting - #16 CPC doesn't.

If you find the scenery on WFW#10 to be comparable to that at CPC #16, well... you must really like fairway grass and bucolic looking houses.  Perhaps you think scenery doesn't matter... well, it does.  Man does not play golf with his eyes closed, nor his heart.

And that's be most important point of all... CPC #16 stirs the heart, the soul, hell the loins.    WFW #10 just presents yet another brutally tough shot in a course full of them.  Reach the green and make a par on 16 CPC and you have a story to tell your grandchildren.  Do the same on WFW#10 and you won't even get your playing partner interested... that is, unless he happens to be Tommy Naccarato.

Sorry my friend, WFW#10 is a very tough, very fine golf hole. CPC #16 stirs the soul.

BTW, you want a great par 3 with a long tough shot to a very tough, very strange green?  Try Sand Hills #13... what WFW #10 wishes it were, if it really were a truly great golf hole.

TH

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

I believe that the "Pro from 52nd Street" and one of golf's greatest gentlemen said the following about WFW #10:

"It's a 3 iron into some guy's bedroom."

- Dave Marr

The beauty of #10 is that the hole rewards great shots while punishing the off line hit.  Casper's strategy at WFW was to miss far side (If hit did miss the shot) to avoid short siding himself.  The best fun is watching the "Beach Volleyball" as people go back and forth between the two bunkers in front/right and side/left.  Very similar to #8 Left at PVGC!

JWK

If the quote is not David's, and is someone else, please let me know.

[redanman]

Reach the green and make a par on 16 CPC and you
have a story to tell your grandchildren.  

Birdie the road hole, long, short and the eden on two
one-hour naps the first time seeing the Old Course,
shoot 73 , live long enough and then you have a story to tell your grandchildren.

One shot does not make a grand-child story,
certainly not for a laser-straight hitter like you,
nor with a knee as big as mine.  

You're going to need a better story.

How about hitting into the right bunker at #6 Seminole,
 hitting that one into the left bunker, then holing for par?
That's at least a small-kneee story.

(I will give you that #16 CPC is beautiful, especially
with [size=18]...........FOG..........[/size]
 

[THuckaby2]

redanman:

On the Old Course we agree - legends are made
there without a doubt.  I have a fine deuce on
#11 that my kids are already sick of hearing about.
 

And well... let's just say that a certain shot of mine on 16CPC
sure has provided great argumentative fodder here...
the day I so foolishly went for the green
into a 3-4 club wind when the obvious
proper strategic choice was to lay up... the fact that I made it
over and made a three not negating the fact that I so
obviously made the wrong play, in the mind of one
other player anyway.

In any case I believe you're wrong about 16CPC.  What's
the first question anyone asks when you return from
playing the course?  I'd bet 9 times out of 10 it's "how'd
you do on 16?".  Why?  Because it's such a soul-stirring
shot, one that every golfer has seen in pictures, but
so few have played.  

Seeing it in person only heightens the soul-stirring...
Maybe it's just me but I was week at the knees playing
it, each time.  On #10 WFW, I just figured it was a tough
shot with a 4iron but when I inevitably miss the green, well...
whatever... just another missed green at a brutal course...
no knee weakening, no soul stirring, just more resignation
that this course requires more game than I have.

BTW, getting up and down out of greenside bunkers
for pars on 15 and 16 at WFWest is a pretty fun thing
also.  My kids don't know WF enough to care about this
story though... not YET, that is... just wait until we see
it on TV again....

TH