Michael,
My point is more that if one plays the course without the yardage book or even help from a caddie in terms of distances to the hole, the architecture itself becomes more interesting, even more thought provoking in terms of deceptions and nuances. It also makes the game quicker and faster to play.
C&C Hanse and Doak are all great at doing this--making things look farther and closer then they appear. Certainly at Hidden Creek this happens a lot. I mistakingly mumbled to the caddie or Jeff Lewis or Uncle George, "What's the distance here?" and it was surely a slip of the tongue, simply because I hadn't asked for a yardage all day, nor the rest of the day after that nor since. I like being tricked and fooled when it comes to this, because it has also made me better at looking at something and being able to tell what the yardage actually is. (In the long run)
This is where courses like Hidden Creek both get and give a bad vibe. People don't like it when they get fooled or have a caddie give them a distance
they felt was a bad information. Visually, as Neil's excellent pictures will attest--Hidden Creek is an art form. As a enjoyable challenging golf course, I think it also fits that bill quite effectively. I think that was the point of my post of a week or so ago. That many compare the course to how they played it, and frankly frustration isn't a fun thing--but if I think this is where people have to understand that when something seems so simple, yet it can creep up on them bite them where it most hurts, and then suddenly the course gets a tongue lashing of vile and dispute from the victims. Such as the narrow opinions of some of my friends in the friendly and brotherly confines of Philadelphia!
(My new nickname for Mayday is "Cream Cheese!")
And Mayday, just when was the last time you ventured West?!?!?!