GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group

Caledonia #9

<< < (9/9)

Andy Hughes:

--- Quote --- I think Andy's photo somewhat flattens out the up-and-down dimension of the hole.
--- End quote ---
Brent, you are correct. This photo does make it look much flatter than it is. I may be wrong, but I do recall there being tees around and behind us that were appreciably higher.   I think to that back pin it was playing around 155.

Tim, sorry  ;)
This was the only time I played True Blue (hope to rectify that someday), and I am sure it is very different from the right side tees to a right-front pin.

Re #9 at Caledonia--- I do wish the hole had just a little more '2 or 20' to it, a little more sense of thrill

Doug_Feeney:
I have played Caledonia too many times to count and I like the 9th hole!  I have seen many near holes in one, and I have seen some absolutely horrendous shots - bladed wedges into the azaleas behind the green as well as shots dumped into the sand just in front of the tee.  If anyone thinks the hole is easy, wait till they try playing from a bad lie in the sand 60 yds out!

1.  The major problem with the hole is that Caledonia (as most courses in MB) starts groups off #1 and #10.  The ninth as a finishing hole leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

2.  The teeing area, particularly the back of it, is consistently in poor condition.  Combination of lots of wedges and shade from the live oaks.  

Michael Whitaker:
Doug - I agree completely with your post. Don't know what they can do about the condition of the teeing ground as you can be assured those beautiful live oaks are NOT coming down!!! Again, that's one of the things that makes me think that Strantz had a definite vision for the 9th hole, and that it was not just "stuck in" as some on this site have questioned.

tonyt:
Firstly, I sympathise with Mr Klein's view that a potentially cramped site is best crafted into a shorter course with a lower total par figure, whatever that may exactly be to suit each site. it is also the chance for a "sporting" course, or one where the green complexes can be made very interesting if indeed the client still insists on a scorecard defence.

But in reading many of the above posts, one point truly saddens me. How can somebody be in a happy frame of mind, be on a golf course, and then play an innoffensive hole and walk off on a downer or less happy than when they arrived? What game are you playing?

When a hole's possible crime is that it doesn't fit, was built as an afterthought and is a little easy, that is perhaps enough to reduce the "ranking" of the course for the sake of discussion, but how can it be instrumental in spoiling the day?

A.G._Crockett:

--- Quote from: Tony Titheridge on November 27, 2005, 06:46:42 PM ---Firstly, I sympathise with Mr Klein's view that a potentially cramped site is best crafted into a shorter course with a lower total par figure, whatever that may exactly be to suit each site. it is also the chance for a "sporting" course, or one where the green complexes can be made very interesting if indeed the client still insists on a scorecard defence.

But in reading many of the above posts, one point truly saddens me. How can somebody be in a happy frame of mind, be on a golf course, and then play an innoffensive hole and walk off on a downer or less happy than when they arrived? What game are you playing?

When a hole's possible crime is that it doesn't fit, was built as an afterthought and is a little easy, that is perhaps enough to reduce the "ranking" of the course for the sake of discussion, but how can it be instrumental in spoiling the day?

--- End quote ---

Amen, and thanks for the perspective.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page