[ForkaB]

I don't really know who should get credit for the 14th at Royal Dornoch.  What say you, Rich?  If it's Tom Morris, then throw out his first at Machrihanish for the first at Sand Hills.

Then you only need a new par-4 ninth hole, and I've got a list you would find tough to match.

Tom

I think "Foxy" is Tom Morris' creation because the 1892 map of the course shows the green location in exactly the same place (about 5 years after his visit).  However......

--there is uncertainty as to just what OTM did in his visit.  It seems clear that he added 9 holes to an existing 9, but which 9?  I'm pretty sure that the old 9 would have been centered around the clubhouse, and the new 9 out where the current 14th is, but I have no proof (nor does anybody else,that I know of).
--in 1892, Foxy was 255 yards long, so even in the guttie age would not have been the complete test (driving and approach AND recovery!) that the current hole is.  Then again....

....even today whether your 2nd shot is 220 yards or 100 (I've had both) the green site is so great that 90% of your challenge on that hole remains....

Gene

You know well how much I respect and love Shinnecock, but I just remember its 14th as yet another great hole on a great course.  The 14th at Dornoch is not just great, but, to paraphrase Judge Alito, super-duper great!

[Mark_Rowlinson]

You thought this had all gone away, didn't you?

It hasn't.

Put yourself in the position of being editor of that first World Atlas of Golf in 1976.  You know quite a bit about golf, but you are a publisher. You have to sell books.  You have assembled a formidable team of authors: Pat Ward-Thomas, Herbert Warren Wind, Charles Price and Peter Thomson.  

One of the suggestions is an eclectic course.  It's not vital (and, indeed, it has not been part of the Atlas for many years).  The suggestion is taken up.  You could fill it with what GCA regulars today might think essential, such as holes at The Addington or Crystal Downs, but you also have to reflect the contemporary and you have to sell books to people who have never heard of any of these.  That was why Dorado Beach, Champions, Club zur Vahr and Fujioko were in that first edition, if not actually contributing to the eclectic 18.  

There's another issue we've not confronted.  We need geographical spread.  We have to have holes from every continent, though we might exempt Antartica.

So, the options are:

You get the problem.

Keep trying....

[Ian Andrew]

Mark,

There are a few very well travelled people on this site who could actually do this. Ran and Tom are the first thoughts, but even Ben and a few others have seen an awful lot. I look forward to their lists. It's the South American hole that I'm most curious about.

Ian

[ForkaB]

It's the South American hole that I'm most curious about.

Ian

I think the 10th at Carnoustie fits the bill.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ian,

Would you say that the original list was fueled by visuals-vistas ?

[Ian Andrew]

Pat,

Would you say that the original list was fueled by visuals-vistas ?

Do you mean my list, or the 1976 list ?

I think that all lists would be fueled by this aspect. When we are in surroundings that take our breath away, we enjoy what ever we were doing much more. There are lots of architecturally clever holes to choose from, so the next breakdown would be what is a great hole in a great and unique setting. They stimulate you more, do they not ?

May be the next question from this discussion is what are the 18 best holes, completely manufactured by the architect from a below average site.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

This post has fuelled many discussions and not a few threads in their own right.  I do not doubt that there were many discussions over the content of the original eclectic 18 - think who the authors were and what their brief may or may not have been.  Unfortunately. this particular part of the book disappeared long ago, long before I became involved with it.  It is not in my gift to say whether it should or should not return in some future update - the brief is largely decided by whichever co-producer has put up the money to do so - but thank you for your input.  I think it rather suggests that any entry, whether in the main body or in the anticipatory material, is contentious, to say the least.  All I can say is that GCA had a considerable input into the most recent update, flawed (mildly and seriously) though it is for a number of reasons which we do not need to go into here.

[Tom_Doak]

Mark:  I was under the impression that Pat Ward-Thomas had written that eclectic 18 in the World Atlas himself, instead of getting input from all the rest.

Ian and I [almost a palindrome] will be glad to help with a new eclectic 18 if you ever do another edition.  I would have volunteered last time but I didn't know the original was kaput.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()