News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


John Goodman

Low Hanging Fruit?
« on: January 17, 2006, 03:25:37 PM »
Those who know Teeth of the Dog better than I (I have played it a total of twice, both last week, and I thought it a fine course though not a Doak Gourmet choice):  why is it that three of the seven ocean holes are par 3s?  I don't have an opinion on the routing per se, just a suspicion - maybe Dye went for the low hanging fruit a little bit on the ocean holes?  I liked Teeth a lot but I thought more than once as I was playing that it seemed to lack a little something.  Teeth was beautiful and a fine test but it made me appreciate Pebble a little more . . .

wsmorrison

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2006, 03:29:49 PM »
I am firmly in the camp of thinking less of Teeth of the Dog than Doak, Jim Coleman and a host of others.  I played it three times and didn't find it all that compelling.  The water holes were nice but not so outstanding as I would hope due to the lack of variety that you refer to.  I haven't been there in years, and I don't plan on it either.  It was nice but if I were to rank, it would be way down my list of favorites.

mike_malone

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2006, 03:37:59 PM »
 Is the water on the same side for each of the par threes ?
AKA Mayday

Tom_Doak

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2006, 06:11:43 PM »
Wayne:  You are also firmly on the side opposite of Pete Dye.  The two of us can take you any day.

John:  It's a matter of linear footage.  No matter how much coastal frontage an architect is given, it's pretty common to include a number of par-3's on the coast, to try and maximize the number of oceanfront holes.  Just to cite a couple of other examples:  Cabo del Sol has the back-to-back 3's on the front (6 & 7) and the 17th on the back; Cypress Point, obviously; Pacific Dunes has 10 & 11, although I did also put two very long par-4's on the water.

Pebble Beach's stretch of great par-4's along the water is the exception, rather than the rule ... then again, none of us has had as much coastline to work with as Pebble Beach.

Andy Troeger

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2006, 06:14:21 PM »
This is probably partially why all the par threes at Whistling Straits are along the lake too.

mike_malone

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2006, 07:16:18 PM »
 I read where Dye was asked to "build me a Ballybunion" at Whisting Straits. The par three variety and routing at Ballybunion puts the ones at WS to shame. WS are built for "resort" golf; get all the sizzle you can.
AKA Mayday

wsmorrison

Re:Low Hanging Fruit?
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2006, 09:17:25 PM »
Tom,

I may be on the opposite side of you and Pete Dye (which certainly figures), but that's alright as we don't have to agree all the time.  I did not have a high regard for the course when I played it.  I will admit that I last played it about 5 years ago and my appreciation for architecture has hopefully become more informed since then.  However, I was underwhelmed by the course in a general sense and found crossing the airport runway a serious detraction and far short of quirky.

I may be wrong, but aren't all the seaside greens played parallel to the water?  Are any of them perpendicular with the green by the sea?  It didn't seem that way.  I also didn't like the caddies constantly cheating by moving the balls out of traps and from behind trees and bushes, especially since they were my competition's shots that were improved.  I take it the caddies cheat on behalf of their players so as to get a bigger tip.  I was not amused.

Where do the two of you want to take me by the way?  If it is golfing, I am at your command.  If it is for knocking some sense into me, well I think I'll pass.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2006, 09:18:58 PM by Wayne Morrison »

Tags: