In his review of We-Ko-Pa Saguaro, Ron Whitten said he had a mild distaste for the 16th hole, a short uphill par 4, because it plays into the prevailing winter sunlight on a desert resort course. He said:
"I played it fine, fairway wood off the tee, 9-iron into the green, but the hole faces to the southwest, into the low, winter midday-to-late-afternoon sun. Since Saguaro is basically a winter playground, this is a hole on which many golfers will always be squinting. Minor point, perhaps, but one that stuck in my mind as the only flaw in the routing."
My first thought on reading was, “he has a point.”
On second thought, what if Coore and Crenshaw did it on purpose?
Knowing that many golfers will play the 16th hole later in the winter-early spring desert day, and wanting to protect par on a short hole, why not take advantage of the sun to add a little uncertainty to the golfer’s decision-making? Like water, sand, wind, topography, and gravity, it’s a natural element that could by choice be used to defend a hole.
Clearly you wouldn’t want to do this too often, because it would be annoying. But is there a rule of thumb altogether against this ploy, like “the first hole of the course should not face east?”
Rather than designing this element into the hole on purpose, is it more likely that the architects found a good green site, and, after realizing the hole would play up-sun in the winter afternoon, decided “C’est la vie?”