Thommo,
KH could hardly be considered that small a site - it was one of the longest courses in Australia when first constructed I believe - 6800 odd yards back in the early 1900s? A bogey 80?
If it was so tight, then why have three long par fives?
Why not one like West Sussex or Rye, or two like the vast majority of links courses?
Ed Getka:
I think the main drawback of Kh, is, that despite Mike Clayton's assertions, it is a flat site. Or at the very least, appears to play very flat.
I also believe the notion that it has variety is bollocks - the 4th and 13th are basically exactly the same holes, only one is 30 metres longer. The 1st and 6th are basically the same, as are the 8th and 16th.
There is a minimal rise in the land in one or two places, and KH uses it exactly the same for all the holes.
I believe it's poorly routed, because the 15th hole is the only leave alone standout - the 3rd and 10th could have been constructed anywhere.
Woodlands has fantastic variety, on an even less undulating site. The 2nd is a fantastic short five with a ridge in the driving area like KH, but it does it much better, then you have a great second or 3rd to a narrow green.
You then have a tight pitch to a 'fat' green, a driveable par four to an inordinately skinny green situated on a wide fairway, and a great slightly uphill medium length par three.
That's variety.
Commonwealth, too, uses its limited land even better than KH - the left-to-right side sloping fairway on 3, a down then up great par four at 11, a great second shot slightly uphill to a biggish, for Commonwealth, green, surrounded by sand at the 8th.
Most people bag it because it has too many trees, and because the old 1st, 6th and 7th were better than what is there now. But 15 through 18 are four of the best holes you will play in Melbourne.