[Shane Gurnett]

The 15th is the best short four on the course.  How Misters Doak and Clayton can think 4 is is beyond rational comprehension.

Mark, care to provide some reasoning to support that rather outreagous outburst?

[Chris Kane]

The 15th is the best short four on the course.  How Misters Doak and Clayton can think 4 is is beyond rational comprehension.

Two professional golf course architects wouldn't have a clue, would they?

[Paul_Daley]

Mark:

A little context is needed on your phrase "the best short par-4 at Barnbougle". The 15th is routed to play primarily into the wind, so if you play there often enough, you'll have days of slashing in three-iron appraoches to that green. You'll also pitch to it when the wind is "acting up" in a contrary manner.

The difference is that Barnbougle's 4th and the 12th remain short par-4s regardless of what direction the wind is coming from, and its velocity. That cannot be said for the 15th. Call it semantics but it's dubious to classify the 15th as a short par-4. On the other hand, with the jet-propelled balls of today, it is not quite a medium par-4 either.

For what it's worth I think the 15th is the best par-4 on the course - of any length or size category.

My favourite short par-4 at Barnbougle is the 12th ... by a whisker over the 4th.    

[Jason Topp]

Scott,

What were your own feelings of that "Sitwell Park" green?
What were your playing partners' thoughts on it?
Too tricked up? Stupid? Great? Awesome?

Curious.

JJ

I thought the green was terrific.  It has a lot of undulation but it is the more subtle breaks in the green, particularly in the context of the strong wind that makes it a challenge but not a tricked up one in my view.

[Mark_F]

Which means, of course, that 8 at Barnbougle and 13 at St Andrews Beach must be good holes?

And that RM East is a Doak 6? Which wouldn't put it in the best half dozen courses in the country.

[Mark_F]

Paul,

The definition of a short par four appears to have subtly altered with the passage of time.  I always thought a short par four was one less than 350 or so yards?

I can't believe you would ever have to hit a 3-iron into 15.

I would also consider the 3rd to be a short par four, and  it too, along with 4 and 12 run into the prevailing wind, so I guess it plays a little longer.


Shane:

I'll provide some reasoning if you first elucidate your own thoughts on 4 vs 15.

After all, you have previously made the statement that the bunkering at Barnbougle is both better placed and shaped than at St Andrews Beach, and failed to provide any supporting reasoning.

[Shane Gurnett]

Shane:

I'll provide some reasoning if you first elucidate your own thoughts on 4 vs 15.

After all, you have previously made the statement that the bunkering at Barnbougle is both better placed and shaped than at St Andrews Beach, and failed to provide any supporting reasoning.

Mark, Paul Daleys response answers most of your question. In  a nutshell I prefer 4 over 15 because it has more options off the tee (including the drive the green option for the better player) and the bunkering and green contouring is better. 4 represents more of a thinking hole in terms of strategy from both the fairway and the tee, whereas 15 is a simple drive pitch hole, except when the wind is strong enough to make it driver 3 iron. Regardless of the wind direction I consider 4 a more interesting and challenging hole. 15 is a very good hole but its not in the class of 4.

The bunkering at BD is better shaped and placed than at St AB. Thats not to say that the St AB bunkering is in any way less than excellent. Its just that in my opinion the bunker shaping and strategic placement at BD is a little better. I find myself in more bunkers at BD than St AB so that may also be a contributing factor. The bunkering at St AB still looks a little "new" to me eye - perhaps my opinion will change in time.

Shane

[Chris Kane]

Which means, of course, that 8 at Barnbougle and 13 at St Andrews Beach must be good holes?

And that RM East is a Doak 6? Which wouldn't put it in the best half dozen courses in the country.

Mark was quoted on here long ago as saying at RME should be a 7.

Its the "rational explanation" comment that I find ridiculous - why do you feel the need to insult the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you?  The way Clayts defends both holes (at length) is perfectly rational, I just don't agree with him!

The first time I played 15, I hit 7-iron in, and the second time it was a 3-iron.  Into the wind both times, obviously, but its not a short par-four.  Whatever we call it, its a fantastic hole.

[Mark_F]

Shane,

There we go.

I prefer 15 because I think it has more options.

From the tee, you can sneak right if you are brave enough, lay up short of the bunker, go over, or go close to the left hand side edge.

Or chicken out to the left.

4 has no options unless you can drive it over the bunker. It stresses length over placement, as the most precise shot, driving somewhat alongside the right edge of the bunker, still leaves a semi-blind shot to a right pin, and a blind one to a left rear pin.

If you and I were to play it, and you attempted to drive over it with a 7-iron and came unstuck, I should have an advantage because of your brave but ultimately foolhardy heroics.  

Instead, I have no option if I can't carry the bunker.  A blind shot in or a a semi-blind shot in from either alongside or further to the left, simply because I am unable to carry a certain distance?

Unlike at 12, where if you where to have a slash and came unstuck, I wouldn't be at a disadvantage.  Or at 15. Or even 3.

[Shane Gurnett]

Shane,

4 has no options unless you can drive it over the bunker.

Sorry Mark but that is just garbage - the positioning off the tee on 4 is a major decision that is governed largely by where the pin is on the day. Pin left = tee shot right, and vice versa, whilst the decision to take on the RHS bunker on the fly depends upon the wind conditions of the day and the ability of the golfer. Having played there twice again on the weekend, the guys I played with all made their choice based upon the position of the pin on the day (day 1 left, day 2 right) with those executing the better drive having the easier second shot. Dont forget that from the tee the pin postion is plainly visible to allow the appropriate tee shot decision to be made.

And finally, and please dont take this the wrong way, but do you consider that your lack of golfing ability clouds your judgement on evaluating holes fairly? You seem to base your assessment of a holes quality primarily by the challenges it presents only to you and your limited golfing skills. How can this be fair?

Shane

[Mark_F]

Chris,

As opposed to your withering sarcasm?

I fail to see how what I said is insulting to anyone's intelligence.  Maybe I should make more use of emoticons.  But then, maybe I assume people with intelligence don't need them.  

[Mark_F]

[quote author=Shane Gurnett
And finally, and please dont take this the wrong way, but do you consider that your lack of golfing ability clouds your judgement on evaluating holes fairly? You seem to base your assessment of a holes quality primarily by the challenges it presents only to you and your limited golfing skills. How can this be fair?
Shane

I don't take it the wrong way at all Shane, although I find it amusing that you are evaluating my golfing ability based on two rounds when I haven't been playing well, and assume that extrapolates into my thoughts on architecture.  If I hadn't cack-handed half a dozen putts I would have wiped the floor with Chris at KH.  Does this mean you will take no notice of his architectural ruminations from now on?

Why is it also, that I find Carnoustie a great course?  After all, a no-hoper useless wanker like me surely couldn't find anything to like at a 7500 yard course, could they?

I thought short fours were supposed to be the great equalizer? A test of precision over power?

Pin left at 4, most players have no option other than a blind shot from the bottom of the fairway, or a blind shot from a bad angle on the left side of the fairway, if they can't carry the bunker, since getting close to it requires almost as much length as going over it.

It's 215 metres or 197 metres carry into a, generally, 2-3 club wind.  What percentage of golfers can reasonably make that?  I would say 5% or less.  I didn't see anyone during my time there trying to take it on, and it was quite calm when I was there, so I wouldn't say it requires much of a decision.

None of the other short fours there force that decision on you.

Chris,

You really need to develop some consistency of argument.

On the National Moonah vs Gunnamatta thread a long while back, you defined a short par four of anything less than 330 metres, from memory.  

Now 324 isn't short?  

And 330 metres at National Moonah surely equals 324 at Barnbougle?

[Chris Kane]

Mark, 15 at Barnbougle plays straight into the prevailing wind.  It plays much longer than 324 the majority of the time.

I find it amusing that you judge my golfing ability on one round.  If I hadn't played my worst round of golf in five years at KH, it wouldn't have been close.  Shane has seen me play good golf many times.  I shot +4 off the back tees at Commonwealth in a club championship final, on a windy day.  I've shot +3 on a medal day.  Those rounds are IN COMPETITION.  As for social golf, Brian Walshe can tell you about the 78 I shot at RME (back tees) with an 8 at the last (four in the bunker), and I've shot around par many times at Commonwealth.

Around eighteen months ago, when I was only one solid round from playing off 6, a former European Tour player opined that I'd be off 3 within a year.  I've been going backwards hard since then, but I know what its like to play good mid single-figure golf.  I find it laughable that our games could be considered comparable, besides a miserable day at KH.

I've seen the top of the highest mountain, from a one day visit to base camp.  You couldn't get a visa to Nepal  

[David_Elvins]

I thought short fours were supposed to be the great equalizer? A test of precision over power?

Interesting assumption.  When you are operating within a framework such as that it is no wonder your views are so different to most other people.  

Personally, I think you are underating the strategy that the 4th green and 70 metre wide fairway presents.  However, the 15th is my favorite hole in golf so I agree with you on the merit of that hole.  

The 4th is a drivable Par 4 (and yes, I have witnessed several double digit handicappers drive the green) and 13 is not designed to be drivable  so I don't think you can directly compare them easily. However I agree that the 15th has more flexibilty in different winds, just not by as much as you think.

[Mark_F]

Chris,

You seem to forget I've seen you play several times. Prior to KH, you were in no way the 8 handicap you claimed.

You appear to be judging me on what I am now, which is fair enough, but then you judge yourself on what you used to be.

Trust me, if I played the way I did before I went to University, you would have packed up and gone home that day at KH by the 4th hole.

You would have found it embarrassing to be outdriven by forty yards by an old codger like me.

[Mark_F]

Interesting assumption.  When you are operating within a framework such as that it is no wonder your views are so different to most other people.  

David,

My views are different to most other people because I think for myself, instead of taking the popular opinion because one is afraid of having to defend oneself against the majority.  

I'm sure there are some here, but can you tell me at least two recognisably great short par fours that do reward power over precision?

One may come to me, but I can't think of it yet.

Handicap players come in all shapes and sizes.  I think you are off 12, but you drive like a low single figures marker, or what Chris apparently was before he became old.

I've played with more than a few single figure players who couldn't drive 200, yet make up for it through their iron play and short game.

The 'problem' I have with 4 is that if lay up short of the bunker, you still have a high shot into the wind to get over it, so you can't punch one down, and ditto if the pin is left and you are either alongside it or way over and down on the left.

[Chris Kane]

You would have found it embarrassing to be outdriven by forty yards by an old codger like me.

Everyone outdrives me by 40 yards, so it wouldn't bother me in the slightest.  

I don't think its a case of short par-4's rewarding power over precision, its that they're equally important on great holes.  Tell me Ogilvy doesn't have a massive advantage over you or me at 2 on the Gunnamatta due to his length.

[Shane Gurnett]

Mark,

I believe you are being too simplistic by referencing simply "power" and "precision", as every shot in golf combines elements of the two. Golf is all about the combination of the two factors, and great golf holes demand both.

4 at Barnbougle does not simply reward the power hitter. The tee shot over the bunker is a huge risk in any conditions as the penalties for poor execution is enormous. As someone who can carry that bunker in most conditions, it is probably the right choice of shot only 25% of the time. And I have (as does a short hitter like yourself) at least three other options from the tee as well. It depends what score you are trying to achive or more to the point, what score you are trying to eliminate. I never want to make more than 4 on the hole, but I'd like to make 3 at least 25% of the time. Someone in your shoes should be trying to make 4 or no more than 5 with a good approach shot and putt giving the chance of a 3 on occasions. The hole has something for everyone. If you want to avoid the high pitch then you lay it up back further in the fairway. Easily done.

And as for Chris game, I have seen him shoot everything from 75 to 102 (and most scores in between). His performance in winning the B grade championships against fellow GCA'er Andrew Presnell in a high standard match a few years back was testimony to his then ability. As with most young blokes who have not yet learnt the art of yipping he plays totally on confidence. If only he'd listen and get some lessons the consistency in his game would improve out of site. Until then, like you (it seems), I'm happy to take his money most of the time.

[Tim Pitner]

Wow, you guys from Down Under take no prisoners.  Hopefully, you're kinder to visitors.  Maybe I don't want to play in any GCA events lest anyone use my mediocre game against me.  

[Chris Kane]

Tim, we're kind to visitors for as long as it takes them to hit a bad shot!  

[Sean Walsh]

David,

I am testament to the fact that a high teens golfer can drive the 4th.  I do however believe that this choice from the tee is the sucker play for someone of my ability.  In competitive play I would never attempt to drive the green and try and talk my opposition into doing so.  

Mark,

I would say that the 15th rewards power more than the 4th.  A high percentage of people have the choice of going for the green off the tee.  The penalty for doing so and failing however is severe in most cases.  In contrast the tempting aspect of 15 is the right centre bunker.  Someone with power (and a degree of precision) will often/sometimes have the option of comfortably blowing it past this bunker.  This is an option not availaable to me.  I'm not saying there are not risks with this decision just that a power player is better rewarded on the 15th than on the 4th.

As to the merits of each hole I found them equally enjoyable and less easily compared than the 4th and the 12th which offer similar dilemmas.

[Chris Kane]

Chris,

You really need to develop some consistency of argument.

On the National Moonah vs Gunnamatta thread a long while back, you defined a short par four of anything less than 330 metres, from memory.  

Now 324 isn't short?  

And 330 metres at National Moonah surely equals 324 at Barnbougle?

Mark, I've just back and read the comments you referred to.  That old-style education (as opposed to the modern education of Thommo and myself which teaches no failure) has failed you dismally.  I did not define a short four as 330m or less - here's the quote:

"Moonah suffers because there is only one short four, that 9th hole being an afterthought (and it shows).  There is one hole (from the members tees) under 330m"  

How could you possibly intepret the two sentences as being my definition of a short four?

[Paul_Daley]

Mark: Your're dead right: I've never needed to hit a three-iron into Barnbougle's 15th - but many people have. Dreading use of the perpendicular pronoun, my comment was referring to other golfers when intimating that three-irons will be polished-up at times.

One often hears of three-iron's being played to Barnbougle's 126-metre 7th, so in those gale force conditions the same golfers would logically need long-iron's into the 15th. Naturally, of course, this wouldn't happen if the wind eased or switched direction.

All this is bye-the-bye: it brings into question JUST WHAT IS A SHORT PAR-4. Is it some vague distance range, or is it how a hole plays? Perhaps both? For instance, a 330 metre hole where conditions see it "down wind" most of the time, and "down gale" some of the time, could be viewed by many as a short par-4; not because of its stated length, but because it plays much shorter and seen by some as driveable.      

My gut feeling is that if some arbitary distance range was adopted - even unofficially - it would make a nonsence of the framer. Given the wide variables (altitude, fast-running fairways and wind - for starters), it may even be a dumb move to try and define it.

[Andrew Thomson]

Hopefully, you're kinder to visitors.  Maybe I don't want to play in any GCA events lest anyone use my mediocre game against me.

there is nothing wrong with a mediocre golfer, but to describe Mark's game as mediocre would be to do a disservice to mediocre golfers worldwide.

If you handicap is 27 or better, you're a superior golfer to Mark.

But Mark is right, Chris is a former single figure marker and I'm a current single figure marker and neither of us are in any danger of breaking 85 anytime soon!  

[Mike_Clayton]

Mark


10 at RM,3 at KH,15 at Victoria,3 at RA,4 at Woodlands,2 at St Andrews Beach are short par fours- and the holes I was comparing 4 and 12 at Barnbougle to.

I have never hit more than a pitch to any of these holes - except at the 2 at Barnbougle when the wind is really up and they are a drive and a low push forward from 80 yards with a 7 iron.

15 is not the same beast - it's driver 5 iron a lot of the time.It's not remotely close to beind drivable and its never an iron off the tee.
It is a shortish par four by yardage - 350 - but it plays much longer.

I also think 4 has more options than just about any short 4 I have ever played.
Into the wind with the pin left you go over the toe of the left dune - with the pin left you go 80 yards left of that at the right egde of the fairway.
And it's only 215 metres over the bunker unless its a gale there is a huge temptation to take a fly at it - after all most golfers think they can fly it 215 metres.
There are way more options than any of the holes I mentioned above - except maybe 2 at St Andrews which arguably has as many - but not more.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()