Mark-I played Woods Hole a couple of weeks ago. It is a terrific golf course: small greens, an intimate setting (only 180 acres), rolling topography (similar to, but not on the same scale as Eastward Ho!). The only minuses are that fifteen of the holes are routed in the same east to west direction (the lack of available land probably being a factor) and three of the four par threes are of the drop shot variety. The front nine is a solid effort. But the back nine is where the course truly comes to life. In fact, the stretch from 9 through 16 is excellent. In that stretch, some of the better holes were: #13 an uphill one shotter that plays to a small well bunkered green that falls away on both sides, #14 a short dogleg left par four with a shallow green set at a left to right angle away from the approach shot (the putting surface falls away on all sides), #15 an uphill dogleg right playing over a gully with bunkers on the right protecting the integrity of the hole, the green is bunkerless but drops off in the back to the public road that divides the course and #16 a 440ish par four that tumbles down to the green.
In fact, the least interesting hole on the back is the one that the club may be best known for, #17 which sets on the edge of Buzzards Bay. While it is picturesque, it is a 130 yard drop shot par three which is nothing more than a well struck wedge for most players.
While it may never be spoken of in the same terms as the more revered courses in Mass., it is a fun and unique course. There are blind shots galore off the tee and few, if any, level lies to be had. If you get the chance, I would definitely check out Woods Hole.