The Gambler at King's North

[Coral_Ridge]

Is the 6th Hole at King's North in Myrtle Beach a good golf hole?  I just got home from playing golf on the Grand Strand.  I did not play the King's North course by Arnold Palmer, but stopped by the pro shop to pick up a scorecard.  I will consider the course on my next visit.  I want some feedback from players who have played this hole and/or have heard about it.



King's North

[peter_p]

John,
Check back on threads this past week and you'll get your answer. Here's the link: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=25338

[Ryan Farrow]

Hey, Is that not the best tee-shot in golf?

[Coral_Ridge]

Thanks for the link, Peter.  What a coincidence.  I thought of searching, but thought that if ever discussed was probably back further in the past.  

Still hoping for specific responses to this hole (and golf course).

[Tommy_Naccarato]

It looks unbelievable. Simply unbelievable....

[Jim Nugent]

Jon, I think the hole looks cool.  No sarcasm at all.  A lot cooler, e.g., than the 17th at TPC Sawgrass.  I haven't played either one, though.  

Do you know what sort of distances/clubs are involved at the gambler?  

[Coral_Ridge]

The 6th hole (The Gambler) is not listed in the two books, 1001 Golf Holes and The 500 World's Greatest Golf Holes.  Is it because the hole has little natural aspects?  Or with the exception of the risk reward choices, is it that the design lacks a good green surface, etc...?  Again, I have not played this course to see the hole firsthand.

The 17th at the TPC Sawgrass is a great hole, most would say and the dynamics appear similar.  The difference being one is a par 3 and the other a par 5.



 



TPC Stadium #17

[Mike Boehm]

I've played the Gambler twice.  Both times I have played it, I have missed the island left of the water and ended up by the 6th tee.  Managed to par it both years and was the only guy either year in my 4-some to record less than a 7.  The hole can definitely be a cardwrecker.  To get on the island, the player must carry it 215 from the back tees and 167 from the regular tees.  The island is approximately 100 yards long.  From the back end of the island, the player has about 235 to t he green and about 135-140 from the front of the island.  Taking the conservative route, the hole is 568 from the tips and 525 from the regular tees.  I am yet to see anyone try the conservative route.

It is an extremely memorable hole but there are a few problems with it - primarily, it is terrible for pace of play between the water balls, the trip to the island and back (or in my case left of it), the photo ops every group takes, etc.  It really can back the course up a bit.  That said, I enjoy it, and it is probably one of the only holes down on the strand my buddies could tell you today exactly how they played it.  Makes for great stories around a couple beers after the round.  I'm not so sure it is great architecture, and I definitely wouldn't want one like it on every course, but once every year or so, I love it.

Mike

[Paul Richards]

I have to agree with Mike.

It's not great architecture, but it is a lot of fun.

 

Regardless, pace-of-play is definately an issue here.....

[PThomas]

soon to be plowed under I believe!

[peter_p]

Strategy is a mirror image of the 17th at Running Y, but with water added. How many other Palmer named courses have an iteration of this hole?

[John_Conley]

I've played the Gambler twice.  
Mike

Thanks, Mike.  That is a great description for me.  I didn't have an understanding of the shot requirements.  I appreciate your recap and I think I'd have fun playing it once.  Or at least until I played it well once.

[Jim Nugent]

The 6th hole (The Gambler) is not listed in the two books, 1001 Golf Holes and The 500 World's Greatest Golf Holes.  Is it because the hole has little natural aspects?  Or with the exception of the risk reward choices, is it that the design lacks a good green surface, etc...?  Again, I have not played this course to see the hole firsthand.

The 17th at the TPC Sawgrass is a great hole, most would say and the dynamics appear similar.  The difference being one is a par 3 and the other a par 5.

Jon, it seems to me there is a key difference between the two holes.  The gambler gives you an alternate route.  You don't have to shoot for the island.  TPC Sawgrass does not give you that choice.  That is why, judging only from the photos, the gambler appeals to me more.

TPC Sawgrass has little (no?) natural aspects, yet it is rated one of the world's four best par 3's in one of the books you mentioned.

[Michael Whitaker]

It looks unbelievable. Simply unbelievable....

To all:  What would be your opinion if it didn't have the island?

[John_Conley]

It looks unbelievable. Simply unbelievable....

To all:  What would be your opinion if it didn't have the island?

Oh, you mean if it looked like #6 at Bay Hill?

I've been thinking the same thing all along.  The problem is the novelty aspect and fact that everyone DOES try the short route.

[Jerry Kluger]

My father-in-law lives on the 4th hole at Aberdeen in Boyton Beach, Florida, a course that was designed by Desmond Muirhead.  It too is a par 5 with the option of hitting your tee shot on to an island which dramatically cuts down on the overall distance of the hole or you can play left of the island and go around - there is no bail out right.  Has to be one of the worst holes I have ever played as the island is far too narrow and not nearly deep enough to be a reasonable play off the tee but playing around to the left makes it almost impossible to reach in regulation.  

[John_Conley]

Careful, I think Tommyknockers is a Desmond fan.

[Michael Whitaker]

Oh, you mean if it looked like #6 at Bay Hill?

I've been thinking the same thing all along.  The problem is the novelty aspect and fact that everyone DOES try the short route.

It does look like #6 at Bay Hill, doesn't it!

I don't see the "novelty aspect" as a problem. Let's put this into context... the course is in the middle of the Grand Strand, competing with around 100 other courses for attention. The novelty aspect of this hole fits perfectly with the marketplace... especially for golfers who are only going to see the hole once a year, or maybe once in their lives. King's North customers are on vacation. This is supposed to be fun... and from most of the comments I have heard or read about this hole it achieves its desired purpose.

Is it great GCA? Maybe not. But, is that necessary to successfully entertain its primary clientele?

[Jim Nugent]

Here's a question.  Suppose the conservative route was a great golf hole by itself, with great architecture.  Then in addition, the island was there, too, for the gamblers.  Would that be a great golf hole, with great architecture?

Second question.  Considering the hole that is there, does the island add or detract from the architecture, and why?

[Jason Topp]

I have to agree with Mike.

It's not great architecture, but it is a lot of fun.

 

To me the definitions of "great architecture" and "fun" are identical.