News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Architectural Disasters
« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2007, 12:12:19 AM »

I won't try and describe the hole (TD does a much better job) but I have cut and pasted what GC of GA says on their own website about this hole.  (I guess they thought this was a favorable description ???  Enjoy:

"  No question, this can be one of the most challenging holes in the world, but here’s a simple solution: hit your driver or 3-wood to the right of the pine tree. Then hit a wedge or short iron to the edge of the fairway. From there, pretend the hole is now a long par 3 and play a fairway wood or a long iron to the two-level green. Lots of trouble in front and to the left of the green, so bail out to the right of the green or onto the bailout area itself. Go for the green in two shots, however, if your tee shot finds you well into the fairway and within your reach. But come up short and then face another challenging shot—this time through the pine corridor of the drop area."

That is hysterical.  Why don't they just say--skip this ridiculous hole.  I can't believe they put that in writing.  

Glenn Spencer

Re:Architectural Disasters
« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2007, 12:15:19 AM »
A. Because no golfer is good enough to hit the tee shot. Nobody. B. No, because it makes you hit it into a space about the size of a large comforter. C. You would probably need to see it or a diagram of it. There is no thinking on the tee shot, just hope you hit the left side with your 3-wood and hope that you hit it between 261 and 272 yards. Left center though as the creek will get you 272 down the left side. Jordan, I have to inject Mucciology on you here. I don't care what it sounds like, it is one of the worst holes in America.

Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Architectural Disasters
« Reply #52 on: May 12, 2007, 12:25:09 AM »
A. Because no golfer is good enough to hit the tee shot. Nobody. B. No, because it makes you hit it into a space about the size of a large comforter. C. You would probably need to see it or a diagram of it. There is no thinking on the tee shot, just hope you hit the left side with your 3-wood and hope that you hit it between 261 and 272 yards. Left center though as the creek will get you 272 down the left side. Jordan, I have to inject Mucciology on you here. I don't care what it sounds like, it is one of the worst holes in America.

or D.  Dont play the back tees.  
Right?

Your a good enough player to make par from the tips arent you?
Can you carry the hazard?
Is the closer to the hazard the easier your next shot a bad method?







p.s. Dont ever try and muccify me...only the great pat mucci can do that..thanks : )

Glenn Spencer

Re:Architectural Disasters
« Reply #53 on: May 12, 2007, 01:16:24 AM »
What I meant was, you would have to play it to talk about it- Mucciology.

I am not good enough to par that 390 yard hole more than 3 times out of 10 and that is playing it conservatively. There is no hazard to carry. The only part about closer to the hazard that makes it easier is that you are not blocked out by trees.

Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Architectural Disasters
« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2007, 01:52:23 AM »
I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

I'm just trying to make sure the hole isn't being over criticized simply due to the designer.





What about 17 at TPC Sawgrass?...good, bad?