[Phil Benedict]

A number of major championship venues have 9's of unequal difficulty.  The front 9 at Baltusrol is much harder than the back, while the opposite is true at Southern Hills.  British Open courses tend to have loops of uneven challenge, Carnoustie being a case in point.

Should the degree of difficulty be more or less spread evenly over 18 holes (if possible), or is this irrelevent so long as there is variety and challenge in the course as a whole?

[Garland Bayley]

My club has two nines of significant difference in difficulty (par 34, 36). It works out nicely, because older members come an play the easier 9 and younger members with only time for nine play the more difficult 9.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phil,

I know the PGA Tour kind of likes at least similar starts to each nine holes, because they use double start tees. I think the theory is no one should have a signifigantly more difficult start than others, to eliminate any competitive disadvantages.

As to overall difficulty, I have heard some club pros worry about it affecting handicaps if nine hole players typically play only one nine, rather than completing 18 holes as rated on the card.

All of that said, I don't really hear too many people who would advocate manipulating the best holes downwards a bit just to even out the challenge.  I guess some would upgrade the weak holes on the easier nine, but mostly because they wanted the course more difficult overall.

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think it many ways, it does not matter.  I do think of Stroke Index and I think of how strokes would be distributed for match play. Generally I think of 6 strokes with a hole between 2-3 4-6 7-8 11-12 13-15 16-17 getting one of those numbers. If the routing is such that naturally there are not any naturally long holes (400 yards plus) I would try and make a shorter hole more difficult.
I dont think it matters if a par 70 is a 34 & 36 and ofcourse the yardage difference could be significant, however yardage v par is not always a sign of difficulty and if the difference is say less than 450 yards in two nines with a two par difference the 34 par nine could be more difficult.. length also is not everything.
Great courses need dramatic finishes though IMO, this can be by a combination of hard and easy difficult holes, perhaps where a hole in a tournament plays 3.6 average (an easy 4) or a tough 4.6.. the idea being that shots will easily change hands. I think there are some commercial principles that might need to be adopted into the first few holes. Other than that I think its what the land throws up.
An interesting thread could be what is the greatest difference in par between two nines? .. I think I've seen a 33 and 37.

[TEPaul]

I kind of like what HVGC asked for via the nines from William Flynn. He built three nines--A, B and C. A was supposed to be hard, B harder and C REALLY hard. That club wanted a championship course, they asked the architect for that and they got it. The "C" nine was and is (after being restored from sixty years of obsolescence) difficult in spades.

[Tom_Doak]

That "equal difficulty" thing is one I just don't get -- an expansion of the American golf fairness doctrine.  Why SHOULD nines be of equal difficulty?

We are planning a resort course in Costa Rica and I've proposed making the nines very different on purpose -- a 2900-yard par-34 front nine and a 3700-yard par-37 back nine.  The idea is that late-afternoon casual golfers can go out and play the much shorter nine and that's all they need, while the serious players move on to the back.

[Phil Benedict]

That "equal difficulty" thing is one I just don't get -- an expansion of the American golf fairness doctrine.  Why SHOULD nines be of equal difficulty?

We are planning a resort course in Costa Rica and I've proposed making the nines very different on purpose -- a 2900-yard par-34 front nine and a 3700-yard par-37 back nine.  The idea is that late-afternoon casual golfers can go out and play the much shorter nine and that's all they need, while the serious players move on to the back.

Tom,

To create more variety, why don't you put Doak greens on one 9 and [name the architect] greens on the other 9.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Phil,

I'd say, absolutely not, unless the land calls for it.

Striving for equality amongst the nines would seem to stifle the creative process and compromise what the land best presents.

Don't you think it creates a "forced" situation.

One play at Somerset Hills might dispel your premise.

I like imbalance in the nines, I think it introduces diversity and a refreshing, if not unusual presentation.

Before I played Pacific Dunes I was a little taken back by the "perceived" imbalance in the nines, but, once there, and able to see and play the golf course, what I had thought might be a big negative, wasn't.

GCGC and NGLA don't have balanced nines.
Both start off in a generally benign fashion, but quickly turn after the 2nd and/or 7th hole.

The other factor that strikes me as creating imbalance is one I love.  The WIND.  On many courses the prevailing winds create a clear imbalance, a different playing experience.

Vive la differencia !

[Jed Peters]

I think we err in thinking about "9" too often.

I tend to think of a course (or should) in an 18 hole format....

Example, in a tournament last week, I shot 42 on the "front"....if I was thinking about the "9" I would have been out.

An even par 36 on the "back" gave me a pretty good round of golf.

I like to think of golf as the "total" 18 holes. If one wants to turn in early...so be it.

[Andy Troeger]

I agree with those that think equal difficulty should not be a priority. I do enjoy a course that has some ebb and flow throughout and probably wouldn't want a cakewalk followed by a massacre but I can't think of any courses off hand that have that anyway.

As to the two nines having very different ratings, I guess that's just something that makes very little difference to me.

[Phil Benedict]

Just to give an example, on my course 3 of the 4 hardest par 4's are on the front nine, and the fourth is the 18th.  Because of the requirement to equally distribute stroke holes between the two 9's, our #2 stroke hole is a fairly straightforward par 4 (the 15th).  It's much easier for the guy getting a stroke to par this hole than our 7th, which is the 5th stroke hole.  I suppose it balances out because players giving strokes have an advantage on the front 9 but may be at a disadvantage on the back 9.  I don't suppose that architects need to take into account how the distribution of difficulty affects the Saturday 4-ball.

By the way, the fact that I asked the question doesn't mean I think the answer should be yes.

[Tom_Doak]

Phil:

I've seen many courses overseas where they don't allocate the handicap strokes evenly between the nines, but just do it on the basis of difficulty wherever the chips fall.

I've never correlated whether this is true only at the many courses which don't return to the clubhouse at the ninth, or whether it's common throughout Great Britain & Ireland.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Phil:

I've seen many courses overseas where they don't allocate the handicap strokes evenly between the nines, but just do it on the basis of difficulty wherever the chips fall.

I've never correlated whether this is true only at the many courses which don't return to the clubhouse at the ninth, or whether it's common throughout Great Britain & Ireland.

Tom - I think it is quite unusual in the UK for unequal nines of stroke allocation though in yesteryears it did happen more. The R & A or EGU (I cant remember which, though it may even have been jointly) gave out a directive a few years back, basically it said that prime importance must be to how strokes are evenly distributed throughout the round, some points were made re that the 1st, 9th, 10th and 18th must not be under 8 stroke index. These days more par 3 holes seem to get a low index, perhaps because of the directive. Salisbury & South Wilts used to have a scorecard where a 10 handicapper received 8 of them on one nine and 2 on the other, I am not sure if the have changed now. An out and back course with no 10th tee start I dont see the need or any reason why the 9th or 10th was not Index 1. The guideline may have been.. Where courses have more than one starting point...

[Jordan Wall]

My feeling is that a course should be what the land presents.  If that means one nine is harder than another, let it be like that.  Quality should not be replaced with difficulty.  

[Walt_Cutshall]

Interesting question. I don't dislike courses that have nines of unequal difficulty, but I do dislike courses that have nines with dissimilar styles. For example, a course that is wide-open and long on the front, but short and tight on the back. I'm not sure why this is. I may feel like the architect doesn't have a good concept for the course, or didn't route it well.

Nines of equal difficulty? I don't care. I do like courses that really test you in the closing holes though.

[Andrew Balakshin]

That "equal difficulty" thing is one I just don't get -- an expansion of the American golf fairness doctrine.  Why SHOULD nines be of equal difficulty?

We are planning a resort course in Costa Rica and I've proposed making the nines very different on purpose -- a 2900-yard par-34 front nine and a 3700-yard par-37 back nine.  The idea is that late-afternoon casual golfers can go out and play the much shorter nine and that's all they need, while the serious players move on to the back.

Is this near the 4 seasons? Interesting idea.

[Michael Whitaker]

That "equal difficulty" thing is one I just don't get -- an expansion of the American golf fairness doctrine.  Why SHOULD nines be of equal difficulty?

We are planning a resort course in Costa Rica and I've proposed making the nines very different on purpose -- a 2900-yard par-34 front nine and a 3700-yard par-37 back nine.  The idea is that late-afternoon casual golfers can go out and play the much shorter nine and that's all they need, while the serious players move on to the back.

Tom - Will this course measure 6600 yards from the back tees... or, will you have to add an extra set to offer a 7000+ course?

[Peter Nomm]

The concept of striving to balance the nines reminds me of discussions of minimalism vs. man-made.  An architect can force this if that is what the client wants.  But shouldn't the lay of the land and the surroundings of the course dictate the difficulty?  And isn't this "difficulty" often subjective to the individual player?

I suppose Tom's concept in Costa Rica wouldn't fly an a lot of circumstances, but for the purpose of that specific situation it might make sense.   

And there are a number of courses I can think of that, due to the available land, have one nine with a significantly different look/difficulty than the other.  I think that is part of the reason we love them so much - the variety.

An interesting tid-bit to add to the handicap stroke allocation comments - a professor at University of Wisconsin (Whitewater) did a study on the effect of handicap hole stroke allocation.  In short, after analyzing the data from millions of "matches" at various golf courses throughout the world, he concluded that you could number the holes any way you want and still 99% of all matches would have the same outcome.  Anyone on the site can correct me if I am wrong, but he says the Australian Golf Association stipulates that every course has the same allocation.

[Philippe Binette]

Route the best course possible, see what happens.
front nine back nine only exist because 18 / 2 = 9... a lot of course have been ruined because of returning nines, equal strength of then nines etc.

I prefer to think of rythm as stretch of hard and easier holes.

[Michael Powers]

I would hope that architects place a higher priority on routing, finding the best green sites, and best holes, regardless of the difficulty between the 9's.  It should be irrelevent.

[Patrick Hodgdon]

Interesting question. I agree with a few comments above and think that:

a) I like challenging finishing holes... and yet I also can like an easy 18th hole after playing a tough course to end with birdie or par and walk off smiling even after getting beat up by the course.

b) I don't really care if the nines are equal or imbalanced although I think there could be a point that they were TOO imbalanced in that it might make it goofy.

c) I am not as big a fan of a course with two distinct styles of nines because usually I like one and not the other.

d) I don't think I would take anything away from a good course if one was easier than the other

e) One thing about haveing "arguably" equal nines is hearing people argue which is tougher.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()