When comparing courses, have you ever..........

[David Stamm]

....had a course that came in second in a hole to hole comparison and yet, the second one as a whole seemed like a better course? I suppose this would come under the "whole is greater than the sum of the parts". I was thinking of 2 courses the other day I have played numerous times and for fun I compared them in my mind on a hole to hole basis ala matchplay comparison. Course A won the match, but for some reason, course B felt like it was better overall. I know it sounds odd, but has this ever happened to you? BTW, for now, I don't want to reveal the courses I'm thinking of because I don't want it to unfairly influence this exercise.

[Sean_A]

David

I would say it is a fairly common experience for me.  Plenty of courses are weaker than others in their makeup, but work better as a package.  However, I must point out that I have somewhat strong biases toward short walks between tee and green, fairly short courses (say under 6500 yards) and a variety of hazards/obstacles etc. 

Ciao 

[John Kavanaugh]

Just happened to me at Bandon.  I can now see where Bandon Dunes is a better course than Pacific even though Pacific may be the superior design.  Over the course of 18 holes Bandon Dunes is just more fun, more challenging, more beautiful and more of a delight to play.

[Michael Dugger]

Just happened to me at Bandon.  I can now see where Bandon Dunes is a better course than Pacific even though Pacific may be the superior design.  Over the course of 18 holes Bandon Dunes is just more fun, more challenging, more beautiful and more of a delight to play.

You mean it's more forgiving to the wayward hitter?

[John Kavanaugh]

One thing I don't like about Pacific is that it is too easy to post a score.  It needs a hole like the 17th at Bandon.

[Chip Gaskins]

Just happened to me at Bandon.  I can now see where Bandon Dunes is a better course than Pacific even though Pacific may be the superior design.  Over the course of 18 holes Bandon Dunes is just more fun, more challenging, more beautiful and more of a delight to play.

wow, is there anyone else out there that things Bandon is better than Pacific?  i don't even put them in the same category.  Bandon #3, #8, #13, #14, all are mediocre at best. 

Bandon has some great ones, but hole for hole Pacific crushes it.

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

Agreed.

Is that Freddie Mercury or Borat? 

[Chip Gaskins]

Yes, because match play of courses is a ridiculous way to compare courses. 

fair point, though someone did match play hole for hole with pebble and pacific in a golf magazine and i think it got a lot of discussion on this board.  but i  agree is is silly to attempt hole for hole.

with that said, pacific still is much better than bandon.

[JMorgan]

Absolutely.  It's a Gestalt thing.  Whole greater than sum of parts etc.  Je ne sais quoi ...  it's where I get off the "where golf is great" train and play the Willie Fernie or Turner original nine instead of #23 course in the world.

[David Stamm]

Yes, because match play of courses is a ridiculous way to compare courses. 

Ridiculous? Perhaps, but I just did this for fun.

[Kyle Henderson]

I actually find this to be true in many comparisons. One couse may win more hole to hole matches, but with a small margin in each win and a huge margin in each loss. Also, holes cannot truly be examined outside of the context of their 17 brothers and sisters.

[CJ Carder]

Just happened to me at Bandon.  I can now see where Bandon Dunes is a better course than Pacific even though Pacific may be the superior design.  Over the course of 18 holes Bandon Dunes is just more fun, more challenging, more beautiful and more of a delight to play.

wow, is there anyone else out there that things Bandon is better than Pacific?  i don't even put them in the same category.  Bandon #3, #8, #13, #14, all are mediocre at best. 

Bandon has some great ones, but hole for hole Pacific crushes it.

I think you just proved his point.   

[Bill_McBride]

One thing I don't like about Pacific is that it is too easy to post a score.  It needs a hole like the 17th at Bandon.

Wouldn't the 7th qualify?  You don't have much of a run up play there (as you do at both #4 and #13) but it's longer than #17 at Bandon Dunes.  I think it could be the toughest hole at the resort.

[Brent Hutto]

Yes, because match play of courses is a ridiculous way to compare courses. 

Hear, hear.

Comparing two holes that are similar in some way is a perfectly valid exercise. For instance, in what way is the fifteenth at CPC better/worse/different than the seventh at Pebble Beach?

Pretending to compare to golf courses by reducing them to a series of hole-to-hole matches is absurd. For starters, a course is more than a bunch of isolated shots or holes. Then there's the question of what does "better" mean...how much better is an awfully important issue doncha think?

[David Stamm]

Maybe I should've posted an O/T thread........

[JMorgan]

David, I'm curious to know which two courses led to the dilemma.  Perhaps after a certain number of posts ... .

[John Kavanaugh]

One thing I don't like about Pacific is that it is too easy to post a score.  It needs a hole like the 17th at Bandon.

Wouldn't the 7th qualify?  You don't have much of a run up play there (as you do at both #4 and #13) but it's longer than #17 at Bandon Dunes.  I think it could be the toughest hole at the resort.

The seventh is a tough hole (I went birdie, par this trip) but I do not see it as a round buster like the 17th at Bandon.  My problem with Pacific is that like in my case when I played the front nine under par, you can relax and protect your round with four par threes remaining.  Even the 13th with trouble left offers mega room right.  Because of my particluar need to blow a round, which I do not think is unusual, I like to see holes on the back nine that a guy fears from day one.  Pacific does not have one as all the round busters are on the front.  It's like surfing..If you can get on the board you just ride the wave home.

[Bill_McBride]

One thing I don't like about Pacific is that it is too easy to post a score.  It needs a hole like the 17th at Bandon.

Wouldn't the 7th qualify?  You don't have much of a run up play there (as you do at both #4 and #13) but it's longer than #17 at Bandon Dunes.  I think it could be the toughest hole at the resort.

The seventh is a tough hole (I went birdie, par this trip) but I do not see it as a round buster like the 17th at Bandon.  My problem with Pacific is that like in my case when I played the front nine under par, you can relax and protect your round with four par threes remaining.  Even the 13th with trouble left offers mega room right.  Because of my particluar need to blow a round, which I do not think is unusual, I like to see holes on the back nine that a guy fears from day one.  Pacific does not have one as all the round busters are on the front.  It's like surfing..If you can get on the board you just ride the wave home.

Actually, the first time I played #13 I got twitchy about the large water hazard left and managed to block slice a tee ball up into the blow out bunker.  That wasn't much fun.

Probably the biggest opportunity for disaster, and on such a little hole, is #16.  You can play some back and forth on that little devil.

But you are right, #7 is on the front nine.  Birdie, par, good playing. 

[John Moore II]

I think in general you can't compare courses based on individual holes, unless you give a weighting of some type to the holes. Take Pebble Beach as an example, the ocean holes there are hard to beat, and overall, how much better are they than a hole they might be compared against? And how much worse are the inland holes than others at other courses? In that way, Pebble might lose a head-to-head with the individual holes, but certainly be better than most other courses in America.