Is every single hole on the back nine of The Old Course better than its twin?

[Patrick_Mucci]

No way 1 beats 18.  1 is a largely penal hole and 18 is a terrific half par.

That's your opinion, not one shared by all.

Many find # 18 a bland, easy par 4.[/color]

Patrick - where am I off in the analysis below?

I disagree on 18.  There are interesting decisions off on 18 the tee in direction caused by the valley of sin and the ob. 

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

As to OB, there's OB to the right on # 1, or do you only count the OB to the right on # 18 ?[/color]

The approach is definitely easier from the right side. 

The approach is easy from everywhere[/color]

With the wind, the hole becomes driveable for many but taking the line directly at the green brings ob in play and presents a more difficult decision. 

Have you ever thought of playing a fade ?
Especially with a left to right wind ?[/color]

The valley of sin as a hazard presents difficulty to the good player without presenting undue difficulty to the high handicap.

Let's see, "Valley of Sin" or  "Swilcan Burn" which directly fronts the green, which presents a more severe hazard ? 

I'll go with Swilcan Burn.[/color]

By contrast, 1 presents a decision off the tee largely in terms of distance. 


So the OB which you fear on # 18 has no impact on direction on # 1 ?
[/color]

I do not think a huge advantage can be gained by angle. 

The second shot is a very typical decision over a frontal hazard - do you play safe by hitting it to the back of the green or do you try and get it close to the pin? 
Every course with a bunker or pond in front of the green presents the same decision, which for me means hitting it to the back of the green every time.

Since the great majority of golfers hit the ball short of target on the approach, there's a much greater likelihood that Swilcan Burn will come into play.  # 1's additional length isn't substantive, maybe a club or two.

And, driving # 1 is far more difficult.[/color]

[Chris Kane]

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

The approach is easy from everywhere

Patrick, how many times have you played the Old Course, and in what conditions?  It is not my experience that the "approach is easy from everywhere", and its usually much more than a lob-wedge.

[Bryan Izatt]

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

The approach is easy from everywhere

Patrick, how many times have you played the Old Course, and in what conditions?  It is not my experience that the "approach is easy from everywhere", and its usually much more than a lob-wedge.

And, of course, only Patrick would first think of an aerial lob wedge shot on a firm and fast links course. 

[Tim Nugent]

Who say's a front nine should be equal or "better" than a back nine?  Typically, a good routing builds throughout the course.  The fact that there may be some holes stronger  on a front nine than their numerical counterparts is determined by the ebb and flow of the rhythm of the routing.  In fact, it is rare that pars on a front and back are a of  pallidrone of one another.  This is helped by the fact that there are only 1 - 3 par  and 1 - 5 par on each nine.  What if you started on 18? This whole thread falls apart.
OT - Would you rather start on 18 so you would finish on #17? Like CP, I feel that those 18th holes are just a way to get back to the house, the round climaxes on 17.

[Bill_McBride]

Who say's a front nine should be equal or "better" than a back nine?  Typically, a good routing builds throughout the course.  The fact that there may be some holes stronger  on a front nine than their numerical counterparts is determined by the ebb and flow of the rhythm of the routing.  In fact, it is rare that pars on a front and back are a of  pallidrone of one another.  This is helped by the fact that there are only 1 - 3 par  and 1 - 5 par on each nine.  What if you started on 18? This whole thread falls apart.
OT - Would you rather start on 18 so you would finish on #17? Like CP, I feel that those 18th holes are just a way to get back to the house, the round climaxes on 17.

The round may climax at 17, but there is nothing like playing 18 with lots of critics looking on!

[Patrick_Mucci]

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

The approach is easy from everywhere

Patrick, how many times have you played the Old Course, and in what conditions? 

I haven't played it in all conditions.

Hence, I have to rely on James Anderson stated about the hole, he's a fellow who's more familiar with the golf course than I am.[/color]

It is not my experience that the "approach is easy from everywhere", and its usually much more than a lob-wedge.

At 354 yards, a 250 yard drive leaves 104 yards to the center of the green,
A drive of 300 leaves 54 yards to the green.

It's been stated by knowledgeable, experienced individuals, such as James, that the easier approach is from the left side, which is away from the OB.

You must have missed where I stated that it was a wedge to a lob wedge.

54 to 104 are within my lob wedge and sand wedge range, with 120 yards being my wedge range.

So I stand by my statement.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

The approach is easy from everywhere

Patrick, how many times have you played the Old Course, and in what conditions?  It is not my experience that the "approach is easy from everywhere", and its usually much more than a lob-wedge.

And, of course, only Patrick would first think of an aerial lob wedge shot on a firm and fast links course. 

I was a fairly decent Lob wedge player, able to hit low shots with plenty of RPM's, which stopped after the second bounce, as well as high shots, from 80 to 5 yards, although, I felt uncomfortable going beyond 70 with the Lob Wedge, prefering to throttle down on my Sand wedge for 80 yard shots, which I could hit low with RPM's or high, landing like a butterfly with sore feet.

We each have our comfort zone and preference for shot selections.
I play my game the way I feel most comfortable, with each club and shot selection based on how I feel that day and how I'm executing that day.

What may be a full 8 iron one day might be a choked down punched 5 iron the next, despite it being the same basic approach.

Since my game has served me well over the years, I prefer it to yours.[/color]

[Rich Goodale]

You obviously missed your calling, Pat, as not even the best of the pros would attempt either of those shots of yours when TOC was playing fast and firm and the pin was in it's normal Open position.  I can just see the headline now.....

"Crippled Tiger struggles in 2023 Open in his Quixotic quest to overtake Mucci's record of 37 Major wins."

[Patrick_Mucci]

You obviously missed your calling, Pat, as not even the best of the pros would attempt either of those shots of yours when TOC was playing fast and firm and the pin was in it's normal Open position.  I can just see the headline now.....

"Crippled Tiger struggles in 2023 Open in his Quixotic quest to overtake Mucci's record of 37 Major wins."

Rich,

You and those other bozos talk about F&F conditions as if they're universal.

They're not.

I think my golfing experience qualifies me to assess the nature of the conditions I face and to select my shots and clubs accordingly.

While I may not have Neil Regan's deft touch with the putter from 160 yards, I know how to play and how to deal with a particular situation on a given day.

[Rich Goodale]

Kowabunga Clarabelle!

Even in the winter and being allowed to squirt seltzer water all over the approach to the Open pin (which is the only pin of any interest on the 18th green at TOC), even you couldn't effectively hit the low hit and check wedge shot to the 18th.  Know why, Chuckles?  Well, there's only about 4 square feet of green on which to land if you want to hit such a shot stiff.  Ask Signore Rocca.  Ask yourself why you'll never see any pro play that shot (or the flop and drop) unless they are willing to gamble a bogie for a 5% chance at a birdie.

Buffalo Bob

[Mike Hendren]

I agree that the ninth is better than the 10th for three reasons:

1. On the way out the one place you can't miss is wide right.  Suddenly at the 9th it's a new ballgame - not unlike a prize fighter guarding against the left hook only to be knocked out by a right hand.  The gorse really encroaches the direct line near the green.

2.  Boase's and the End bunkers are placed right where you want to drive the ball.

3.  The big round green has the ultimate low profile and it is very difficult to guage the distance on one's pitch or putt to yield a much needed birdie before heading home.

As to 10 I found it much more straight forward - just banged a drive and putter onto the green both rounds.

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

I was making a point about what I presumed was your comment that the generic "you" was left with a wedge or lob wedge shot.  People other than you might wisely play different shots.  If you are saying that those are the two shots you'd play all the time there, peace be with you.  Silly plays to some pins, but knock yourself out.

As to your abilities, I wouldn't question that.  Never seen you play; but by all reports you're very good.  As to preferring your game to mine, you're stuck with your game, as I am with mine, but never having seen my game, perhaps you should be less judgmental.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

It's not a question of being judgemental.

I know my game and am comfortable with certain shots in certain circumstances.  You may choose other shots in the same circumstances because you're more comfortable with them.

I also hit a lot of guinky shots, probably shots that many would be uncomfortable with, but, for me they work, so when someone is critical of a shot I play, a shot that not only works for me, but a shot that I'm comfortable with and confident in, as I stand over it, that's being judgemental.

That Lob-Sand-Pitching wedge played low in a punched fashion that takes two bounces and stops dead, or a high shot that lands softly, work for me.

So, don't be so critical of my choice of clubs and method of play.

[Bill_McBride]

Bozos? 

I resemble that remark!

[Chris Kane]

At 354 yards, a 250 yard drive leaves 104 yards to the center of the green,
A drive of 300 leaves 54 yards to the green.

It's been stated by knowledgeable, experienced individuals, such as James, that the easier approach is from the left side, which is away from the OB.

You must have missed where I stated that it was a wedge to a lob wedge.

54 to 104 are within my lob wedge and sand wedge range, with 120 yards being my wedge range.

So I stand by my statement

Patrick, your post demonstrates the folly of making statements about a hole which you don't know well enough to adequately understand, then relying upon the statements of others as an alternative.

I lived three minutes walk from the hole in question for twelve months, played it over three dozen times, saw it played hundreds of times more (by ALL levels of golfer), and would never describe the approach as "easy". 

I found the prevailing wind meant that the hole was usually played with the wind hurting and from the right.  I actually prefer playing from the RHS, because it means I can hit a draw with my six-iron through to lob wedge which takes the Valley of Sin out of play for most hole locations.  Playing from the left, you almost always have to carry the Valley of Sin.

If you were to play the course year round in a variety of conditions, I suspect your average approach club would be more than a wedge.

I know my game and am comfortable with certain shots in certain circumstances

But Patrick, you don't know the "certain circumstances" - you haven't experienced them and your posts demonstrate that you aren't aware of them!

In many of the conditions I saw during my year in St Andrews, you would be absolutely crazy to attempt the two bounce lob shot, and even crazier to attempt a "high shot which lands softly" - it wouldn't land softly after being hammered by the wind.

[Mike_Cirba]

This is a really interesting and perceptive question, but I'll stand up for #4 and #9 over their counterparts.

The problem is that most every hole on the front nine is very good.

It's just that virtually every single hole on the back nine is phenomenally world-class and are all essentially original standards of excellence.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, your post demonstrates the folly of making statements about a hole which you don't know well enough to adequately understand, then relying upon the statements of others as an alternative.

It's not a complex hole.[/color]

I lived three minutes walk from the hole in question for twelve months, played it over three dozen times, saw it played hundreds of times more (by ALL levels of golfer), and would never describe the approach as "easy". 

Then you're at odds with James Anderson and most of the golfing world.

# 17 is a hard hole.  # 18 is an easy hole.[/color]

I found the prevailing wind meant that the hole was usually played with the wind hurting and from the right.  I actually prefer playing from the RHS, because it means I can hit a draw with my six-iron through to lob wedge which takes the Valley of Sin out of play for most hole locations.  Playing from the left, you almost always have to carry the Valley of Sin.

Yes, but the green slopes more favorably for approaches from the left.[/color]

If you were to play the course year round in a variety of conditions, I suspect your average approach club would be more than a wedge.


I doubt it.[/color]

I know my game and am comfortable with certain shots in certain circumstances

But Patrick, you don't know the "certain circumstances" - you haven't experienced them and your posts demonstrate that you aren't aware of them!

You need to take a refresher course in reading comprehension.

I do know the "certain circumstances" because the "certain circumstances" are the ones "I" encounter.[/color]

In many of the conditions I saw during my year in St Andrews, you would be absolutely crazy to attempt the two bounce lob shot,

Again, your reading comprehension skills have failed you.
It's not a lob shot, it's a line drive with high RPM's.
Two bounces and it stops dead.
And, the shot is not confined to my lob wedge[/color]

and even crazier to attempt a "high shot which lands softly" - it wouldn't land softly after being hammered by the wind.

That's a dumb statement.

I know enough about playing golf to know when to use the wind, avoid the wind and fight the wind.  My club and shot selection are based upon my recognition of the conditions, architecture and how I feel about the shot at hand.  I know MY game and what works best for me under the circumstances presented.  You DON'T.[/color]

[Chris Kane]

Patrick, your post demonstrates the folly of making statements about a hole which you don't know well enough to adequately understand, then relying upon the statements of others as an alternative.

It's not a complex hole.[/color]

Its not particularly complex, but to fully understand how it plays for a variety of golfers under a variety of conditions, you need to experience those conditions.  By your own admission, you havn't.  If I was making similar statements about a hole at NGLA I'd seen once, you'd have had buried me in green ink by now.

I lived three minutes walk from the hole in question for twelve months, played it over three dozen times, saw it played hundreds of times more (by ALL levels of golfer), and would never describe the approach as "easy". 

Then you're at odds with James Anderson and most of the golfing world.

# 17 is a hard hole.  # 18 is an easy hole.[/color]

Its an easy hole when measured against par.  The approach shot is not "easy from everywhere" - a good friend I caddied for in the Links Trophy last summer (who is in top 10 of Golfweek's amateur ranking) even commented on what a tough shot it was to get close to the hole when its just behind the VOS.  I have played many approaches into that green which I wouldn't describe as easy shots. 

I have never heard of James Anderson (he is just one opinion, regardless of who he is).  What on earth do you mean by "most of the golfing world"?

I found the prevailing wind meant that the hole was usually played with the wind hurting and from the right.  I actually prefer playing from the RHS, because it means I can hit a draw with my six-iron through to lob wedge which takes the Valley of Sin out of play for most hole locations.  Playing from the left, you almost always have to carry the Valley of Sin.

Yes, but the green slopes more favorably for approaches from the left.[/color]

If you were to play the course year round in a variety of conditions, I suspect your average approach club would be more than a wedge.


I doubt it.[/color]

We will have to agree to disagree.  I think you are mistaken[/color

I know my game and am comfortable with certain shots in certain circumstances

But Patrick, you don't know the "certain circumstances" - you haven't experienced them and your posts demonstrate that you aren't aware of them!

You need to take a refresher course in reading comprehension.

I do know the "certain circumstances" because the "certain circumstances" are the ones "I" encounter.[/color]

Patrick, you don't know what "certain circumstances" you would encounter, you've barely seen the hole.

In many of the conditions I saw during my year in St Andrews, you would be absolutely crazy to attempt the two bounce lob shot,

Again, your reading comprehension skills have failed you.
It's not a lob shot, it's a line drive with high RPM's.
Two bounces and it stops dead.
And, the shot is not confined to my lob wedge[/color]

and even crazier to attempt a "high shot which lands softly" - it wouldn't land softly after being hammered by the wind.

That's a dumb statement.

I know enough about playing golf to know when to use the wind, avoid the wind and fight the wind.  My club and shot selection are based upon my recognition of the conditions, architecture and how I feel about the shot at hand.  I know MY game and what works best for me under the circumstances presented.  You DON'T.[/color]

Agreed: I don't know what works best for your game under the circumstances presented.  I suspect you're selling the Home hole short, and would be interested in how you view the hole having played it more in different conditions.  We will have to agree to disagree.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, your post demonstrates the folly of making statements about a hole which you don't know well enough to adequately understand, then relying upon the statements of others as an alternative.

It's not a complex hole.[/color]

Its not particularly complex, but to fully understand how it plays for a variety of golfers under a variety of conditions, you need to experience those conditions.  By your own admission, you havn't.  If I was making similar statements about a hole at NGLA I'd seen once, you'd have had buried me in green ink by now.

The holes at NGLA are substantively more complex than the 18th at TOC.
Do you want to compare the complexities of the 1st and 18th at NGLA to the 18th at TOC ?

You've agreed that the 18th hole at TOC isn't complex.
We agree that the hole is short.

It has a wide open fairway, no bunkering, no water in play, a green that's void of precipitous contours and slopes, ergo, it's an easy hole.

Now I admit to not having played it in the snow, and I haven't played it in 100 degree temperatures, but, I can recognize an easy hole when I see and play one. [/color]

I lived three minutes walk from the hole in question for twelve months, played it over three dozen times, saw it played hundreds of times more (by ALL levels of golfer), and would never describe the approach as "easy". 

Then you're at odds with James Anderson and most of the golfing world.

# 17 is a hard hole.  # 18 is an easy hole.[/color]

Its an easy hole when measured against par. 

What the hell are we measuring it against, the speed of light, Chinese arithmetic or PAR.

Thank you for agreeing that it's an easy hole.

The approach shot is not "easy from everywhere" - a good friend I caddied for in the Links Trophy last summer (who is in top 10 of Golfweek's amateur ranking) even commented on what a tough shot it was to get close to the hole when its just behind the VOS. 

Would you say it's more difficult to get closer to the hole when it's cut behind the VOS or is it more difficult to get closer to the hole on # 17 when the hole is cut just behind the fronting bunker ?

It's not even close.

One is an easy shot, one is a very hard shot, from any distance.[/color]

I have played many approaches into that green which I wouldn't describe as easy shots.

What's your handicap ?[/color] 

I have never heard of James Anderson (he is just one opinion, regardless of who he is). 

You never heard of James Anderson ?
And you spent how long at TOC ?
Perhaps you know him by his nickname, "Tip"
Does that ring a bell ?[/color]

What on earth do you mean by "most of the golfing world"?[/color]

That would be 51 %[/color]

I found the prevailing wind meant that the hole was usually played with the wind hurting and from the right.  I actually prefer playing from the RHS, because it means I can hit a draw with my six-iron through to lob wedge which takes the Valley of Sin out of play for most hole locations.  Playing from the left, you almost always have to carry the Valley of Sin.

Yes, but the green slopes more favorably for approaches from the left.[/color]

If you were to play the course year round in a variety of conditions, I suspect your average approach club would be more than a wedge.


I doubt it.[/color]

We will have to agree to disagree.  I think you are mistaken[/color

I know my game and am comfortable with certain shots in certain circumstances

But Patrick, you don't know the "certain circumstances" - you haven't experienced them and your posts demonstrate that you aren't aware of them!

You need to take a refresher course in reading comprehension.

I do know the "certain circumstances" because the "certain circumstances" are the ones "I" encounter.[/color]

Patrick, you don't know what "certain circumstances" you would encounter, you've barely seen the hole.

Let me see if I can understand this.

If I've played the hole from 145, 128, 93 and 64 yards you're telling me that I can't conceptually conceive of playing it from 137, 121, 88 and 56 yards ?

It's not as if the fairway is laced with pronounced architectural features or that the green complex is so incredibly well protected, with a green with incredible slopes and contours.  It's not.

You're trying to glorify an easy hole, yet, you've admitted it's NOT complex.
It's short, and there aren't an abundance of features to challenge a golfer, ergo, it's an easy hole.

You've already admitted that it's easy when measured against par.

So why are you arguing that it's not, when you've already admitted that it is ?

You and others want to deify a relatively simple, easy hole.
If that hole was in the midst of the routing you'd never hear about it.[/color]   

In many of the conditions I saw during my year in St Andrews, you would be absolutely crazy to attempt the two bounce lob shot,

Again, your reading comprehension skills have failed you.
It's not a lob shot, it's a line drive with high RPM's.
Two bounces and it stops dead.
And, the shot is not confined to my lob wedge[/color]

and even crazier to attempt a "high shot which lands softly" - it wouldn't land softly after being hammered by the wind.

That's a dumb statement.

I know enough about playing golf to know when to use the wind, avoid the wind and fight the wind.  My club and shot selection are based upon my recognition of the conditions, architecture and how I feel about the shot at hand.  I know MY game and what works best for me under the circumstances presented.  You DON'T.[/color]

Agreed: I don't know what works best for your game under the circumstances presented.  I suspect you're selling the Home hole short, and would be interested in how you view the hole having played it more in different conditions.  We will have to agree to disagree.

I'm not selling the home hole short, I'm telling you that the short home hole is an easy one.

And, that I found # 1 to offer more difficulty due to Swilcan Burn.[/color]

[Jason Topp]

Who say's a front nine should be equal or "better" than a back nine?  Typically, a good routing builds throughout the course.  The fact that there may be some holes stronger  on a front nine than their numerical counterparts is determined by the ebb and flow of the rhythm of the routing.  In fact, it is rare that pars on a front and back are a of  pallidrone of one another.  This is helped by the fact that there are only 1 - 3 par  and 1 - 5 par on each nine.  What if you started on 18? This whole thread falls apart.
OT - Would you rather start on 18 so you would finish on #17? Like CP, I feel that those 18th holes are just a way to get back to the house, the round climaxes on 17.

A good question.  I think I enjoy the front nine as much as the back even though I do think the back has the better collection of holes.

I think the 18th is a perfect finisher because you feel like you should make 3 but it is difficult to do so.  I am always surprised at the relatively low percentage of 3's by tour professionals in the Open.

[Jason Topp]

Patrick - where am I off in the analysis below?

I disagree on 18.  There are interesting decisions off on 18 the tee in direction caused by the valley of sin and the ob. 

What decisions, it's a wide open driving area leaving you a wedge to Lob wedge into the green.

As to OB, there's OB to the right on # 1, or do you only count the OB to the right on # 18 ?[/color]

The approach is definitely easier from the right side. 

The approach is easy from everywhere[/color]

With the wind, the hole becomes driveable for many but taking the line directly at the green brings ob in play and presents a more difficult decision. 

Have you ever thought of playing a fade ?
Especially with a left to right wind ?[/color]

The valley of sin as a hazard presents difficulty to the good player without presenting undue difficulty to the high handicap.

Let's see, "Valley of Sin" or  "Swilcan Burn" which directly fronts the green, which presents a more severe hazard ? 

I'll go with Swilcan Burn.[/color]

By contrast, 1 presents a decision off the tee largely in terms of distance. 


So the OB which you fear on # 18 has no impact on direction on # 1 ?
[/color]

I do not think a huge advantage can be gained by angle. 

The second shot is a very typical decision over a frontal hazard - do you play safe by hitting it to the back of the green or do you try and get it close to the pin? 
Every course with a bunker or pond in front of the green presents the same decision, which for me means hitting it to the back of the green every time.

Since the great majority of golfers hit the ball short of target on the approach, there's a much greater likelihood that Swilcan Burn will come into play.  # 1's additional length isn't substantive, maybe a club or two.

And, driving # 1 is far more difficult.[/color]

As to the two tee shots:

On 18 there is an advantage to tempting the ob - you either have a better angle or a chance of driving on or close to the green.  On 1 there is no advantage or a minimal one at best.

I tend to agree that the tee shot on 1 is more difficult but am not sure why it is more difficult or why the difficulty has anything to do with quality.  There is no decision off 1 tee other than how far you want to hit it.

As to the Valley of Sin v. the Swilican Burn - I agree the burn is the more difficult hazard that is more likely to come into play.  I disagree that by being more difficult it makes it more interesting.  There is little temptation to make an agressive play with the burn right there.  The valley of sin does not look like much and in reality is not a very severe penalty, but every golfer has the hope of negotiating it and has several options for doing so, from a run up to a lob to getting lucky on a mis hit shot.

As to the easiness of 18 - to me it is a par 3-1/2 hole, with 3 being a lot more difficult to achieve than it seems like it should be.   If choosing between the two, I'll take that over 1 any day.   

[Bill_McBride]

#1 and #18 both resist birdies because 1) you must definitely carry the burn and that means a lot of shots to the back of the green, and 18) it's just difficult to get close to the hole with what looks like an easy approach shot - you have to get the shot up onto the green and it's difficult to judge the speed of a ground shot or the firmness of the green for an aerial shot.

It's always best to play long on #1, because nobody wants to start with a bogey or worse!

[Patrick_Mucci]

As to the two tee shots:

On 18 there is an advantage to tempting the ob - you either have a better angle or a chance of driving on or close to the green.  On 1 there is no advantage or a minimal one at best.

Jason,

You keep stating that the prefered drive on # 18 is down the right side.
I didn't find that to be true, and Tip Anderson, doesn't find it to be true.
He recommends aiming at the steeple left of the center of the green, not right like you keep insisting.

The green slopes from high right to lower left, favoring an approach from the left side, not the right side, so why do you keep insisting that driving down the right side near the OB is the drive of choice, when it's clearly not ?

I tend to agree that the tee shot on 1 is more difficult but am not sure why it is more difficult or why the difficulty has anything to do with quality.  There is no decision off 1 tee other than how far you want to hit it.

Are you stating that hole location has no impact on your decision ?

Are you stating that the OB right should be ignored ?

What's your handicap ?

As to the Valley of Sin v. the Swilican Burn - I agree the burn is the more difficult hazard that is more likely to come into play. 

OK, I'm making progress

I disagree that by being more difficult it makes it more interesting. 


It does in a context where difficulty doesn't equate solely to distance.
Since the holes are roughly the same yardage, relatively short, distance isn't a factor in determining difficulty.  Hence the Burn has a far greater impact, especially if the hole is cut behind it.

There is little temptation to make an agressive play with the burn right there.  The valley of sin does not look like much and in reality is not a very severe penalty, but every golfer has the hope of negotiating it and has several options for doing so, from a run up to a lob to getting lucky on a mis hit shot.

Variety in shot selection from 50-100 yards isn't the issue.

There's little in the way of fear instilled in the golfer as he approaches # 18 from 50-100 yards.  The same can't be said of # 1.  Fear is generally more of a factor, which in turn creates interest.

A mishit approach will have little impact on # 18.
A mishit approach on # 1 can ruin the round and the golfer's mind at the very outset.

As I stated earlier, if # 18 was in the mid-section of the routing, you'd never hear about it.

# 17, on the other hand, is a brilliant hole irrespective of its order in the routing.

As to the easiness of 18 - to me it is a par 3-1/2 hole, with 3 being a lot more difficult to achieve than it seems like it should be.   If choosing between the two, I'll take that over 1 any day. 

You made that clear in the title of your thread.
I disagree
I believe that # 1 is the superior hole, tactically.  

[Chris Kane]

This is my final post on the subject.  Patrick has stated his opinion, here is mine.

The holes at NGLA are substantively more complex than the 18th at TOC.
Do you want to compare the complexities of the 1st and 18th at NGLA to the 18th at TOC ?

You've missed the point.  NGLA is a course you appear to know well.  TOC is a course I believe I know well.  If I played there once, and made a comment you disagreed with, I'd take your more substantial knowledge and experience on board, rather than sticking to an extreme position, refusing to yield even 1%.

Would you say it's more difficult to get closer to the hole when it's cut behind the VOS or is it more difficult to get closer to the hole on # 17 when the hole is cut just behind the fronting bunker ?

It's not even close.

One is an easy shot, one is a very hard shot, from any distance.

False argument.  Of course the approach on #17 is more difficult, its one of the hardest approach shots on the planet.  The approach into #18 is always easier - that doesn't mean that its always an easy shot.  Surely you aren't suggesting that a shot can be classed as "easy" because the Road Hole is tougher?  I thought not - that would be silly.

What's your handicap ?

9.  But irrelevant.  As I said earlier, I've had one of the best amateurs in the world describe an approach he played into that green as a "tough shot". 

You never heard of James Anderson ?
And you spent how long at TOC ?
Perhaps you know him by his nickname, "Tip"
Does that ring a bell ?

"Tip" does ring a bell.  I spent twelve months living in St Andrews in 2006-07.  He passed away in 2004, so I never met him. 

What on earth do you mean by "most of the golfing world"?

That would be 51 %[/color]

Interesting.  Could you show me where 51% (or more) of the golfing world have stated that they agree with your contention that the "approach is easy from everywhere".  If you can't, you're merely speculating.

Let me see if I can understand this.

If I've played the hole from 145, 128, 93 and 64 yards you're telling me that I can't conceptually conceive of playing it from 137, 121, 88 and 56 yards ?

I would hope you could.  That's why I'm surprised that you cannot concede that not all approaches are easy from everywhere.  Your position (if my reading comprehension is good enough, please correct me if I'm wrong) that that 100/100 approaches into that green are easy (ie. "the approach is easy from everywhere").  I disagree.  Some are easy, some are more difficult. None are as remotely difficult as the Road Hole, but that isn't the issue.

It's not as if the fairway is laced with pronounced architectural features or that the green complex is so incredibly well protected, with a green with incredible slopes and contours.  It's not.

You must be a truly gifted wedge player if you consider a shot from 60 yards from a hanging lie to the front hole location, just beyond the Valley of Sin, to be an easy shot

And, that I found # 1 to offer more difficulty due to Swilcan Burn.

I don't think I've even mentioned #1 yet!  #1 is unquestionably a more difficult hole, and a good one.  I'm not sure its definitely the better one: #18 is terrific fun to play, and a wonderful finishing hole.

[Gary Slatter]

No way 1 beats 18.  1 is a largely penal hole and 18 is a terrific half par.

I cannot understand why 9 is better than 10.  Based on my experience, it is a drive to a flat green - just a featureless long par 3.  10 green is very interesting.

Jason

9 is a P4 - 8 is a P3

18 = half par ? what 3 and a half ? Yes it has the valley of sin but that's about it. The approach on is 1 much more interesting. Put the pin just behind the burn and it's a very difficult pin to get at - go too far through the green and it's a pretty subtle but slick comeback

Kevin - I know 9 is  par four but from the tees that visitors play it is a really short, flat par four.

I disagree on 18.  There are interesting decisions off on 18 the tee in direction caused by the valley of sin and the ob.  The approach is definitely easier from the right side.  With the wind, the hole becomes driveable for many but taking the line directly at the green brings ob in play and presents a more difficult decision.  The valley of sin as a hazard presents difficulty to the good player without presenting undue difficulty to the high handicap. 

By contrast, 1 presents a decision off the tee largely in terms of distance.  I do not think a huge advantage can be gained by angle.  The second shot is a very typical decision over a frontal hazard - do you play safe by hitting it to the back of the green or do you try and get it close to the pin?  Every course with a bunker or pond in front of the green presents the same decision, which for me means hitting it to the back of the green every time.

I find that by driving left on the first it opens up ALL pin placements.  Hitting past to the back of the green on the first is one of the easiest three putts on the course.