[Gary Slatter]

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 finishes on 18 so a player has a chance to redeem themselves after being humbled by 17, leaves all golfers a chance to finish positively,  regardless of how they scored.

[Sean Walsh]

Gary,

Re the 1st I agree.  Sitting on the second tee after two is much nicer than being off the back or left rear.  This is a more likely result from centre and right of the fairway than over towards the bridge.  Also the angle from the left gives a little more margin for error on the slightly short approach

If you aim central and push it right the water is a lot closer and if short of the water the psychology of having to fly over water three times with your next shot isn't great 

[Patrick_Mucci]

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%.

I didn't miss the point.
You're trying to make # 18 into a tremendously complex hole when it's not.
You're trying to make it into a difficult hole when it's not.
One doesn't need to play # 18 100 times to understand it, from any and all angles.  The hole is simplistic and easy.

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.  No it's not, it's a valid 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.

You fail to understand the concept of relativity.
As you agreed, the approach to # 17 is difficult, from anywhere.
The approach to # 18 is easy, from anywhere.

Incrementally, it's not even close.

I've stated, over and over again, and you've failed to comment on the statement.  "If # 18 was in the mid-routing of the golf course, would you ever hear about the hole ?"  It's an easy hole that gains its notoriety from its position in the order of play.

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". 

It's not irrelevant.
It allows me to context your assessment.

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. 

He called it an easy hole.
He was a very good golfer and caddied for about 40 years at TOC and others.

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.

Conversely, claiming that it's a difficult approach from select spots is also speculating and tends to reflect your views based on your golfing ability.

Perhaps it's a difficult approach from inside the R&A Clubhouse.

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.

Sure it is.

It contexts difficulty.

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Trying to insist that # 18 is a difficult hole from position X, Y or Z.

It's not, the approaches are all easy.
Some are just easier than others.

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[/b][/color=blue]

Hanging lie ?
You must be kidding, or do you equate the downhill lies at # 10 and # 11 at ANGC to the lies on the fairway on # 18 at TOC ?

Let me quote the words of Desmond Muirhead regarding # 18 fairway.

"On the one hand, you've this COMPLETELY FLAT football field of a fairway with HARDLY A RIPPLE IN IT. "

Now where are these hanging lies ?[/b]

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.

If you would have paid attention at the very begining you would have seen that that was my point, that # 1 is more difficult and a better hole than # 18.

Again, if # 1 and # 18 were in the mid-body of the routing, there'd be no comparison.  It's # 18's position in the routing that gives it notoriety.

[Sean Walsh]

Pat,

So the whole basis of your argument is that No 1 is a more difficult hole and QED is a better hole?

As for mountains and molehills. Reminds me of Pot v Kettle.

FYI I've got no preference for one over the other.  I like them both but there are others on the course I prefer much more.  I do think 18 sits well where it is on the card a 3.5par hole following a tough stretch.  Not only that but a hole where everyone (or just about) has a good chance at birdie and also where the majority of golfers walk off with par feeling they really missed a trick.

I think on 1 there is more interest in the placement of the drive while on 18 more options are available for the type of approach you can make.

   

[Patrick_Mucci]

So the whole basis of your argument is that No 1 is a more difficult hole and QED is a better hole?

No, that's your conclusion, one created by not reading my comment thoroughly.

Perhaps you missed the word "and" in my last post.

As for mountains and molehills. Reminds me of Pot v Kettle.

FYI I've got no preference for one over the other.  I like them both but there are others on the course I prefer much more.  I do think 18 sits well where it is on the card a 3.5par hole following a tough stretch. 

Not only that but a hole where everyone (or just about) has a good chance at birdie and also where the majority of golfers walk off with par feeling they really missed a trick.

So, you too find it an easy hole.

I think on 1 there is more interest in the placement of the drive while on 18 more options are available for the type of approach you can make.

Swilcan Burn eliminates putting and running the ball to the green, but I don't consider those to be the only two options in shot selection.

   

[Jason Topp]

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.

Perhaps my experience with the 9th is tainted because of weather conditions.  Both times I played it downwind and there was no thinking needed - just a driver or 3 wood to the middle of the green  (I'm sure we played relatively short tees).  I could not have imagined any reason to hit it right.

By contrast, 10 green tricked me both times with the interesting slopes at the front of the green.  I also recall thinking pretty hard about the tee shot - whether I could get close enough to the green to chance the gorse on the left.

[Sean Walsh]

Patrick,

With a handicap of 16 I don't exactly find any hole easy but I find 18 is easier than 4 and 13 and they are both also par 4's.  So in relation to par yes it's a relatively easy hole (SO WHAT!!) it does not diminish the hole in my eyes.  It fits perfectly with it's place in the course (and the town for that matter).  An interesting and significantly sloping green which you really should be having a makeable putt for birdie with anywhere from 5 to 50 people willing you on.  Some of my most satisfying moments in golf have been standing on that green (most of them while not actually playing). 

It is a good hole but as you have already alluded to it's place on the card and in golf raise it to something more.  The difference is that you used this to somehow denigrate the hole as if any golf hole can actually stand outside its environment. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

It is a good hole but as you have already alluded to it's place on the card and in golf raise it to something more. 

The difference is that you used this to somehow denigrate the hole as if any golf hole can actually stand outside its environment. 

Not really, I just don't believe it belongs on the pedestal that many have chosen to place it on.

It's a fair golf hole, owing its notoriety to its position in the routing the and significance of the golf course, as opposed to the architectural merits and playability of the hole itself.[/color]

[Jim Nugent]

It's a fair golf hole, owing its notoriety to its position in the routing the and significance of the golf course, as opposed to the architectural merits and playability of the hole itself.

Patrick, do you think any other holes at TOC are like that, i.e. fair but not great holes?  If so, which ones?   

[Patrick_Mucci]

It's a fair golf hole, owing its notoriety to its position in the routing the and significance of the golf course, as opposed to the architectural merits and playability of the hole itself.

Patrick, do you think any other holes at TOC are like that, i.e. fair but not great holes?  If so, which ones?   

Jim,

Every course has its share of fair but not great holes, some just have more than others.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()