What's wrong with the 18th at RCD ?

[Kevin Pallier]

I've heard a few here mention that they don't like the 18th at RCD. Why ?

I found it a challenging finishing hole to my round. There's a few bunkers to navigate but is it really that bad a hole ?

[James Boon]

Kevin,

A challenging hole it is, especially into the prevailing wind.

What lets it down for me, is that it is over much flatter ground that the rest of the course and rather than having some select bunkers, they are scattered everywhere, all 24 of them. This makes it out of character with what has come before and doesn't really add anything new. I imagine that on some lesser links courses it would prove a good addition but it just doesn't fit well here.

On the Doak 10 thread there wasn't much love for the 17th at RCD either, a bit to do with the pond on 17, some comparing it to a Florida like feature. Its a natural spring and being on a flatter part of the course there are some wet areas around as there are on many other links courses, think Burnham, Westward Ho etc. It is a bit odd to find it but as its natural shouldn't get the bad press that it does. Its a good green site though and perhaps if they moved the fairway to the left onto rougher ground it would take the pond out of play and perhaps improve the hole?

As they recently redid the 16th, I feel a lot of people wouldn't be too bothered if they did the same for 17 and 18 also? Though I must say that the course is by far one of the best I've ever played and I was walking off greens with a big smile even after the occasional silly double bogey!

Cheers,

James

[James Boon]

Notice I didn't give the course a "Should have been a ** on the Doak Scale" (and I almost put an X in there...). I'll leave the ranking to Mr Doak himself. I would love the time to put together a Boon Scale but I'll need to play a lot more courses before I do!

Cheers

James

[Tom_Doak]

I went back and played County Down again in August ... I do love the place.  However I've never had much love for the 18th hole, and losing my ball this time after pulling my lay-up 5-iron did not help matters any.

What I didn't like about the hole was this:  after a perfect drive, I still wasn't quite within reach of the green, so there was really only one option for me on the second shot ... to lay up.  I suppose I could have tried to force a second shot down into the funnel of narrowing bunkers on the second shot, but there wasn't any good target area down there to play for, just more and more bunkers as you went on.  If they would TAKE OUT a couple of bunkers, or widen the fairway to the left in some spot, I think it would be a better hole.

I sort of liked the new 16th hole but the front left of the green was a VERY strong slope so that it's a bit too hard to hold the green from anywhere in the upper part of the fairway.

[Jon Wiggett]

Kevin,

A challenging hole it is, especially into the prevailing wind.

What lets it down for me, is that it is over much flatter ground that the rest of the course and rather than having some select bunkers, they are scattered everywhere, all 24 of them.

James,

is being flat really a negative if this is the natural form of the land? Isn't it more important that the hole fits in with the land. The 1st and last holes at TOC are pretty flat compared to much of the rest of the course and yet this does not in any way detract from them.

[Matt_Ward]

Kevin:

I raised the issue on a different thread concerning the 17th and 18th holes at RCD.

Let me put it this way -- the plethora of bunkers at #18 is akin to a gal who has to overdose with make-up because her naturally born features are not sufficient enough to carry the day.

#18 at RCD doesn't have the kind of land you experience with so many of the other holes at the course. It is a bombardment of bunkers in order to throw obstacles enmass -- without really providing different playing angles or more of a optimum landing zone as Tom D indicated in his comment.

The last two holes at RCD do need a bit of re-thinking. Let me add for total clarity - I really like the place but there are clear deficiencies with the two final holes in my mind.

[Johnny_Browne]

Hi all,
I suppose I had better reply being a member of RCD.  First the 16th - it has the makings of a good hole but the green does not as Tom D says quite work - it has been changed once and will probably be again.  The 17th is actually a very good hole once you learn to ignore the pond which seems to be just a natural collection of water - it never dries up.  The drive is good with generally the right centre being the best place to attack the green from but the bunkers on the right are bad news. Most of the members would aim for left centre of the fairway as the safer option.  It is a saucer green which is always interesting to play. 
I do not like the 18th because it has joined the ranks of some many holes today in being too hard - the bunkers on the right are so severe that golfers, even very good ones, rarely take on the second shot to the green because the penalty of going right is so severe.  Tom D suggested that if you widened the fairway left (which is a bad side to come in from) the hole would improve and I agree with him.  However change is unlikely as the word generally is that is a great (so many people now equate hard as great) hole.
Johnny Browne

[James Boon]

Jon,

I suppose you are right, flat isn't always a bad thing, especially regarding TOC at St Andrews. as you suggest However, having thought about a few other links courses, my least favourite holes tend to be on the flatter land: The weakest holes at Burnham & Berrow are possibly 7, 8 and 11 over the flattest land. Same at Westward Ho, the holes in the dunes are the best. The only example of a flat holes on a links that I really like is 8 at Brancaster but thats a great strategic hole, unlike the 18th at RCD as Tom suggests earlier.

Cheers,

James

ps I was only there on Monday but all this talk of RCD makes me want to go back already!

[Jon Wiggett]

James,

thanks for the honest answer. I would also say that movement in the fairway usually makes a hole more interesting. It is however, more than possible to produce interesting holes that are flat and therefor if a flat hole is boring it is not purely because it is flat.

[Bill_McBride]

I went back and played County Down again in August ... I do love the place.  However I've never had much love for the 18th hole, and losing my ball this time after pulling my lay-up 5-iron did not help matters any.

I sort of liked the new 16th hole but the front left of the green was a VERY strong slope so that it's a bit too hard to hold the green from anywhere in the upper part of the fairway.

Tom, during last year's Walker Cup they let spectators sit up in the rough above that deep greenside bunker on the left side of #16.  It was great fun to sit there and watch the players trying to deal with (1) that bunker, (2) the firmness of the green, and (3) the slope away to the back right.  There were some wonderful pitches and there were some great recoveries from beyond the green.  I thought a couple of the longer guys might try to drive the green, but no one was able to get much closer than about 40 yards short left and that definitely brought the bunker into play.

[Matthew Hunt]

Tom, for most of us the hole is still a proper three-shooter and even off the tee the strategy should reflect this(dull as it may be).

If one was to attempt to go for the green in three a right-centre drive would be most applicable. But unless you are a plus handicapper it is probably best hit a three-wood or a smooth Driver down the centre before laying up  as long and as right as possible before hitting your approach to a simple yet interesting green complex.

Some were suggesting the hole be revised, yet it was in 1997 by Donald Steel, he perhaps put in a couple to many bunkers thought in singularity they are all great bunkers and the shaping done was really top-button.  I bit of tweaking would do the hole no harm though.

The 17ths a good hole if one ignores the concreted-in pond which is why it never dries up. (Johnny must be too good to have visited it ).

[TEPaul]

I liked #18 a lot, and the basic reason was, it seemed like you really had to concentrate throughout on this par 5 finishing hole or you could make a bogie in a heartbeat. I liked that. I'm aware that they toughened up the hole with more bunkering but I can't even remember what it was like before that because I hadn't played it in over forty years.

To me the hole will always be really memorable for another reason though. I was just walking off the green when I heard about the terrorist attack on New York on 9/11.

[Tony_Muldoon]

From Richard Latham’s, “Evolution of the Links at RCD”.




 

[Kevin Pallier]

I liked #18 a lot, and the basic reason was, it seemed like you really had to concentrate throughout on this par 5 finishing hole or you could make a bogie in a heartbeat. I liked that. I'm aware that they toughened up the hole with more bunkering but I can't even remember what it was like before that because I hadn't played it in over forty years.

TEPaul

That's a feeling that I got from the hole as well - I mean RCD is one of the thoughest tests of golf one could play - and the 18th is the ultimate example of that.

Yes- there is a multitude of bunkers (as most detractors have alluded too) but you try and overpower it at your peril IMO. There are still lines into the green and the funnel from Tony's photos (thanks Tony M) are reasonably wide. I couldn't recall the bunkerless depressions off on all sides - save for the front.

I enjoyed it as a finishing hole but I suppose unlike Johnny Browne - I dont have to tackle it on a regular basis