Courses that grow on you

[Mike Benham]

Numbers 4, 9 and 12 at Rustic all fall into the category where the green makes the hole ...

[Tommy_Naccarato]

#16 is a 5 iron off the tee (hit more if your ego demands, but it's not needed) and a 5/6/7 iron approach....depending on how much you want to watch it bounce and roll.  I actually think the approach is the one that requires the least amount of skill and the most luck on the course.  Luck is fine, it adds to the variety, but it's more luck than skill in getting it to bounce correctly on those front left mounds

Brian, If you can reach Rustic #16 with a 5 iron and then 5/6/7 iron approach, then I'm a Tuskeegee Airman. Maybe in a extreme Santa Ana condition, which of course may have been the case on Sunday when I wasn't there, but is this true?

[Joe Perches]

#1, I agree it's better thought of as a long par 4.
#16, Just how far do you hit a 5 iron?  The prevailing wind is in your face and it's still a 480 yard hole.  Also, I believe the best approach to that green is with a lob wedge, but I just can't drive the ball far enough.  Nobody get too much practice with downhill stance short to medium irons.  I rather like the hole myself, it's picturesque and very difficult to score well.  I don't think it's luck, just proper execution under difficult to judge, varying wind conditions.
#17, It's a decent to very good hole with the pin on the back right.  Unfortunately, the green helps feed the ball to a pin there.  Still a little left to right shaping helps too, just don't go too far right.

[Brian_Gracely]

Brian, If you can reach Rustic #16 with a 5 iron and then 5/6/7 iron approach, then I'm a Tuskeegee Airman. Maybe in a extreme Santa Ana condition, which of course may have been the case on Sunday when I wasn't there, but is this true?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that both Thomas Brown and myself hit those clubs.  I think it might have been downwind that day (because 13 played into the wind), but while the card says 480yds, it really only plays about 400yds with the elevation drop / down canyon effect / ground game into the green.  So two 200yd 5-irons is not Pinnacle Long-Drive Championship length.  

Now, in a cross-wind I expect that hole is a monster, especially with OB on both sides.  

Keep in mind that throughout the round I played with David Moriarty, he kept saying "when the normal winds blow in the opposite direction, this hole....".  With that being the case, I'd think the following aspects would come into play:

#1 doesn't play as a longer Par4 and the ditch in front comes into play

#5 the crossing-ditch comes into play on the drive

#7 the go / no-go decision on the drive is more interesting

#9 getting home in two is possible

#10 and #11 are less of a beast than into the wind....very difficult

#13 Principle's Nose never comes into play

#14 tee-shot is scary!!

[George Pazin]

I do agree with Ed a bit though on #9. I still think a few (5 or 6) small and hidden and partially hidden bunkers spread throughout the hole ala #12 on the Old Course would be fun there. Make the other shots more to think about instead of just the approach.

I've always wondered why more architects don't take this approach on par 5s. It seems like there are fewer universally praised par 5s than anything else.

I wonder if it's not the result of designing for "better" golfers. I know when I play my home course, a delightfully understated and underwhelming muni in Pittsburgh, I play each hole in so many different ways all the time, due to my own inconsistencies, that some random bunkering would really spice things up. Instead, what minimal bunkering there is follows the standard pinching bunkers or flanking greenside bunkers.

My home course has always grown on me, and continues to do so, but that's probably due more to the memories than the course itself.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

#1 doesn't play as a longer Par4 and the ditch in front comes into play
It does the same in either wind.

#5 the crossing-ditch comes into play on the drive
I would disagree with this, especially with the new tee. In fact, I think it will change your original opinions of the hole entirely.

#7 the go / no-go decision on the drive is more interesting
IMHO, I think into the wind there is no question for any player NOT to go for it to simply lay-up, but if the wind is at your back, absolutely going for it beause it makes all of the difference if your on the other side as far as dealing with the that mound in the front right half to center of the green. The difference of being over there, when the wind is at your back compared to going into in front of the hazard is a huge.

#9 getting home in two is possible
I don't see a lot of players reaching it that often, but I could be wrong there.

#10 and #11 are less of a beast than into the wind....very difficult
#10, I think your visions of the hole would be much different now then before since the HHA which hasn't dictated a different play as much as its affected play because the angle of attack is much more obvious, as well as the hazard of playing anywhere right of the hole, past the massive sand hazard.

On #11, I saw you play the hole with a small wind at your back and you got off a pretty good drive and had a good angle into that left pin that day. Still, the left running sand hazard poses a threat to all, and I have seen a lot more flirt with it then succeed with it. I don't think the hole yields a lot of birdies either.

#13 Principle's Nose never comes into play
Wrong! I actually think it comes into play more with the wind at your back, and I'm not just meaning me. You might not have a problem clearing it, but where the ball runs from there, as well as the great green itself, could pose a lot some problems. This is where I think the great pin placements as well as the person knowing where to place them on a really windy day comes into effect.

#14 tee-shot is scary!!
#14 tee shot is the bane of my existence. I look forward to every return try!:)

But even into the wind, for a guy like you Brian you wouldn't have a problem getting over it all, the most thats going to happen is you going to be going into the green with a mid iron instead of a short.

[Will E]

Tommy-
Not only has Rustic grown on you, it has possessed you. Seek help now.

Dick-
I did get to Blue Mound this summer. It's a fine course for sure, 8 might be the second best punch bowl I've seen. I don't think it compares to Lawsonia though. In fact not much does.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Ahhh Whadda' you know!

[Pete Lavallee]

Dick,

Certainly Tommy does a great job defending Rustic Canyon; I wouldn't have picked 2,4,11&12 as the weaker holes there. The 2nd has the ultimate boundry strategy, risk flirting with the OB left and get the best angle into a green that needs a good angle to get the ball close (or even get on). You could put #4's green at St Andrews; it's that good, it requires the golfer to play a different golf shot to get close, anytime that happens golf wins. I like 11 because it has an alternate strategy, sometimes driving away from the trouble on the left is the smart play; how can you not like that narrow green with the huge nose in the middle, very unorthodox for a longer secnd shot in? I think that a hole like 12 must be played multiple times before judgement can be passed; heck even I'm not sure that it's great, but do think I might come to that conclusion some day.

As for Barona, I've come to the conclusion that there are no weak holes there. My first impression was that the 10th was the only unappealing hole, but time and experience has changed my opinion there. The drive is truely wide open, I've never seen anybody reach the bunker uphill at 310 yards, but the green complex has a back to front slope that really makes going long an adventure, and going long happens alot on a green with that much front to back slope; I think that's desiegn genious in action. The 12th is one of those holes that has a variable strategy, based on the pin position. Some days, it's worth risking driving over the far right bunker for the only angle the can hold the green, never mind getting close. Holes where golfers don't quickly realize that par can be a good score, especially at that length, are amongst my favorites. The 15th forces the golfer to generally drive to the right, hugging the fairway bunkers to get the best angle to the most difficult pins positions. Granted, there are some hole locations that only require a nuclear tee shot, aimed in the general direction of the green, but the native area left is an automatic bogey, and there is a Sunday pin just over the front left greenside bunker that is one of the most demanding cups to get close to, even with a wedge in hand! Finally, you must have been preoccupied with Lynn's favorite tree on #1 to miss out on what's going on at #2! The fairway carries every ball to the right when it lands, unless you can put some draw spin on the tee shot. That brings the left hand bunker complex into play. The hole also has the right hand bunker complex which is fun for higher handicap players to drive over in the 180 yard range. The green here is one of the top 3 on a course with nothing but great greens, the lack of right back pins keep's this hole from getting the respect it deserves, but remember that front left is extremely treacherous too! The firm conditions from tee to green are what really make all of these stategies work at Barona; God bless them for keeping the course maintained that way.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pete,
I certainly agree with you in regards to Barona with the exception to #16. Todd certainly has heard it from me a million times, and the sad thing is when he was building the place.  Get rid of a few bunkers on that hole, build up the green to make it a true boomer and the hole is a million times better.

With the recess in the center of the back of the boomer its just not a good hole and it has too much trouble all around for the higher-handicappers that can't hit a 8 or 9 iron 150 yards or more and are trying to hit a 7 iron or more to 9 iron height.

I probably do expound on the virtues of Rustic a wee bit too much, but its such a fun place to play golf. Lots of stuff going on out there.

[Thomas_Brown]

Tommy - What sort of hat does a Tuskeegee Airman wear?
Brian could get there w/ 2 5i's.

I'll take the blame for Brian on #16 - I usually hit 2i off the tee there - I think I told him I don't care for the teeshot.  I'm in favor of the approach and the St. Andrews about the green's backside - just not the massive downhill nature of approach shot.  In my group on either Sat. or Sun., I recall someone within 60 yards of the green on the teeshot.  If you carry the ball 270+, it's definitely not driver - the angle on the left slope is too acute.

Rustic is the least common denominator - all GCA threads factor down to this topic.

I don't like the teeshot on #12 - There too little reward for the risk it presents - the slope after the bunkers on the left is too banked for that type of teeshot.

I like #2 at RC a lot.

Some beardies would help #9 - never thought of that idea.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom,
For him to go five iron/five iron, it's only going to happen in a 50+ mile an hour Santa Ana condition. Its a 480 yard hole, granted downhill. If Brian can hit a 2-240 yard 5 irons with accuracy, all the power to him, and I'm certainly not doubting his ability, but let me ask this, did he hit the green?

Its all pretty ridiculous though when you think of it isn't it--this equipment?

You and I have had a date with both #1 and now #12 for a long long time. We need to get over there! Call me tomorrow!

[Brian_Gracely]

Its a 480 yard hole, granted downhill.

Its all pretty ridiculous though when you think of it isn't it--this equipment?

Tommy,

Downhill, downwind, down canyon.....that down canyon thing at Rustic is good for like 20-30yds, especially considering how firm the ground is.  So "480yds" is just a notation on the card, it's not the real distance as the crow flies.

And I missed the green as it rolled just off the back-right edge.

And I've been playing with persimmons and 1972 Haig Ultra's lately, just to get some perspective (still using 2004 balls).  The irons are about 1/2 club shorter and the woods are 10-60yds shorter....depending on where you hit them on the face  It's the ball and the shafts in today's drivers.  

[RJ_Daley]

As for Rustic, a much tougher one to find a weak hole, but there must be one.

At least I put in that disclaimer before naming 2-4-11-12!

Let's put it this way...  If I had to play the weak holes I named in my post on the three courses for the rest of my life as some sort of punishment for shooting off my mouth, I'd be the winner in the end.  

This is what happens when one tries to find something pithy to say and hasn't got the goods to back it up.

I would have said 1 at RC, but I guess I was giving it the Ross philosophy of easy opener, which is OK to be weak.  I just didn't find that the opening 2 holes were too difficult off the tee with the down wind (even for me) and like 12, the 2nd has all the business at the green end of the hole.  

4 somehow never wowed me from the time I first yawned at it while looking at it during construction with Tommy, when he first gave me a good stern lecture about my comments.   I can agree that it is a hole with those TOC like qualities that it needs to be played repeatedly to let you discover its' intracacies of green contouring and clever bunker placement.  It is not like I ever birdied it or anything, but it did somehow leave me with the feeling that it wasn't really a redan, and wasn't really visually impressive, and was sort of a shot you ought to get down pat within a few rounds of getting used to what shot and club to hit.  I really like the two holes before and after it, so it sort of is sandwiched there in my memory.

The thing that is great about Rustic Canyon is because of the possibility of a very helping wind on any given day, from up canyon or down, the ones that are getting the help may seem like breathers, and not give you their full measure, yet on a return visit will be the ball busters that you find the toughest.  While that is true on any course, I think RC is even more like that.  Thus, everyone being amazed at Brian and Tom Brown's comments off the tee with irons.

[ed_getka]

Tommy,
  I love your idea for #9. #12 at St Andrews is one of my favorite holes there. The greens are even somewhat similar with a gathering area, although #9 doesn't fall off in the back. Even just one bunker like the last one you negotiate going into #12 at St Andrews would improve #9 Rustic quite a bit.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tommy,

Downhill, downwind, down canyon.....that down canyon thing at Rustic is good for like 20-30yds, especially considering how firm the ground is.  So "480yds" is just a notation on the card, it's not the real distance as the crow flies.

And I missed the green as it rolled just off the back-right edge.

And I've been playing with persimmons and 1972 Haig Ultra's lately, just to get some perspective (still using 2004 balls).  The irons are about 1/2 club shorter and the woods are 10-60yds shorter....depending on where you hit them on the face  It's the ball and the shafts in today's drivers.  

Brian,
 I too went to using my Wilson Staff Gooseneck blades just recently just for shifts and giggles and believe it or not, I picked-up like 10-15 yards distance on each iron! But man what a difference to hit! A lot more misses!

Still thats pretty impressive from the tee.

Ed,
Don't get me wrong, I like the way Rustic #9 plays, in fact I think its in tune perfectly with the rest of the course. But if bunkers were to be added I think I would like to see at least two blind little bunkers similar to the blindness of the coffin bunker and/or one huge nasty bunker similar to Hell somewhere threatening the 2nd shot.  The options off of the tee would be the same, but it would set up more defined routes to the hole ala #14 at St. Andrews.

I'll try to draw-up something later what could be an option.

Also, I think once you see the difference the HHA has made as far as visual interest, I think the 9th has become a better understood in its own character.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Dick, I think originally I had told you that the 4th was going to be Redan like, and it was somewhat going to be at that time. But during construction things changed, and the hole has more Eden like qualities to it then it does Redan with the exception of no bunkers in front of the green.

I think the 4th is one of the more quiet holes to ruin you round out there, and I find it to be just as tough as any of the one-shooters there. You'll here people talking about their birdies and pars but you don't here them talking about their bogies and double bogies. In any wind, I play the low running hook into there. It just has more success for me then any other shot and I have constantly seen many try to fly the flag and only have it go left almost everytime. I don't even use a tee most of the time I'm playing that hole by choice, just so I can keep it down and also because if I don't have a runner into #3, I have to get warmed up and confident to run shots for the rest of the day here.

By they way, I showed Slag where we got the car stuck!

[ed_getka]

Tommy,
  I've seen the new work and agree that at least now you don't have back to back par 5's without anything to factor on your second shot. However, #9 isn't even close to the level of the rest of the course, until you get to the green, which is the only redeeming quality on that hole IMO. Any par 5 that you can indiscriminately hit two shots as far as you can (at least for my length) is not a good par 5.
    #5 is better too. Its amazing how much differently the hole plays now with the tee moved over to the right.

   As for #12, the only place you can drive the ball and get into trouble is if you pull or hook it left. Otherwise you have a HUGE area that is FLAT to land your drive. The crux of the hole is the second shot plain and simple. You can make a big number on #12, but that has nothing to do with the drive and everything to do with the approach shot and subsequent putts.
    However, as I'm thinking about what makes #7 Sand Hills great, and compare and contrast the requirements of the two holes, I guess you could make the same argument for both.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Sorry folks, Barona is rated lower because the casino doesn't serve beer!    

A dry casino???!!!  What are those folks thinking!  I was dying of thirst when I got off the 18th!!!

JC

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Ed,
I started thinking about it a bit. I wouldn't change a thing!

Why would you want to compare this hole to a hole at Sand Hills? (Its two completely different places and mind you one of them is #1 in the world in the modern arena and private while the other was just trying to be an excellent public access course in a challenged market, with tremendous golf architecture influenced by the Southern California School of Golf Architecture. (A once prestigious but now very small university that has fallen on hard times!  )

Sometimes we forget that there are many in the public market who have a very difficult time playing the Sport of Golf. They don't hit the ball far and they have trouble chipping and putting--Lord knows some of us on this Discussion Group have the same problems--but with Rustic, the mantra was sort of like, "lets give them something that they will want to return to time and time again." Its designed for 80K rounds a year and if your going to fit that many people on the course in one year, you have to make it where its still going to be challenging and yet not stretch it where its going to be over five hours to play a round--much in an environment that is conducive to lost golf balls because of the tall natural grasses.

This is why Rustic succeeds because it is a fun course to play, they are getting the 80K a year and making a fortune while doing it. Yet the course is totally natural in appearance and is unlike any golf course built in SoCal in the last 65+ years, and the guys building acheived every goal they set before they started

Giving the people one or two holes on the front where they aren't going to have to fear losing a golf ball like they did on #holes 5, 6, 7 & 8 (when the foxtails are tall) isn't that far out of line in my opinion. Would have I liked to see the hole have more obvious strategy to it? If it was my own personal course--absolutely! But as far as SoCal is concerned, I would rather the majority of people that play the course play it because they find it to be unlike anything they have ever seen before, and they have questions why. Because frankly, there is no excuse for the 30+/- courses built here in the last 10 years not to be just like it.

Another example Ed is many can find fault with a course like The Valley Club of Montecito not being a very strategic course when considering its designer and his other designs.  These are the people which I like to consider very blind and are not much in touch with what a golf course is and what it should be.

They don't understand, that paticular golf course (The Valley Club) is PERFECT for its element and its environment. To make it anything different then that would have been a crime and truthfully this is why the good people of the Valley Club protect their gem.

Rustic has a path too, and while it has dodged so many bullets in its first three seasons of existence--just the idea the course is there and the beauty that Gil, Geoff, and Jim managed to protect and enhance is just freeking awesome!

You know what it was like, you were out there and saw it when it was being built. I know you feel the same, and its unfortunate you can't play the course as much as you should. I could see an Ed Getka going there after a 18 hour shift at the hosptial that ended at 3:00 in the afternoon, and you had only one thing on your mind--golf--and trying to figure out the best route up that ninth fairway and that Gil, Geoff and Jim were right in just leaving it that way.

Yes, if Ed Getka lived down here I could see that a lot!

[George Pazin]

Tommy -

I'm not entirely sure, but I think I kind of disagree with the premise of your last post. Speaking as a relatively poor golfer, I think an occasional shot from a cross bunker would make things more interesting, as well as having to avoid the occasional bunker while trying to lay up from the odd places I end up.

Of course, I may not be your average mediocre golfer, in terms of what I'm looking for.

I personally like the idea of sprinkling some pot bunkers throughout the low level courses that I play, although they probably wouldn't fit aesthetically.

Kind of an interesting dilemma.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

George,
We are a almost extinct breed of golfer--those who enjoy paying attention to golf architecture and don't have the Game.

At RC #9, its a long hole for those who aren't long. It takes all three shots to get there and more, and it also hapenes to be the most natural contour on any green that's out there. You also have to factor in that your going up hill more then it looks. With the natural contours of the fairway, golfer's like us don't need to think about fairway bunkes up until we get closer to the hole for the approach shot, and its a blind one at that. We're talking a green where a front to center pin placement or a back left pin placement is going to screw with you even more.

Now for interests of the really good golfers out there, yes, maybe it could use another bunker or two out there. I just think if you do it, your going to slow the round down on a course thats got a tee sheet thats filled from daylight till 4:00pm with a slight lull just before twilight.

That might be a question to ask Geoff or Gil: If Rustic Canyon was going to be a totally private club, what would they have different in the design? I think you might have seen some different things, not a lot but some things different then the way they came out.

On #12, personally, I love the hole and look forward to it each time I play it.

[Mike Benham]

... Don't get me wrong, I like the way Rustic #9 plays, in fact I think its in tune perfectly with the rest of the course. But if bunkers were to be added I think I would like to see at least two blind little bunkers similar to the blindness of the coffin bunker and/or one huge nasty bunker similar to Hell somewhere threatening the 2nd shot.  

Tommy -

I humbly disagree that two little blind bunkers might be needed on #9 ...

I believe the understated beauty of the second shot is that you are tempted to hit everything you got or not !!!

And regardless of where you end up, the third shot is a doozy ... the green and the hole location for the day is what makes the hole so difficult to score on.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike, I started thinking about it and you may have missed it, but I did reverse myself on post #45. I think the hole is fine as it is..

[DMoriarty]

For what it is worth, No. 9 is only the second hole without some sort of potentially troublesome feature between the tee and green.  The first such hole is No. 4 another hole which many considere weak off the tee but tough on the approach.  

Can someone please explain how a hole can have a great green yet demand absolutely no positioning for the approach . . . . Thanks.