[Kevin Pallier]

The course would not get my green fee - based on that picture alone.

[Lou_Duran]

Is this some kind of rorschach test to expose our deep seated architectural biases?

Golf is so not one dimensional as some might try to make it.  This thread does demonstrate the power of a picture to further a specific agenda, whatever that may be.  Those who have looked at marketing brochures for real estate know what I mean.

Here is another example.

http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.php?title=Vietnam_Execution

[Kalen Braley]

I don't know if longer or shorter shadows means its necessarily downhill or flat.  My first instincts told me they are just simply taller trees and hence casting a longer shadow.

I must say my interest has been picqued because as Joe says, I suspect thier will be at least a mild surprise when the ground lvl pics are shown and the architect is revealed.  So let me go on record as saying, some trees need to be chopped down at the very least if for no other reason to add some options to that right side.

[Kalen Braley]

Here are the main culprits purely based on the aerials, that would seem to be prime suspects for removal to mostly open up that right hand side.  It could potentially make the hole shorter and/or a viable option to get home in 2. 

[Steve Salmen]

Since everyone did such a great job criticizing the hole, I looked a long time to find something remotely positive about this thing.

The water and greenside bunker affect the decision whether to go for the green in two shots.  Neither should come into play for the third.

[Kalen Braley]

The water and greenside bunker affect the decision whether to go for the green in two shots.  Neither should come into play for the third.

For the pros or scratch golfers maybe...for everyone else they are likely in play especially if that green is elevated as it looks with a steep bank down to the pond.

[cary lichtenstein]

This hole reminds me of the 17th hole at Mission Inn, near Orlando.

I really like this hole, although it is way too tough for most players.

You must hit 3 well placed shots, which include height, distance and direction.

[Niall C]

why have the bunker when the pond is there ?

[Mark Pearce]

The green/bunker formation reminds me of the 7th on the Priestman Course at Slaley Hall.  The bunker there serves to rescue balls which carry the water but don't reach the green and which would, absent the bunker, roll back into the water.

[David Stamm]

The topography is pretty much flat on this hole. There isn't an elevated tee or drop off in the fw. The hole is 473 yards from the tips, a short par 5. I think the first set of trees that have to be carried off the tee are about 20 feet tall and the ones in the middle of the fw are about 25-30 feet tall.

[Kalen Braley]

The topography is pretty much flat on this hole. There isn't an elevated tee or drop off in the fw. The hole is 473 yards from the tips, a short par 5. I think the first set of trees that have to be carried off the tee are about 20 feet tall and the ones in the middle of the fw are about 25-30 feet tall.

Ahh come on Dave,

Can you at least tell us which state this hole is located in?  The suspense is killing me. 

[Lynn_Shackelford]

I have actually played this hole twice.  It was lacking a bit in turf, as it was new, but that wasn't the biggest problem.  I think there are two ways to play it.

1. Hit driver high over the first trees, hope that you land far enough past or in the second set of trees (and the ball doesn't stick in the trees), so that you have a shot at the green.  But the green is not receptive to a fairway wood so that is not too appealing.
2. Hit 7 iron off the tee avoiding the trees.  Hit 8 iron for second shot and again hope to avoid the trees that are on the right.  In other words play down the left side of the fairway.
Now you are about 160 yards out and you hit to the green.  Then you are finished with the round and you wondered just what kind of experience that was.

[Tony_Muldoon]

The green shape is a reduced, reversed, mirror image of the lake.  Odd.

[Steve Salmen]

Here's a thought.  If the tee was moved to the left a little and forward about 40 yards, and all the trees on the left removed or moved another 20 yds left of present location,  I think it would be a good hole giving the player multiple options for the second shot, provided he stays left.  The hole would be a longish par 4 and the bunker would come in play with much greater frequency.  The shape of the green also works nicely since the player is coming to in on more of a straight line.  In it's current form, the green is relatively shallow for second shots and third shots from the right side.

This seemingly awful hole actually has good potential IMHO.

[Lyne Morrison]

Without being overly critical this is a good example of not acknowledging the 90 odd percent of golfers who are usually happy to make reasonable contact with their ball without the added negotiation of unnecessary hazards. Golf ceases to be fun when holes are tricked up to an excessive degree - and that can't be a good business model for an owner - imo.

On the sketch below I have removed some of the offending trees to open the fairway corridor and added a forward tee - because golf isn't just a game for blokes..

For a bit of fun the blue line shows the the long 'dudes' (who spend too much time hitting balls) setting up their eagle - which is possibly what someone is trying to prevent here hence all the obstacles - but hey these golfers are leaving the green happy.

The purple line is based on historic accounts of Garlands play - a demanding approach for this lefty -- but he is putting for birdie after a fine display of skill.    and he is happy now too!

Cheers - Lyne

[Bryan Izatt]

It looks sort of similar to the second hole at Valderrama, although that is a par 4.

But, after much searching, it is Buenaventura Golf Course, designed by the esteemed Forrest Richardson in 2005.

Perhaps Forrest could elucidate us on the thinking behind the hole.  Maybe all the trees on site were protected? Otherwise it looks real odd.

[jkinney]

Can't judge a hole from an aerial. Show some photos with a 135mm lens from ground level, please.

[Damon Groves]

What is the point of the fairway cut right of the trees?  The gutsy play over the trees to the sliver of fairway is rewarded with an impossible cut shot over lake and bunker?!?!  Is there a severe drop from tee to fairway?

I agree. Does not seem to make a lot of sense.

[Bryan Izatt]

An alternate look at the same hole with sun at a different angle.

[Doug Siebert]

Well, if that's only 473 tee to green I guess there's nothing stopping me from just aiming over those two trees in the middle of the fairway.  If I hit it straight its an easy 7 iron into the green.  If I hit it crooked and don't have a good line at the green, no big deal just chip it forward a bit in front of the lake somewhere and wedge it on.  Its not so much a risk and reward proposition for longer hitters as a hit and hope, with a rather mild penalty for failing to hit the tee shot properly since a 473 yard hole with that kind of tree trouble is one where I'm not complaining about a 5.

However, for a shorter hitter, especially one who struggles to be able to hit his/her shots very high, it seems rather a cruel hole...

[Bryan Izatt]

The only way that this hole is 473 yards is from the back of the tee to the back of the green.  Why was the hole squeezed in as a par 5?  It would make more sense as a par 4 and with some of the trees removed.  Could it be that the it was a misguided effort to get the par up to 70 and keep the tips over 6,000 yards.  Heaven forbid that it might be a par 69 and under 6,000 yards from the back tees. 

[Tom Huckaby]

I have to believe it was definitely stretched to be a par five for exactly the reasons you state, Bryan.

I also believe that sad though it is, those issues matter a lot at this course.  Make it par 69 and less than 6000 and they get a lot less business, I have to believe.  People wouldn't see it as a "real" golf course.  Not that this is RIGHT in any way shape or form... but I do believe it is the reality for this public course which is already seen as the bastard step-child in its area.

It would be a more fair golf hole with the center trees removed, for sure.  I recall standing on that tee thinking what the hell do I do here?

However.. as it stands now... it sure as heck is unique.  I am really not sure if more fair equals better in this instance... Maybe, maybe not. This course does need things like this to stand out.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

It looks sort of similar to the second hole at Valderrama, although that is a par 4.

But, after much searching, it is Buenaventura Golf Course, designed by the esteemed Forrest Richardson in 2005.

Perhaps Forrest could elucidate us on the thinking behind the hole.  Maybe all the trees on site were protected? Otherwise it looks real odd.

Brian,

Interesting you should mention this because Google Earth has an aerial of the course while it was still under construction.

[Sean Leary]

I have to believe it was definitely stretched to be a par five for exactly the reasons you state, Bryan.

I also believe that sad though it is, those issues matter a lot at this course.  Make it par 69 and less than 6000 and they get a lot less business, I have to believe.  People wouldn't see it as a "real" golf course.  Not that this is RIGHT in any way shape or form... but I do believe it is the reality for this public course which is already seen as the bastard step-child in its area.

It would be a more fair golf hole with the center trees removed, for sure.  I recall standing on that tee thinking what the hell do I do here?

However.. as it stands now... it sure as heck is unique.  I am really not sure if more fair equals better in this instance... Maybe, maybe not. This course does need things like this to stand out.

TH

Huck,

This hole reminds me a bit of 18 at Diablo, except for the first set of trees and the water hazard. Thoughts?

[Tom Huckaby]

I have to believe it was definitely stretched to be a par five for exactly the reasons you state, Bryan.

I also believe that sad though it is, those issues matter a lot at this course.  Make it par 69 and less than 6000 and they get a lot less business, I have to believe.  People wouldn't see it as a "real" golf course.  Not that this is RIGHT in any way shape or form... but I do believe it is the reality for this public course which is already seen as the bastard step-child in its area.

It would be a more fair golf hole with the center trees removed, for sure.  I recall standing on that tee thinking what the hell do I do here?

However.. as it stands now... it sure as heck is unique.  I am really not sure if more fair equals better in this instance... Maybe, maybe not. This course does need things like this to stand out.

TH

Huck,

This hole reminds me a bit of 18 at Diablo, except for the first set of trees and the water hazard. Thoughts?

YES!

Great call. Trees in the way, same sort of thing.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()