Hardest Hole You Have Ever Played?

[John Mayhugh]

I corrected myself in a previous post -- did you not see it or read it ?

Please show where you corrected yourself.  I cannot find it. 

Please show where you corrected yourself.  I still cannot find it.

I didn't make the green sound like the Postage Stamp at Troon to anyone but you.  I stated the green was 4,800 square feet.  That's about 60% larger than the Postage Stamp green.  The 8th green at Wolf Creek is about 20% smaller than the 17th green at TPC Sawgrass. 

I'm comfortable in saying that I'm at least as willing to listen to alternative viewpoints as you are.   

Now what about this Kansas comparison that you made? 

[Matt_Ward]

John:

The landing area for the 8th is sufficient -- provided one plays a solid shot and does so from tees that are appropriate. When someone heads to Wolf Creek you are playing one of the most demanding sloped courses ANYWHERE. John, the course personnel do insist on people understanding the course and what they are up against. The problem comes with people thinking they can get away with impunity on such a course and then bitch and moan when they find out otherwise.

Your idea has been to suggest that the 8th is beyond playability. I have said otherwise and stressed that using the 150-yard tee boxes would work best for roughly 3/4's, if not more, of the people playing the course. I also point out that there are other landing areas beyond the green itself -- short works -- so does out to the right. One other thing -- the green is quite deep and again you failed to admit that the EFFECTIVE DISTANCE FROM THE 217-YARD MARKS - is considerably shorter than the posted distance. In reality, unless wind is in one's face the actual yardage to play the shot is no more than 190-200 yards. I also pointed out -- which was either ignored or not understood -- that the hidden green dimension from the 217-yard markers determines plenty of the intimidation elements people have when standing on that tee box.
 
John, I've written an alternative to your original post several times and frankly like so many posts on this site it becomes nothing more than a stone wall for certain people to possibly consider the views of others. I also pointed out where I corrected myself in the application of the Kansas tagline. End of story ...

[John Mayhugh]

Matt,
I stand by my original post.  I just responded to your hyperbole with some actual facts.

Hold on there, partner!  The green is the size of Kansas?  Are you sure about that?

The green is about 4800 square feet.  Decent size, but not what I would call huge.

The 8th green is 35 yards deep.  But the big problem with hitting it is this: starts out 20 yards wide in the front and it narrows to about 13 yards in the back. It's hard to take advantage of the wider area of the green since there's water right in front.

Also, while there may be more room to the right than you see, there are about 15 yards between the right side of the green and the cart path. Right of the cart path is the "environmentally sensitive" desert that also plays as a hazard.


You can distort my argument all you want.  The fact is that you exaggerated the size of that green in the process of defending your beloved Wolf Creek.

And I still haven't seen where you corrected yourself.  You may have shifted your argument to be marginally more reasonable, but corrected yourself?  As in saying something like "I overstated" or "I exaggerated?"  As in admitting you were wrong?  No, I don't think you ever corrected yourself.  Can you help me out and just cut and paste what you consider a correction?  Perhaps I've overlooked it.

Thanks!

[Matt_Ward]

John:

The green is big enough to handle the shot required. If you're still so wet in your shorts about my Kansas comment get over it.

My God man -- the green is FREAKIN 36 YARDS DEEP. Do YOU need Kansas to actually hit the target ? John -- lighten up and understand that I said that figuratively. I also added -- which you can't seem to understand -- that the effective playing length of the hole is shorter than the 217-yard marks because of the elevated tee. You also have bailout areas -- which you have never admitted as being sufficient. You also have failed to acknowledge that the 150-yard option tee works for the sheer bulk of people who might entertain playing Wolf Creek. On and on and on it goes but never an acknowledgement from you.

John, I restated my usage of the word --- how bout you come clean in realizing what's been brought forward by me? You want movement -- I showed it. You need to realize that your previous statement of, "I'm comfortable in saying that I'm at least as willing to listen to alternative viewpoints as you are" is great in theory but poor in practice from your end.

Keep it in mind before your next retort ...

[Bill Gayne]

The corral hole at Bethpage was a hard hole.

[John Mayhugh]

Matt,
I cannot acknowledge that the 150 yard tee shot option works for the majority of people. I did not play the hole from those tees so I'm unable to render a valid opinion.  In my experiences there, the staff did not make any sort of recommendations about which tees to play.  They certainly didn't suggest we move up a set of tees on certain (or any) holes.  

I can speak only for myself, but the depth of that green isn't all that helpful as from 200 yards I probably have a wider dispersion left to right than I do in carry distance.   I realize that "big as Kansas" was a figure of speech. I didn't take it literally as that's just ridiculous.  However, I may have misinterpreted your meaning.  When I read "big as Kansas," I took that to mean that this is a very large green (as Kansas is probably in the top 20% of states in area). Did you mean it some other way?  All I did was point out the actual size of the green to show that the green wasn't huge.  Not small, but not huge.  I would think you more than most might appreciate dealing with facts rather than just opinions.

From my two plays of the hole, the bailout area did not seem to be large.  Of course, part of that is that you cannot see much of it from the tee I shouldn't have been playing from.  If you say the bailout area is large enough to represent good architecture, I'll accept your opinion.  It just doesn't match the one held by the eight people in my group.  

I'm still amused by how you characterize shifting your argument as a sort of correction of a misstatement, but I've given you enough of a hard time.  Merry Christmas, Matt.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

What BS and a cop-out.

The 150 yard marks provide for a TOTAL VIEW OF THE HOLE IN QUESTION and clearly when you have that much added danger to the hole -- the idea that the bulk of people can handle the added distance is inane.

John - I trust you are just being silly -- you cannot be remotely serious.

If someone is hitting a short iron -- the hole is no more than a 7-9 iron from 150 then the green landing area -- in full view I might add -- does help them when compared to the next tee box.

The staff at Wolf Creek do speak to each group -- if yours was not then consider yourself out of that loop. I have spoken to management and they are extremely concerned that people only handle what they can reasonably handle ... playing from the appropriate tee boxes make their day a bit more enjoyable than just simply firing away with no realistic opportunity for any success.
 
John, I understand full well the demands the 8th presents. I always play the hole from the 245-yard marks and it's a beast -- on the same page with such a hole like the 17th at The Ocean Course.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

I cut off my last reply --

I can understand that people who see bailout areas would want them to be especially large so that a generalized misshot can be made without going into big numbers for the hole.

John, you touched upon something I mentioned at the outset -- the view from the 217-yard plate obscures the bailout area and the intimidation factor grows several times over before any player pulls the trigger on their approach. No doubt when people play the hole for the first time they'd better drive / walk up a ways to get a better sense of what's expected. Far too many people believe the right side is deadsville and then yank an approach to the left and a quick watery grave.

The 150-yd tee boxes can provide a thrill ride for the average player without overburdening them. Understanding one's limitations as Eastwood adised, is the only remedy when playing Wolf Creek.

John -- if you want to talk about a more unfair hole than #8 -- check out the tee situation you face with the 9th.

[archie_struthers]

 

the 11th at CC of Charleston is harder  ......lol

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

There is no bailout on # 5 at PV.
There is no alternate play, no safe haven for your tee shot.

It's a PURE pass/fail tee shot.

It's an intimidating view and it requires a heroic, accurate carry.

Tee shots hit left and right can befall the same fate as tee shots hit short.

And, just because you finally reach the green, doesn't mean that your work is done.

[John Mayhugh]

Matt,
I haven't played the hole from the 150 yard tees.  I did take a photo from there, but I didn't actually play that tee shot.  You've often made the assertion that you have to play a hole to render a valid opinion, so I'm just commenting on what I actually know.  No need feeding you more ammunition.   

It does seem that there should be enough room from that tee.  I think the angle is a bit friendlier as well.  I just didn't play it from there.

You might reconsider your comment about the white tee shot just being a 7-9 iron.  There are a LOT of golfers that woudl need more than a 7 iron to achieve a 150 yard carry, even downhill. 

The staff at Wolf Creek did speak to our group, but it was only to caution us on cart rules, cart speeds, desert/ESA rules, and to ask us what set of tees we wanted to play from.  Since the blues are listed at 6436 and the whites at 5820, we selected the blues.  No one on the WC staff recommended that we play from the whites, and we wouldn't have listed if they had.  No 7-15 handicaps are going to select a 5820 yard course.  The staff also didn't suggest that we mix up tee shots on certain (or any) holes.  While I agree that is an option, it seems that with the difficulty of WC the architect might have made whites somewhat more appealing (say maybe 6100 total). 

Even though we KNEW the bailout area was there the second time around, it's still hard to perceive it's there. 

The 9th is a tough tee shot, but from the blue tees you don't have to hit it any farther than from the tee on the 8th, but there is much more landing area.  From the tees that you use, it might be a beast.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

There are so many but #8 at Pebble was one of my early favorites.

[Matt_Ward]

Pat:

Don't know if you have played the 17th at The Ocean Course at Kiawah or the 8th at Wolf Creek but if you haven't -- I can tell you after having played the 5th at PV plus the two aforementioned. The PV hole is in third place for overall demands.

It's not a knock to PV's 5th but more an acknowledgement to the hole I just mentioned.

John:

Fair enough -- but playing from the 150-yard marks is fairly ordinary because you can see all the demands and have far less club to pull it off. That was my main point - when compared to the 217-yard tee boxes. The angle is also much more friendlier and the club of choice for most players would be a short iron -- save for any massive headwind one might encounter. You also need to realize that the 150-yard shot is much shorter because of the elevated tee box area. Is it possible someone would need a 5-iron or more. Sure it's possible. Likely such people would be connected to an ICU machine if that's the case because it provides such a dropshot situation -- save for any headwind one encounters.

The bailout area is hard to realize because it's blocked by the hillside on the right. It's tough to conceptualize that you have that much more room to that side than to the left side of the hole.

John, my point on the 9th was that the carry was all on the player to achieve. Big difference to what you experience on the 8th hole.

My point on choosing different tee boexes is something each group needs to determine. Clearly, the first time around you may have not thought aout that option but clearly the second round there would have made you think about doing it given the demands dictated by the design. You are correct -- a different tee optoins / arrangement would have worked better -- say making the 8th at 150 yards for those playing at your level and then adding the back tees for lower handicap types.

 
 

[Bill_McBride]

9th Hole at Muirfield.  I played it 3 times in a row (late in the day and no else was on the course) and could not par the dang hole.

Paul, here we go again, did you play it as a par 5 (medal tee) or par 4 (yellow visitor tee)?  If you can avoid the OB left and hay right and fairway bunkers, it's an easy 5 and very difficult 4.

Bill, we played it as a Par 4 in 2001, I assume it was the visitor tee. That is what was on the score card.

The same thing happens to the unsuspecting visitor at North Berwick, where #8 is a 520 yard par 5 for the medal player and a ball buster 470 yard par 4 for the visitor on the yellow tee box.

I just kind of ignore it and play like it's a par 5......

[mike_beene]

13 at Jeff B's Cowboys is the toughest 3 shotter I have played.600 yards into prevailing wind with layup between a creek on left and unplayable woods right. In second place is 11 at TOC.

[Sandy Smith]

Jud ,

I have to  say you might have hit it . 14 at BT did not come to my mind at first but after some thought ....... it might just be the hardest.

[Matt_Ward]

On the subject of tough holes one that comes to mind for me is the long par-4 16th at Desert Mountain's Geronimo Course. The gold tee had the hole at roughly 490 yards and it's location was on the same side as the preceding hole -- the gold tee was also located on an angle in which you had to hit one's tee shot across this canyon and the spread of distance to cover the canyon was truly intimidating -- especially when facing a predictable SW wind.

The hole forced you to play wider to the right because the carry was closer but it still demanded a pure shot. The spread of distance from the gold to the next tee box was roughly 50 or so yards -- but the next tee box was on the closer side to the canyon thereby reducing the amount of carry needed.

If when you hit the tee shot across the approach is equally daunting to a green framed by a few bunkers and pitched from back-to-front with a few internal contours.

I have not had the opportunity to return to DM for quite some time but in my last round there the gold tee appeared to be abandoned or was not kept in good repair.

Jack Nicklaus was known in his early days for creating very hard par-4's -- the 16th at Geronimo, when played from the gold tees, would certainly make my short list of hardest holes I have ever played.

[Dan Herrmann]

Hardest hole I've ever seen:  PV #5.
Hardest hole I've ever played:  Bandon Trails 14 - all due to the green.

[Ronald Montesano]

The one instance I played Bandon Trails, I hit driver up the left side, pitched on to the green and two putted for par.  It was nerves of steel that were formed at Sheridan Park (ha ha, Dan)...actually, it was fortune and execution.  For whatever reason, although I saw the fairway lower right, I did not see it in my mind's eye and hit the tee ball in position A.  The pitch went to the back of the green and stuck, and the rest is history.

Have we made a distinction here between "hard" and unfair?  I can tick off about six holes from Joe "Middle" Finger's MONSTER at the CONCORD that, from the tips, are damned near impossible, starting with that long par five, either #4 or #13, depending on the order of the nines.  Next, have we validated or eliminated old lady par as an element of "hardest"?