[Tom_Doak]

I know the cliche answer, and I know that every golf pro would have to say the back nine is more important.

But I was reading the Ballyneal thread and then thought about Pacific Dunes as well and the key to those courses is how quickly you are hooked by them and excited to be out there.  And the same thing is certainly true of Royal County Down and Pine Valley and Crystal Downs.  (And don't forget, Dr. MacKenzie had the nines at Augusta reversed to start with.)

So, is it REALLY important for the back nine to be better, or is that just because of television?  Think about your own favorites before you give me a stock answer.

[Will MacEwen]

On my home course, I would say the front nine is better.  I prefer this as I play lots of nine hole rounds in the evenings, and it is always empty.

That is a simple, selfish reason, but I suspect most members will play more half rounds on the front.

[Bill_McBride]

My personal favorite courses have more of an ebb and flow routing than one nine better than the other.  I like it when there's a relatively easy hole to get away on, and then more difficult and easier holes alternate so there's a breather.  Par 5s can be the easier holes and still offer risk/reward options.  The finish should be demanding and the course should build to that finish.  (That's why it's pretty amazing that Augusta National reversed the opposite nines, but the finishing holes on the back nine are not the exciting holes, it's the risk/reward holes earlier that create the excitement.  #17 and #18 current routing are two of the dullest holes on the course, IMHO.)

Cypress Point does this well, but the arguably three most exciting holes are at the climax.  Does this mean the back nine is better than the front?  I guess that could be argued, although the 18th is always a bit of an anticlimax for me.

Actually I don't think I've ever played a course where one nine is significantly better than the other, although the back nine at Pasatiempo remains my favorite nine holes in golf.  There are a bunch of good holes on the front nine, but the use of the barranca on the back nine wins the contest.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Tom I think probably it is better to have the back nine slightly better, playing the whole round is all part of it and the final parts should perhaps be the best bits, but probably great courses should have as many good holes as possible and if the good holes are fewer should be spaced at intervals in the round, maybe the best way I could describe it if you were a recording artist with 9 hits and you playing live you would'nt bang off the first 9 songs with hits and then finish with the B sides, perhaps the way would be to play the hits well spaced but leaving the million seller towards the end. I think its quite important that nines are not weirdly balanced in terms of greatness/ poorness.

[tlavin]

As long as the last three or four holes are great, it wouldn't matter to me if the front was the better nine.  I don't like being disappointed by a weak hole toward the end of the front nine, but I think the last few holes should be among the best.  There are many old layouts that violate this pet peeve of mine, most notably Cypress Point...

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom -

For what it's worth, my perspective is that of someone who doesn't play very much these days, who tends to play different courses throughout a season, and who isn't very good at judging an entire side, just individual holes.  And all I can say is that the opening few holes establish for me the feel and character and challenge-level of a course, and puts me in a certain frame of mind (for good or ill), usually for the entire rest of the round.   I rarely find that my initial impression (and overall judgement) of a course changes much after the first nine -- even if there are one or two holes on the back that I either like (or don't like) very much. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but that's how I experience it.

Peter

[Carl Rogers]

A good start and a great finish would get my vote.

[Dan Herrmann]

Every golf course has a top 1/3, a middlle 1/3, and a bottom 1/3.    Give me a little of each on each six hole portion.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

Does it matter if the club wanted to host an important tournament or championship such as the U.S. Open?

The Black gets considerable criticism for a weak 18th hole that actually would serve quite well as a 9th hole. A great finish is important for clubs that want that piece of history.

[Jim_Kennedy]

My favorite golf course takes a couple of holes to rev up and then winds down on the last couple of holes.

I'd say that most of the courses that I like follow this same pattern, or at least the same pattern at the end.




 

[DMoriarty]

I think great finishes are overrated, and one of the unfortunate consequences of golf on television.   Courses should be designed for matchplay and too often great holes are wasted if the best holes are saved for last.  At least this is true for me since I am usually closed out by then.  

Prairie Dunes' arguably has a better front nine, as does Crystal Downs in my opinion.   The setup suits both courses well.  

I'd prefer a nice flow, but if I had to choose one over another, I'd take a stronger front nine.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Terry

If you and I got together for a round the complaining might never stop.

Give me a good punch in the face right up front, not a hard punch but a fun punch.

Forget about nines gimme fives and sixes. Ganton, Yale, #2, RMW: the exhilaration felt walking off 5 or 6 is one of the best feelings in the game.

Durban and Southern Pines come out of the gate shooting, too.

Mark

[Michael Whitaker]

Tom - I assume you are referring to courses that leave the golfer with a "big finish." My personal preference are courses that ease you into the round, then mix in the "wow" holes along the way. I have played a good number of courses that are OK in the beginning, relatively dull in the middle, then get interesting with the last 3-4 holes where the architect throws the kitchen sink at you in an effort to leave you with a big impression. Those are not my favorite courses. As I think about it, my favorites are courses with nines that could be played in either order without disappointment.

On further reflection, however, I do enjoy courses with an impressive finishing hole... particularily if it asks for a unique challenge or presents an exciting atmosphere... a few good examples would be Caledonia, Yale, Kingsbarns, and Pebble Beach. Those all have closing holes that were meant to be closing holes. They wouldn't feel right in the middle of a round.

[Dan Moore]

I actually prefer the middle of the course to be the strongest part of the course.  I look at courses as having at least 3 but more often four sections.  Start, front middle, back middle and finish.  The intro is important to set a tone and warm you up to the challenges ahead, but these as a whole don't need to be the best holes.  The middle is where the battle lines are drawn and ebb and flow to these holes is important.  The finish doesn't need to be the best as many matches are already decided before the final holes, but should require quality golf to close out a match.  

Crystal Downs is a great example featuring a strong start with 1 great hole and 3 others that introduce the character of the course, 5-9 being world class superb, 11-15 also superb but with a different characater, and 16-18 finsihing the round or match with holes that may not be as good as the rest (17 is a bit too quirky for a finishing hole imho) , but still requiring quite good play to finish off a match.

At my favorite Lawsonia, I also see 4 distinct segments.  1-4 ( a good start with two very strong holes (2 and 4), 5-8 (great character to 5,7, and 8 with 7 the best hole on the course) , 9-13 (the funky 5-3-5-3-5-3 segment of the course),  and 14-18 requiring very strong play at the end of the match while lacking the charm of the middle sections.  

So I don't think it really matters which nine is better, but the finish (last 3-5 holes), while not needing to be the best part of the course, shouldn't be weak.    

[Dan Herrmann]

Does the answer matter if it's a "match play" or "stroke play" type course?

I love the fact that my home course has a "birdie" hole in the final 3 (#16, a shortish par 5).  Makes matches pretty exciting, but could be a dullard on a course better known for stroke play.

[Tim Bert]

Hard to say if it is "better" to have a great front nine or a great back nine - I'll take one of each please!

Seriously, even if you look at your 3 favorite courses and they each have a better front nine, it could just be that the course in its entirety is better than the other courses you've played.  In some instances the course may be improved if the nines were flipped, so its hard to judge simply based on where they appear in the current routing.  As an example, if course A is your favorite course on the planet and the front nine is better you have to consider the possibility that the course might still even be better if the front nine were the finishing stretch instead.

Of my 5 or 10 favorite courses, I think the common trend is that they have two great nines.  For Pacific Dunes and Ballyneal and Crystal Downs as you mentioned the front nines are certainly "wow" nines, but they each follow it up with a pretty darn good nine as well.  

To really judge this question, one must consider a course with one nine that's mediocre or bad and one nine that's wonderful.  I'll always take the wow nine on the back unless I'm simply offered the option to only play nine.  As an example, who the heck would want to finish on the front nine at Pacific Grove after playing the back nine?  As it stands, I'll line up to play the front just to enjoy the thrill of the holes on the back.

[cary lichtenstein]

I can only say that many times I have been bored to death long before I got to the 4 or 5 closing holes.

I saw wow em early and often and just keep it coming. And wow doesn't mean difficult.

[Richard Hetzel]

Tom,

a great back nine is much more important than a great front nine. I have played many courses with a great front nine, and then wallowed in self pity on the back because the last 9 holes are lackluster. It makes you only want to play the front 9 and then go home.

A decent front 9 that flows into a great back 9 is much more tolerable IMO.

[Brent Hutto]

Our club's course has 27 holes and there's one of the nines I like better than the others. I'm finding over time I much prefer to play my favorite nine as the "back nine" of the day. Now in our case that's also the shortest and easiest (but tighter with more opportunity for lost balls) of the three nines so it may be that I just like having the thought of a good back-nine score to look forward to as I'm double-bogeying the a couple holes on the first nine.

Given that I don't usually hit range balls or practice before a round, I think saving the best for later is probably more enjoyable for me.

[Mike_Young]

Tom,
I have never thought about it as distinct nines...but I do think the great courses have several crescendos through out the course and in most cases they end on a high....it may not be as high as other crescendos during the round and it may have even been a front nine at one time during the life of the course.....I don't know of any great course that has just one high....IMHO
Mike

[Rob Rigg]

I think most courses would be happy with either one

At Ghost Creek, the front nine is probably the best nine on the property, while the back nine has some strategy as is a decent "tournament" nine but not nearly as interesting as the front. The nines on Witch Hollow flow better IMO with strategy and interest.

I really like a course like PD where is there is a nice balance between the two nines. The front is probably stronger but not by a lot. I think the real issue is when one nine totally overshadows the other. It seems like a lot of links courses face this dilemma where often the front nine holes are all out along the ocean and the back nine are inland. It is a major anti-climax.

If the nines are comparable I think either way is fine - it if is all or nothing, I would rather have a great back nine and weak front because then the match will hit its most challenging stretch when it matters and you will reach the 19th with some great memories of the "challenge" on the way in.

A great front and crappy back is the worst. Yippee, then ZZZZ.

[Ben Sims]

I think it's important for golf courses to "set the hook" early.  The best golf courses I've played have "set the hook" early in the round and used a similar technique to keep me engaged throughout the round. Of my top five courses, I'll expound

1) Pac Dunes sets the hook with holes like #2 and #4.  It keeps it with 6, 10-13, 16 and 17.

2) Pasatiempo sets the hook with 3 and 4.  It keeps it with 8, 10, 11, 13, 16, 18.

3) Ballyneal sets the hook with 3 and 4.  It keeps it with every other hole out there.

4) Bandon Trails sets the hook with 1 and 3.  It keeps it with 6, 8, 12, 15, 17.

I feel that if the front nine--in particular one or two holes in the first four--really capture me, there's not a lot a golf course can do on the back nine to lose that feeling.  

In fact Tom, that begs a great question.  Can you think of any courses that start very strong and continually fail to live up the set expectations throughout the round?  Spyglass comes to mind in regards to setting.  For the record, I think Pasa makes a great TV tournament course if it's nines are reversed.  But for the member and public match player, its amazing as it is.

[Joe Hancock]

I'm currently thinking of the question as an analogy to a woman.....tough choice.

Joe

[jim_lewis]

The architect and the members should be very happy if either nine is "great", since few courses can make that claim. Much depends on what you hope to accomplish. If you are looking for high ratings, impress me early. First impressions are hard to change. If you are looking for a tour event, impress me late. Just don't make the second nine a lot harder than the front. I always seem to get one less stroke on the back where I seem to need it most. In the final analysis, just take what the land gives you.

Jim Lewis

[Mike Nuzzo]

make every hole as good as you can and let the chips fall

I like the front of Wolf Point a bit better (more unusual) and I prefer the routing that way
15-17 is a hell of a stretch though

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()