Mike Y, unfortunately Perception is Reality. I've looked but can't find "golf must be fair" in the Rules of Golf. But that doesn't stop the F word from constantly being used by golfers when things don't fit their game or ideals. I say Golf and Fair are 2 four letter words that shouldn't be used in the same sentence. Golfers feel Rub of the green or luck shouldn't play into things (unless it directly benefits them)
If they get it on the green, they feel they should have a relatively straightforward (ie single-breaking) putt for Birdie. A double-breaking putt is tolerated if the rest of the hole is beneign. But once you start throwing triple and greater- breaking putts, they start looking for the nearest tree to hang the GCA from because it negates their achievement of getting on in Prox.
I tend to agree that a hole should be Designed from the green back. But a course is a progression of holes and that dictates that the hole be Routed from the tee.
The slopes leading into and off the green are probably the biggest defense attribute. How receptive or rejective they are will be the #1 determinate of the difficulty of the hole. Take the pinned section of the Ballyneal #7 green shown. The punch bowl slopes will kick a short shot long but will be a backboard for long shots. The strong left-to left cant of the resulting swales demands that a shot be played to the right of the pin or a cut shot into the grain of the contours. These are tricky to get just right. If the slopes get too steep, it is possible that a long shot into the back slope and a short shot off the ridge could result in the exact same putt (kinda like a skateboard U-ramp). As this is a short 4, one can surmise that it will be approached with a high iron, so the GCA can get away with asking for a more precise shot. Would this green be good for a 485 yd par 4 playing into the wind, I, personally don't think so.
As for defending par at the green, I don't think it should be an all or nothing propositioin. For rhythum and variety, I like to place the premium on different aspects of the game on different holes. On some, execution of the tee shot is more important than the approach, provided one properly execute the tee shot. On others, the tee shot isn't as critical as the approach.
And still others the premium is on the green. As the round progresses, combinations are employed to require successive executions, then relaxed back to one if a breather is sought.
I believe the golfer plays against the course - so he's providing the offense, the GCA has to defend the course and sets up the defense. Everyone likes a close game, blow-outs one-way or the other are no fun. So, to tie-in to the "What make a Bad golf course bad" thread, if the GCA makes the course too well defended and beats the crap out of the golfer on every hole or too easier and the golfer isn't challenged, it's no fun and not exciting. The trick is, especially since some golfers want more of a challenge than others (Type A competetors vs Type B walk-in-the-parkers) to reach a happy medium.
Mike N, while not my cup of tea, I have done a couple Rollercoaster greens. The 10th at High Meadow Ranch in TX is about 16k sf but is more a Big-Honking segmented green. We also did a 15k sf 'C' shape green with slopes and tiers but not undulating on the Anchor hole on the Harborside Port course. The problem I have is with wildly undulating greens is it takes a lot of expensive to construct and to maintain real estate to produce an adequete number of pin locations. Plus most of the time, we have no idea who the super will be at the time of creatiion. If you don't get the right guy, you could end up with a disaster on your hands and all the blame placed at your feet.
Also, I believe that the more 3-dimensional greens are, the more 1-dimensional they are to read. The big breaks telegraph the line, while I find, better players have more difficulty with more subtile breaks. I like to try to plant a seed of doubt into the players read of the line. Like Pete Dye says, "once you get those guys thinking, you've got 'em". You will find my greens to contain much stronger features around the perimeter 10'-15' but be more subtile in the interior, pinnable area. I will break up larger green with small rolls, tiers and punchbowls. but I tend to shy away from features that subject to excessive drying and wetness. Greens with Diddle bumps tend to have crispy nobs and soggy swales. The grass grows differently and can putt differently. The swales can become more thatchy while the nobs thin out. Same with big tier slopes (deck ramps) and roll-overs. all the water collects at the base, sucked by gravity out of the higher area. And trying to hand water the highs just ends up with more moisture in the lows. And we all know where Poa likes to thrive.
If you make something that's going to require extra effort to maintain, those resources are going to be pulled from somewhere else, unless you have a big maintenance budget.