News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: THM Redan! TEPaul Div 8th Seed Tamarack #7 vs 9th Seed Kingsley #16
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2011, 09:56:55 AM »
Kingsley's has no charm at all. Tamarack is a decent hole

John - KC's 16th has no charm at all?  Please expound.

The cart path, the superfluous bunkers in front of the tee, that stand of timber, it just looks off. It could just be the photography though. In any event, I don't see a great golf hole here
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Andrew Lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: THM Redan! TEPaul Div 8th Seed Tamarack #7 vs 9th Seed Kingsley #16
« Reply #26 on: June 01, 2011, 11:08:00 AM »
Kingsley's has no charm at all. Tamarack is a decent hole

John - KC's 16th has no charm at all?  Please expound.

The cart path, the superfluous bunkers in front of the tee, that stand of timber, it just looks off. It could just be the photography though. In any event, I don't see a great golf hole here

John -

Those bunkers aren't -- or at least shouldn't be -- in play on 16, as they are designed to catch errant approaches on 15.  And the trees are there to protect players teeing off from the blue markers on 17 -- a popular line into 16 is a low, hard shot into the large bowl just left of where they stand.  From the back tees (225 yards), this can require a pretty long club.

I think 16 is a very good hole, but wouldn't necessarily argue that it is great -- in fact, for me it probably ranks fourth of the course's five par 3's.  But I do have a hard time seeing how anybody who has played the hole would say it lacks charm.

Best, Andrew

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back