One of the very best I know of is the 4th at St Enodoc - this is the sort of hole I would call supreme architecture. It has two principal things in its favour. First, it is a great hole which serves as a connector hole much like we see for par 3s - using a very messed up piece of land. Second, either option, going for it or laying up, is very uncomfortable - nobody gets a free pass.
Another very cool example is Beau Desert's 9th. While more forgiving than the St Enodoc's 4th, it too has two uncomfortable choices to be made off the tee. The safe play is to lay-up in the valley and be left with semi-blind severely uphill approach over a bunker and to a smallish green tilting very hard to the left. If one goes for it and misses short right, right, left or long he will do well to make a par. A great thing is, its often better to risk the trees left and hope for a good lie than to miss to an open spot right. The yardage of 250ish is so tempting that many have a bash. It takes extreme self control to lay-up.
#9 at Carne is another example. Not quite as good as the above two, but probably better liked by most golfers. This is a rising drivable par 4 protected by a large hollow covering the right side of the fairway. Here is a look at the green and the large hollow after a layup.
Of course, there is always Stoneham's 13th. A blind uphiller to a very narrow green. A mid-green bunker right protects against the bail-out to the right (away from trees hard to the left of the green) off the tee. A very simple design which is incredibly effective.
I think the problem with these sorts of holes is people just don't get them. Its no fault with the architecture, its the golfer who is at fault.
Ciao