Why not more holes like #8 at ANGC?

[jeffwarne]

Great way to get player uphill
Impossible to lose a ball(assuming you don't plant azaleas). Lots of open space
shared fairway with 9 allows good use of space.
Strategic layup for proper angle
Trees setting up a late second shot dogleg-great potential for big # with trees and mounds.
mounds repelling second shot unless perfectly shaped
one bunker on hole protects trying to open second shot (in my opinion this could be a smaller bunker which might tempt one to challenge it more often)

[Mark Saltzman]

Jeff, though it is a par-4, would you say that 13 at Palmetto is similar?  I love the use of a single bunker to protect the ideal line into the green. Simple. Effective. Efficient.

[Matthew Rose]

Always thought it was one of the more underrated holes at Augusta.

To get the favorable angle on the second, one must challenge the bunker. Some thought must be put into any layup because the green is long and the pin position may cause the distance to vary quite a lot.

A bunkerless green but a great deal of short game options. Traditionally the most difficult par-five at Augusta, yet eagles are not entirely out of the question.

I quite like #8.

[David Royer]

I ve had the good fortune to sit at 8 many times. I ll be there Friday through Sunday. I think the green is under appreciated. Depending on the pin position the swale in the green can greatly affect the outcome on the third shot.  The third shot lends itself to a classic demonstration on flighting wedges.  The ability to properly flight the approach shot is critical to the likelihood of making 4.  The angle of the approach shot in relation to the orientation of green is also under appreciated. While the player is given wide expanse on the second shot, the angle to the green determines the width of the green on the third shot.  IMHO

[Rich Goodale]

It's hard to build great "par" 5's but the Committee at ANGC has managed to do it with #8 (not to mention 13, 15 and even 2...).  I love the stratgegic challenge off the tee for the flat bellies and the options for all of us thereafter.  The green is a poster child for the lack of need for bunkering.  It is the hole on the front 9 that intrests me most and probably in the top 3-5 of all the holes on the course.

Thanks for bringing this up, Jeff.

[BCrosby]

The 8th is one of the most under-appreciated holes at ANGC.

Particularly so after Nelson and Finger restored Mack's original green, the first and only attempt to restore a feature of the circa 1935 course.

I too don't know why the 8th isn't used more often as a model for how to route a course to get back up to a higher elevation.

Bob

[Matthew Petersen]

Wonderful hole.

A couple thoughts I didn't see already posted:

- The better player who wishes to reach the green in two from the tee must challenge the bunker and the best way to do so is to hit a left-to-right drive. If successful, the second then needs to be played right-to-left. I always enjoy a hole that calls for two differently shaped shots.

- For players who lay-up options are still rife. I can't recall any other wedge shot where pros hit so many different kind of shots, even to the same hole location. You'll see plenty of players try to lob it in, some trying to get close to chip, some laying way back to leave a full wedge, and others trying the skip-and-stop. Anytime you get the best players in the world to try all kinds of different approaches, you probably have something good going.

[Peter Pallotta]

As per the article embedded in another thread, Dr. Mac envisioned the 17th-now-8th as follows:

No. 17—Championship 490 Yards

A three-shot hole up hill. The green will be in a punch bowl surrounded by large hillocks nine to twelve feet high. It will be completely visible for the third shot, and a player, who is sufficiently long to get up in two, will be able to define the position of the green owing to the size of the surrounding hillock. It may be compared to the seventeenth Green at Muirfield, (Scotland).

Peter

[jeffwarne]

Thanks guys

But why not more  holes like this
?

[Matthew Sander]

Jeff,

I'll take a stab referring directly to two of the items you listed above.

1. Shared fairways can be precarious. Specifically in the case of #8 at ANGC, the shared portion seems to put those coming off of #9 in direct line with wayward attempts at reaching the green in two or even longer third shots.

2. On one of the other ANGC threads, I believe several pointed out that the mounding at #8 looks particularly artificial. If the designer's/developer's goal is a natural looking course, then this may be an issue. Personally, I have no problem with the mounding on #8 as its placement serves a golf specific strategic purpose. It is not superfluous mounding on the periphery, rather an obstacle to be avoided or in many instances used to the player's benefit.

That said, I really like the 8th hole and agree with your initial post. I'm just trying to noodle your question.

[jeffwarne]

Jeff,

I'll take a stab referring directly to two of the items you listed above.

1. Shared fairways can be precarious. Specifically in the case of #8 at ANGC, the shared portion seems to put those coming off of #9 in direct line with wayward attempts at reaching the green in two or even longer third shots.

2. On one of the other ANGC threads, I believe several pointed out that the mounding at #8 looks particularly artificial. If the designer's/developer's goal is a natural looking course, then this may be an issue. Personally, I have no problem with the mounding on #8 as its placement serves a golf specific strategic purpose. It is not superfluous mounding on the periphery, rather an obstacle to be avoided or in many instances used to the player's benefit.

That said, I really like the 8th hole and agree with your initial post. I'm just trying to noodle your question.

True, the mounds on #8 are very artificial looking.
Along with green grass cut to fractions of an inch, along with bunkers filled with sand cut into clay.
But almost every course has those two features.

Minimalism/naturalism is cool on certain sites and in certain enviroments,but the fact that it's currently popular shouldn't deter one from building/enjoying great holes with created features(when appropriate) on a created landscape.

Even without the mounds, I really enjoy the dogleg second shot feature created by the trees.
The mounds really make you think about your second and third shot though, and make the hole unique in American championship golf

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob Crosby,

I think you need three things in combination.

The terrain.

The location in the routing.

An architect who's not afraid to introduce a template

It's a rather simplistic hole that didn't have the exposure of the back nine par 5's and the drama that water provides.

[BCrosby]

Pat Mucci -

The 8th gets a remarakable amount of golfing mileage out of a very simple design. As mathematicians say, it is an elegant solution to a difficult architectural problem. 

That the 8th is less dramatic than the 13th and 15th is not much of a criticism. Not many holes are.

Bob

   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat Mucci -

The 8th gets a remarakable amount of golfing mileage out of a very simple design. As mathematicians say, it is an elegant solution to a difficult architectural problem. 

That the 8th is less dramatic than the 13th and 15th is not much of a criticism. Not many holes are.


Bob,

One of the things I found interesting about the 8th and most holes with fairway bunkers is that the bunkers are so large that they look much closer than they are, and therefore, they look like you can carry them.  But, rarely can you do that.

It is a simple hole but just ask Greg Norman if it can thwart scoring.

   

[Ben Sims]

Pat Mucci -

The 8th gets a remarakable amount of golfing mileage out of a very simple design. As mathematicians say, it is an elegant solution to a difficult architectural problem.  

That the 8th is less dramatic than the 13th and 15th is not much of a criticism. Not many holes are.


Bob,

One of the things I found interesting about the 8th and most holes with fairway bunkers is that the bunkers are so large that they look much closer than they are, and therefore, they look like you can carry them.  But, rarely can you do that.

It is a simple hole but just ask Greg Norman if it can thwart scoring.

Patrick,

It's not just #8.  Scale of features is one of the things that really pops out at ANGC as an architectural tool for confusing the golfer.  Standing on the tee or in the fairway on several holes, I have been confused about yardages due to the size of the bunkers, undulations, elevation changes, etc.  Even the trees are larger and more prominent due to how thin the treed areas are, and therefore they all look huge.  It's not unique to this course (SFGC, Beth Blk come to mind as similiar, never been to either), but it's very effective.  I would imagine that playing the golf course without yardages is a nightmare.   

[BCrosby]

There is something about the scale of great golf courses. They have big features, or at least they feel big when amongst them. Sometimes you don't notice it right away. And then it hits you, or at least it hits me, like a brick.

Bob

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ben,

I referenced holes other than # 8 as well

Those massive bunkers are certainly functional in more ways than one.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Gentlemen this is a great hole, the rewards two or three really well played shots. I love the hole after spending a half day watching it played a few years back.

[JNC Lyon]

Thanks guys

But why not more  holes like this
?

Lack of restraint.  Architects often try to do too much on par fives, meaning heavy use of water or bunkers around the greens.  Interesting, 13 and 15 at ANGC seem to be the template for some of these designs.  However, I've always been compelled by 8 from what I've seen on TV.  The green looks simple yet maddening.  Yet most golfers wouldn't have the guts to do something like that.  They'd have to charge less for it.

[Tom_Doak]

I think it's a very cool green, though I would not call it a very good hole, not a great one.

But, Matthew's reason why there aren't more of them is correct.  It's just a style that wouldn't fit in on many other courses.  Are you going to build a green like that at Oakmont?  Cypress Point?  Winged Foot?   I don't think so.  Common Ground? 

We might have done something like it at Ballyneal, if we would have found the right natural green site.  But nearly anywhere else except for a links, it's going to look way out of place.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think it's a very cool green, though I would not call it a very good hole, not a great one.

But, Matthew's reason why there aren't more of them is correct.  It's just a style that wouldn't fit in on many other courses.  Are you going to build a green like that at Oakmont?  Cypress Point?  Winged Foot?   I don't think so.  Common Ground? 

We might have done something like it at Ballyneal, if we would have found the right natural green site.  But nearly anywhere else except for a links, it's going to look way out of place.


Tom,

Doesn't the hole almost require trees to preserve the corridors of play ?

[Tom_Doak]

I think it's a very cool green, though I would not call it a very good hole, not a great one.

But, Matthew's reason why there aren't more of them is correct.  It's just a style that wouldn't fit in on many other courses.  Are you going to build a green like that at Oakmont?  Cypress Point?  Winged Foot?   I don't think so.  Common Ground? 

We might have done something like it at Ballyneal, if we would have found the right natural green site.  But nearly anywhere else except for a links, it's going to look way out of place.


Tom,

Doesn't the hole almost require trees to preserve the corridors of play ?

Patrick:

You could do the same type of hole in sand dunes, as long as the native areas were sufficient to define the fairway corridor.

[William_G]

Why not?

Not many golf courses are sited on slopes like Augusta, so you don't have the uphill feature which is a large component of the architecture.

The second shot to the green is blind and protected even more by the punch bowl like mounds.

The green is challenging even for your third particularly if you have the wrong angle.

Love the hole.

thanks

[jeffwarne]

I think it's a very cool green, though I would not call it a very good hole, not a great one.

But, Matthew's reason why there aren't more of them is correct.  It's just a style that wouldn't fit in on many other courses.  Are you going to build a green like that at Oakmont?  Cypress Point?  Winged Foot?   I don't think so.  Common Ground? 

We might have done something like it at Ballyneal, if we would have found the right natural green site.  But nearly anywhere else except for a links, it's going to look way out of place.

Seems like a green that can be built anywhere, and also seems like a few courses could use a green like that.
I guess I'm amazed that the architectural world accepts bunkers repeatedly as hazards(and go to great lenghts to make raked pits of sand "natural") and rejects mounds as hokey.

Of course it would be cool to find such a setting in a dune or natural hillside, but in the absence of that it's pretty cool.
Reminds me of some of Dye's work, except I'm not sure he could leave the wide  fairway unimpeded

The mound in front of 11 green can be a bit scary as well

[Link Walsh]

I love holes where you have to plot your way through differently based upon where the pin is on the green.  This green is so deep and so varied that it impacts where you leave your second shot and how you play your third.  Some golf holes can get boring because it's the same club selection every time.  Add in the uncertainty of not seeing the entire surface due to the uphill nature of the hole and it builds anticipation. 

I also like how the mounds to the front left don't scream hazard at you.  The open nature to the right and front of the green and lack of bunkers or water encourage players to give it a go, which can of course leads to some interesting recovery shots from under the trees.  It's a fun hole to watch (and I'm sure play )