[Garland Bayley]

Bayley,

I was thinking that the end of a match creates its own excitement, thereby lessening the need for architectural excitement on the back 9.  A great front 9 can draw in the golfers while the match is still young. 

What excitement? Dull course, hit it to the center of the fairway, hit it to the center of the green, sometimes sink a putt for a birdie and win a hole. Don't you know man, the whole reason for great holes and strategy is to enhance the match! If you think all the excitement comes from the match, I have some airport runway design munis I can recommend to you.

PS I think naming the airport runway design style is attibuted to Forrest Richardson, and most highly advocated by Matt Ward with his 3.5 degree, 47 inch Bang driver.

[Tim Pitner]

Bayley,

You're taking my argument to an extreme I never intended (or suggested).  Yes, great holes enhance a match but the question is whether it is better to have them at the beginning (the "draw you in" approach) or at the end (the "save them" approach).  I say at the beginning because, among other reasons, the holes at the end may not even matter in a match. 

[J Sadowsky]

As the resident 20+ handicapper, I prefer a better back 9.  It has nothing to do with television.  Instead, it has to do with the fact that it takes a guy like me several homes to start playing my best golf.  I'd rather be at my best for the "star" part of the course.

Of course, that's assuming there are two 9s where one is better than the other.  My preference would therefore be regarded as slight.

[Ben Jarvis]

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.

I was thinking about this very topic just a few days ago.

For me, the ebb and flow of a golf course is REALLY important. I don't want the course to jump out with all guns blazing, only to be wishing I was back at the 1st tee before the round is over. Royal Melbourne West provides that ebb and flow I like to see.

At RMW, holes 2-7 is quite an amazing stretch - certainly the best stretch of holes I have played. However, when I walk off the 7th green, I'm not at all disappointed as I know great holes are to follow when reaching the 10th and 16-18.

Furthermore, a wonderful finishing stretch has you wanting to go back to the 1st tee without delay! 

[Jud_T]

first impressions matter.  I prefer a great front nine.  don't underestimate the pull of the emergency nine either...Matches are often over by the middle of the back and the vaunted great finish often goes wasted or one is simply playing in after the money's been decided...

[Michael George]

I think it is critical to grab the players attention early in a round.  If the front nine is average, I think it is next to impossible to totally enchant the player.  For instance, I was not enthralled with the front nine at Laurel Valley so even though the back nine was fantastic, I never fell in love with the course.

I have been amazed at how many great golf courses that I have played where the 18th doesn't measure up.  Just look at Bandon, you could argue that 18 at Bandon Dunes and 18 at Bandon Trails are 2 of the worst holes at the resort.   In fact, even though I liked Arcadia Bluffs, I think 18 is one of the worst holes that I have ever played on a good golf course.

[Sean_A]

We could use a live case.  Machrihanish has a superb front nine (10 actually) and its back nine suffers quite badly in comparison.  Do folks think less of that course because of this scenario? 

Ciao

[Brad Isaacs]

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.

The front nine of Ballyneal hooked me, I grew to love the back nine.  So no, it is not important for the back nine to be better. I will say you don't want the last couple of holes of any course to be too difficult. You don't want the customer to leave feeling totally beat up. You don't want the last couple of holes,  to be holes, that you have to give strokes on either. Handicap 6 8 or maybe 10.

[Tom ORourke]

I just want a flow through 18. Some holes to catch a breath, make a birdie, some stretches of difficulty, probably in the middle. Riverton is a nice old course in South Jersey, and, imho, the back nine is better than the front, but 17 and 18 are not really good holes. 17 is probably the easiest hole on the course and 18 is just okay. So having the back nine better can be undone by a mediocre finish. Riverton was redone years ago and the original first hole is now 13, but there was a desire to get the clubhouse in a town with a liquor license. If it still ended with 10, 11, 12, it would be even better. It also creates a 37-34 = 71 layout which was okay to me. I am not sure everyone playing just nine holes liked playing a par 37. A bad 18th, either too dull, too difficult, or just a bad hole, can kill a nine. Start with some good holes, end strong, mix up the middle. Sounds like Merion, Kiawah, PB, PV. If I had to choose I would go with a better back as you can build up the round, but defining a course by nines never caught my fancy.

[Jim_Coleman]

    I don't think it makes a wit of difference.  You get to play 18 holes.  No matter what order you play them in, you've played the same course.  If it's a great course, it's a great course.  Pine Valley would still be Pine Valley, even if the par 3's were the first four holes,  the par 5's the next two, and the course finished with what are now #'s 11, 12 and 17 (which I suppose are allegedly the weakest holes).

[Matthew Petersen]

The course that immediately comes to mind for me is TPC Scottsdale. I have played no other course with such a noticeable difference in the nines. The front is ... OK. Boring. Nothing offensive, but not really any holes worth remembering. But the back is full of interesting holes and it particularly crescendos with 15-18 and leaves you with a feeling of having played a really wonderful, interesting stretch.

That's good for the course, I suppose, as it can cause people to sort of overrate the experience based on the high at the end. Not necessarily good for the player who may not remember until their next trip around how worthless the outward half is.

[V. Kmetz]

Hi All,

Incredible as it may seem, given the other thread, I have been devoting a great deal of thought to the question:

As we're so split between how we experience Golf (watching-observing/playing) I would say:

1. If your course is going to be on TV or a venue for championship play, then if it has to be weighted, the BACK 9 is the better weight to let carry the better holes.

2. If this will be a course largely experienced as a playing venue by players of all stripes, then the FRONT Nine is probably the best place to put the best holes.

In all of this, I'm assuming that the entire course is of a pitch of quality and the difference between the nines is marginal.

cheers

vk

[Jon Wiggett]

Tom,

I think it is better to have a stronger back nine as this leaves the player with the lasting impression. I do however hope that a GCA would be looking at producing a balanced course.

Jon

[Stephen Davis]

Tom,

My knee jerk reaction was that the back nine is more important, however, the more I thought about it, the more I think it is more important to have a better front nine. My favorite courses all have front nines that just pull me in and before I know it I am hooked. The rest of the round is perceived to be great because I was already sold early. This is opposed to the courses where you wade through a plain front nine just to get to the back nine.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()