Best Hole and Least Exciting Hole

[Eric Smith]

From the description, #13 sounds the most interesting.  Is there a natural pull to play toward the flag and is there a sliver an option to be rewarded for doing so?  How long is the hole?  Does anyone have a pic of it?

Ciao

Sean,

I think if you play toward the flag from the tee you'll find yourself in the native. I believe the hole can play as long as 460ish(?) from the back tees. Tom or Chris can verify.

Here are a couple of pics.

The tee shot image is from last October.


This one from the landing area is from last week.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom - this is interesting. You must've believed that you'd find these answers instructive and useful or you wouldn't have started the thread. But then, how does the response/feedback you're getting in this context (from golfers who have only walked a course that is still not open for play) compare for you -- in terms of usefulness -- with the response/feedback you'd get in a different context (from golfers who have played, probably more than once, a finished/open course)?  For me, the latter 'experiment' would seem to be much more fruitful and productive; but I'm guessing you don't see it that way (?)

Peter

Peter:

Feedback from actual play is always more important, because you can be pretty sure people are seeing the full golf hole.  Most guys aren't used to touring a course under construction, so it's never certain if they really know what they are looking at, even if the hole is laying right there ready to be grassed (or already seeded).

But, I won't have that luxury for another year, so I was just curious what feedback I would get, and perhaps identify which posters to discount in future because they clearly don't know what they are seeing. 

I wasn't really expecting anyone to say anything that made me think about tearing up a golf hole and building it differently, though one of my friends did on Monday, and it's very easy to do at this stage, so you never know.  To answer Michael George's question, the hole which I'm still playing around with in my head is the green site for #12 ... I think we are going to move it, as the hole just feels too easy to me with the prevailing wind off the right.  That's one of the reasons we have saved it for last.

[Mike Hendren]

I liked the 7th once I discovered the abundant fairway to the right over the two fairway bunkers.  I might be alone in being disappoined that the 8th green is being moved right.  I loved the straight-away sprawling visual with Big Horseshoe in the distance.  Also liked the 9th with its low profile green, seamless transition to the 10th tee and spectacular backdrop.   Finally I like the reprisal of the diagonal ridge carry off the 17th tee, reminiscent of similar demands at Old Mac and Pac Dunes.

I found the 15th to be the least exciting - not sure the severe undulations short of the green will make the hole. 

Overall I really liked the abundant width, green to tee transitions and a little more structure in the teeing grounds than was built at Ballyneal.

Finally, I think the 16th is a courageous design - it's a little distinct from the other holes in its sectioned green.  It could prove to be the most controversial hole on the golf course.

I learned more in four hours than I had in 40 years.  As Doak led his people through the wildnerness I expected manna to fall from the sky, or at least a few bottles of water. 

Mike

[Brett_Morrissy]

Tom,
Can you discuss a little why you prefer not to begin a routing with a P5 please? I am sure they sometimes happen because of clubhouse proximity, but my understanding of D2 is that this is not an issue in relation to the routing.
Both your Australian courses have P5 openers, did Clayts have influence on these decisions?

Is the terrain rarely the best for a P5 near the start of a routing?

[Dan Herrmann]

This is based on my 2011 tour - but the hole that stuck in my memory is the par 3 third.  I loved the deep falloff/bunker to the right of the green.   The holes by the river looked amazing, but I was too busy trying not to kill myself on the Gator that the hole numbers didn't stick

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,
Can you discuss a little why you prefer not to begin a routing with a P5 please? I am sure they sometimes happen because of clubhouse proximity, but my understanding of D2 is that this is not an issue in relation to the routing.
Both your Australian courses have P5 openers, did Clayts have influence on these decisions?

Is the terrain rarely the best for a P5 near the start of a routing?

Brett:

I've actually started a lot of courses with a par five (full list below), so it's not that the terrain near the clubhouse is usually unsuitable.  At Dismal like many of the others, I considered a par-4 instead, because it would have made a better connection to the second tee; but there just wasn't a good green site there for a par-4, and the par-4 would have been a very difficult start into the wind.

My dislike for the par fives is that I just don't like the flow of the start of the course that way.  As a golfer, I don't like to worry about making a six right out of the box if I hit a sloppy third shot, and as a designer, I don't want to put so many hazards out there that the average player might make a 7 after a bad drive.  But, the best par-5's generally have some interesting hazards.

The other reason I've wound up with a lot of par fives at the beginning, anyway, is that often I have only three of them on the course and the client doesn't want me to turn the hole into a par-4 and wind up with only two.  Not many of my clients have a bias against par-71 but a fair number have asked me to change it when I get down to a par-70 solution.

Courses which start with a par five:  Black Forest, Stonewall (Old), Apache Stronghold, The Village Club of Sands Point, Barnbougle Dunes, St. Andrews Beach, Dismal River.  Our two courses in China will also have par-5 starting holes.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom - an outsider's two cents, from someone who is not a big fan of Par 5s anyway: I've never met a golfer who doesn't like a gentle opening hole, and who doesn't like even more a gentle Par 5 opener. It gives us a chance; and if we make a hash of it we've got no one to blame but ourselves. Now, that kind of opener usually won't -- as you say -- make for a 'great' golf hole, but it can play a good and useful part in the making a great golf course, the first step in the journey and first link in the chain. That guys like us will say the strangest things when the architect is giving us a personal tour of a not-yet-open-for course is another matter.

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

Tom - an outsider's two cents, from someone who is not a big fan of Par 5s anyway: I've never met a golfer who doesn't like a gentle opening hole, and who doesn't like even more a gentle Par 5 opener. It gives us a chance; and if we make a hash of it we've got no one to blame but ourselves. Now, that kind of opener usually won't -- as you say -- make for a 'great' golf hole, but it can play a good and useful part in the making a great golf course, the first step in the journey and first link in the chain. That guys like us will say the strangest things when the architect is giving us a personal tour of a not-yet-open-for course is another matter.

Peter

Peter:

Yes, that's the crux of it.  To open with a par five means you are making a big choice:  consciously start out with a less-than-great hole in order to ease people into the round and improve the course as a whole, or jazz up the par five to make it a great hole, and risk the beginning of overkill.

My favorite opening holes from my own courses tend to be the shorter par-4's, like the first at Lost Dunes and the first at Old Macdonald.  Both of them give you a lot of room off the tee, but the second shots are pretty difficult, especially if you don't drive it in the right place.  You won't make six often, but it's possible if you are too aggressive, and five is very possible if you're too meek.  I just don't like taking the same approach with a par five, because then you are talking about 7's and 6's, while the strong player is looking at 4's and 3's.

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't understand this conversation considering an opening par 5 works perfectly at Sand Hills.

[Brett_Morrissy]

Thanks Tom,

From your experience, for a golf club, not necessarily a pay for play course, although may be the same result - what do you think is the ideal hole type to get the field for the day away smoothly? Let's assume that a P3 is the worst, especially a long one.

PS: I remember fondly my round at Waterville, we had a double bagger on his second loop of the day, we were getting ready to tee off as the group in front were getting to their tee shots, and he said, let's take our time and wait for them to get to the green, this was a refreshing approach than the hustle bustle of normal play on a busy course.  We will catch them by the next hole anyway.

Edit: posted while JK was - the one course that I came to mind with a great opening P5 was SH.

[John Kavanaugh]

Let's not forget where this course is located. One of the joys of taking first time visitors to the Dismal River region is the promise of firm and fast fairways. If we should choose to play the Doak course first a long running drive with the possibility of reaching a par 5 in two could set the tone for a perfect trip.

[John Kavanaugh]

I'm not even so sure that the first at Sand Hills is a great par 5 but it is a sweet first kiss on a great date.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom - thanks. You clearly understand the dynamics and know what you're doing out there 

But as John suggests in his last two posts, one of the good points of a gentle Par 5 opener is that it offers a decision-making opportunity right away.  Even for me (an average golfer), if it is gentle enough I get to my tee shot and right away have to decide whether to go for the green in two or not -- in other words, I have to feel/sense whether or not "I have it" on this particular day, whether my body/mind will cooperate.  The fact that it usually doesn't and that i usually make the wrong decision doesn't alter the mini-thrill of having to make that choice right off the bat. (And if, upon making the wrong choice, the golf hole still allows me to make a bogie at worst, that's a nice bonus -- and a kind of promise that, while I will have to prepare myself for justice and judgement, I can also expect a little mercy and grace.) 

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

This is a good discussion but I am threadjacking my own topic (with some help) so I'm going to move the new topic to its own spot.

Anyone here with input on the best and least exciting holes on the new course at Dismal is still welcome to post, although pretty much every hole except 5 (which must be too hard for the likes of you guys) and 10-11-12 (two of which were hard to visualize) has gotten a vote as the best hole, which is pretty crazy.  I thought that two or three holes would dominate the discussion, and those haven't even had much support.

Peter:

Could you post that on my follow-up thread?

[Michael George]

Tom:

CJ gave my group a tour of the Doak course on Saturday morning in the Polaris.  This tour was really where I realized how good of a steward CJ is for DR.  He consistently referred to his membership throughout the tour and how they would like this feature or that feature.... rarely talking about himself.   Other than myself, no one in my group knows much about golf course architecture (you could easily argue that I don't know much, but we will leave that for another discussion) but each of them loves golf and each of them would clearly be classified as one of Mike Keiser's "retail golfers".  So their feedback is probably pretty good.  

Each of them loved the course and confirmed the hype about the place.  They loved the loop on the front 9.  They told me afterwards that they just thought it was really cool and unique and unlike anything they had ever seen (none of them have been to Scotland).  They also loved #17-#18 as great holes with a great view of the clubhouse and cottages in the background, along with big/little horn.  I guess Mackenzie was right when he talked about the importance of beauty on a golf course.

Here was their general thoughts:

Best par 3 - #3.  They loved the site of the huge blow-out short/right of the hole.   A couple of the lesser golfers were pretty intimidated by #5 but were good with it after seeing #6.  Putting the driveable #6 after the difficult #5 was a great idea and it was widely loved in my group.  As the 15 handicap in my group said, I can make 4-4 and feel pretty good about myself after those 2 holes.

Best par 4 - #9.  This was a landslide - it was easily their favorite hole on the course.  They loved the huge gulch on the right, the infinity green and playing into big/little horn.  It was a funny part of the tour as CJ admitted that you had to convince him to cross the road in the middle of a hole.  The group jokingly thanked CJ for listening to you.

Best par 5 - #8.  They like how you played downhill through those dunes and had views of the cabins and big/little horn as you played the hole.

The biggest complaint was not actually about a golf hole.  It was about the flies down by the river.  While I did not notice much, a number of my group were concerned about getting eaten up down there.  

Personally, after really thinking about it, I really liked the following holes:  #6, #9, #14 and #18.  Which one is my favorite, I don't know, but all are close to perfect.  #14 is in my head the most.  I just loved that hole.
 

[Tom_Doak]

Tom:

CJ gave my group a tour of your course on Saturday morning in the Polaris.  Other than myself, no one in my group knows much about golf course architecture (you could easily argue that I don't know much, but we will leave that for another discussion) but each of them loves golf and each of them would clearly be classified as one of Mike Keiser's "retail golfers".  So their feedback is probably pretty good.  

Each of them loved the course.  They loved the loop on the front 9 - none of them have been to Scotland - so they really had never seen anything like it.  They also loved the finish.  

Here was their thoughts:

Best par 3 - #3.  They loved the site of the huge blow-out short/right of the hole.   A couple of the lesser golfers were pretty intimidated by #5 but were good with it after seeing #6.  Putting the driveable #6 after the difficult #5 was a great idea and it was widely loved in my group.

Best par 4 - #9.  This was a landslide - it was easily their favorite hole on the course.  They loved the huge gulch on the right, the infinity green and playing into big/little horn.  It was a funny part of the tour as CJ admitted that you had to convince him to cross the road in the middle of a hole.  The group told CJ that you were right.

Best par 5 - #8.  They like how you played downhill and had views of the cabins and big/little horn as you played the hole.

The biggest complaint was not actually about a golf hole.  It was about the flies down by the river.  While I did not notice much, a number of my group were concerned about getting eaten up down there.  

After really thinking about it, I really liked the following holes:  #6, #9, #14 and #18.  Which one is my favorite, I don't know, but all are close to perfect.
 

Michael:

Interesting that all three holes your friends named are on the front nine.

I do wonder if #9 will be as well liked when it's finished.  The hard thing about that hole is that if you bail out just a little left [at least, from the back tees], you may be down in a hollow for your approach and unable to see anything but the top of the flag.  I thought about tinkering with the fairway contours a bit to minimize that, but eventually decided that I'm a minimalist, so I'd leave it alone.

P.S.  It's Little Horseshoe.  Playing into "little/big horn" has not worked out so well, historically.

[Brandon Urban]

Tom,

Count me as a guy who loved 5. It was one of those holes that I was immediately drawn to. I think it is the heroic nature of the shot. I stood on the tee and pictured hitting a little cut driver into a bit of wind. It's also pretty cool that it looks like it plays about 350 from the tee. Can't wait to play it.

9 was a close second for me. Playing over the road is a cool feature and that second shot is going to be a lot of fun.

10 might be my least favorite probably because I was having trouble visualizing that one more than any of the others or yet built.

[Michael George]

I could not remember if it was big or little horn so I just used both names.  

I think most of them talked about (and were in awe about) the back 9 more than the front, but the top on the list was #3  and #9.   However, if I had to name the 2nd and 3rd favorites, it would have been #16 for a par 3, #17 and #18 for a par 4.  Not a lot of discussion about a second favorite par 5.  As you said #10 was not very developed.

[Michael George]

Tom - if it matters to you, most of my group talked about how intimidating the 2nd shot on #9 was with view of the green.  You may not need the blindness of the hollow to make the hole harder as the infinity green had my group nervous enough. 

Actually, my 15 handicap was talking about "chunky soup" and he was just looking at the 2nd shot.

[John Kavanaugh]

The front nine is in the vein of traditional greatness where the back transcends new territories.  One reason I can't identify which is either the single best or least of holes is because of the intimacy of the fifth three hole sequence.  This is a course, like no other, where 18 parts is not a viable discussion of the whole.

[Doug Siebert]

I suspect for people like myself, for whom this is the first course I've ever seen built (first last year as just mowed areas in the grass, now this year with 18 holes in all stages of completion) will be far more likely to change our minds once we see the finished product.  Last year with the exception of the par 3s, it was pretty much impossible for me to look at the raw land and see a real golf hole there.  Now that they are in various stages of construction, some looked more like golf holes than others did to me, so to be honest there was probably never much chance of me picking 17 or 18 due to their relative state of incompletion.

Thus my choice of #15 was based as much on knowing my own discomfort on the tee for this type of hole.  I always prefer holes where the choice off the tee isn't obvious, though I think this happens a lot less frequently with today's big headed drivers.  Using those, it's become my default choice to hit driver to a green I can reach or get really close to reaching, unless there's something obvious to fear or experience teaches me otherwise.  I'm actually more likely to hit an iron off the tee of a 450 yard hole than I am a 300 yard hole.  While the odds of actually putting it on the green would be rather low (at least for me) with the narrow 7 or 8 yard wide corridor on the front right as the only possible route, it's difficult imagining those little moguls short left being problematic enough to make me prefer laying up.  But I'm taking your word for it that they will really piss me off enough after being in them a couple times that I'll start to think an iron off the tee is a more reasonable play.  I can't shake the notion that I'd really really prefer playing in from the left rough if I do so.  Maybe I'm remembering the green contours incorrectly (in fact, I probably am) but I remember standing on the green thinking that if those moguls were an issue, being a bit short and left of them (as viewed from the tee) would be a pretty darn nice place to be assuming it would be rough and not gunk in the area I was looking.

[Mac Plumart]

This is a course, like no other, where 18 parts is not a viable discussion of the whole.

John...I think you are spot on regarding this. 

A hole by hole analysis of this course, or any other, is kind of fun to do...but it miss the fact that a golf course is not a collection of holes.  Rather it is an entity consisting of the holes, the routing, the surrounds, the hazards, the features, and the interplay between all of those features.  In the end, this creates a uniqueness that far transcends 18 isolated parts.

[John Kavanaugh]

Mac,

I know what I said can be dismissed as cliché, but...When I think of the Doak course it always seems to get broken down to three hole sequences.  That being said I would be interested in what are peoples favorite three holes stretches where the last hole is a multiple of three.  ie: 1,2,3...4,5,6 and so on.  I personally like 1,2,3 as much as 16,17,18.  Where I believe the core of the course will exist and most rounds will be decided is 13,14,15.  Obviously the least exciting and potentially dangerous stretch is 4,5,6.

Now if you take it a step further to multiples of 6 you will find that the first 6 equals the last with the middle, 7-12, being where your day will hang in the balance.

We were promised a genius routing and the numbers seem to verify that Doak delivered.

[Michael George]

John:

In 3 hole stretches, my favorites are:

16-18
7-9
13-15
4-6
1-3
10-12

In 6 hole stretches, my favorites are:

13-18
1-6
7-12

I agree that it is hard to not focus on the flow of certain holes.  That is why in my initial e-mail, I mentioned the loop on the front 9.   However, I think Mac and you are digging a little too deep on your hole analysis. 

The sheer beauty of 17 and 18 matter (in addition to being good golf holes).  Without beauty, would Cypress Point be top 2 in the US? 

[Eric Smith]

Obviously the least exciting and potentially dangerous stretch is 4,5,6.

May be the least exciting for you, sir, but this is my choice for favorite 3 hole stretch. What I love about it:

1. Top of the routing, highest point on the golf course with expanded views of the front nine.
2. The intimacy of the holes with 5 tee, 4 green & 7 green all in close proximity. This will make group or event play all the more interesting.
3. Ground for golf. 250 yard hole (5) then a 300 yard hole (6). Forget what par is supposed to be. Some thrilling golf shots to be played out over this stretch.

Here's a look at 5 from last week.