Pacific Coast Amateur at Bandon Resort thru Friday.

[William_G]

Emile and Mike,

this what you talking about







(pin postion 1)

I was nice to everyone all round long and all the putts seemed to go in.

 

[Pete_Pittock]

Chris Williams, Univeristy of Washington, shot 66 from the tips this March in a college event.

[Mike Benham]

this what you talking about

A 3 on 14, the hole needs to be toughened up a bit ...

[Will MacEwen]

this what you talking about

A 3 on 14, the hole needs to be toughened up a bit ...

If it was a fun hole a good player like Gray would have taken a bogey.

[David Bartman]

...
Secondly, if you don't think 14 is a terrible golf hole than I would love for you to explain to me why it isn't terrible?
...

Because it equalizes low and high handicappers. I get sick and tired of hearing low handicappers cry unfair or calling a hole bad when a hole has shots they can't hit. Give me a break. Golf courses are full of shots high handicappers can't hit. Golf should not be about score. When golf was invented, they didn't even keep score. They simply kept track of who was ahead on the hole, and then kept track of holes won and lost. 14 produces wins and losses in match play. What could make a hole better than that? Some hole where a low handicapper can consistently get birdie? par? Those are terrible holes in golf.

The original hole didn't do this at all, high handicappers could barely finish the hole, this has nothing to do with score, it has to do with the design of the golf hole not lending itself to accepting solidly struck, golf shots that the hole requires. 

[David Bartman]

...I personally witnessed very good players , hitting solid shots and not getting the proper results for a wedge.   

So the course presented a shot they couldn't hit. You're breaking my heart here. 

Its not about easy or hard ... its about the design of the hole requiring a certain type of shot , uphill, to be hit to the green in regulation.  A well struck shot often times would not hold the green due to the design of the hole.

If very good players couldn't get a wedge to stop on the putting surface how do you expect poorer players to do it?  This had nothing to do with distance, most all tee shots ( assuming the lower handicapper laid up ) would be from the same spot, 70-100 yards out.  Due to the sever up slope, the angle of approach to the green and the lack of surface area of the green from that angle, well stuck wedges had a hard time staying on the putting surface, once off the putting surface, even further challenges presented themselves , especially for poorer players in keeping chips, pitches, sand shots and putts on the surface as well. 

Have you even played the hole? 

[Garland Bayley]

...
Secondly, if you don't think 14 is a terrible golf hole than I would love for you to explain to me why it isn't terrible?
...

Because it equalizes low and high handicappers. I get sick and tired of hearing low handicappers cry unfair or calling a hole bad when a hole has shots they can't hit. Give me a break. Golf courses are full of shots high handicappers can't hit. Golf should not be about score. When golf was invented, they didn't even keep score. They simply kept track of who was ahead on the hole, and then kept track of holes won and lost. 14 produces wins and losses in match play. What could make a hole better than that? Some hole where a low handicapper can consistently get birdie? par? Those are terrible holes in golf.

The original hole didn't do this at all, high handicappers could barely finish the hole, this has nothing to do with score, it has to do with the design of the golf hole not lending itself to accepting solidly struck, golf shots that the hole requires. 

Well, A. V. Macan wrote that there were two types of high handicappers. Those that needed to have their head examined, and those that didn't. I suppose you are writing about the high handicappers that need to have their head examined. However, I can't imagine you have ever played the hole with a high handicapper. So I am guessing you are just reporting hearsay.

[Garland Bayley]

...I personally witnessed very good players , hitting solid shots and not getting the proper results for a wedge.   

So the course presented a shot they couldn't hit. You're breaking my heart here. 

Its not about easy or hard ... its about the design of the hole requiring a certain type of shot , uphill, to be hit to the green in regulation.  A well struck shot often times would not hold the green due to the design of the hole.

If very good players couldn't get a wedge to stop on the putting surface how do you expect poorer players to do it?  This had nothing to do with distance, most all tee shots ( assuming the lower handicapper laid up ) would be from the same spot, 70-100 yards out.  Due to the sever up slope, the angle of approach to the green and the lack of surface area of the green from that angle, well stuck wedges had a hard time staying on the putting surface, once off the putting surface, even further challenges presented themselves , especially for poorer players in keeping chips, pitches, sand shots and putts on the surface as well. 

Have you even played the hole? 

So you miss with your first shot, and then you expect your recovery shot to be accepted, and it isn't? Sounds more and more like great design all the time.

I've played the hole. I'm one of those nonexistent people (according to you) that puts BT ahead of BD and PD at the resort.

[David Bartman]

Garland - once again jumping to conclusions

do you consider an 18 a high handicapper?  That was one of the skill levels in our foursome.  

He hit some sort of fairway wood down the middle, with a fade, it bounced right, right again and then proceeded down the hill to the right.  He was still in the fairway approximately 100 yards from the pin, which was in the front third of the green.   Since I had played the course before and he was my partner I told him not to even go after the pin, but to aim at the front edge of the green some 10-15 yards left of the pin.  He hit a solidly stuck 9 iron which landed about 2 yards on the putting surface, but due to the lack of height and spin the ball bounded over the green into the left green-side bunker.  Once again , I advised him to play to the front of the green and try to two putt for 5, he hit is sand shot a bit too firm and his ball rolled down the same hill he had just played up from.   From 30 away he hit a pitch shot not quite hard enough, it rolled to his feet, his second attempt  he landed his pitch a few yards short of the green and it just had enough power to get to the front of the green.  He two putted for an 8.   He hit a solid drive and and solid nine iron and made an 8 because the design of the hole was too severe to accept properly struck golf shots.  That to me , make a bad hole.  


Nobody missed a shot, the second shot is not a recovery shot, it is from the fairway!  I never said that some people didn't prefer trails, I said that nobody that I know that have played all 3, about 100 people, has indicated they prefer BT. 

It's as if you struggle to read, so you simply jump to conclusions based on material that had never been written down.   I even explained the pool of people that I was drawing from.  However, I digress ... 

I for one, think that short holes are a great opportunity for an architect to really take advantage of terrain and risk/reward.  Many of my favorite holes are short ones, in my opinion, the original design of the 14th hole at BT failed in this regard.  

Another thing, so many of the people that have posted on this topic have indicated that they are not a fan of #14, from stating that it was the worst on the course, they are not a fan, its not my favorite, etc...  

Since I am new to this board my question is why people are so unwilling to admit say that a hole is "bad."  

[Bill_McBride]

Because it isn't.  "A man has to know his limitations."

[Pete_Pittock]

Garland - once again jumping to conclusions

do you consider an 18 a high handicapper?  That was one of the skill levels in our foursome.  

He hit some sort of fairway wood down the middle, with a fade, it bounced right, right again and then proceeded down the hill to the right.  He was still in the fairway approximately 100 yards from the pin, which was in the front third of the green.   Since I had played the course before and he was my partner I told him not to even go after the pin, but to aim at the front edge of the green some 10-15 yards left of the pin.  He hit a solidly stuck 9 iron which landed about 2 yards on the putting surface, but due to the lack of height and spin the ball bounded over the green into the left green-side bunker.  Once again , I advised him to play to the front of the green and try to two putt for 5, he hit is sand shot a bit too firm and his ball rolled down the same hill he had just played up from.   From 30 away he hit a pitch shot not quite hard enough, it rolled to his feet, his second attempt  he landed his pitch a few yards short of the green and it just had enough power to get to the front of the green.  He two putted for an 8.   He hit a solid drive and and solid nine iron and made an 8 because the design of the hole was too severe to accept properly struck golf shots.  That to me , make a bad hole.  


Nobody missed a shot, the second shot is not a recovery shot, it is from the fairway!  I never said that some people didn't prefer trails, I said that nobody that I know that have played all 3, about 100 people, has indicated they prefer BT. 

It's as if you struggle to read, so you simply jump to conclusions based on material that had never been written down.   I even explained the pool of people that I was drawing from.  However, I digress ... 

I for one, think that short holes are a great opportunity for an architect to really take advantage of terrain and risk/reward.  Many of my favorite holes are short ones, in my opinion, the original design of the 14th hole at BT failed in this regard.  

Another thing, so many of the people that have posted on this topic have indicated that they are not a fan of #14, from stating that it was the worst on the course, they are not a fan, its not my favorite, etc...  

Since I am new to this board my question is why people are so unwilling to admit say that a hole is "bad."  

Could this have also happened on the 10th at Riviera?

[Garland Bayley]

Well there you go David. A high handicapper trying to hit shots requested by a former pro.

"He needs his head examined." A. V. Macan

[David Bartman]

Pete-

Absolutely not!

The 10th at Riviera is an example of a tremendous short hole.  If a high handicapper hits a solid drive to the left of the large cross bunker and a solid 9 iron from 100 yards that lands anywhere on the right half of the green, the ball will remain on the green.  

Any good player that hits a solid wedge into the 10th hole will have their ball remain on green with the exception of the very front left portion of the green.  

Due the severity of the up slope of the terrain which is almost a certainty for the poorer player to have to navigate on BT #14 ( original design) a well struck shot into the green landing in the most receptive area had a good chance of not staying on the green for a marginal player and for a good player, most of the green wouldn't hold a well struck wedge.            

[Alex Miller]

Garland - once again jumping to conclusions

do you consider an 18 a high handicapper?  That was one of the skill levels in our foursome.  

He hit some sort of fairway wood down the middle, with a fade, it bounced right, right again and then proceeded down the hill to the right.  He was still in the fairway approximately 100 yards from the pin, which was in the front third of the green.   Since I had played the course before and he was my partner I told him not to even go after the pin, but to aim at the front edge of the green some 10-15 yards left of the pin.  He hit a solidly stuck 9 iron which landed about 2 yards on the putting surface, but due to the lack of height and spin the ball bounded over the green into the left green-side bunker.  Once again , I advised him to play to the front of the green and try to two putt for 5, he hit is sand shot a bit too firm and his ball rolled down the same hill he had just played up from.   From 30 away he hit a pitch shot not quite hard enough, it rolled to his feet, his second attempt  he landed his pitch a few yards short of the green and it just had enough power to get to the front of the green.  He two putted for an 8.   He hit a solid drive and and solid nine iron and made an 8 because the design of the hole was too severe to accept properly struck golf shots.  That to me , make a bad hole.  


Nobody missed a shot, the second shot is not a recovery shot, it is from the fairway!  I never said that some people didn't prefer trails, I said that nobody that I know that have played all 3, about 100 people, has indicated they prefer BT. 

It's as if you struggle to read, so you simply jump to conclusions based on material that had never been written down.   I even explained the pool of people that I was drawing from.  However, I digress ... 

I for one, think that short holes are a great opportunity for an architect to really take advantage of terrain and risk/reward.  Many of my favorite holes are short ones, in my opinion, the original design of the 14th hole at BT failed in this regard.  

Another thing, so many of the people that have posted on this topic have indicated that they are not a fan of #14, from stating that it was the worst on the course, they are not a fan, its not my favorite, etc...  

Since I am new to this board my question is why people are so unwilling to admit say that a hole is "bad."  

People are willing to admit a hole is bad. Not this one though; not with their own opinions.

About your friend, he may have hit "solid shots" but they were not well thought out enough given his capabilities to play the hole as best he could. Had he hit a solid shot farther left off the tee, he has a better angle into the green. Had he hit pitching wedge instead of 9iron into the green, perhaps he doesn't make 8, but rather 4 or 5.

Solid=smart, but solid + smart = good!

[Garland Bayley]

...

Nobody missed a shot, the second shot is not a recovery shot, it is from the fairway!  I never said that some people didn't prefer trails, I said that nobody that I know that have played all 3, about 100 people, has indicated they prefer BT. 

...

A shot in the fairway is very often a missed shot. If the fairway is 20 yards wide like at the US Open, then maybe it isn't a missed shot. You described where the ball ended up. It was a missed shot. When you get up on the tee, do you aim to hit your ball where he hit his? If so, I think you need your head examined.

[David Bartman]

Well there you go David. A high handicapper trying to hit shots requested by a former pro.

"He needs his head examined." A. V. Macan

Garland,

Are you tying to insinuate that I was causing the player to be more aggressive than he should have been because I used to be pretty good at golf?   Are you trying to imply that I am not capable of guiding a less talented player around a golf course so that they can score as low as they can?   The more you post, the more ignorant I think you are?  Once again, if you could read you would realize I was trying to guide him as conservatively as possible while still trying to make a reasonably good score.  

A wedge wouldn't have made it up the hill, and his ball barely got to the slope are you saying that any shot that isn't on the narrow area on top of the hill, left side of the fairway, isn't a good shot for an 18 handicap? 

And for what its worth A.V. Macon wouldn't have liked the 14th at BT because the "ordinary member" would take no pleasure in it.  

Let me ask you this, since you have played the hole, if one hits a drive that rolls down the hill to right, still in the fairway, where would you tell that individual to aim , ( assuming the pin was in the front third )?

[Howard Riefs]

That being said, I have never heard anyone who has played BD, PD and BT indicate that they prefer BT of the three, I'd say I know upwards of 100 people of all skill levels that have played the three course, 50 of which are very good golfers.  ( BTW, most say, including me, PD  ) 

Clearly, you need to do some serious reading on this site before posting stuff like this.

There are quite a few people on this board who have stated that BT is the favorite of the Bandon courses. Read some posts on this site. You may learn something interesting...

Here's some serious reading:

BT is the favorite of ~20% of those who took a recent survey administered by a fellow GCAer, Jim Colton. Even the first responder to the thread has BT at the top of the list. 

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,52677.0.html

[Garland Bayley]

David,

You're the one that guided him to the shot that ended up down the hill again.

I believe we have played different versions of the hole, so it is hard to answer where to hit, when I haven't seen your version.
There was no left side bunker(s) by the time I got there.

[Sven Nilsen]

Its a tricky little hole.

Everything in the fairway moves left to right, but if you hug the left side (and if the shape of your shot is moving right to left) you have a pretty good chance of staying on the high side with a pretty good angle into the green.

If you're long enough, you can try to knock it up close to the green.  But as with any longer shot, the chance of variance is greater and there is a bit of trouble that will punish a miss.

The green itself is not that hard to hold if you're coming in from the better angle (and from the higher side of the fairway). 

For the slicer, its a very tough hole, but then again the game of golf in general is very tough for the slicer.  At least their natural movement is a benefit when extricating themselves from the greenside trap.

Bandon Trails as a course and the 14th hole individually have continued to look better and better the more I've played it and the more I've thought about it.  I've said it before, Trails is the course on the property that is most like a riddle.  When you figure the lines, the curves, the contours, the better misses and the death zones, the round of golf is about as enjoyable as anywhere else I've played.  If you don't like to think while you're standing on the tee, it might not be the course for you.  Head on over to BD, where everything is right in front of you.

[Tom Yost]

Some like Chardonnay, others like Pinot Noir...

And that's all fine.  But if anyone orders Merlot, I'm leaving!

[SL_Solow]

There really is too much shouting on this thread.  What is evident is a philosophical difference.  It seems to me that David believes that the 16th hole at BT is too difficult for the average player and leaves him few acceptable options to mitigate the difficulty.   It is rare that this criticism is raised on a short quirky hole.  David, I presume you have the same problem with difficult forced carries on longer holes or par 3s?

I agree with David that the hole is quite different from the challenges presented by Riviera 10.  I think BT 16 is much closer to Crystal Downs 17.  Having said all that, personally, I admire BT 16 and Crystal Downs 17.  I think an occasional very difficult hole, particularly one that is difficult for reasons other than length, makes for great interest for all level of players.  I suppose if I were playing a medal play tournament it could be upsetting but I generally don't rate courses that way even though I have a reasonably low handicap.  The short difficult hole gives players of all handicaps a tast of similar problems which I think is a good feature in a design.

Candidly, I have had just about as much trouble with 16 at Pacific Dunes as i have had with 16 at Trails.  I like them both.  While I enjoy all of the courses at Bandon, I find the original my least favorite even though I usually score best on that course.

But back to my original thought, I understand David's point of view.  I just think that in the end, if one insists on the type of "fairness" implied by his critique, one limits design significantly to the detriment of variety and inspiration.  As such I would rather see an occasional hole that goes a little overboard rather than restricting the architectural license, particularly where the terrain suggests the hole.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

SL 16 on BD is a horribly designed hole when the wind is from the north. It does work when into the a southern wind. There is a landing area for a 200 to 230 shot. !6 down wind becomes a drivable hole with no other option but a short iron to the lower landing area. The upper land area will not hold any shot. If one goes for the green the people on 17 tee are again in danger of a blind incoming drive nailing them. 13 has a 3rd shot that sets up the first time payer at 14 tee. Of course 14 tee is blind to the incoming shot creating a danger from fly balls. 17 tee shot with a north wind has to be very low or drawn to stay on the course. It is more than rough the ball goes into. The list of architecture busts on BD is long. I only see 14 as a hole that has issues on trails. Of course this has nothing to do with this event which again I am so pleased is there.

[David Bartman]

David,

You're the one that guided him to the shot that ended up down the hill again.

I believe we have played different versions of the hole, so it is hard to answer where to hit, when I haven't seen your version.
There was no left side bunker(s) by the time I got there.

So you have only seen the hole after they softened it!  OMG!  

I haven't been back since they softened it, but it seems that the initial shot by the 18 handicapper would have stayed on the putting surface with the significant extension to the left side of the green!  


SL-

I love short holes, and yes I have a problem with forced carries on poorer players regardless of the holes par, assuming they are playing the appropriate tees

I don't aim to limit design at all, if the huge slope wasn't there and you could possibly roll the ball onto the surface than I wouldn't have a complaint!  However, when 90% of all tee shots are going to be in a certain area, that is significantly below the surface of the green and you build a green that cannot receive well struck shots from that area, that is when I have a problem.  

Tiger- I couldn't agree more with you that BD has some seriously dangerous situations that arise on the back nine. 

[Sven Nilsen]

However, when 90% of all tee shots are going to be in a certain area, that is significantly below the surface of the green and you build a green that cannot receive well struck shots from that area, that is when I have a problem.  

David:

I'd have a bit more respect for your arguments if you weren't making up statistics out of thin air.  I'd like to see the citation for that 90% number.  If you play the hole knowing the left side is where you want to be, its easy to avoid the "trap" of ending up at the bottom of the hill.  Every caddy I've ever had on Trails has made this point, and its a fairly obvious deduction on one's own when surveying the hole from the tee.

Have you played the hole with a 6 iron off of the tee and 9 iron or wedge in?

[Garland Bayley]

David,

You're the one that guided him to the shot that ended up down the hill again.

I believe we have played different versions of the hole, so it is hard to answer where to hit, when I haven't seen your version.
There was no left side bunker(s) by the time I got there.

So you have only seen the hole after they softened it!  OMG!  

...

So you wrote "BT has maybe the worst hole in America" about a hole that doesn't even exist anymore! OMG!