Ratings: Where Lies The Greatest Gap?

[Sean_A]

Sean, you do realize a number of the bunkers (not to mention greens) you reference didn't exist or weren't in their current locations when Mac designed the course, yes?

Si.  I am referencing the 1934 course.  I think some things were altered very quickly. 

Ciao 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Ok. Well, the bunkering was unusual; I'm not sure it was original. Maybe. But for example Yale had, what, only 34 bunkers?

Here's a thread by the way that covers some of the copying homage:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,32995.0.html

Jeb, the 7th and 11th have been made greater by having been toughened up yet without introducing caprice. You get what you deserve. Architecturally, that's no mean feat.

Additionally, the premium placed on well-placed drives has been increased as has the demands placed on the approaches. The holes now ask very specific questions that, if answered properly, define proper accomplishment on a course. The green complexes as always call for the appropriate measure of finesse in both approaching and putting.

All around, Fazio has restored these two holes to previous greatness. Frankly, they had gotten too easy. The shot values had gotten out of whack, with not enough of a premium placed on length and accuracy. Mickelson's drive on 11, to the feet of Mssrs Johnson and Fazio, a mere wedge in, even though he is a pro provides as suitable a datum as any. And scoring had fallen precipitously. The 11th is not supposed to be "easy."

[Mike Hendren]

I apologize for the unintended thread jack.  Now, back to gaps in the ratings/rankings.

Bogey