[Ran Morrissett]

Why aren't there more such holes?  Why even bother building a course that doesn't have one? 


These three holes have a similar shape and share many playing characteristics. They also have differences such as the mouth that feeds onto the 17th putting surface at Oakmont is much smaller than the other two.
 
Do you have a strong favorite among the three? I can't say that I do. It seems that whichever I have seen most recently becomes my favorite. So, Merion's 10th is enjoying a surge this week. Personally, I think many of the pros played it wrong today and laid too far back with their tee balls, thus creating a crummy angle to the back left hole location. Nice to see a hole of that length stump the bomb and gouge gang. Plus, wait til the tee is moved forward at least one day this weekend -  fireworks are guaranteed!
 
So ... which of the three that are within 320 miles of each other do you like best? And why?
 
Given PV, Merion and Oakmont’s leadership positions, why didn't many more courses follow suit with similar short, angled two shotters? I have a great appreciation for short straight par fours like 9 at Harbour Town, 12 at St. Andrews and 6 at Winged Foot West. Yet, isn't a near 90 degree angle/dogleg preferable because of the array of playing angles/options that it creates?
 
16 at PacDunes, 8 at Cabot and 12 at Rustic Canyon are some that have arrived in recent years from architects that appreciate the past. And, of course, Philadephian George Thomas must have been influenced by what he saw in Penn/NJ when he built the 10th at Riviera.
All of these little design gems add mightily to their respective courses.

Pity that there aren't more.

Best,

[Joel_Stewart]

All of these great classics also have great long 3 par holes on the front nine with similar characteristics. 

[Tim_Weiman]

Ran,

The comparison I think about is Merion #10 vs Royal Melbourne #10. Probably more impressed with RM, I guess because I think the green complex presents more trouble.

[Mac Plumart]

Wish I could comment, Ran, and get some good discussion going...but I haven't played any of those 3 holes you mention in the title.

I have played 10 at Riviera a couple times.  Phenomenal hole where you need to begin thinking prior to grabbing your club on the tee.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ran,

17 at Oakmont would be in 3rd place due to the visibility or lack thereof.

As to # 10 at Merion or # 12 at PV, it's pretty close.

With some tree clearing, # 12 at PV might get my vote

Aren't # 10 at Merion and # 12 at PV modeled after # 1 at GCGC ?

[David_Elvins]

Number 10 at Merion must be one of the most disappointing holes I have played.  

Way too narrow to make a great strategic par 4.  

Pat bringing up the first at Garden City is an interesting comparison.  If Merion 10 had a similar fairway layout to the 1st at GC it would be a far better hole IMO.  As would almost any other option that widenned the fairway significantly to the left.  

[Malcolm Mckinnon]

Ran,

We have this same template at Springdale Golf Club in Princeton, NJ. Ours is a right bender. Springdale was renovated by William Flynn and the new course opened in 1927. Flynn took great interest in the project as his friend and mentor Hugh Wilson captained the Princeton Golf team. He wanted his work at Princeton to be a tribute to Wilson.

It used to be our 11th but we moved the clubhouse and re-numbered the golf course and now this hole serves as number 18. Unfortunately a round now ends with a short par four.

Members talk about erasing the current green and lengthening the hole twenty yards or so to make it a more challenging finishing hole. I am fighting the idea tooth and nail. What a tragedy if we were to lose a classic Flynn green and a template hole echoed at both Merion and Pine Valley. I have not seen the example at Oakmont.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

What I like best about # 1 at GCGC is the choice the golfer is presented off the tee.

Drive right with the longer carry and be rewarded with a better angle in to the green.

Drive left with the shorter carry and you have to carry the deep fronting bunker and avoid the back bunkers.

I'm not a fan of narrow fairways which convert a course to default, target golf.

[David_Elvins]

David,

What I like best about # 1 at GCGC is the choice the golfer is presented off the tee.

Drive right with the longer carry and be rewarded with a better angle in to the green.

Drive left with the shorter carry and you have to carry the deep fronting bunker and avoid the back bunkers.

I'm not a fan of narrow fairways which convert a course to default, target golf.

Pat, 

I read a lot about Garden City and Merion before visiting the courses.  I was very surprised at how bold some of the strategic holes were at Garden City.  After all I had read about the tilted greens I was expecting a much more rudimentary style.  Conversely, I was a little surprised at how prescriptive the architecture was at Merion.  It is a great course, no doubt, but it does not tease as often as it should, IMO.  The tenth is the best example of that to me.

[Jim Nugent]

I have played none of the holes, and have only seen one, on TV during the 2007 U.S. Open: #17 at Oakmont.  It didn't look like a great hole to me.  Going for the green looked like an almost impossible shot to a tiny target surrounded by death.  But laying up off the tee looked damn hard too. 

Overall the hole seemed too penal, with little temptation.  Maybe playing it would give me a different perspective. 

[Tom_Doak]

I'd vote:

1.  10th at Merion - because it's pretty easy if you lay up to exactly the right spot, but that spot is hard to get to.  Also because there is the risk of going o.b. if you just bomb away and don't turn the ball over.

2.  12th at Pine Valley - the fallaway part of the green makes it difficult to drive the green or to hit a wedge shot close, even if you hit a risky tee shot and pull it off.

3.  17th at Oakmont - I've never thought of this in the same class.  In fact I don't think it was intended to be driveable at all, they just ran out of room to put the tee back further.  The lack of visibility makes it not tempting at all, unless someone goads you into trying to drive blind over the hill.

[Michael Tamburrini]

Are they really going to move the tee up on the 10th at Merion over the weekend?  Why?  It's already driveable.  Surely if they move the tee up it just turns it into a long par 3 and takes away the strategy?

[D_Malley]

In moving the tee up, they will actually be hitting from a much lower tee which will make the tee shot totally blind.
They used a teeing area at 240 yards in the 09 walker cup.
on that day there were two par 3's which played longer than the par 4 10th.

[archie_struthers]

 

I think #12 at PVGC is the easiest of the three,  but might be the best of the lot.   Of course I'm a little prejudiced .

[C. Squier]

I think #17 at Oakmont tempts the player to hit driver and go for it much more than the other two.  All wonderful holes.  Why don't more GCA's copy?  Simple, IMO.....lowers the total yardage on the scorecard.  Same w/ a great short par 3.  I mean, if you were to add (which you wouldn't, but a modern architect building a "championship" course would) 100 yards on #10 and #13 each, Merion wouldn't be considered short anymore. 

[Bill Vogeney]

Ran, only ever played Oakmont, but I have four rounds there. The 17th is awesome. Once I tried to rip a driver up the hill, the other times  laid up with a flip wedge. The green seems so tiny, less than a postage stamp. One of my rounds there I never did hole out as I felt like a modern day Sisyphus. I can only dream of playing PV and Merion.

I would offer #3 at Prairie Dunes as an example of a great drivable par 4 with trouble surrounding if you miss. The gunsch is very unforgiving.

Vog

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()