To Mike Cirba and Geoffrey Childs:
1. To compare the sites of CD to KC, I would say that one is on a bluff between lake Michigan and Crystal Lake, with a couple of severe patches that required creativity to make a golf course routing work (the long walk to the 12th tee, and the controversial 17th hole). The other is on a property that required one third of the holes to be built on severe patches of the property (1,6,7,9,12,17). Not that this is bad mind you, it's just not what I would call a similar site to CD. I would add the 5th @ CD to the list of severe holes of the 36 holes under discussion here, and I would add that it is not one of my personal favorites at the Downs. Back to CD 17th. I never played the hole when it had the tree in the middle of the fairway, but I'm sure I would have liked it less then. As it is now, you can hit a 3 wood or a 3 iron to the saddle, and then you have a very demanding short shot left. I like the hole. Would I have "found" that hole when routing this great course? I dunno. MacKenzie may have been forced into building a hole there to get back near the clubhouse. Without knowing the boundries of the property there at the time it was built, it would be hard to say. Unlike most people, I like the 18th hole at CD, so maybe he really wanted to get back to a spot near where he wanted to put the 18th tee.
2. The argument one of you made about comparing the 2nd @ KC to the 11th @ Shinnecock is a very good argument. I only have one round in at Shinnecock and I played it on a pretty calm day and I hit it on that green. But...some of the criticisms I made about the 2nd at KC could be made of the 11th @ SH. The 11th @ SH is truly a holy terror in the wind (as we saw the last time The Open was there). A mid-handicap player might not finish the hole under Open conditions (ie: shaved banks on the green surrounds and windy day) which is somewhat similar to the criticisms I have made of the 2nd @ KC. Both holes are very similar in length. You are making me rethink these negative comments.
TS