News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:23:56 AM »
I hold a somewhat minoritiy opinion on Sweetens Cove and I'm unsure of my thoughts.  To cut to the chase I have it as a 5 on whatever scale you choose to use.
 
What did you guys think?
 
Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Keith OHalloran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2015, 08:41:19 AM »
Michael H,
Can you elaborate on why you have it as a 5? I have not been there.

Sam Morrow

Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2015, 08:54:01 AM »
Sweetens is a hoot and a half

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2015, 09:28:57 AM »
Sweetens is a hoot and a half


How does "hoot and a half" translate to the Doak scale?   How many hoots is Wolf Point?


Go 'Stros!

Sam Morrow

Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2015, 09:43:43 AM »
Sweetens is a hoot and a half


How does "hoot and a half" translate to the Doak scale?   How many hoots is Wolf Point?


Go 'Stros!

I don't know the definition of each number on the Doak scale. All I know is that if someone said the only 2 courses you could play the rest of your life are Wolf Point and Sweetens that I'd smile.

If that's not really good then I don't know what is.

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2015, 09:45:09 AM »
Sweetens is a hoot and a half


How does "hoot and a half" translate to the Doak scale?   How many hoots is Wolf Point?


Go 'Stros!


Not sure if it answers your question,but in East Tennessee,a hoot and a half is several levels below a hoot and a holler.

Sam Morrow

Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2015, 09:49:41 AM »
Sweetens is a hoot and a half


How does "hoot and a half" translate to the Doak scale?   How many hoots is Wolf Point?


Go 'Stros!


Not sure if it answers your question,but in East Tennessee,a hoot and a half is several levels below a hoot and a holler.

Wow, in Oklahoma it's the opposite!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #7 on: October 08, 2015, 10:12:26 AM »
I hold a somewhat minoritiy opinion on Sweetens Cove and I'm unsure of my thoughts.  To cut to the chase I have it as a 5 on whatever scale you choose to use.


Michael:


Having not seen it, but seen the pictures, I'm not entirely surprised by your post.


Do you feel the same way about Dismal River (White), Ballyhack, and/or Tobacco Road, which were grouped together in another recent thread, that I'll paraphrase as "courses that are just over the top for some people" ?

Chris Mavros

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2015, 10:49:48 AM »
I would give it a Doak 6 or 7.  There's a lot going on with the greens, which certainly fosters a lot of creativity with the short game and a few holes probably demand a little too much precision.  But the lay out provides nine very distinct and interesting holes.  I also enjoyed how there was a chance at recovery of all but the most severe mis hits. 

The course asserts itself as unique and that could lead to polarization, but I found it to be an enjoyable play and kept wanting to play over and over again to try different approaches on each hole. 

It would also be a terrific match play venue. 

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #9 on: October 08, 2015, 11:57:10 AM »
Tom, I try hard not to use the phrase "over the top" since I don't really  know what the top is.  Unlike Tobacco Road, Dismal White and Ballyhack, in my opinion the architecture elements at Sweeten's Cove are incongruent, though generally well designed and constructed by Rob.  I don't know any other way to put it and hope to back that conclusion up with examples this evening.  An analogy would be a parade of homes residence where the primary mission of the builder is to demonstrate the entire breadth of his capabilities with the result being a place that impresses the neighbors but isn't functional and comfy.
 
My comments would benefit from an aerial photograph if anyone has the time and capability to post one.
 
Again, what Rob and Ari have accomplished is remarkable and if I'm in Rob's shoes I would not have passed on the opportunity to showcase my design and construction capabilities. 
 
Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #10 on: October 08, 2015, 12:01:06 PM »
Tom, I try hard not to use the phrase "over the top" since I don't really  know what the top is.  Unlike Tobacco Road, Dismal White and Ballyhack, in my opinion the architecture elements at Sweeten's Cove are incongruent, though generally well designed and constructed by Rob.  I don't know any other way to put it and hope to back that conclusion up with examples this evening.  An analogy would be a parade of homes residence where the primary mission of the builder is to demonstrate the entire breadth of his capabilities with the result being a place that impresses the neighbors but isn't functional and comfy.


So your comment is more about stylistics than playability ?   I can see that.  I had the same reaction to several courses built in the 1990's when other architects started mimicking Pete Dye's work, but with all sorts of kitchen-sink features thrown in.  They tried to defend it as "variety," but you don't paint your bedroom walls four different colors.

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #11 on: October 08, 2015, 12:18:05 PM »
I hold a somewhat minoritiy opinion on Sweetens Cove and I'm unsure of my thoughts.  To cut to the chase I have it as a 5 on whatever scale you choose to use.


Michael:


Having not seen it, but seen the pictures, I'm not entirely surprised by your post.


Do you feel the same way about Dismal River (White), Ballyhack, and/or Tobacco Road, which were grouped together in another recent thread, that I'll paraphrase as "courses that are just over the top for some people" ?


Why did you leave Kingsley Club off that list?
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

BCowan

Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #12 on: October 08, 2015, 12:35:10 PM »
The only hole in do not like at thee Cove is #6.  I think the green is weak and over undulating.  plus I detest ponds by greens.  The tree in front of 3 is ridiculous and ruins a great hole. I'd prefer that as a ball buster par 4. Par is irrelevant around here, so no biggie.  The other 7.5 holes are top notch in my opinion and is exactly the kind of architecture I crave.  I know bogey is a dye lover and I would play sweetens in a heartbeat over the overrated honors course.  I guess if one needs 10+ water hazards on there course to make it interesting and uses "it has angles card", then we disagree on golf architecture.  Plus the tree management excluding 3 at sweetens is marvelous.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2015, 09:04:46 PM by Ben Cowan (Michigan) »

Jason Way

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2015, 12:41:40 PM »
I would give it a Doak 6 or 7.  There's a lot going on with the greens, which certainly fosters a lot of creativity with the short game and a few holes probably demand a little too much precision.  But the lay out provides nine very distinct and interesting holes.  I also enjoyed how there was a chance at recovery of all but the most severe mis hits. 

The course asserts itself as unique and that could lead to polarization, but I found it to be an enjoyable play and kept wanting to play over and over again to try different approaches on each hole. 

It would also be a terrific match play venue.


This sounds like a description that could fit The Dunes Club, especially now that the trees are being managed better.  Fair comparison?
"Golf is a science, the study of a lifetime, in which you can exhaust yourself but never your subject." - David Forgan

Brandon Urban

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2015, 01:29:55 PM »
I drove 9+ hours to play Sweetens with Eric Smith on New Years Day. It was maybe 32° with a bit of breeze.
I would do it again in a heartbeat! Absolute blast to play with its bold greens and great bunkering. The all world Biarritz 10th hole is not to be missed.
181 holes at Ballyneal on June, 19th, 2017. What a day and why I love golf - http://www.hundredholehike.com/blogs/181-little-help-my-friends

Josh Tarble

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #15 on: October 08, 2015, 01:34:17 PM »
I was able to have a go at Sweetens right around the time of the Dixie Cup.  First off, the maintenance meld is incredible and perfectly matches the architecture.  Streamsong is the only other place I've encountered that has bermuda playing that firm and fast - really fun.  Especially compared to the squishy bent greens and ball-swallowing bermuda rough we found the rest of the trip.

I still haven't decided exactly how I feel about Sweetens.  I had a blast playing it, so that should really be all that matters. 

However, I felt I really had to alter my mindset while doing so.  There were some really fun shots, the greens made playing angles actually matter, but too often a terrible shot and a great shot resulted in the exact same outcome.  That's fine I guess, but I found a lot of my shots were a matter of chance.

I think you could describe the undulation as excessive at times, but that's also what helped create the strategy for the playing angles. 

So I guess this post was long for "I don't know how good it is, but I had a blast"

Ben Hollerbach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2015, 01:55:52 PM »


I've enjoyed every round I've played at Sweetens, but have always left feeling that something wasn't right. Maybe its the strange juxtaposition between the pancake flat river basin and the undulation built into the course. The whole place feels a little out of place and out of scale. I wonder more than anything if the course feels a little off because I don't want to play it as a course, I want to use it like a playground. Because of the imbalance of scale I feel that just playing the course as it's laid out only lets me see a portion of the property. I would rather just go exploring, trying out a variety of shots, than playing the course as is. This same imbalance of scale also makes it a brilliant matchplay course but a poor strokeplay course. With so many possible ways to play each hole playing for score can shift from exacting to borderline unfair quite quickly, but the same characteristics allow chances to be taken and holes to be won or lost in dramatic fashions.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2015, 02:10:48 PM by Ben Hollerbach »

Morgan Clawson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2015, 04:45:57 PM »
Bogey -

Using the old Doak Scale I would give it a 7.  I was able to play Sweeten's Cove 4x during the Dixie Cup (2x on 2 different days).  My Dixie Cup experience was definitely enhanced by playing it.  The rugged and random nature of Sweeten's was a perfect compliment to the linear equations of the Raynor/Raynor tribute courses we played.
My favorite par 5 was #1 (spectacular bunkering, particularly the coffin bunker by the green). My favorite par 4 was #5 (more great bunkering and a neat L shaped green).  My favorite par 3 was #9 (dynamic 3 tiered green).

Here's some of the Doak Scale descriptions:

4.   A modestly interesting course, with a couple of distinctive holes among the 18, or at least some scenic interest and decent golf. Also reserved for some very good courses that are much too short and narrow to provide sufficient challenge for accomplished golfers.
5.   Well above the average golf course, but the middle of my scale. A good course to choose if you're in the vicinity and looking for a game, but don't spend another day away from home to see it, unless your home is in Alaska.
6.   A very good course, definitely worth a game if you're in town, but not necessarily worth a special trip to see. It shouldn't disappoint you.
7.   An excellent course, worth checking out if you get anywhere within 100 miles. You can expect to find soundly designed, interesting holes, good course conditioning and a pretty setting, if not necessarily anything unique to the world of golf.
8.   One of the very best courses in its region (although there are more 8s in some places and none in others), and worth a special trip to see. Could have some drawbacks, but these will clearly be spelled out, and it will make up for them with something really special in addition to the generally excellent layout.

The Doak Scale descriptions are written from the viewpoint of a golfer seeking-out great and unique places to golf.  So, under that prism I give it a 7.  If Sweeten's was 100 miles from my home, I might still love it, but might have a difficult time getting there often, given that it is only 9 holes and 100 miles is a long way to travel for golf on a normal day.  One of the great things about a golf vacation is that you have more time for playing and traveling than you do in normal life.  You're not on the clock to leave and return home in 5 hours.

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #18 on: October 08, 2015, 05:01:18 PM »
Having played Tobacco Road 4 times, TR's green complexes are far larger and far tamer than Sweeten's.  Sweeten's will come close to edge of over done and for the individual either tip over or not tip over that edge.  On another thread, I said that I was in the undecided camp. 
Much hole location scouting prior to the round is required to avoid embarrassment.
The 4th green, for me, would require a dozen re-plays and along with hours of study to understand.  What makes it more so is the relatively high native growth that obscures much of the green.
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #19 on: October 08, 2015, 05:03:29 PM »
First off, we all have our own tastes and preferences.  That is what can make talking about golf courses so interesting...everyone will have their own take.


For me, I made the 1.5 hour trip to play Sweetens Cove earlier this year.  It was, to me, incredible.  In the discussion for best greens I've ever seen (in the ball park of Augusta National, Prairie Dunes, and National Golf Links of America).  And the best 9 holer I've ever played.


But, that's just my take.  I think it is worth a trip to see if you are in the vicinity.  That makes it a potential for a Doak 7...but that would assume you enjoyed it after making the trip.  Which I did.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Rob Collins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2015, 06:32:28 PM »
Michael - I understand where your comment is coming from regarding the "tour of homes" - there are clearly a lot of bold / audacious / insert adjective features on the course.  I knew that while we were planning / building Sweetens Cove that we would receive a lot of comments along those lines, and I think it is easy to get stuck on those characteristics and not see the subtleties hidden behind them.   For me, good golf courses make you think over every shot, have variety in the green complexes, bring contour and the ground game into the equation / give players the option of using contour to get the ball close to the hole, play differently from one round to the next, and don't dictate to players how they have to play / have multiple routes to the hole.  I wanted Sweetens to have all of those characteristics, but I was interested in physically and visually expressing those elements in an uncommon fashion.  Personally, I think we accomplished all of the above. 

Regarding the suggestion that it is incongruent or disjointed, I simply disagree with that.  All of the above qualities exist on each hole, which helps establish a sense of continuity throughout the layout (along with certain visual themes).  I actually think that the continuity and its use of core themes is one of the greatest strengths of the course -- essentially, that was the biggest challenge at Sweetens: how do we create unique & bold features that are interesting in their own right, but at the same time all tie together? Along those lines, I've personally been to Sweetens 700+ times, and I get a kick out of finding little contours and details that we hid throughout the layout.  It's not uncommon for me to look at something and think -- wow, I forgot we did that, with the point being that it is all about local knowledge and enjoying the process of discovery.  In spite of all of the bold features that attract immediate attention, my focus was on making an impression on you / teaching you something after your 50th, 100th, or 500th time around the layout.  In the end, I think that if you focus on the undercurrents rather than the big splash, you might change your mind.  And, if you don't, that is fine too.  I accept that it is not for everyone.  It definitely wasn't my intent for it to be loved by all.

Finally, I read that someone noted that it was a good match play course, and I can say that Sweetens was definitely conceived with match play in mind.  I intended for there to be wild swings in play, which I think helps create a sense of drama in one's match, with the final shot coming on a short one shotter.
Rob Collins

www.kingcollinsgolf.com
@kingcollinsgolf on Twitter
@kingcollinsgolf on Instagram

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #21 on: October 08, 2015, 08:56:55 PM »
Ben, thank you for posting the aerial.

Rob, thank you for your well reasoned post - I'm glad you weighed in.  Again, I'm very uncomfortable with my opinion and am looking for other input.  Yours is helpful.

For the benefits of others I have only played the 9 twice.  I did pay the standard fee (Barney) and presented the owners with a bottle of wine in a modest congratulatory gesture.  I have no axe to grind.

Now to picking the nits:

I like the first hole, but question whether the coffin bunker fronting the green isn't all the bunkering the hole needs.  I do like the left-hand carry bunker from the tee, but don't like being confronted with it the first shot of the day, particularly in the absence of a range to warm up on.  The massive right hand bunker off the tee only comes in to play for the higher handicapper hitting a slice from the first tee - not an unprecedented start.

I think the second hole is rock solid with a very well placed center line bunker.  This relatively unadorned hole is visually stunning primarily due the beautiful vista down the right hand side.  Clearly a case that less is more.

I see no strategy on the 3rd.  Perhaps the massive bunker down the right side could have been angled from short right to long left, thereby requiring carries of varying lengths.  This might work well in tandem with bunkering short right of the green.  I'm a tree guy but don't care for the single tree short of the green as it represents the second center line hazard just short of a green in two of the first three holes, both par fives at that.

Surprised no one has mentioned the double-back nature of the 4th. I understand the rectangular site is restricted and have no idea how that could have been avoided.  While the green is a marvel, I don't see the need for the front portion as any pin there would call for the fourth consecutive pitched approach.  Besides, the party's in the back.

While I agree that the 5th green is cool,  I'm not sure the fairway width does it justice with the single tree and cart path bordered lake encroaching down the preferred left side. 

The 6th is a demanding two shotter, but I was unfortunate to have to play to a hole location back right.  The small nature of the back right section coupled with the swale and bank is a little too demanding for me.

The 7th green is one of the absolute best greens I've seen on a modern golf course.  It makes the hole and as a result the large fairway bunker is unnecessary.   Interesting that it's also one of the smallest.  More holes like the 2nd and greens like the 7th and the course bumps up to a hard 7 in my book.

The 8th should ideally be approached from the far right side of the fairway yet the only fairway bunker is left.  In my opinion a biarittz only functions when played down the length of the green.  Given the green's angle, that's virtually impossible here. 

The 9th is visually stunning but I'd sure like to hit a bucket of balls there to guage the functionality of this redan.  I do think the back-bunkering along the left side of the green removes the pitch-back option available to most biarittz greens.  I'm also not sure about the upslope front right as it brakes, rather than accelerates a draw played there. 

Overall, the massive bunkers  could perhaps have been angled diagonally across fairways, thereby creating mock-doglegs on a site where the limited room required straight line routing.

That's my thought on how this course goes from a 7 - perhaps the "correct" consensus opinion, to a 5 in my book.  It is a very good golf course.  It is an absolute blast to play.  It's a bargain. That's plenty good for me. 

I invite all to nit-pick my nit-picks.

Respectfully,

Bogey



« Last Edit: October 08, 2015, 08:58:56 PM by Michael H »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Jay Mickle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #22 on: October 08, 2015, 09:31:02 PM »
 Enjoyed the course greatly. It appeared to be a great hickory course that would accommodate the ground game but I found I found a number of greens\approaches that rejected run up shots.  Second time around I had more success even with a grooveless niblick.
While the greens are out at the end of the bell curve, that you play them twice every 18 certainly shortens the ride up the learning curve. It is surely a wonderful course that I could play all of the  without boredom (if I did I would find a way to put lightening attractors atop the tree in front of 3 green). Doak 6.
@MickleStix on Instagram
MickleStix.com

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #23 on: October 08, 2015, 10:11:24 PM »
Playing the Cove. Not jumping the shark. Great conditioning despite the rain. It is a course you should go back to time and again, and would be good prep if you're going to play links golf. The tree on 3 didn't bother me because I don't have an aerial game. On the 4th I hit 7 iron to the front and 3 wood to the back. If you are going to really enjoy the course you'll have to map out the greens. because the hole locations can be extremely hard to get to, I was suckered much too often.  Seldom have I hit a putter from off the green that comes back to me, followed by a re-putt which goes off the other side. The margin off error can be very slight unless you go for the very lean fat of the green.

Rob Collins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Dixie Cuppers' Sweetens Cove Review
« Reply #24 on: October 08, 2015, 10:36:27 PM »
File this in the category of "for what it's worth" --


#1 - the bunker off of the tee is easy to carry and is intended to be more of a visual imposition to your game rather than one that affects you from a playability standpoint.  However, I accept that it impacts the first swing of the day -- given this, I think that its distance from the tee works well strategically.  If you carry it, you are in position to attack the par 5 second from the best possible angle.  Also, the two fairway bunkers are absolutely essential to the strategy, as they are on the line of charm.  If you chicken out and bail to the right, not only will you have an awkward third shot approach to the green but you could potentially be dealing with a blind shot, as the shaping on the right side obscures visibility of the green -- this is one of the common themes throughout the course: strategy isn't always dictated by the common elements of bunkers & water. Instead, visibility or the lack thereof directly influences play on this hole and others at Sweetens. As far as the right hand bunker goes, I have never seen a high handicapper reach it off of the tee so I don't think that is a relevant point.


The third hole presents strategic challenges on every shot.  If you notice the shaping in the landing area, you will realize that a small, difficult to reach plateau exists to the left of the central bunker.  The goal is to get to this spot.  If you hit a weak shot and fail to make it to this area, you may be pushed via the contours to an area to the right and short of the central bunker.  From here, you have a blind approach to the green.  From either spot, it is the golfer's responsibility to recognize the location of the flag.  Choose your layup spot wisely based upon this information.  If you fail to hit the desired spot, the game is not up, as the gathering or repelling contours of the green (depending on the quality of your approach) can either funnel the ball to the hole or make your life miserable.  Further, the tree in front of the green is essential to the strategy as it forces players to hit around, underneath, over, or through it depending upon their angle of approach and the pin placement.  One of our members told us the other day that he hit "one of the best shots of his life there" from 125 yards out.  His playing partner didn't think he could clear the tree and get the ball to the pin.  He didn't think he could clear the tree and get the ball to the pin.  He thought about going to the left, he thought about going to the right and he eventually decided to go over. He struck the ball perfectly on a path that took his ball over the tree and he ended up 1' from the hole with an easy tap in for birdie that included a standing ovation from the group on 4.  This is the precise scenario that I had in mind when we decided to leave the tree.  Would he have this story if the hole lacked strategy or if the tree wasn't there? Obviously, the answer is 'no'


The fourth hole is one of my favorites as it has infinite variety built into it.  It can play anywhere between 85 yards and visible or 215 yards and blind.  The combination of tee and pin location makes it an enduring and fascinating challenge, in my opinion.  As a low handicapper, I actually prefer the front portion of the green since the gathering contours allow for an abundance of creative shot making on both the tee & recovery shots.


On the fifth, the fairway is 100 yards wide, and only a horribly misplaced tee shot will find the hazard on the left.  The width and extreme variety of pin locations v. green/fairway contour variety conspire to make it an extremely interesting and strategic short par 4.


The sixth hole was designed to be the toughest on the course and an important part of the "give & take" nature of the routing.  It is sandwiched between two short par 4's and falls two holes after a potentially ball busting par 3...so, I don't know what to say other than "hit a better shot."


Hardly anybody knows this (until now), but the strategy of the 7th hole was inspired in large part by the 4th hole at Pebble Beach, which is one of my favorites on that course.  At Pebble, you have a miniature putting surface that is flanked by bunkers left and right. In order to access the best angle of approach, you have to challenge the cliff along the right side of the fairway -- from here, the axis of the green is opened up and it is a simple approach. If you go too far left into the extremely wide fairway, you are playing across bunkers and against the axis of the green toward a cliff.  If you replace the bunkers and cliff at Pebble with the violent greenside contours at Sweetens, you essentially have the same hole.  As far as the big bunker is concerned, it is elemental to the strategy: squeeze it into the skinny portion of the fairway to the right and you are playing along the ideal axis...bring out the driver and pull it left or chicken out to the left (on a 150 yard wide fairway) and you have a hell of a tough approach...only this time you are dealing with contour and short grass rather than bunkers and cliffs.  For my personal tastes, I prefer the former hazard because it doesn't dictate the type of recovery shot required to the golfer.  There are at least four ways to play that approach and recovery, as there are on every other approach and recovery shot as Sweetens.


On the eighth, the worst angle of approach is the center of the fairway.  Depending on the pin location and your skill set, the best angle of attack is the far left or far right side of the fairway.  Also, the bunkers aren't technically on the left of the fairway given that the shared fairway with #7 is 150 yards wide.  Personally, I've played the hole hundreds of times, and I'm still trying to decide which angle I like best.  Also, the green isn't really a biarritz, nor was it ever intended to be.  During construction, it just kind of turned out the way it did as things tend to do when you have an open and fluid construction process.  I think of the green as being similar to the 16th at N. Berwick even though that was never the intention going in.  I simply liked the way it was shaped and the strategies / angles that it presented to the golfer...so, we went with it. The most important thing about the eighth is that it has both repelling and gathering contours like every green on the golf course, the lone exception being the 7th, which is mostly repelling save a few micro "helping" contours.  Whether or not the contours repel or accept your shot depends on the following: angle of attack, pin location, and strike of the ball.  The meaning of all of this is that the functionality of the "biarritz" depends entirely on those three factors.  Sometimes you may get helped, sometimes you may get kicked where it counts...its up to the golfer to deal with the consequences.


On the ninth, I have one minor change that I want to make to the hole.  I intend to fill in about 500 square feet of the back bunker and convert that area to fairway ramp (on the right side facing the tee).  My intention with the hole was for the far right run up shot to as viable as the "flying directly at it" shot. As it is now, I think the run up on the right side has a margin of error that is too small.  It can be done -- I've done it as have many others, but its is a little out of "balance" for my tastes. However, I still think it is an uncommon and wonderful par 3 given the alternate routes and unique characteristics of the green and its surrounds.  Currently, I think you have about a 20% chance of success playing far right...my intention was for it to be closer to 50/50 and we will eventually get there.  I hope to make the change this Spring.  It is worth noting, however, that we have had five (5) hole in ones on the hole since opening, most of which came from high handicappers who used the redan contours to funnel the ball toward the hole...so, its not that far off...but, I am a perfectionist when it comes to architecture so we will address that concern.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2015, 11:09:10 PM by Rob Collins »
Rob Collins

www.kingcollinsgolf.com
@kingcollinsgolf on Twitter
@kingcollinsgolf on Instagram