The first hole of a course:

[Ian Mackenzie]

I have always been intrigued by Donald Ross' (supposed) view that a first hole should be a "gentle hand shake" opener to ease a player into the round.


How do you see it?


- should it depend on the routing?
- is it designed to set the tone?
- do you want it to be easy or moderate or difficult?
- does it even matter?


I look at some of the best courses here in Chicago as a reference:


1. Chicago Golf Club - Par 4, 450 yards. I'm elated if I escape with a 4
2. Shoreacres - Par 5, 490-520. A birdie chance for sure.
3. Old Elm - Par 5, 490 (or so) downhill. A birdie chance if there ever was one.


Should there be an "orchestrated progression" when designing the first few holes? Or, should the routing dictate how the GCA views the sequencing?

[Mike Nuzzo]

The first at Wolf Point was intended to be gentle, and it is also tempting.
The fairway is wide.
It is a 310-330 two shot hole with a bigger than average green.
The big green was inspired after visiting Banff and especially Jasper.
The better player will push for a birdie.
I watched a very good player hit their fairway wood tee shot over the green and make bogie.

[Mark McKeever]

I like the idea of a birdie opportunity off the bat.  Either by way of a shorter par 4 or shortish par 5. 


Take hole 1 at Fenway for example.  It's a short downhiller, but trouble still lurks for the errant tee shot. A good drive leaving a pitch is an ideal opener for the course.  Keep in mind, the second hole is a monster, which I also like.  It balances out the start quite nicely.


Not only can a birdie hole get the round started on the right foot for a golfer, it's not a brutal hole thats slowing down play of the first hole.  I'd rather see groups play the first hole quickly.


Mark

[Tim Gavrich]

I don't like how many opening holes end up being boring throwaways, especially at courses that have driving ranges. I don't mind a first hole where a birdie is particularly feasible, but the fact that it's hole #1 shouldn't encourage lazy design. I've seen a lot of lazy opening holes.


It's good to start the round off with a half-par hole, to encourage more matches to begin with a won hole.

[Ira Fishman]

I certainly do not like too difficult--never fun to start an anticipated round with a double.  But I think that the most important aspect is a proper introduction to the architectural experience you are going to encounter. Kapulua, Mid Pines, Lahinch, and Primland all are not super difficult but definitely show you the kind of course you are on. Even a big championship course like Congressional has a first hole that is consistent with what is to come--not as big as the rest but signals that you should get prepared to get beat up.  On the other hand, as much as I like the courses, the first holes at Waterville and Ballybunion are not proper introductions to the rest of the day.

[Peter Pallotta]

There must be a reason(s) why the No. 1 hole is never the best hole on any course I've ever played or read about. Like Tim, I've played many an opening hole that much too clearly crossed over from gentle handshake to limp throwaway. I think that if architects *tried* to make the opening hole the very best one on the course, it would at least *end up* being the 7th or 9th best (given the demands/constraints of getting away from the clubhouse, and the inherently deep bias towards half par openings).

[Jeff_Brauer]

It's good to start the round off with a half-par hole, to encourage more matches to begin with a won hole.

It's really terrible to open with a half par hole, whether reachable par 4 or 5, from the pace of play standpoint.  Generally, we want a mid to long par 4, so if a player partly muffs his tee shot, he can play away immediately, because his max distance will still be short of the green.  A true three shot par 5 (by mere mortals at least) serves the same function.  But a short hole, where people have to wait to putt out to hit the drive on a par 4 or second shot on a par 5 just sets back completion of the first hole, and thus, pace of play for the entire day.


That does sort of lead to perhaps making features a bit easier, for similar reasons and to compensate for the first hole being one of the longer ones.  Generally, I use grass hazards front right of the green as one tool.  Placing more fw hazards left, etc. also helps.  Of course, I am designing mostly public courses where these things are more important. 

[Ally Mcintosh]

As TD so often states, firm and fast rules in design are not a good thing.


That being said and all things equal, a relatively gentle (though not necessarily straightforward) two shotter is a nice way to start. Though best not to have a driveable par-4 unless you are happy working with 12-15 minute tee intervals.


Worplesdon is one of my favourite openers in this vein.


EDIT: same point made by Jeff in above post which crossed.

[Ally Mcintosh]

There must be a reason(s) why the No. 1 hole is never the best hole on any course I've ever played or read about. Like Tim, I've played many an opening hole that much too clearly crossed over from gentle handshake to limp throwaway. I think that if architects *tried* to make the opening hole the very best one on the course, it would at least *end up* being the 7th or 9th best (given the demands/constraints of getting away from the clubhouse, and the inherently deep bias towards half par openings).

A post worthy of a new thread entitled "courses where the first hole is the best or most celebrated".


But seeing as Ran wants a moratorium on too many new threads, here will do:


Portstewart 1st and Doonbeg 1st are often considered the best on their respective courses. Maybe they are exceptions that prove the rule?

[Duncan Cheslett]

Reddish Vale begins with an excellent five-hole loop on high ground before plunging into the river valley at the 6th.  It has been a topic of hot debate - most likely for 100 years - as to whether the course would be better starting at the current 6th and finishing with the five hole loop.





Personally, I think that this would make a great opening hole. I know that par 3's are generally considered unsuitable as openers as backlogs can develop, but this 240 yarder is always played as a call-through hole, with the players on the green allowing  the following group to tee off before putting out. It works perfectly.

[David Wuthrich]

Ross designed courses in an era before the courses had wonderful practice facilities like they do today.  Most golfers were "not ready" to play the best or hardest hole on the course since they had not warmed up like we do today.  I think that is why you see a lot of the older architects start out with holes that let you ease into the round.  Of course there are exceptions, Chicago Golf comes to mind.

[Joe Hancock]

There must be a reason(s) why the No. 1 hole is never the best hole on any course I've ever played or read about. Like Tim, I've played many an opening hole that much too clearly crossed over from gentle handshake to limp throwaway. I think that if architects *tried* to make the opening hole the very best one on the course, it would at least *end up* being the 7th or 9th best (given the demands/constraints of getting away from the clubhouse, and the inherently deep bias towards half par openings).

Peter,


I don't know if the first holes at Kingsley and Greywalls are the "best" holes on their respective courses, but if someone felt that way I would understand. They're both very good, considering they are 5'ers. Also note that I"every been taught to not think in terms of "best hole on the course", but rather how each hole fits together in the big picture; indeed, the "best hole" might even be the breather hole in an otherwise intense portion of the routing, for it's physiological effect on the golfer during the round....but that's another thread waiting for inspiration.

The first at Grand Island was a no-nothing, par 4 at 315 yards. Our oldest son hit his tee shot into the creek that was 15 yards behind the green with a 3 wood....when he was a high school freshman. He was so upset with himself, and all I could ask was "why did you hit so much club?"

[Michael Graham]

I really like Castle Stuart's opener. It's very much a gentle handshake with the large inviting fairway while giving you a real flavour of what's in store.





It's not a great photo of the hole but I like that you can see the walk down to the tee which is out of sight from the starter's hut. The anticipation is definitely building at this point.

[Joe Hellrung]

I think Country Club of Rochester fits this description. While not the most difficult on the course, it opens with a par 4 up the hill to a tricky green.  Woods to the right and a FW bunker to the left, the a good drive is necessary.  Approach is up the hill, and by no means easy.  It is actually one of my favorite holes on the course.  Just beautiful to look at from the tee box, and lots of fun on the green. 

[Jason Topp]

Unlike most, I really like the opener at Streamsong Red - a brutally long par 4.  In part, I like it because it does not fit into the same old formula.  This big wide fairway provides plenty of room for a shaky start, the fact that people are hitting woods or hybrids into the green means that the tee on the 2nd is usually clear and you get a tough one out of the way out of the shoot.

For me personally, I am usually going to make a 5 on such a hole anyway so my initial mental challenge is to plan to just hit shots easily within my capabilities and try to have a good putt for a 4, no matter how I get there. 

[Duncan Cheslett]

I really enjoyed the first hole on the Highgate course at Enville which I played with Neil White last week. A big, open long hole with which to ease yourself into a round.  I was happy to be just off the green with my second and to up and down for a four.




I was even happier then to discover that the hole is a par 5!!   


Great hole!

[Ruediger Meyer]

There is so much to think about designing an opening hole. It obviously shouldn't be a pace-of-play-killer, it should be close to the clubhouse, it shouldn't frustrate the player right off the bat. Plus: if you would put the best hole of the course at the start, almost everyone has forgotten about it, when they come back to the clubhouse. So there is almost no incentive to put one of the best or one of the hardest holes here. The exception would be amazing pieces of land where every hole is a highlight and maybe courses where you have the Clubhouse on the highest point of the property. Portsteward Strand comes to mind (where the first hole is no pushover).

[Thomas Dai]

No hard and fast preference other than avoiding a 1st hole that plays directly into the sun first thing in the morning. Maybe let the lie of the land and the overall best routing dictate. Clubhouse location also being important, sometimes unavoidably so.

I actually rather like having a par-3 as the opening hole, and there have been threads herein dedicated to this over the years, but if this were the norm things would be boring.

If it wasn't soooo bloody steep the short on the card but not in actual play 1st at Painswick with the quarry in front of the green would be kinda nice.

My personal favourite 1st hole is this one - 1st at Royal Jersey - short video - scroll down to see Hole 1 - http://www.royaljersey.com/page.aspx?pid=39454


Atb

[Joe Zucker]

I'm not certain of the architectural history of the course, but Manakiki in Cleveland is a Ross course that starts with a blind tee shot that has OOB on the left. It is anything but a handshake and a shot I have never been able to figure out.  However, I don't know if the hole is original and Ross abandoned his philosophy this one time because the land dictated it or if the hole has been altered.


Jason's mention of Streamsong Red is an interesting call out because I think it is one of the toughest openers I have played.  At first I didn't like it and thought it was too hard when playing for a score.  But if I'm honest with myself and judge the hole based on the shots it asks me to hit and it's merit as a match play hole, I think it's a good hole.  This leads me to think there should be no rule for the 1st, other than it be the best hole the architect could fit on the land.

[Tim Fitz]

Ross designed courses in an era before the courses had wonderful practice facilities like they do today.  Most golfers were "not ready" to play the best or hardest hole on the course since they had not warmed up like we do today.  I think that is why you see a lot of the older architects start out with holes that let you ease into the round.  Of course there are exceptions, Chicago Golf comes to mind.

Using Ian's three examples, you will notice that Chicago Golf starts out with a more challenging first hole than Old Elm or Shoreacres.  Neither of the latter have much of a modern driving range.  While Chicago's requires a walk across a few fairways, there is full range to allow for a few swings of the wrench before teeing off.

[Kalen Braley]

The opener at Chambers Bay is the opposite then... more like a punch in the gut.  Just a brutal opener which is already long and plays into what i'm guessing is the prevailing wind.  Nothing like a bogey or worse to start the round out...


I can't think of a more difficult opening hole of courses I've played....

[JReese]

Ross designed courses in an era before the courses had wonderful practice facilities like they do today.  Most golfers were "not ready" to play the best or hardest hole on the course since they had not warmed up like we do today.  I think that is why you see a lot of the older architects start out with holes that let you ease into the round.  Of course there are exceptions, Chicago Golf comes to mind.

Using Ian's three examples, you will notice that Chicago Golf starts out with a more challenging first hole than Old Elm or Shoreacres.  Neither of the latter have much of a modern driving range.  While Chicago's requires a walk across a few fairways, there is full range to allow for a few swings of the wrench before teeing off.

Regarding CGC, I believe the now driving range was once upon a time a polo field.  I don't know if CBM intended this area to also be used to warm up pre-round.

[Jason Thurman]

Did Ross call it a "gentle handshake"? I never took the old Scot for a limp fish.

[Josh Tarble]

Did Ross call it a "gentle handshake"? I never took the old Scot for a limp fish.

And of the few Ross courses I've played, none of the first holes have been all that easy.

[Bob Montle]

Ian, very good question!

My preference is a short (drivable for the young flat bellies) par 4 to start the round. One which has a severe penalty for them if they miss their target.

They may be enticed to go for it when they aren't warmed up yet.  Meanwhile I may still par the hole after a poor drive but can try for birdie if I hit a good one.

This is purely personal, but may apply for some others here.  Opening holes with forced carries or tight landing zones cause me to tighten up and make me lose my swing, perhaps never to be found until way into the round.

Those easy openers encourage an easy, smooth swing, and establish my tempo for the whole round.