[Marty Bonnar]

Sure, we’re all fully aware of the importance of holes 1 and 18 - and probably 9 and 10 - in building the rhythm and drama in a Course routing.
1, we hope, sets a benchmark for the player, giving that idea/feeling/message on what the design is about to present to him/her. Tough, gentle, atmospheric, natural, wide open, narrow, heavily-bunkered, bendy, the options are many but should indicate the architectural intent fairly obviously.
18, in my feeble mind at least, is the most important hole on the golf course. Final lasting memory of the day’s experience, it might be the last time you see/play the golf course, so needs to be a fitting testament to the time - and money - you’ve spent not only playing it, but getting there, staying there, eating and drinking there and meeting up with your fellow golfers, old friends, new friends, architecture aficionados and other assorted eedjits.
9 and 10 follow pretty much the same rules and should, if possible, possess similar values. You know, getting back to the clubhouse, rounding out the score for the 9, using the terrain well, etc. I know other stuff gets in the way, but we’re (I’m!) talking relative here!
So, here’s my point. Is there EVER a time when an architect might think: “Oh boy, I’m loving the idea of making this the 3rd/6th/14th/whatever hole here at Optimal Variety Country Club?
If so, why?
Or, indeed, why not?!
Cheers,
F.

[Carl Rogers]

Wouldn't a course used primarly for match play want the 15th or 16th to be "the hole"?

[Tom_Doak]

Wouldn't a course used primarly for match play want the 15th or 16th to be "the hole"?

Bernard Darwin wrote that it is the duty of every good course to have a fine 17th hole.  I guess he figured if the match didn't get there, it wasn't that close.

[Tom_Doak]

To the opening post:  I probably worry less about the 9th and 10th holes than any architect I know - and more about the first three, which really set the tone for the day.  If I've got a couple of dullish holes I will try to hide them somewhere around the turn, but certainly not early in the round.


I would say that on many sites, you don't have a lot of ability to change where holes fall in sequence for an ideal experience, but certainly if you have a great short hole you'd hope not to use it too early, right?  But if you want it to be the 8th or 13th, that's just superstition.

[Peter Pallotta]

Interesting, Tom.
For me the worst phrase/maxim  ever uttered in the history of golf course architecture is ‘a gentle handshake’.
I don’t know what the phrase might’ve meant to a Ross or Mackenzie or Doak or Colt, but to the architects who designed most of the courses I play it must’ve meant ‘as dull as dishwater’.
I’ve actually had to train myself not to get annoyed or mentally check out of the round on the very first tee. But it’s still hard for me not to prejudge the course because of that ‘gentle handshake’ of an opener. Luckily, even when I do prejudge, my expectations are not often disappointed....

[Thomas Dai]

I believe I’ve read somewhere that Pete Dye liked courses to finish 5-3-4? Wouldn’t such a preference, amongst many other considerations, be inclined to influence terrain selection in terms of hole selection, routing etc?
Atb

[Tom_Doak]

I believe I’ve read somewhere that Pete Dye liked courses to finish 5-3-4? Wouldn’t such a preference, amongst many other considerations, be inclined to influence terrain selection in terms of hole selection, routing etc?
Atb

Yes, and yes.


Mr Dye wasn't 100% sticklish about that order:  Crooked Stick and Harbour Town and Long Cove are 4-3-4 with the 15th as a par 5, and The Golf Club is 3-5-4.  But Pete did prefer to space out the par-3 holes fairly evenly through the round, and mix up the pars, in the sort of textbook style.


Of course, a large number of Pete's projects started with flat land (or worse), so he didn't have the terrain pushing a different solution, and it made less sense to divert from his ideal.   But that was the main reason I decided I didn't want to have an ideal finish in mind, because I thought it weighed too heavily on Mr Dye's choices.

[Peter Flory]

Interesting, Tom.
For me the worst phrase/maxim  ever uttered in the history of golf course architecture is ‘a gentle handshake’.
I don’t know what the phrase might’ve meant to a Ross or Mackenzie or Doak or Colt, but to the architects who designed most of the courses I play it must’ve meant ‘as dull as dishwater’.
I’ve actually had to train myself not to get annoyed or mentally check out of the round on the very first tee. But it’s still hard for me not to prejudge the course because of that ‘gentle handshake’ of an opener. Luckily, even when I do prejudge, my expectations are not often disappointed....

I love the gentle handshake concept.  It lessens the need to hit range balls and greatly decreases breakfast balls/ mulligans. 


I always found the first hole at OFCC North to be problematic.  While it may be the easiest hole on the course, the tee shot is very demanding.  Bunkers everywhere and the best shot is a draw toward the OB.  It just leads to players reloading right off the bat, which sets the wrong tone.  And for the sticklers, it's just sort of demoralizing to be hitting 3 off the first tee. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

A bit OT, but a few thoughts....


Many owners want the 1-3 and 10-12 sequence to be similar for tournaments or more practically, double starts.


And, pace of play consultants stats show the best way to avoid back ups is to start with the toughest hole and have them get slightly easier as the round goes on, on the theory that the group ahead should actually get ahead of your group and stay there.  And the worst thing you can do is follow an easy hole with hard one, which almost guarantees the group ahead won't be clear when you finish the easy one.  I never adopted that theory, but its out there.


As to the OP question, I thought about it and never looked for a specific third or whatever hole.  I usually look for the best 18 holes, and usually also know where the clubhouse is, whether there will be returning nines, etc.  It usually just works out where it works out.  And, except on really great sites (or partial ones) if the rolling land is about the same, as much of the hole's quality would be derived from bunkering, etc.  Lastly, sometimes we consider flipping nines, but that is mostly to keep the most holes out of the rising morning sun or setting PM sun, not because we think a particular hole.  Or, we want to get the first par 3 later in the nine, etc. for pace of play.


And, the only one I remember discussing here is RTJ's decision to start Spyglass along the ocean rather than finish it, more like Pebble Beach and Cypress.  But that again is start and finish......

[Jerry Kluger]

The question I would add is what holes should you not put in a particular place in the hole sequence?  For example, the long and tough par 3 is going to probably cause some backup as well as a par 5 which can be reached in 2 by many players - they are certainly assets for a course but where do they belong in the sequence. (I am presuming that there is more than one possible routing giving more flexibility of hole sequence.)

[Dave McCollum]

I'm not sure I understand this thread.  I've often wondered why so many 17th holes are par 3 and speculated that the architect knew where the finishing hole and house would be and used the par 3 to get there.   

[Tom_Doak]

I'm not sure I understand this thread.  I've often wondered why so many 17th holes are par 3 and speculated that the architect knew where the finishing hole and house would be and used the par 3 to get there.

A lot of architects just like the idea of a par-3 17th ... the Spanish designer Javier Arana built one on every single one of his courses.  (He only built a dozen or so.)


Personally, I'm not a big fan of having the 17th be a par-3, though it was at High Pointe and is at Pacific Dunes and Rock Creek.

[mike_malone]

Some Philly Flynn#3’s


Rolling Green is a short one that is perpendicular to 1,2,4 so it gets you to 4 and is along the entrance road.


PhillyCountry present 3 was 18. It’s a typical Flynn 5 with interest in the layup area. Someone tell me which is the original.


Manufacturers is my favorite hole on the course. Up the hill to a typical great Flynn green.


Huntingdon Valley is a stellar 3. It’s Flynn’s own Redan template.


Lehigh is also a 3. The signature Flynn long 3.


Lancaster is a 4 that crosses the river and is a Flynn classic short 4. Again it’s not original.


The 6th and 14th at Rolling Green are strong 3’s with 14 among the best holes anywhere.


I’ll leave it to others to discuss 3,6,14 at other Philly Flynns.


It may just be that he doesn’t make weak holes or care about building to a crescendo!

[Tom_Doak]

In keeping with my idea that the first three holes are extra important, I have also wound up with a bunch of good third holes: 


the third at High Pointe brought you around to the barn
The 3rd at Pacific delivers you to the ocean
The 3rd at Old Mac goes up over the ridge
The 3rd at Tara Iti gets closest to the beach


All of those feature a demanding shot which would have been pretty intimidating if tackled any earlier in the round.

[Matt_Cohn]

Taking this a bit too literally, a disproportionate number of courses have their 3rd hole as their first par-3. It makes sense—not #1, and probably not #2, and you have to have par-3's eventually. Among Golf Digest's Top 50 in the US, here is how many courses have their first par-3 at...


#1:   0
#2:   6
#3:   20
#4:   12
#5:   8
#6:   4
#7+: 0

[Philip Caccamise]

In keeping with my idea that the first three holes are extra important, I have also wound up with a bunch of good third holes: 


the third at High Pointe brought you around to the barn
The 3rd at Pacific delivers you to the ocean
The 3rd at Old Mac goes up over the ridge
The 3rd at Tara Iti gets closest to the beach


All of those feature a demanding shot which would have been pretty intimidating if tackled any earlier in the round.

While not the most memorable hole on the course, it's one of my favorites. Can make anywhere from 3 to 8 and is either a 4.5 or a 5 depending on the wind.

[Kyle Harris]

On the George Thomas model of routing, the 3rd hole was likely the first to get you significantly away from the clubhouse in a new direction from the 1st.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()