I heard a story about number 3 at WFW that Billy Casper laid up each day of the US Open rather than take on the well bunkered green. I see that as an indictment of the architecture of the hole.
The 14th at Rolling Green is a par three that allows a hook, a fade, a straight shot or even a layup. I don’t think WFW has a par three near it. Number 10 at WFW was one I liked. I’m not sure if I like it more than 10 at RG.
Mayday,
I would beg to differ. Casper laid up, because #3 at WFW was round-killer very early on the card.
At 192-243yds, "Pinnacle's" extensive bunkering and sloped green contours left very little room for any margin of error. Like anything at Rolling Green, it most certainly allows for any style of play, but slightly favors a fade. Casper exercised shrewd judgement in laying up, especially in light of the severity of US Open style grooming.
I take a little issue with Tom's statement either of the 2 front-nine par-3 holes "would be a castoff at Rolling Green, Manufacturers, or Lancaster." No doubt all three of those courses have wonderful sets of one-shotters, but I hardy think the terror of #3, or the demand on short precision on #7 would be castoffs anywhere, save for a Somerset Hills, Cypress Point, or a RMGC.
Lastly, although there is some question of derivative attribution, I'd offer that the examples of
McKenzie-related architecture found on Melbourne's Sandbelt handily eclipse Philly's sextet....similar to the results of the last two Eagles games!