[cary lichtenstein]

I thought I'd ask whether the Treehouse thought the road hole was a good hole since another thread seems to imply it is worthy of consideration at Old McDonald.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Cary,

It's a world class hole.

Examine all of the elements.
Examine all of the features
Examine all of the shots.

What do you think ?

[PThomas]

Cary,

It's a world class hole.

Examine all of the elements.
Examine all of the features
Examine all of the shots.

What do you think ?

Patrick - does it matter that it apparently has to be tricked up in order to challenge world class players??

it it does, then the answer, sadly, must be no

[cary lichtenstein]

Pat:

The 1st time I played it, it was exciting to play as it was steeped in so much history.

On multiple plays, I think it is too penal. Not the tee shot, the shot into the green.

I think you can make a double bogey with 2 very well struck shots, so is that a good hole in my book, probably not, but I would like to hear what others think.

Cary

[Bill_McBride]

I thought I'd ask whether the Treehouse thought the road hole was a good hole since another thread seems to imply it is worthy of consideration at Old McDonald.

That's interesting, Cary.  The "Road Hole" at NGLA #7, is similar to TOC #17 but quite different in important ways.  The "road" is represented at NGLA by a long bunker below the level of the green, Where the actual road at TOC is demonic and could cost several shots if not played precisely onto the green, the bunker at NGLA is not such a challenge.   There is also not an OB in the dogleg at NLGA, just some rough to be challenged off the tee.  So that's much less punitive.

So I guess the answer is it depends on which "Road Hole" Tom would emulate at Old Macdonald, the Macdonald hole or the original.

In my opinion, either "Road" hole is a great hole, better than good and certainly should be included in any Macdonald-inspired course.

[Aaron Katz]

I don't really see how it is tricked up during the Open.  It is what it is.  

One feature that I don't like about the real Road Hole is the rough off to the left.  I think it forces the player to take the OB into play off the tee.  I'd rather the road bunker itself be the only consideration for the player in choosing the line of his drive.  

I think the green is wonderful, and not tricked up at all.  It's refreshing that the best play might be to play long and left up near the 18th tee.  

[PThomas]

I don't really see how it is tricked up during the Open.  It is what it is.  

One feature that I don't like about the real Road Hole is the rough off to the left.  I think it forces the player to take the OB into play off the tee.  I'd rather the road bunker itself be the only consideration for the player in choosing the line of his drive.  

I think the green is wonderful, and not tricked up at all.  It's refreshing that the best play might be to play long and left up near the 18th tee.  

Aaron -- didn't they grow a ton of rough down the right side this year which some people felt tricked it up?

[Aaron Katz]

I didn't see that.

I would agree with you that the narrowing of the fairway with the rough is kind of messed up.  But that certainly isn't the Road Hole's defense, and the hole would play just as hard (or at least just as strategically) if the entire playing area was fairway height.  I don't see anything tricked up about how the angle of the fairway, the blindness, or the location of the road bunker.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think it is a great hole in its setting and location on the course. The replaca road holes tend to use the trap in the front of the green as the primary feature. I like the idea of a blindish tee shot being in the mix as well as rear right trouble, not necessarily a hazzard.

[Philippe Binette]

Cary

you said:

The 1st time I played it, it was exciting to play as it was steeped in so much history.

On multiple plays, I think it is too penal. Not the tee shot, the shot into the green.

I think you can make a double bogey with 2 very well struck shots, so is that a good hole in my book, probably not, but I would like to hear what others think.

Golf is not about striking golf shots well (that's why american golf is so boring) it's about the result of the shot, the position for the next one...

The road hole is great, nothing too tricky about it (only if you're stuck with the perception of par)...

It's a blind target of the tee, follwoed by a long approach to a small target... the thing is, for the average guy (even for Bobby Jones) don't go for it if you're on a 30% chance of pulling the shot out... if you get to the front right side in two, 40 yards of the hole, play a decent chip, you have a 15 footer for par... at worst 5.

What's make it great is the fact that over your second shot, it's really inviting to go for it, because outside the road hoe bunker, it's a really open spot on the course. If it was a creek front left (covering more space) you'd see more layups, more 5s and less 7s.

It's a hard hole in the 2 shots Green in regulation / 2 putts perspective which is the perspective that messed up much of golf... that perspective can be thrown in the garbage on the old course.

[Jay Flemma]

I agree its a great hole...many of our greatest holes are "half holes" and it has an unforgettable natural setting as well as terrific design and phenomenal Bunkering.

[cary lichtenstein]

Cary

you said:

The 1st time I played it, it was exciting to play as it was steeped in so much history.

On multiple plays, I think it is too penal. Not the tee shot, the shot into the green.

I think you can make a double bogey with 2 very well struck shots, so is that a good hole in my book, probably not, but I would like to hear what others think.

Golf is not about striking golf shots well (that's why american golf is so boring) it's about the result of the shot, the position for the next one...

The road hole is great, nothing too tricky about it (only if you're stuck with the perception of par)...

It's a blind target of the tee, follwoed by a long approach to a small target... the thing is, for the average guy (even for Bobby Jones) don't go for it if you're on a 30% chance of pulling the shot out... if you get to the front right side in two, 40 yards of the hole, play a decent chip, you have a 15 footer for par... at worst 5.

What's make it great is the fact that over your second shot, it's really inviting to go for it, because outside the road hoe bunker, it's a really open spot on the course. If it was a creek front left (covering more space) you'd see more layups, more 5s and less 7s.

It's a hard hole in the 2 shots Green in regulation / 2 putts perspective which is the perspective that messed up much of golf... that perspective can be thrown in the garbage on the old course.

Philippe:

Interesting perspective...as I agree with you in that is the way to play the hole, still not sure if that makes it a good hole.

If par on it were 4.5 and par on 18 were 3.5, then I would agree. Or maybe that's the whole point, forget about par or fair and just play, the course is the same for everyone. Very interesting

Cary

[Aaron Katz]

This is sort of a variation on my "playing safe" thread:

Does the Road Hole cease to be a great hole once the player has decided that he will never, ever, ever challenge the road bunker (or the road itself)?   The first time one plays it, the player MUST be itching to challenge that pot bunker and hit the green "in regulation."  But what if, after five plays (and five failures), the player says "screw it, I'm laying up short and right every time"?  At that point, there are no more hazards on the hole and, aside from the blind tee shot (which is neat, but can't make the hole by itself), it's just a boring par 5.  

At some point can a risk/reward hole dangle so little a chance at reward that its no longer a strategically good hole?  

[Bill_McBride]

Aaron, don't you think it's a great hole if you decide not to challenge the Road Bunker and then have to think and execute your way to a par?  To me that's a great hole in the right setting.  There are many ways to accomplish that on the Road Hole at TOC - you can play left of the bunker if the pin is over there and try ot chip or putt close.  You can play right and try to lag a putt up close.  You don't have to challenge the bunker but you'd better be ready to play a very good shot to make a 4.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick - does it matter that it apparently has to be tricked up in order to challenge world class players??

it it does, then the answer, sadly, must be no

How is it tricked up ?

Why would the need to challenge the best players in the world be the sole determinate of the worth of any hole ?

[Tom_Doak]

Aaron:

What if you drive it into the neck of the fairway 340 yards off the tee, as one of my playing partners did during the Dunhill Cup last fall?  You aren't going to lay up with a 9-iron are you?

No, you're not; you're going to hit into the road and make six.

That's one reason it's still a great hole.  As the better players get their drives closer to the green, they feel more obliged to take on the green, instead of simply laying up.

[Patrick_Mucci]

That's interesting, Cary.  The "Road Hole" at NGLA #7, is similar to TOC #17 but quite different in important ways.

The "road" is represented at NGLA by a long bunker below the level of the green, Where the actual road at TOC is demonic and could cost several shots if not played precisely onto the green, the bunker at NGLA is not such a challenge.  

The long, deep, rear bunker is no pushover and may add more strokes to your score than the road.

There is also not an OB in the dogleg at NLGA, just some rough to be challenged off the tee.  So that's much less punitive.

Yes and No,

A lost ball in the blind, deep, right side rough presents the same penalty as OB.

While finding a ball in the deep, dense rough is immediately less penal than a ball out-of-bounds, that can change quickly when the golfer fails to extricate himself from the rough after a few swings.

So I guess the answer is it depends on which "Road Hole" Tom would emulate at Old Macdonald, the Macdonald hole or the original.

It's not that simple.

On a blind hole, with either out-of-bounds or deep rough, pace of play becomes a serious consideration, especially at a facility where rounds per day drive cash flow.

I think one of the problems is:  As you diminish or eliminate some of the component architectural pieces, you distance yourself from the template of the real McCoy.  And, as you get further and further removed, the hole fails to resemble and play like its intended model.

In my opinion, either "Road" hole is a great hole, better than good and certainly should be included in any Macdonald-inspired course.

Agreed

[PThomas]

Patrick - does it matter that it apparently has to be tricked up in order to challenge world class players??

it it does, then the answer, sadly, must be no

How is it tricked up ?

Why would the need to challenge the best players in the world be the sole determinate of the worth of any hole ?

i'm sure some people feel it must challenge the best players....but I don't think it needs to

it's just another example of how the overlylong ball is hurting the pro game

[Mark_F]

It isn't even the best 17th hole in Scotland...

[Yannick Pilon]

Philippe,

I totally agree with everything you said.  I would also reinforce your answer by adding this to my response to Cary:

Two very well struck shots mean nothing if you don't place them in the proper location for the next shot you have to play.  And this is especially true at St Andrews.  And this is why this hole is so great.

YP

[Aaron Katz]

Tom Doak,

I agree with that.  Which is why I think the Road Hole definitely IS a great hole (and why I think it is actually better when the rough isn't pinching in that bottleneck spot so much, so as to encourage even more aggressive drives).

[Jay Cox]

I agree completely with both Phillippe Binette and Tom Doak.

[Chris Cupit]

I've played the hole 6 or 7 times, twice in competition and I'm still not sure.  It is a converted Par 5 (converted in 1964 I found out) that would most likely be the source of withering criticism if it weren't part of TOC.

If it's not part of TOC I suspect many bemoan the fact that the green, for hundreds of years "designed" to receive a pitch shot, is wholly unaccepting of a long iron.

BUT, as a piece of the overall Old Course puzzle, it is a dramatic, historic hole that's a "buzz" to play.  I love the tee shot and the walk around the corner is like peeking behind the curtain to see the wizard.

I do wish that the front portion of the green, which used to come well out in front of the road bunker was still maintained as green.  It has been converted to fairway and I think it played better before as it was a little easier to run the ball up on the green.  Now, at fairway height that old front portion of the green strikes me as a little tricked up.

Also, given a gentle finishing hole, 17 isn't so bad--you just want to take 8 strokes in from 16 and few get too upset if they take 9.

This is where I think it's wrong to pull a hole out of the context of the rest of the course.  Within TOC it's a great hole, anywhere else, it's borderline stupid.

[Jim Nugent]

Also, given a gentle finishing hole, 17 isn't so bad--you just want to take 8 strokes in from 16 and few get too upset if they take 9.
 

Which makes Nick Faldo's score on the holes a few years ago in the Open Championship pretty remarkable.  He took 5 strokes total on those two holes.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()