National Moonah Par Fives vs Barnbougle Par Fives

[Mark_F]

On another thread, one esteemed contributor/reviewer/ranker made the contention that National Moonah's par fives are better than Barnbougle's Par Fives.

For those who have played both, yay or nay?

I don't mind the first at Barnbougle, although I think the green complex looks a little awkward, and 14 is a pretty good hole.

11 is nothing special, aside from some fantastic fairway movement once over the hill, but National Moonah's par five's I thought were okay only.  

2 on National Moonah has a good green but is nothing until you actually reach it.  7 is the best, and whilst 15 is a spectacular hole, and should therefore appeal to my simplistic way of thinking, it lacks something for mine.  Maybe because it only plays as spectacularly as it looks for long hitters?

Maybe because a certain long but erratic National member undoubtably thinks it's a good hole, which is reason enough to cast doubt?

Interesting also that on a recent post. Tom Doak thought that great par fours made a great course, and that the threes and fives therefore only had to be good. Anyone know if Misters Harrison and Norman share this philosophy?

[Chris Kane]

Interesting also that on a recent post. Tom Doak thought that great par fours made a great course, and that the threes and fives therefore only had to be good.

Where did he say that?

[Shane Gurnett]

Mark -  I agree with you.

[Scott Coan]

The 2 days I was at Barnbougle there was a very unusual 2-club wind out of the East, making the 8th the best par-5 on the course!  

[Mark_F]

Chris,

There was a thread a while back where if I remember correctly Tom said he wasn't all that keen on them, but I have no chance of finding it with this search system.

The recent 'any idiot can design a par 3..." thread he espoused his views on par fours. The rest I just made up.

You've played both, how about some thoughts?

[Chris Kane]

The reason I've ask is because you've either misquoted him; or quoted an extraordinary comment correctly.

To be quite honest I think #2 on the Moonah is the only top-class par-five out of the two courses, and is fantastic all the way from the tee to the green.  #7 and 15 on the Moonah are good holes, but nothing special, and #12 is average at best.  The fives at Barnbougle are all good, within #11 being my favourite, but none are world-class.  I guess that gives it to the Moonah on points!

I assume this doesn't mean anything - the fact that I agree with Brian Walshe on #2 means I can't think for myself.
 

[Mark_F]

Chris,

I probably just made it up for a bit of fun.  Or attempted to read his mind.  But there was a thread where he proferred that he wasn't that fond of them.

Why do you think 2 at National Moonah is so good?

There's a blind bunker from the tee, although following David Elvins' recent chastisement about not looking at KH's 6th green prior to playing it I now look much moe closely, including stepping off the tee if need be - and the bunker wouldn't even come into play for most good players who want to reach it in two anyway.

The bunker on the left in the lay-up? area would hardly come that much into play.

It appears to me the hole is all about sneaking along the right hand side and then fading one in?

It's okay, but nothing special. But the green is good.

I assume this doesn't mean anything - the fact that I agree with Brian Walshe on #2 means I can't think for myself.

Definitely.

[Chris Kane]

It appears to me the hole is all about sneaking along the right hand side and then fading one in?

Have you even seen the hole?  The ideal line on the tee is WAY LEFT if you want to have any sort of angle at the green for the second shot.  Sneak along the right hand side and you have almost  no shot.



This photo shows the angle from the left edge - its a difficult shot from there let alone from the other side of the fairway.

[Brian Walshe]

Mark,

Not sure where the blind bunker from the tee on 2 is.  There are two bunkers off the tee which are offset from one another, the left being 20m closer than the right.  Downwind most people can carry the left hand bunker, but very, very few can carry the right hand one.  Into the wind carrying the left hand bunker is near impossible for most players so you tend to play short of it or aim at the right hand bunker.  

Your comment on "sneaking it up the right" is what makes the hole so good.  People are drawn to the flag and aim up the right side from where you bring all the trouble on the right and short of the green into play and from where you have a near impossible pitch to the short axis of the green with the swale over the back.  If the pin is back (right side from the tee) then you have to clear the greenside trap and then stop it on a downslope as the back left of the green (looking at it along the long axis) falls away.

The line for the 2nd shot is actually left towards the bunker set in the dune.  That leaves you a pitch down the long axis of the green and hopefully takes the swale front left as you look at the green out of play.

Downwind I've seen as short as a 9 iron second but from more than 130m out it's just near impossible to hold the green unless you are way left which means you've hit a 350m drive.  Into the wind I saw both Norman and Scott fail to get there with 3 wood seconds.

The 2nd green is one of the best on the course and one where the small movements around the green make the hole.

[Tyler Kearns]

Mark,

I do not think that #11 at Barnbougle only has terrific topography going for it. The green is very good, and unique, with a depressed back right quadrant and spine running the length of the green. I will have to double check the photos that I took (which I get tomorrow), but if memory serves me correctly, I felt that #11 and #14 played too similar, especially off the tee and in their orientation. I did enjoy the first, which I felt was a nice opener with a wide, hazard-free fairway. The central bunker provides plenty of interest on the second shot, whereby the wind and the rumpled fairway lie must be judged properly to carry the hazard. The hole culminates with a receptive green, whose center gathers balls hit to its left and right hand extents.

TK

[Mark_F]

It appears to me the hole is all about sneaking along the right hand side and then fading one in?

Have you even seen the hole?  The ideal line on the tee is WAY LEFT if you want to have any sort of angle at the green for the second shot.  Sneak along the right hand side and you have almost  no shot.



This photo shows the angle from the left edge - its a difficult shot from there let alone from the other side of the fairway.

Chris,

I've seen it twice.  I guess those two pars I made in hacker mode from the right hand side were total flukes.

Have you paid royalties for the use of someone else's intellectual property above?

[Mark_F]

The 2nd green is one of the best on the course and one where the small movements around the green make the hole.

Brian,

Something we actually agree on. I'm a little worried now, as that means either I can't think for myself anymore, or you are starting to think like me.

It will be a long journey for you, Brian, but one well worth it.


Tyler,

I did like the 11th green, I just thought all three shots to the 14th required (more)thought and execution than those at the 11th. I didn't find the drives similar at all.

Why so?

[tonyt]

Barnbougle's overall land movement and winding journey are a lot of it's magic. As stand alone holes, I think none of the par fives are truly incredible or awe inspiring, but all solid.

Of them, I like #14 most with the diagonal drive lines (somewhat negated a little heavily downwind), and the fact that the tease is to head down the right. The second shot is absorbing in that there are many minor degrees of layup/line of play targets rather than a bland second for anyone who must treat this hole as a three shotter. And the green is very invitingly sized and in plain view, but with the less than precisely hit distance shot feeding towards the back of the green and leaving a fair bit of real estate back to the front half of the green, is no snack.

#11 I found not really similar at all off the tee to #14, save for the left fairway edge for the short to medium hitter. It then has wonderful movement of topography on to the green, and although it opens up very grandly and wildly, never gets boring, has plenty of variation in outcomes and interest for the player who must play it as a three shotter (if not threatening, then at least toying with many different lines of play for a third and positions above, below or level with the green), and provides a demanding shot for the player looking for the dance floor in two. The back right of the green's portioning not only affects hole locations in that zone, but helps to influence the proximity of danger to any other pin.

#1 is plainer, but as an opener, is a solidly good hole that succeeds in tempting the player to play nearer danger to have a better look. The clever play is to knock it down the middle, and then head over the traps (wind permitting) with the second and not get greedy over the angle of the pitch as it isn't that tough from below right.

#2 is the only par five at National Moonah that is really memorable to me. It looks sensational in a grand setting and is a delight to play, it cleverly (as has been said already) draws the player to make an error not only on their tee shot but also their second in target line (thus in my book destroying the notion that this hole is only good at the green), and then throwing down one heck of an enjoyable challenging approach shot in to the green, with many of the hole locations part of the fun, not ONLY those on the right half.

I give Moonah #2 the award for best, but I'll take Barny as a group over the Nash Moonah ones every day of the week.

[Matthew Mollica]

What a great idea for a thread Mark

Personally, it's very interesting, having visited Barny Dunes half a dozen times, and having played National Moonah frequently for six years, to contrast my views with those who have posted here already. Many have played both courses but somewhat infrequently. Makes for an interesting thread on how much one actually needs to see, play and visit a course, until they really absorb it, but that's for another day.

Barnbougle's par 5s fail to excite as other parts of the course excite. About that, there can be no question. The first has been criticised for being mundane, which I do not accept at all. The 11th is a very clever hole, due to it's massive width, and the need to pick a clear line down what looks to be a mile wide. Ideal line when going for the green in two is pin position dependant. The green is subtle and clever, and the seemingly safe haven of fairway pin high left would more often than not result in bogey and not par. The 14th perhaps undulates more than the other 5s at BD, and with a diagonally situated fairway, and clearing of the right half of the landing zone, is a great driving challenge. The approach is cool fun too.

Moonah's par 5's boast more intricate green complexes. They provides greater angles and shot types into pins. Putting on them and chipping around them is more cerebral and more fun than one has at BDs 5s.

Moonah's are more elastic than Barnbougle's. As Brian noted, the 2nd avoided Adam Scott's 3wood second, after a smoked driver. I hit it with driver seven iron last week. There's days I've hit D,4I, 4I short. Talk about variety, and fun too.

The lack of recognition for the qualities of 15 really surprises me. Providing tremendous width, and huge choice on each shot, with a wonderful green, and an intelligently routed double dogleg, the hole is very good indeed. Sparse bunkering, correctly positioned, and aesthetically constructed, the hole is top class.

7 is fun, and the go - no go decision is always an enjoyable challenge when possible. The green shape is quite creative, and allows pin position alone to boast sizeable bearing of the ease / difficulty of the hole. I'm not sure any pin position on a par 5 at BD does this as effectively as is possible at 7, let alone 2 at National Moonah.

12 is clearly the weakest of the set at Moonah but is not a dog.

BDs strength lies not in it's par 5s. They are good holes, yet no match for Moonah's. Anyone who would like to re-assess is welcome to join me at BD on July 6, or come to The National with me literally any weekend. It'd be my pleasure to assist!

Matthew

[Kevin Pallier]

The design of P5's I believe are Messrs G Norman & B Harrison strength and those at National (Moonah) are no exception - wonderfull variety and good green complexes. #12 is probably the 'least impressive' at NM but as a collection IMO they definitely shade those at B Dunes.

However, if we were talking collection P3's and P4's (especially short one's) it's hands down to B Dunes and for mine that's the great thing about B Dunes - consistency in quality all the way around.

[Mark_F]

What a great idea for a thread Mark

No worries, Matt.  You National members sure are a fantastic source of inspiration.

Such interesting and differing opinions between Tony and yourself.

Would you agree that perhaps the land is more exciting at Barnbougle, thus giving it the X factor, but that Moonah's par fives are perhaps better tests/designed?

Seems that way to me.

[Chris Kane]

Would you agree that perhaps the land is more exciting at Barnbougle, thus giving it the X factor, but that Moonah's par fives are perhaps better tests/designed?

I'm having trouble finding a way to disagree with you here.

[Andrew Summerell]

Would you agree that perhaps the land is more exciting at Barnbougle, thus giving it the X factor, but that Moonah's par fives are perhaps better tests/designed?

Seems that way to me.

Mark, I believe this statement sums it up. I'm not really sure of the point of this thread, as it seems obvious to me.

[Mark_F]

Andrew,

I'm not sure it is that clear cut.

Look at Tony's answer above.

I too prefer Barnbougle's, as I like the 1st, and I think 14 is pretty good too.

National Moonah, I think 2 is a very good hole, but 7 and 15, whilst good tests, aren't all that inspiring, at least for me.

Simply a matter of horses for courses.

As to the point of this thread... you didn't enjoy the contrasting, eloquent and impassioned replies of both Matt and Tony, not too mention Tyler's input?

I sure did.

I even enjoyed Brian's reply.

[Brian Walshe]

I actually don't think the land that BD's 5's are routed on is better - in fact I'd argue it is inferior.  A very wise man by the name of Dave Elvins made an interesting observation on BD after his first visit there.  He made the point that the par 5's were routed on the lesser of the land at BD, something I agree with.  If we ignore 1 at BD and 2 at Moonah - both are routed on some of the more open land in both cases, you are left with 11 and 14 at BD and 7 and 15 at Moonah (let's ignore 12 for a minute as it is the runt of the litter at Moonah).

I'm struggling to see how the land for 11 and 14 at BD is "more exciting".  Forget the actual holes but there is more movement both vertical and left to right at Moonah.  After the tee shots at 11 and 14 at BD you start to move into some of the more open land away from the dunes.  7 and 15 at Moonah play between and around some of the biggest dunes on the property.

Can someone explain what they mean by "more exciting" and why they think the land for the 11 and 14 at BD is superior?

[Matthew Mollica]

Would you agree that perhaps the land is more exciting at Barnbougle, thus giving it the X factor, but that Moonah's par fives are perhaps better tests/designed?

I'm having trouble finding a way to disagree with you here.

Not me. As a man partial to the occasional adjective, I could use 50 before I thought about employing exciting for the land of 1 and 14 at BD.

11 yes, as it cascades down towards the green with all manner of humps, hollws, ridges and swales which confound the conservative player with his stance and lie while playing the third to a wide open and reachable par 5.

The land on which BD 1 sits is pedestrian, and they've tried to spice it up (somewhat successfully) in the landing zone for the drive. The hole is well designed for it's purpose - an opener. Wide enough to not lose a ball. No great penalty for hitting the first one or two with a rusty swing. Unlikely reachable in 2. Gets players away. Wide, and adequate use of some of the least inspiring land on the block. It embodies Doak's ambivalence for par 5s.

BD 14's land is no more or less dramatic / attractive than 12 at Moonah.

Do yourselves a favor and rank the holes in fun, beauty, strategic quality and playability from 1 to 7. If BD has a hole in the top 2 and / or Moonah has a hole in the 7th position, you're kidding yourself. That test alone tells you which course boats the better three shot holes.

Mind you, this is all sounding like an argument of whether or not we drink a 1990 Grange, 1996 Dom, or 1996 DRC. What a world we live in. I'd happily play either course each day for the next few years...

Matthew

[Mark_F]

Matt,

Maybe the land itself isn't all that exciting - apart from the humps and hollows in the 11th fairway, but perhaps Doak and Clayton have managed to tart it up a bit better?  


Without wanting to get into a 'this is better than that scenario,' I think their bunkers look a lot more impressive and dramatic than National Moonah.  

I think 11 at Barnbougle is a good but not great five/hole, but I thought 14 managed to be challenging and exciting at the same time - I really like the shot up to the green, which isn't to diss the other two shots either, but I suppose it is a bit less imaginative than the others - a sound test but not an inspiring one?

I think Barnbougle's three par fives rank above National Moonah's in terms of fun and playability.

[Andrew Summerell]

As to the point of this thread... you didn't enjoy the contrasting, eloquent and impassioned replies of both Matt and Tony, not too mention Tyler's input?

You are correct, although having this discussion around a warm hearth with a fine red would be preferrable.

[Tags:]

Tags: