Padraig:
Mackenzie's comments about CPC and his whole philosophy on creating controversy of opinion on golf holes or courses is a poser, no doubt.
But one can certainly point to the truth in his remarks by just looking at those great holes in the world that seem to be eternally enigmatic, controversial and still globally respected by all if not completely loved by all.
We're talking the likes of the famous Road Hole, or Riviera's #10, ANGC's #13, PV's #8, Shinnecock's #11, NGLA's #1 or #6 etc.
Do those holes have one thing in common in play? I think they do, and it's called a "wide scoring spectrum".
That fact alone of a golf hole, I think will often put it in that rare class of architecture that ends up passing the test of time forever and enduring pretty much as it is. They have become the virtual icons of golf and golf architecture. So we need to look very very carefully at them and particularly their nuances that have made them that way over such a long period of time. In those few holes is probably a good deal of the key to great golf course architecture.
Can or should an architect attempt to offer holes like that 18 times? Probably not because that might even wear out even the best golfer, and the enigmatic beat of what constitutes a great golf course in a general sense just goes on, doesn't it?
