Is this a bad hole?

[Chris Cupit]

Yes, that is a bad hole.  Of course, I have no idea if it was "necessary" in order to save the rest of the course but I hope so!

Other holes looked nice enough though I hope the pictures were taken right after a 6 inch rain--those bunkers looked completely washed out and unplayable.  Don't get me wrong, I love "unplayable" bunkers--just so long as they are designed that way--not conditioned that way!!

[Sean_A]

This hole doesn't look like my sort of thing for the drive or second, but the green is cool.  I do like how the fairway flows into the green.  The bunker on the left looks a bit detached - tuck that closer to the green and Bob's yer uncle.  

Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

If that's the #3 handicap hole, what's the #1 handicap hole like?

The 15th at Cape Kidnappers (the long par 5) is 40-45 yards wide for its last 400 yards.  There really wasn't much else to do there, either you went out there or you didn't ... and the client certainly wanted us to go.  Unlike this hole, it doesn't twist and turn so much, so you can play it as safely as you want.

[Walt_Cutshall]

That is one of the worst holes I've ever seen.

[Kalen Braley]

I would have to agree with the consensus view of the hole being "less than desireable"

It does look it could be a really cool ski run with about 5 feet of the white powdery stuff on it.  

[John Moore II]

yeah, that golf hole is pretty bad that way its laid out. even for me, and i like extreme challenges...

[John Mayhugh]

Tom Doak
The #1 handicap hole is 430+ yard par 4.  The fairway is fairly wide till you get more than about 240 off the tee and it narrows quite a bit.  There is a small water hazard on the left size that factors into a long tee shot or poor second.  Green is large with plenty of room to miss.  That hole is much easier than this par 5.  

Chris Cupit
The pics were taken after a lot of December rain.  I don't have a good overhead of the course, but this hole doesn't seem to be critical to the routing.  At a minimum they could have just cleared out a lot more trees along the right side.  The next hole parallels this one, so the only reason to leave the trees is to separate the two holes.

Jed Peters
I think the course is still worth playing.  Fortunately the 4th hole happens early enough in your round.  The second nine is pretty good.  I just feel sorry for kids that have to play that hole in high school tournaments.

JC Jones
Here's that green on the 11th viewed from behind.  The slopes do kick the ball towards the fairway & green as long as you avoid the bunkers.


This spring I'll try to provide pics of some of the other courses Doug mentioned.  I haven't played all of them, but this will give me a good excuse.  

Since there seems to be a pretty universal consensus that the hole isn't a good one, given the limited information any good ideas how you could fix it?  

[JC Jones]

I am not a GCA so take this opinion for what it is worth:

I'd clear space and add about 30 yards to the left side of the hole, starting with just off the tee box and extending through the landing zone.  This would give people a wider landing zone and a well placed drive long up the left side would allow for an unobstructed play at the green.  You could also widen the landing zone on the right so people would have a safe play short and right but would then be faced with the more difficult semi-blind lay-up (depending on how much of the trees they wanted to go over/cut off).

Just a thought though....

[Andy Troeger]

I think some of you guys have gotten a bit carried away with this. If the hole is indeed 30-40 yards wide (and I'll admit it doesn't look it) then there's quite a bit of room and as a short par five it would be pretty easy to play conservatively and still have a fair chance at a par or bogey. There's some risk/reward element to trying to hit driver and see if you can get there in two, but it appears the reward would not be worth the risk given the doglegs.

I don't think by any means that from the descriptions and photos that it looks like a good hole, but I've seen far worse, often involving forced carries. The only thing it needs is more width really, but it looks like the land would have made that a difficult task and this course appears to have been built on a fairly tight budget by today's standards (nothing wrong with that!) Heck at least this hole is interesting, which to me would be better than something ho-hum boring.

[James Bennett]

I couldn't see any catch-basins on the hole.  That is good.



James B  

[Jeff Doerr]

Tighter then De Laveaga ...

Mike, that was my thought when I saw this hole. I used to play De Laveaga a bunch back in the late 80s and early 90s.

I would not want to play these all day, but sometimes it works on a hole where you can navigate your way through it with a wise mix of mid-length shots. If it was one connector on the course I'd take it.

[Michael Powers]

you could put in some telephone poles with netting and call it your range.

[RJ_Daley]

Like grandpa Joe said, most of the posts pretty much cover the merits of the hole in a swift one line critiques.  

For my part, I'll say it looks like a drunken road grader tried to route a nature causeway through a woods.  

[David Schofield]

I'd love to jump on the bandwagon and say the hole is terrible, but that wouldn't advance the conversation any further.  So, if only for to play devil's advocate, I'm going to chime in and say I like the hole.  Sure, its a narrow crowned fairway.  What do you expect?  A woodlands course on rolling ground is going to occasionally have to ride a ridge.  Had the design said to lop off the entire ridge we'd be sitting here complaining about how the hole is "over-engineered" or "unnatural".

I'm not a big fan of the local rules stating that all woods are lateral hazards, though I can certainly understand why courses do this (lest 6 hour and 100+ stroke rounds become the norm).  To me, it encourages people to swing for the fences.  The only bright side is that a trip into the woods will yield a bucket of "gently used" Pro V1's...

[Sean_A]

I think some of you guys have gotten a bit carried away with this. If the hole is indeed 30-40 yards wide (and I'll admit it doesn't look it) then there's quite a bit of room and as a short par five it would be pretty easy to play conservatively and still have a fair chance at a par or bogey. There's some risk/reward element to trying to hit driver and see if you can get there in two, but it appears the reward would not be worth the risk given the doglegs.

I don't think by any means that from the descriptions and photos that it looks like a good hole, but I've seen far worse, often involving forced carries. The only thing it needs is more width really, but it looks like the land would have made that a difficult task and this course appears to have been built on a fairly tight budget by today's standards (nothing wrong with that!) Heck at least this hole is interesting, which to me would be better than something ho-hum boring.

Andy

30-40 yard wide fairways is not terribly wide when you consider the dropoffs on either side of the fairway.  It looks like once a ball gets to the outside 7-8 yards (maybe more) then it will just follow a natural path down the slope and in many places straight into the trees.  

Ciao

[Andy Troeger]

Sean,
I agree its narrow but people are making it out to be impossible when its really not. I don't like the lack of recovery options and wouldn't think twice about playing it 3-iron, 5-iron, 6-iron or something to that effect which isn't really that much fun. I don't care for the hole, but I've seen people gush on this site about holes of equal width if they were surrounded by prairie grass or even desert where a lost ball is equally likely.

The thing is...without spending a ridiculous amount of money how would you change it? The amount of fill needed to widen the hole looks to be tremendous! Maybe the architects could correct me but it looks like a tough place to build a good hole.

[Doug Ralston]

I have not played this course, but this hole is similar to a couple of the par fives at Eagle Ridge as well.  Overall the challenge, visual appeal and scale of Eagle Ridge are spectacular, but there are a couple of holes that I am really not sure how to get through without blowing up.  The people who I play with like the course but go in knowing they are some holes that are absolutely above their skill level.

I am actually more troubled with the tee shot than the second shot or the approach to the green.  On the second shot the forced layup does not bother me and it appears that you can elect how aggressive you want to be.  Also the trouble around the green does not appear to be as severe, thus laying back to be conservative may be an option.  as for the tee shot I generally like more width than this.

With that being said, I have played the eastern end of the Kentucky Park System and applaud them for the courses they are making available to the public.

Overall through I really tend to favor courses with more width and the challenge increases as you get closer to the hole.  I have played several courses when most of the holes are like this and it is really difficult to enjoy them.

Charlie;

I assume you are referring to holes #4 and #7, since #14 is a fairly innocuous par-5. Hear are some thoughts on those two.

#4 may be the most difficult par-5 in the Universe. I have heard many people say it is too difficult, and ought to be changed or even eliminated. I disagree completely. There are surprising options here.

For example, when I tee, I play my shot far more right than anyone could expect. Why? Because every time I have hit my ball into that wooded hillside over there it fed right down into the fairway ON THE OTHER SIDE, leaving me a perfect line to the lower fairway on my second.

On the second shot, Charlie, please note that hitting the ball left of the fairway will have a similar result! They keep the underbrush a minum there because it can be used as a nice bail-out on that particularly tight looking second. It feeds to the fairway nicely.


The approach will always need to be straight, but the catchall behind the green is quite puttable. Yes, this is a very challenging hole indeed, but spectacularly beautiful and more possible that is obvious.

I love the way Forrest built in bail-outs where ER seems hardest.

#7 is also quite a challenge. It has less in the way of bailouts, but more room to play. Just be willing to play your third from 150yd and do not, repeat, do NOT, challenge those sidehill bunkers. I once did, and was in that lowest one. It is small, steep, and i thought I was in Hell. Charlie, this is one of the sweetest par-5's I know, and one of my favorite holes anywhere [except of course for holes #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #8, and of course #13 right here at ER!].

Charlie, I admit ER is not a course to everyone's taste. I have had fun finding it's little eccentricities. Most people will be more comfortable with Hidden Cove and Dale Hollow, both quite challenging and a bit more conventional. But ER will have it's little 'cult following', who come from long distances to play in Eastern KY for HC, Stonecrest, Old Silo, along with Eagle Ridge, then go home and talk about #4 and #13 and plan to come back.

And boy, the prices are right!

John Mayhugh;

Please DO go to Eastern Kentucky and play those courses which I recommend in this post. I simply have never learned to post pix here, and I think these courses deserve a look. I make no claim that they compete with the best in USA, but I doubt you will find more for your money anywhere. I especially think Ed Ault has wrought well for us here, and am looking forward to his new 'General Burnside SP' course, which is due to open this Spring.

Thanks for your posting on Mineral Mound. While I do not consider it quite up to DH, HC, ER etc, I did enjoy my trip there.

You know what I wish? I wish Tennessee would sell 'The Tennesseean' to the Kentucky State Parks! [LOL]. That is a masterpiece layout suffering from lack of conditioning. Can you imagine it with KY SP conditions? I hate that it is so lost out there. BTW, I assume you have played there and know what I am talking about.

I am rambling, sorry, been sick  for a week, so ........... I'll stop now  

Doug

PS: http://parks.ky.gov/golftrail/default.htm

Not a great site, but getting better

[John Mayhugh]

Doug
Maybe we can meet up in east KY sometime.  I've seen a lot of pictures of the courses, but just haven't made it over there.  If you have pics and need help posting them, let me know. I'll try to post some pics I've seen elsewhere one of these days.

Paris TN is close enough to KY to take over the Tennessean.  I wish KY or someone would.  That course is a blast to play.

[Tony Ristola]

Looks like a 7-iron, 7-iron, 4-iron hole.

[Pete Lavallee]

John,

I'm shocked Doug Wright hasn't yet posted his favorite Leonard Pinth Garnell quote:

"Exquisitely bad!"

All the best to you in 2008.

[John Mayhugh]

I don't have any my own pics of some of the other KY golf trail courses that Doug mentioned.  Following are links to some from another website.
Eagle Ridge
http://www.golfkentuckylinks.com/Pages/Photo%20Pages/Eagle%20Ridge%20photo.html

Hidden Cove
http://www.golfkentuckylinks.com/Pages/Photo%20Pages/HiddenCoveFall.html

Dale Hollow
http://www.golfkentuckylinks.com/Pages/Photo%20Pages/Dale%20Hollow%20photo.html

Not a KY state park, but one other other Eastern KY courses that Doug mentioned.
http://www.golfkentuckylinks.com/Pages/Photo%20Pages/Stone%20Crest%20photo.html

[Buck Wolter]

John-
When I saw the picture the terrain reminded me of the Tennessean which I enjoyed as well  -- except.....

I think you could do this same exercise on the first hole there  ---far and away the worst Keith Foster hole I've ever played.

Buck

[Doug Ralston]

John;

Since you offer some of Ron's pix from GKL, let me offer the website itself.

http://www.golfkentuckylinks.com/

I highly recommend the 'screensaver'. Download it and see more than 100 fullscreen pictures from around the State, in a nice sequence. Ron's skill as an amatuer photographer makes us proud. And you need not use it for your screensaver, since it offers a desktop icon. I, of course, use the screensaver. This is his 2007 version, and is very good. I wish he still had access to the 2005 version, which, IMHO, was even better, and certainly had even more great pix from the State Park Trail.

Great website. Come join us.

Doug