[Ted Sturges]

I visited Crystal Downs over the weekend and once again was perplexed by the iconic 17th hole there.  To me, it is one of the most severe golf holes I have ever played.  Would any current golf architect build such a golf hole today?  I wonder what MacKenzie had to deal with in building that hole.  Was the area that is the fairway covered with trees prior to construction that had to be cleared?  Has MacKenzie built any other golf holes on land as severe as that?  Obviously he had to get back to the clubhouse after routing the out and back nature of the second 9, but it's hard to imagine anyone would have "found" a golf hole over that stretch of the property.  It's truly an amazing golf hole, but I'm honestly not sure what to think of it, or how to try to play it.


TS

[Tom_Doak]

The 17th is at least partly Perry Maxwell's design, since MacKenzie never saw the back nine.  When I first joined the club, there was a rumor/story that MacKenzie's routing was somewhat different for the 17th and 18th, with the 17th playing somewhere further to the right, but there is no map in existence which shows that, and it's hard to believe knowing the topography over there, and the need to connect the road around that side of the course.


I believe the land was mostly treed except up by the green.  The old apple trees by the green pre-date the course.


When the hole was built, there was only one way to play it:  hit it 200-220 yards to the plateau in the fairway, and then a pitch from there.  I think that is still the best way to play it unless you are very long and 100% sure you're not going to lose a ball by hitting driver.


The hole would have worked better when the fairways were longer and a ball would stay in the dip in the fairway or if the approach came up short.  It's much more severe now that anything short rolls back 40-60 yards.

[Peter Pallotta]

TS -
I played it hybrid-wedge, for one of my few routine pars of the day. I can't imagine veering from that approach very often at all -- even if I came to the 17th 2-down in a match and needed a birdie; a driver off the tee wouldn't improve my chances very much I don't think, though I suppose it could be fun just blasting away on occasion to see what happened. The 17th may be one reason why, days later when thinking about the course, I found myself focusing on and praising the Par 3s (and the 8th hole) instead of the more-talked about Par 4s, ie as varied and visually interesting (and, because of the greens, challenging) as they are, I can't say I found them particularly 'strategic' or thought provoking.

[Tommy Williamsen]

In my "youth" (thirties and forties) I played the course once every year. Back then it only took a call to Fred Muller to gain access. It was before Crystal Downs was CRYSTAL DOWNS. I always hit driver. Sometimes I would get close but often I had an awkward second shot and would make par only half the time. I think I only birdied it once.  I just couldn't make myself lay up. At 75, I think I would still hit driver, but now my shot would be like a lay up.

[Steve Salmen]

What I find interesting about the hole, is that from the tee, it appears the green is lower in elevation than the tee.  As you look up to the green from the fairway, I guess it's easy to forget how far down the hill you came off the tee.

[Padraig Dooley]

I've played it just a few times but I have always hit driver. I have also never played it when the total score truly mattered and in that circumstance why wouldn't you go for it?
In the five times I think it was one easy birdie from a drive just short of the green, three straight forward pars from ok tee shots and once hacking away after a bad tee shot.

I haven't played it with the wind against or when a score mattered and in those circumstances a bit more thought is required.
You also got to love how the green side bunkers tie in with the other bunkers in the distance, are they the ones on the fifth?

[Tom_Doak]

I haven't played it with the wind against or when a score mattered and in those circumstances a bit more thought is required.
You also got to love how the green side bunkers tie in with the other bunkers in the distance, are they the ones on the fifth?

The bunkers in the distance are the big one on the fifth [above the right of the green] and the bunker at the 7th green [to the left of the green, now getting obscured by tree growth].


With the wind against -- which you'll see 30% of the time, and sometimes quite strong -- the hole is a bear.  And, anytime you are trying to post a score, the hole is a potential card-wrecker on par with the 17th at the TPC.


One of the most fun features of the hole, seldom mentioned, is the fairway in the bottom of the hollow off the tee.  In severe conditions, it is literally possible to play it in a series of three 100-yard shots, though I have never seen anyone do that deliberately because the third shot could still destroy you.  I cannot think of another hole I have seen with that feature.

[Jon Sweet]

I’ll have to play it to offer my opinion. Or so I’m told.

[Tim_Weiman]

The 17th is at least partly Perry Maxwell's design, since MacKenzie never saw the back nine.  When I first joined the club, there was a rumor/story that MacKenzie's routing was somewhat different for the 17th and 18th, with the 17th playing somewhere further to the right, but there is no map in existence which shows that, and it's hard to believe knowing the topography over there, and the need to connect the road around that side of the course.


I believe the land was mostly treed except up by the green.  The old apple trees by the green pre-date the course.


When the hole was built, there was only one way to play it:  hit it 200-220 yards to the plateau in the fairway, and then a pitch from there.  I think that is still the best way to play it unless you are very long and 100% sure you're not going to lose a ball by hitting driver.


The hole would have worked better when the fairways were longer and a ball would stay in the dip in the fairway or if the approach came up short.  It's much more severe now that anything short rolls back 40-60 yards.

Tom,


Can you clarify what you mean by “MacKenzie never saw the back nine”?


How was his involvement with the back nine different than that with the front?


Did he not do the routing for both nines? Did he not do the design for the holes on both sides?


Thanks!

[Ted Sturges]

This should answer the question about MacKenzie never seeing the back 9. 


http://mackenziesociety.org/club/crystal-downs/

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()