Rustic Canyon: The Weakest of the Weak.

[David Kelly]

I just want the course to play rock hard at all times regardless of the weather or any maintenance issues. Kind of like Royal St George's in the 2003 Open but faster.

Is that too much to ask?

[Andy Hughes]

15 - With a  badly done triple tiered green, where it is too possible to get a 5 being just 10 feet long on your first iron.  You can have no chance stopping your first putt with a real possibility of putting off the green, ending up downhill 50 yards besides.

Joe, I have never played Rustic Canyon, and am quite sure you are correct in your assessment.
But I wonder in a more general sense if hitting past the pin by 10 feet makes 5 a possibility, does that makes the hole a bad one?  Or does it just make it incumbent upon the golfer to remain short of the hole?

[Joe Perches]

in a more general sense if hitting past the pin by 10 feet makes 5 a possibility, does that makes the hole a bad one?  Or does it just make it incumbent upon the golfer to remain short of the hole?

No, not at all.

I generally rather like holes where 10 feet long or 10 feet short puts you in a hazard or a really bad position just off the green.

When being long matters, you should generally have some length in front of your preferred landing area that allows a bit of relief.  You should also have a sightline to the preferred landing area.

When being short matters, like a deep faced bunker guarding a green, possibly obscuring the preferred landing area, some relief long should be available.

If there is to be no relief long or short, then you should be able to see the landing area.

15 at Rustic is a shortish, about 150y, uphill par 3, with a big 3-tiered green where you can not see on which tier the pin is placed from the tee.  You can see the pin and tiers from the fairway approach to 14 green.

Here 10 feet long of the pin location can leave you in the middle of the green on the second tier.  10 feet short, or even pin high with a bit too much backspin, can leave you 30 yards short after your ball rolls back downhill.

Good luck with that downhill putt.

I think 15 would have been better if the green was smaller and 2-tiered instead.  4 would still be a possibility if you were on the upper tier instead of the lower, but it would take 5 out of the equation for balls on the green.

[DMoriarty]

Joe,

I agree with you that 15 is the weakest on the course, but I disagree with your assessment of how the hole plays.   As you note, the pins are blind from the tee, but not from the previous approach shot.  So check them out and it should in large part solve your problem.  As for the downhill put yes it is difficult to impossible, so dont ever hit it above the hole.  But even if you do, you can almost always get your next one on the right level.  The one exception  might be if you are back left and the pin is front left, but from here you have overshot the pin by at least 20 yds, uphill and that is certianly not the architects fault.  

My problems with 15 are twofold:  First, the green is the only one on the course that feels a bit contrived and doesnt blend with the surrounding area.  (That being said, it might be one of the better greens on the other modern courses in the area . . . a testament to the quality of the rest at RC and the weakness of its neighbors.)



Second, misses just a little left are often lost/unplayable in the brush.  I'd like to see that side a little cleaner so one could at least try a difficult recovery.   That being said, I dont think the hole plays too badly.  It is a fun matchplay hole near the end because there are quite a few degrees of possible agressiveness depending on the circumstances.

As for 17,  the right side is more difficult to hit but the left side is much more difficult to putt, so while sloppy shots left are not punished, I am not sure they are benefitted much either.  I agree that this hole relies on a firm base for the hole to be most effective with any pin.  

So then I'll second your nomination for No. 15 for weakest of the weak.   Let's see if anyone wants to speak in opposition.  

[Mike Benham]

So then I'll second your nomination for No. 15 for weakest of the weak.   Let's see if anyone wants to speak in opposition.  

I'll agree that from a design view, consistancy with the other holes, 15 is out of character.  

I'll nominate #10 as the weakest, at least in the conditions that I played the hole (this is pre-HHA bunker).  

It is a 3-shot par 5 and of all the tee shots on the course, it is the least demanding and exacting.  The second shot is a "hit what you want lay-up" with a nod to keep it on the left side.  The green is the flatest on the course but the subtle breaks make it anything but easy to put.

#10 is not an easy birdie but a 5 is easy to get and you have to hit some bad shots to get a big number ...

Mike

[Mike Hendren]

So then I'll second your nomination for No. 15 for weakest of the weak.   Let's see if anyone wants to speak in opposition.  

David et al,  

Perhaps my opinion is shaded by my two pars at 15 during KPIII, including a stellar two-putt from 30 inches below the hole (extreme back pin) to halve Dan King on day one.

I agree that the green is manufactured and inconsistent with the lower profile of its brothers and sisters.  In my book, that makes it different - not weak. That said, you gotta love the teeing area that is an extension of the 14th green for starters.  The hole is awkwardly oriented, a quirky plus in my book.  As for jail left - don't hit it there.  The play might be always to the front / right, not manly stuff on a relatively short hole but it takes 5 or 6 out of play and leaves a manageable two-putt par to any spot on the green.   In medal play, it's a potential round-wrecker (as is the double-threat of OB on the next hole, for that matter).

Would you take 3 there every time?  It's a sucker hole.  I like sucker holes, because while I am No golfer, I am No sucker.  

Mike

[Joe Perches]

I'll nominate #10 as the weakest, at least in the conditions that I played the hole (this is pre-HHA bunker).  

I used to believe that too.  Repetitive, redundant, boring and dull were words I used to describe 10.  Not anymore.  The HHA bunkers came out reasonably well, along with the additional waste style bunkering long and right on your second shot.  The tee shot is now restricted for very long hitters and the second has a much higher risk because of those wastes.  The percentage of average golfers flailing and failing on this hole is also now very high.  7+ seems the median score there for the 15 or 20 different people I've played with on 10 vs 6 on 9.  The average person seems very relieved to see that 11 from the whites has only a very short carry to negotiate on the drive.

btw:  11 now has an additional teeing area 15 to 20 yards behind what was the blacks.  It's a shorter walk from 10 green and a better hole now too.

[DMoriarty]

Okay how about this one . . .  I nominate No. 11.  Compared to the rest of the course, it most conforms to the humdrum of mainstream contemporary architecture, at least until the green.  

[Joe Perches]

I nominate No. 11.

I don't think so.  I'd say 2 before 11.  11's the only uphill par 4 on the course.  Maybe you could say there's too much space right, but the right side seems purposely left dry and it's not very playable there.  The green does have 3 good pin locations and 1 more exceptional one.