A Great Golf Hole

[Mark Bourgeois]

If not great, then certainly fun.  This is the 428-yard, stroke-one fourth hole, Eden Course, Hong Kong Golf Club (Fanling), designed by Michael Wolveridge.

The drive is dramatic, carrying a deep ravine to a fairway carved out of a mountainside.  The tee panorama takes in mountains and valleys.



Not apparent, but the general slope of the mountain creates a deception.  In fact, most lies in the fairway present a ball beneath the right-hand golfer’s feet!


The ideal line is to carry that small knob protruding in from the right, for over there lies the prospect of the “proper” sidehill lie; i.e., a “draw” lie.  But this too often proves the fool's route, for gaining that knob is nearly impossible -- the knob and the ground before it conspire to push balls left.  And too far right puts the tee shot into the rough and a difficult sidehill stance.

Lastly, the knob makes the hole appear more of a sharp dogleg to the right than it is, further encouraging the golfer to drive out to the left so as to open a vista to the green.

Approach -- up close, the "backwards" slope is somewhat apparent, but more likely the golfer's eyes remain unconvinced by his feet!


Like the 13th at Augusta National, the approach likely is off the “wrong” lie given the orientation of the green, but, unlike ANGC, here the ball (from center and left fairway) will lie below the right-hand golfer’s feet.  The green falls to the right, meaning the ideal shot for the right hander is a draw – especially given the opening in the tree line right of the green, an opening that hints of dark consequences for the wayward shot.

Green. Note left-to-right slope of land, a sharp contrast to the view from the tee.



As the golfer nears the hole, a wonderful vista opens up – wonderful if not for the effect of the Chinese economic miracle!

Note "pagoda" water cooler -- manifesting the sacred


Mark

[Scott Witter]

Mark:

The hole might be fun to play, but what purpose do the bunkers serve? They appear to be far out of play for anyone, both fairway and greenside...do they stop golfers from bouncing on the path and into the woodlands?

[Jim Adkisson]

Scott, it  certainly does look to me that the fairway bunkers are "saving hazards" for a hook off the tee that would otherwise hit the cart path hidden behind them and off into the trees.

[TEPaul]

"Mark:
The hole might be fun to play, but what purpose do the bunkers serve?"

Scott;

I hope architects and others just keeping asking this question over and over again on holes (or courses) like this one. Forget about strategy, I think a sand bunker simply looks out of place on a hole that has the kind of topography and other aesthetic assets this one does.

[Peter Pallotta]

TE
I think you raised the point you're making above on several other threads in the past, but I could never 'picture' what you meant or exactly why it was important. Now I can. It's a very interesting observation.

Peter

[Scott Witter]

Jim:

I see no point to a 'saving' hazard in this instance and to be straight up, I really never understood the point to a 'saving' hazard...sounds like a oxymoron to me for if the bunkers were actually hazards in the first place, golfers would want to be saved from them

Hitting the path is one thing, but Tom Paul understood where I was going with my comment.  The bunkers should not be their in the first place, they take away from the beauty of the hole, the setting and the view, they don't add to it and honestly look completely out of place.  From the tee, which BTW is a great view, the bunkers take away quality of the hole.

Peter...you are a fast learner and a wise observer, we just need to get you in the field/dirt now and you'll soon be on your way, just look at the quick steps up the architecture ladder Tom Paul has jumped

[Chris Cupit]

I'll look again but I think the bunkers look fine.  In fact without them, the view to me would be "more spoiled" by the cartpath.  I don't think the bunkers would save you all that much but they do hide the cart path nicely.

Without them it would be as if the left side of the hole were "outlined" in a black cartpath line.

Pretty neat looking hole.

It's a shame about paths--it encroaches pretty close on the second shot near the bunker as well.

[Joe Hancock]

Put the cart path in the trees perhaps?.....

Joe

[Mark Bourgeois]

Jeez, fellas, a lot of high handicappers play this course -- no need to incent them to buy cheap "Colloway" and "Titleeast" balls! (It's about 6,100 yards from the backs.)

Okay, then how bout the hole before that one (370-yard par 4) -- take your best shot!

Tee shot -- lemme guess...now it's the mounding!


Approach -- plenty of death all along the left on this hole, mounds do less "saving" than the rough


Green site -- bunkers left "save" balls hit off rock face right



Mark

[Scott Witter]

"Jeez, fellas, a lot of high handicappers play this course -- no need to incent them to buy cheap "Colloway" and "Titleeast" balls! (It's about 6,100 yards from the backs.)

Okay, then how bout the hole before that one (370-yard par 4) -- take your best shot!

Tee shot -- lemme guess...now it's the mounding!"

A lot of high handicappers play all sorts of courses, too many to list as examples and many that are very difficult for them, but they do it and always will...my point is that IMO the bunkers and YES, the mounds, take away from the landscape character, the quality (playing and visual) both of the hole and are not needed, in this instance at least.

NOW that is some barber pole,   must be the owner/manager has an inferiority complex and needs to compensate,   but I digress, and just to let you know I do like the left greenside bunker, regardless of the rocks on the right, I think it fits the hole visually for balance and the approach shot and what I would believe to be a right to left slope of the green.

Cheers

[Mark Bourgeois]

Scott, the best part about that barber pole is, what, you've got to chunk your tee shot juuust right to use it properly!

Before we go off beating up the designer for bunkers and mounds, it first would be interesting to know if they were there originally, for it is not hard to see that if they were not original, play on these holes might lead to a chorus of requests for "saving" features.

Re: the cart paths, it sure looked like they blew up a mountain or two already...guess you can take the view either of, "what's a few more $HK" or of, "we've already spent too much $HK to put paths off in the woods!"

Better would be just to take a caddie: three levels of expertise, with the lowest very affordable, particularly for a membership that has shelled out a huge sum, plus probably waited 15 years just to get it!

BTW, not every hole is like these two!

Mark

[Joe Hancock]

Re: the cart paths, it sure looked like they blew up a mountain or two already...guess you can take the view either of, "what's a few more $HK" or of, "we've already spent too much $HK to put paths off in the woods!"

It gives every appearance that the cart paths were an afterthought, rather than being an integral part of the design and construction process. But, as you say, we don't know what the process or limitations were.

Joe

[Tags:]

Tags: