[Patrick_Mucci]

The last 9 holes of this year's open was one of the most interesting, exciting 9 holes of golf that I've ever witnessed.

Without the unique architecture presented by Carnoustie, could such theatre be created anywhere else, especially on the closing holes ?

The combination of the architectural features, inclusive of meandering waterways, OB and roughs of different degees made the last 9 holes a comprehensive challenge, rare, if not unique in golf.

Should there be more quirk in modern American architecture ?

[cary lichtenstein]

This really has been one of the most exciting majors and there is no question that the "quirk" is an important element just as the "quirk" on the back 9 of Augusta leads to birdies and eagles, or it used to.

[Tim Bert]

I haven't seen anything in some time quite as interesting and exciting (sans the painful 17th blow-up) as Romero's par-free back nine of 1 under par.  6 birdies, 2 doubles, and a bogey pretty much sums it up.

[Andy Troeger]

The last 9 holes of this year's open was one of the most interesting, exciting 9 holes of golf that I've ever witnessed.

Without the unique architecture presented by Carnoustie, could such theatre be created anywhere else, especially on the closing holes ?

The combination of the architectural features, inclusive of meandering waterways, OB and roughs of different degees made the last 9 holes a comprehensive challenge, rare, if not unique in golf.

Should there be more quirk in modern American architecture ?

Patrick,
There are other good examples, but Carnoustie presents one of the more exciting championship tests around IMO.

Regarding your last question, go play the Kingsley Club and Black Mesa. Others might disagree, but I also find Jim Engh's stuff to be quirky, which might be why its controversial.

[Tom_Doak]

I would never have thought to use the word "quirky" to describe Carnoustie.  For the guys who can hit it 330, maybe, but for everyone else it's just a beast, though it is an interesting beast when it gets to the end.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

I suppose this is OT, and the golf was interesting, but the MOST interesting ever?  Frankly, it played out about how most majors play out, with the top guy sliding back, some charges, and a lot in between.  Good, but nothing earth shattering.  The world will still always remember the last open at Carnoustie, for what thats worth.

I agree with Brad Klein in that the last two holes are nothing like the first 16.  The stream location is "quirky" and if this course was built in the US before stream and wetland limitations, that thing would have been straightened in one or two locations so the holes didn't play that way.  So, that is quirk there, but the other holes are mostly tough but typical links design, IMHO.

As always, we would have to define the definition of quirk, but for the most part, I don't see Carnoustie having loads of it. I see it as pretty straightforward. (Not as much as Muirfield)

I did like the grass knobs - some fw cut and others rough - on the front corners of several greens replacing bunkers. I had actually been thinking of using something like that in a slightly different situation, and will certainly do so next time I have an opportunity.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff, Tom and Brad,

Couldn't the 1st hole be described as containing "quirk" ?

How does the golf course with the meandering burns and other features not contain "quirk" ?

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

I think I heard the commentators say that players must negotiate the burn at 12 different occasions during the round. (Please someone correct me if I'm wrong on this one). I don't see how this is out of character with the other holes.

Take for example number 3, now that hole just shouts quirk all over it.  Its not clear where to hit it off the tee.  The burn can come into play on both the tee shot and 2nd shot.  And heaven forbid they use that back right pin location, its a teeny lit slice of green.

I really like 17 a lot.  Yes 18 is very very penal, tough, and a unique hole, but nothing too unlike what the golfer has already seen and had to negotiate...

[Tom_Doak]

There is a water hazard that's in play multiple times.  I would only describe its impact on play as "quirky" on the 17th hole ... in every other instance I've seen holes elsewhere which would be much the same in plan view.

I still think you can only get away with quirk on a course which is relatively short.  Players generally make more harsh judgments about a "quirky" feature if they are hitting a 3-iron over it instead of a 9-iron.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Does the North Palm Beach muni saga say anything about the average American's view of quirk?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

That's an interesting qualifier.

One that I'd  normally agree with.

But, with the distances the Tour Pros are hitting the ball today,  what do you define as "short" on par 4's and par 5's ?

[Doug Siebert]

Patrick, I don't think "quirk" is in the tour player's vocabulary.  Anything we'd call quirky, they'd probably label unfair the moment it comes up and bites them in the ass to cost them a stroke.

Unless it is something like the wall on the Road Hole, few players would dare criticize that, but let some architect dare to put a stone wall on a new course they hold the PGA on, and the first guy who can't play a normal shot because his ball is up against the wall is going to have some choice words quoted on Sportscenter that night.  And its likely we'd probably crucify the feature here too, unless it was on a course built by one of the GCA's favored architects.

Think of quirk in context with an Edsel.  At the time it came out, everyone thought it was terrible and it was a huge failure.  Now it is a much loved collector's car respected for being unique and different from what came before and since.  I wonder what the first guys to play "The Pit" at North Berwick thought about it?  I'll bet there were a few golfers with balls who finished up against the wall who wished they'd hire some guys to cart away the stones!

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

That's what I meant by my first post ... for the Tour pros, Carnoustie's quirks are mostly accepted, because they are hitting shorter irons into the greens ... as they do everywhere nowadays.  But I've never even thought of it as quirky, just HARD.

[Phil Benedict]

The thing about quirk is that it elicits extreme responses - some hate it, some love it, few are neutral.  Some people think the Biarritz green at Yale is just plain stupid.  

Tour pros are more likely to hate quirk because what they are doing is such serious business to them.  They are not playing for interest or excitement.  Features that make the game less predictable are anathema to most of them.

[Phil McDade]

Interestingly, Erin Hills in Wisconsin seems to be a course designed for hosting majors that has -- from all reports -- a fair amount of quirk. Some huge and hugely sloped greens, one tiny one in particular, a Biarritz, blind shots, and a Dell hole that may or may not be used in competition.

[Clyde Johnston]

Carnoustie is HARD. I spent a whole week there one afternoon. Some of it was my fault (LOFT) but I didn't know the course either. Looking forward to going back there next spring with the ASGCA group.

[Forrest Richardson]

Patrick — I interpret your equation into one word: Unpredictable.

That is the hallmark of all three descriptions you cite.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()