Andrew:

I'd have to say the five'n dime hole on the Center has got be in the mix - a great short par-4 with a multitude of options. I also like the 3rd on the same nine -- you need to work the ball from right-to-left and the green, I believe it's the biggest at RCC, is also neatly contoured in a subtle manner.

On the East Nine -- I really do like 3. Demanding par-5 and I see the green on that hole as being one of the very best at RCC.

On the West Nine -- hard to beat #5 -- losing the tree to the left side of the green was more of a plus than many might believe. I see this hole consistently underrated because getting an approach shot to stop near to the hole is very difficult.

Mark C:

Good of you to mention Forsgate / Banks Course since you inserted it into the mix at the very beginning of this thread.

What really amazes me is that Doak gave the course a "7" in "Confidential Guide" long before the upgrades were made to the course in terms of turf conditioning and a few extra yards on a few holes -- most notably the 18th.

The Banks Course is rich in so many architectural elements and often times I really believe it's overall location in NJ -- right off NJ Tpke Exit 8A but far enough away from the masses has caused the course to often get lost in the shuffle.

RCC is a superb layout but I think it would make for an interesting head-to-head comparison. My vote would go to The Banks Course by a nose.

I'd have to say the five'n dime hole on the Center has got be in the mix - a great short par-4 with a multitude of options. I also like the 3rd on the same nine -- you need to work the ball from right-to-left and the green, I believe it's the biggest at RCC, is also neatly contoured in a subtle manner.

Now that's interesting, because I don't see that many options on 6C (Five and dime).  The shot to the near-end of the fairway is so short and probably even easier than laying back (closer to the bunkers) that it's a no-brainer to me.  I also don't consider going for the green a realistic option (so much so that I almost forgot to say so).  I did cite it as my pick for Center as well, but for other reasons.  Do you mind describing the options that you see?

I'm also surprised to hear you mention 3C since I think that hole would gain as much (or more) in the way of options from tree removal or trimming as 8W.  The shot to challenge the left side and get farther down the fairway (without running through) requires a significant hook and isn't something people try, in my experience.  Clearing out some of the trees blocking the line of play down the left-hand side of the fairway would encourage an aggressive line that challenges the bend of the fairway that occurs as it starts to drop.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts, Matt.  Thanks.

Bill, I agree with you that 7 East is one of the best par 4's at RCC.  

I argued about the tree at the back of the left side fairway bunker that serves as a double hazard with a buddy.

I checked a picture of the 1935 Ryder Cup and sure enough that same tree is there.

I think the hole would provide more options if the tree was removed and the fairway extended behind the bunker as was proposed by Gil Hanse.

Andrew,

Dave uses a driver on nickle & dime (6 center) two out of three times he playes the hole. One of the last times he played it, he landed on the green on a fly and held the green. He two putted for birdie. So, for him and probably Matt Ward, there is an option.

Cheers

Andrew:

The five'n dime hole always makes the longer hitters think about "what if" I nail a drive and can get home in one big blow. If someone is a short hitter and that option is not available it's likely you and others may see the hole as being a bit limited.

In so many ways the hole reminds me of the same feeling when standing on the tee of other comparable short holes in American golf like the 7th at Olympic / Lake and the 17th at Oakmont.

You just feel like an automatic birdie should be placed on the card and given such willful disrespect the hole makes you pay for even the slightest of errors.

Laying back, of course, is an option but when do that you must play from a partially sloped fairway to a small target with little effective landing area.

In regard to 3C I see the turning point of the fairway as fair game for golfers to overcome. Turning the ball from right-to-left is a shotmakers opportunity to face and handle. Let me point out that a number of competitors in the Sr. PGA event decided to play a fade over the tree line -- if memory serves, I believe no less than Nicklaus himself did this on a few occasions during the event.

Working the ball is an even more demanding skill with today's clubs and balls. Should there a thinning out of additional trees? That's something for the club to consider. Last time I played the hole I didn't see the real need but it's something to ponder.

Bill B:

8W as a par-3 only further demonstrates to me what's lacking from the tee shot and 2nd shot dimensions. If the hole only gets significantly better when played from the distance you indicated then what came before that point needs to be examined for what the hole is missing.

Mike P:

Your point on 7E is spot on and a hole I forgot to include as one of the best at RCC.

Greg:

Excellent point concerning the mound behind the green at 4C.

Bill:

I don't see the value in nearly all instances of the required three-shot par-5 holes which almost always leaves the proverbial approach from 100 or so yards.

One other thing -- re-read Greg's comments on the size of the tree line down the left side of 8W. Why not cut them back to allow for the Cape dimension he outlined? It would then bring into play a major decision on whether to cut the corner or not.

Bill, the issue for par-5 holes should be not to wait until the 3rd shot but to start the strategic dimensions the minute you arrive at the tee. 8W, as constituted now, effectively limits the tee shot elements. You must play to a particular position and then go from there. It's limited.

Even you yourself mentioned in your comments that you can "slightly cut the corner.' C'mon Bill, when you say "slightly" you've got to be joking. There's not enough bait for a player of stature to go for such shot when the only net return is a "slight" gain at best.

If there's any hole crying out for the wood chopper it's 8W - especially the left side.

Couple of other points -- I never said the 3rd shot is not crucial or set up well given the land configurations and green site. But, as I referenced previously, the green at 8W is a much more conventional play when compared with the 9th at Alpine which Tillie also created. Please don't assert that I am minimizing the three-putt possibility there -- but it's even more likely at other Tillie designs -- the 9th at Alpine being a solid case study.

Let me also rebut your comments / re: 8th at The Banks Course / Forsgate. While I am not a fan of automatic three-shot par-5 holes I see this one as being one of NJ's best examples of this type -- throw in the 17th at Baltusrol Lower. The tee shot must hit the right side of the fairway to take advantage of the slope which bends right-to-left. It is uphill all the way and the simple facts that golfers know this can often mean an impulse to hit even harder. Should you draw or pull the shot the left rough is absolutely the last place you want to be. The green site is outstanding -- being elevated with the very DEEP left bunker swallowing the slightest pull. You also have a green that is nearly divided into two different sections.

One other thing -- the 8th is neatly positioned in its routing and is superbly located prior to the 9th -- a completely different type hole that favors an aggressive play to get there in two blows.

I also enjoy the 8th at Forsgate because there is no intrusive quality of trees that have overstepped their role as one sees with 8W at RCC.

Bill, 8W is a fine hole -- I just don't see all the elements of unique options that would make it, in my mind, an outstanding hole. Sharpening a few axes would be a real plus, IMHO.

 

Greg,

East: #5, Great as is, but it would be really something if the tee was moved about 30 yards back to put the fairway bunkers in play and require a mid-iron approach.

I guess it's a better hole for me than you because those fairway bunkers are in play and I am generally hitting a mid-iron into that green.

Do you think they should have moved the fairway bunkers farther out when they moved them a few years ago?  That might not work out so well for play from the tees farther up.

Isn't the area directly behind that tee the swampy area where the 4E green was originally supposed to go?

Matt,

Here is the tee shot, there is still plenty of risk/reward here:



You can hit a safe 230 yard tee shot to the right, but pay the price the rest of the hole. It is a LONG way to the green from the right side, and you definitely have brought the trees on the right in to play, 30-40 yards short of where this photo was taken:

 

Or you can risk the trees and OB on the left with an agressive tee shot to this position:

 

P.S. One last thing -- if you want to see another grand Tillie par-5 be sure to check out the 14th at Baltimore CC -- has all the elements I spoke about and is often left off the radar screen because so much focus on Tillie comes from his works in the metro NYC area and in the Philadelphia area.

Outside of Philly Cricket, what Philly area Tillie gets any mention?

Matt,

I have to agree with Andrew regarding #6 center.  I hit the ball farther than about 99.8% of all players out there and I can't get to the green.  I don't even bother trying in a casual round.   I've probably played and caddied the hole well over 1000 times and I've never seen anyone come close.  

The genius of the hole is not the options off the tee, its the variety of shots that are required for the approach.  

Andrew and Greg,

The last time I played 6 center with Dave was from about 275 yards. As usual for him on that hole, he pulled out the driver and landed on the green on a fly.

His view is if he hits 5 iron sand wedge, it is a hard green to hit.

So he figures, hit driver around the green and take 5 out of play.

It makes it more exciting to watch that's for sure.

Cheers

Andrew:

Look, there's nothing you're going to say that's going to convince me on 8W and likely vice versa.

When you only say "tree removal might create additional options" then you are simply playing word games with your statement at the very beginnng of your last reply that you're not "against removing or trimmng trees."

Andrew -- wake up and smell the coffee. RCC was overrun by tree proliferation -- as was and is so many courses in the immediate Northeast. That has been helped by a more recent effort to take plenty of them down. More can be done on this front IMHO.

8W was originally thought of as a superb cape hole. THAT OPTION DOESN'T EXIST. GOT IT.

Whether the tee was moved or not is irrelevant. Instead of moving more aggressvely ahead with the tree removal the club decided a far more easier situation would be to move the tee to a certaiin amount. That's a half-step correction - it still doesn't alter the reality that the hole is a mandatory 3-shot hole. Continuing this fruitless exercise serves no purpose. No doub members of the club will embrace their feelings because of the natural tie they have to the place and I salute the loyatlty dimension. Sometimes those who are the closest cannot really see the dfferences being explained.

I'll say this again -- look at the 14th hole at Baltimore CC -- the dimensions I have described over and over and over agan in this thread are proof of what I have mentioned is what lacks with 8W.