The only reason for #2 at Tumble Creek is a path to get to #3.  Slightly downhill par three presents none of the visual challenge of the preceding hole nor the visual beauty of the following holes.  

Not every hole can be a winner!

The first time I visited Pacific Dunes, #8 was my least favorite hole, but I just didn't get it.  I liked it a lot more the second visit.  I had a pretty similar experience with #16.  Just about every hole got better on my second visit.

The two holes I enjoyed the least the last time around were #9 and #18.

As I stated on the "best" thread, I've only played the course in the prevailing summer wind (ranging between very mild to whipping, but generally the same direction.)  I've played the lower green on #9 more frequently than the upper green.  By all accounts, I should love this hole in these conditions.  I play a left-handed fade (sometimes slice) off the tee and the angled fairway plays right into my hands.  The hole is actually more difficult for me to the upper green, but I enjoy that version of the hole more.  The lower green has always been a "bomb the crap out of it and then see how close you can get your half-wedge or chip to the hole" kind of hole for me.  That's fun, but the upper green really makes me think harder about what I want to accomplish with the tee shot.  I'm probably also biased because I enjoy the upper tee on #10 (I'm probably in the minority there) and the upper green is usually connected with the upper tee.

The first time we visited, the green tee for #18 was up on the elevated box back by the tips, and I thought this hole worked much better from back there.  During the second visit, the green tee was pushed up and playing from lower ground, probably the yellow tee area.  This location gave me fits throughout the week.  I wasn't comfortable hitting driver from this spot, but my shorter options off the tee still brought most of the trouble into play.  Our group was running the ball through the fairway into the junk with 3 and 7 wood.  From the back tee, I could play a shorter club and leave myself longer second and third shots, or I could break out the driver and challenge the trouble in the narrower part of the fairway.

Ballyneal - #9.  I've already listed my comments on the Ballyneal thread, and others have already chimed in on this hole as well, so I won't pile on.  As Tom said on the other thread, this hole defended par quite nicely.  I just thought there were many more interesting holes on the course.

Ryan, you and I will be playing on alternate days!  I love the timing.

Chris,
 Don't worry, I'll hunt you down like the dog you are and find you! Nomater if it means crossing an ocean or two!

As far as Mr. Doak's Famous BBQ Dead Duck (the 10th at Apache Stronghold) I'll say that I think it is a severely misunderstood hole by many.

I also think it's exceptional, just like the other 17 holes that compliment it. From the serpintine bunker that leads up the middle creating all kinds of defined avenues of play, it was interesting to see how that hole made me want to try a different route everytime. I felt an instant infinity to this golf hole all the way to the reverse punch bowl green. I have yet to see another green in golf that is similar to it, but that's whe you get when your at Apache Stronghold, warts and all.

So, is it a sacred cow?

I can only hope so!

By far, and I haven't seen the hole grassed or remotely close to finish, his Worst BBQ'ed Sacred Cow is #8 at Seboneck. But all of you knew that going in!
 

18 at Barnbougle

Have recorded my thoughts here before on this hole. Long, into the prevailing wind, blind drive up a pretty steep hill. Green is nice but not good enough to make up for what is a disappointing finish, particularly after the thrills and spills of 15 and 17

Given Tom's very high batting average, the few holes I've played by him that I thought were unsatisfactory are pretty easy to name.

For instance, back about 6 years ago here I outlined why I think the 5th at Stonewall Old is a poor, overly penal hole (blind with no bailout and death all around), and I don't get the 17th at all, where you walk about 50 yards just to play a shortish par three without much distinction.   I also think the par three second at Beechtree is just a basic garden variety, Trent Jonesian, water-laden par three that isn't particularly clever or original, I think the par five 18th at Stonewall New is sort of a goofy, intersecting hazards, "get it back to the clubhouse" kind of hole on the worst part of the property, and if pushed to name my least favorite hole at PD, I'm not particularly enthralled with the 10th, which while making a nice poster, particularly from the higher tee, seems more an effort to get back to the water for the next couple of stunners.

I've played Stonewall, both courses, High Pointe, seen and worked on Barnbougle Dunes...

worst hole and still it could be considered a nice hole for a lot of designers:  
13th at Stonewall North... 230 yards par 3 with a lake all along to the right and a green surrounded by bunkers.

because of the length, no place to run it on the green and the hazard right, there's no real shot option on the hole, mostly unplayable for the average guy... not enough make or break effect to be trilling... and I didn't see a technical reason that could have stop Tom for building something else... that's the point of it, sometimes there's weaker hole because it would be hard (technically, financially, or for tiing it in)to make it better... this hole is weak because it had potential to be better.
 

... If there was one hole at Beechtree that I heard the most complaining about while I was there, it was the 8th hole. ...

In contrast, I liked the 8th - particularly the shots it requires which seem to be somewhat opposite of the par 5 that immediately precedes it.  The 7th was a pretty straightforward tee shot with an easy layup if you stayed short of the central bunker.  The difficulty came with the approach the the green which had a lot of contours (I hit a sloppy wedge to the wrong part of the green and 3 putted).  

You then immediately go to the next par five which requires a long, uphill tee shot and a long, difficult second shot.  If you can accomplish those (which I didn't), you are left with a pretty straightforward approach shot to a green that I don't recall being as contoured as #7.

I thought the different demands of the par 5's were interesting and noticeable since they are played back to back.

Andy

Tim,

I have little doubt that our disagreement is rooted in you standing on the wrong side of the ball.

gets my nod as the hole I'd least like to see repeated - it's a complete crapshoot as to whether or not you'll be hitting out of a divot, and that pretty much makes or breaks your hole,

I have never heard anything so silly in my life.  A player getting into a divot is the architect's fault!  

Yeah, my first instinct was also 2 at Beechtree...it wasn't really Tom's fault - he needed that water and the water on 7 to irrigate the course.

I remember taking Nancy there for her second ever round of golf.  We get to the tee box and I chunk it into the water...she's grinning trying to supress a laugh...I just said "stop laughing and throw me another ball."

I rather like 8.  Nice view back to the tee box from the fwy and a good stiff three-shotter for us mere mortals.

John - wanna bet that the architect at Lochenheath never designed or intended that concentrated low point to be part of the hole?  Concentarted collection areas occur in golf as the result of mis-guided shapers, engineering constraints, and evolution of hole (natural erosion and man-made maintenance), but I simply can't imagine an architect designing one.

JC

I would have to say #18 at The Rawls.  (Ive played PD, Rawls and Apache)  Seemed like more of your typical water laden par 5 finishing hole with not too much going on other than the water(after a really good par 5 17th hole) and I really hated the big gaudy Texas Tech bridge although I know thats not Toms fault.