Suprising no commetns from last weeks Golf Week article talking about the winners. Just checked online and did not see it posted. The winner, Bo Links,  had a nice alternate fairway design (w/ a drivable green option) through some sead-side dunes. Very nice rendering also.

Our (and hometown boy!!) John Lyon was mentioned as having submitted something, but was under the legal age to enter!!

One other point that struck me was only 64 entries? I would have thought they would have recieved hundreds!

I think John meant Golf World, there's an article in this week's issue on the winning design. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet myself.

If I had to guess regarding the lack of entries, I'd say most were scared off by the "drawing in your own hand" part and the fact that drawing was part of the criteria. Given The Good Doctor's own stated belief that technological advances would result in superior modern courses, I don't think he'd have a problem with computer-aided drawings.

I'm guessing Mr. Whitten and/or whoever came up with the rules was looking to not give computer savvy folks an unfair edge, but he/they instead gave the edge to folks who can actually draw. Maybe that's how it should be, but then it's a design illustration contest, not a design contest.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

I'll try to post my entry one of these days - sorry about the delay, Ryan.

Sorry - I meant Golf World and it is not online.

As for the 64 entries all it said was that the contest recieved a total of 64 entries. Nothing about valid or invalid or final reviewed list. Just 64 entries.

Interesting thing about the by-hand note. Of the 4 entries they show they are very very well represented artistically. It's tough to tell them from a computered rendered hole.

Quite frankly, I wasn't overly impressed by the winner. I thought Richard Fletcher's entry was far more impressive, well thought out and had many, many more options.

Looking at Links' design, it features a double fairway along an oceanside cliff top. The centerline hazard are dunes, and the green is wide, but shallow and surrounded by bunkers. The design claims that there are three options (it's really frustrating describing a picture) - playing to either the left fairway, the right fairway or driving the green. Here's where I think the hole doesn't quite add up for me. The hole plays 375 yards from the tips. The dunes cut off the entire front entrance into the green, meaning the only way you could drive the green from the tips would be to belt it at least 330 yards on the fly to carry the dunes. The hole has no ground game option to reach the green or really anyway to land a ball short to run up on to the green, which is rather bizarre since it's oceanside - one would think it's rather windy there. Considering the green is so shallow, there is no way even a well struck (monstrous) drive could possibly hold the green, and the sand traps directly behind the green, along with a 10 yard opening in front of the green mean that this really isn't a drivable par 4.

So that we have them all in one thread, I am posting John Lyon's design here too.



George,

If you lost track of the thread, here it is. Now's your chance to post your design (said the other procrastinator).  

If anyone has the mag with the winning design and can scan it and post it, I would appreciate it.

In the interest of my "me too" attitude here goes. Something with which I've been toying for a bit...

Contour Interval: 5 feet (just on 3 shown, this is a rough concept)
Distance from back tee to turn point: 280 yards
Everything else roughly to scale. The green is pushed up and benched into a left to right sloping hillside with the back right, right side and front right falling away from the center of the green.

Temptation on subsequent plays. The slope is reachable from the tees and the possibility of using the slope for a turbo boost has always been an appealing feature to me. Yes, a flip wedge over a bunker can be difficult, but such is the beauty of temptation.

Also, for the higher handicap, it provides an option to get closer to  the green without rough being the only option, and if that higher handicap player manages a good drive, provides an option to go for the green or bail out right.

Agreed Joe about the discussion, and yes, high tee, low green - way to be specific Kyle.

As with a lot of things, temptation and ego tend to work against a golfer, and often times the most straightforward decision is the best. I like the idea of choosing challenges and the golfer being able to "pick their path" in terms of what sort of things they can over come.

In that regard, this hole is also meant to challenge the learning curve. A wise high handicapper may avoid the approach over the bunker, but another high handicapper may be in the "fairway is always good" crowd. You just never know.  

For those who have played there, the tee shot is a bit motivated by the old configuration of the 3rd hole on PSU's Blue Course.

I had initially sketched this out with pencil and paper, and there is a bit more room over the two fairway bunkers than in my MS Paint rendering.

Kyle, looks like someone needs to learn how to use Photoshop.

May I have your copy?

I really just need a scanner so I can get my hand renderings here.

Joe, whats a copier?

Garland, the funny thing is, I think that is what happened to mine.

Kyle's design looks frightening similar to mine (frightening for him, I imagine).