Mark and Bill S,
Let me be clear about this. I had a wonderful time at SLCC, weather not withstanding. The membership and professional staff were very accomodating (my home club made the arrangements for us to pay to play) and I enjoyed my day immensely. My brother and I walked and carried and it was tough to do. There was hardly any wind and it was oppressively hot. This may have made the walk back from 16 green to 17 tee more of a burden then it may have been at other times and temperatures, but it in no way ruined my day. I was thrilled to be on such an Old Guard course as SLCC.
I was trying to think of how that corner area of 16, 17 and 18 tee could have been better routed. I wasn't sure if the tennis or squash facilities (or whatever that is at that end) caused a change. I imagined if the 17th tee was near the 16th green that it required the 17th to be a par 3 (a second set of back to back par 3s) or a very short par 4. I couldn't imagine it a short par 4 as it is a short par 4 as it is today (<390 yards).
In isolation, I find the retracing a very poor routing feature. Given the average quality of the 17th and a better but not great 18th, I wondered what the architect (CBM) was thinking.
Teeing 2 balls at once is an interesting change of pace but not very practical on a day to day basis although I gather there isn't a lot of play at SLCC.
As for the quality of the 18th, I don't mind blind shots at all. In fact I kind of like them. I don't like the artificiality of the fronting bunker and mound. The bunker shot isn't that difficult these days with 60* wedges and better equipment. It just looks so forced on a hole with tremendous natural featurs (elevation change and fairway contouring).
While the course conditions were not very good, that didn't bother me at all. I know the climate demands are problematic. Wit that in mind, I think the greens should have been a bit slower and longer. They were quicker than other courses in SL but patchy and stressed.
Hey, I'd love to return and study the course some more. In no way do I want to leave the impression that I was not glad to be there, thankful for the privilege nor disappointed. It is an early great course and I was fascinated by it. I was also a bit perplexed. I think the short par 4s and the par 3s excellent though I am not in favor of the template design model. Yet there are characteristics of Macdonald, Raynor and Banks courses that I find disappointing. I do not like flat bottom sand bunkers with steep grass faces. The influence of this style in the midwest is significant. Other courses in the area have imitated that style. With a course like SLCC that is on such great land, a more natural style would be more interesting to me. I know I am often in the minority in this way of thinking.