Have we run out of original concepts? At first glance of the winning entry, I thought this hole bears a strong resemblance to Bethpage Black #4, albeit a reversed version. Absent of contour lines, it's difficult to determine the specifics of the shot--if the tee ball is uphill or downhill, second shot, etc. These comments are based on the hole as drawn in the color photograph.
Let's examine in detail.
The tee ball is played to a relatively wide area, from the rear tee. From the more forward tees, the ideal landing area for the tee ball appears to be in the narrow neck of fairway.
It is difficult to determine from the drawing what the lightly shaded area on the left represents, but it is of little consequence.
There are some similarities to the tee ball at BB #4 here. Firstly, as I have previously stated, the ideal tee ball is hit into a wide area. Similarly, it appears from the drawing that a tee ball that does not find the fairway is precluded from having a shot at the green. Although this is a concept not exclusive to BB #4, that a tee ball in the rough cannot approach the green, it is similar.
The second major similarity I see is that the second shot is played over a large expanse of rough or broken ground-again, similar to #4 BB, where the second shot, if the golfer be as bold (and some say, foolish) as to try to approach the green in two, is played over several bunkers, and penal rough.
Third, it appears from the drawing, although is is not drawn, that a golfer wishing to 'play safe' and perhaps prevent himself from disaster on this hole may play safely out to the left of the green, where there appears to be ample room for a "lay-up" shot. From here, it appears that the golfer has a simple pitch, unobstructed by rough or obstacles, with the exception of one "bad news" bunker, to a green with several distinct areas in which to place the hole location.
Fourth, the "lay-up shot" which has not been hit far enough down the fairway will come to rest, absent firm and fast conditions, in a place where the golfer must approach the green from an odd angle, over the corner of a bunker and rough.
Fifth, it appears that behind the green, as evidenced by the photo, is "bad news", again, similar to BB #4, where a shot that runs over the green will run considerably away from the green itself.
In contrast to BB #4, there are a few differences. It appears that "chipping area", or fairway cut, exists between the end of the right bunker and the green, ostensibly to allow golfers to hit into this area and run the ball up on the green. It's difficult to determine if there is sufficent fairway here, to allow a well struck shot, in firm and fast conditions, to slow enough so as not to run into the "bad news" bunker at the rear of the green.
The fairway is uninterrupted from tee to green, although there are necks present between wider sections. BB #4 has two separate fairways, one nearer the tee, for the first shot, one for the second shot, above/past the "glacier" bunker.
It is also not evident from the drawing whether the hole features death just right of the green, as BB #4 does, where a shot missing on the side opposite the "lay-up" area will roll a considerable distance away from the green.
The several bunkers at what appears to be 90 and 70 yards out in the fairway appear to have the potential to harass the weaker golfer rather than the stronger golfer, who can demonstrate distance control with his clubs.
Finally, it appears that the greensite is raised somewhat from the surrounding fairway, similar to BB #4 yet different in that the note that reads "slightly blind" may indicate the green is raised more than the fourth at BB #4.
In conclusion, this looks like a fun hole to play, with risk reward for all players, but a safe route for the beginner or short hitter. It appears to be a fair hole for all to play, which I am favor of, as a player who is subject to both delightfully good and frustratingly bad days.