George,
Since I am the heretic that lead to that response from Tom Doak, I'll bite.
I was unsure of four at Barnbougle, because, to me, the best line in required a carry beyond that which I think 90% of golfers would not be able to make, even from the correct tees, and especially considering the prevailing wind conditions.
So you laid up and had a blind shot in just because you don't possess the cojones to blast a big tee shot.
The most precise approach wasn't rewarded as much as the one displaying brute strength, and a modicum of accuracy - a poor choice for a short par four?
15 on the same course is miles better for all the reasons four isn't.
And I think architects, maybe even the designers in question of a course, fall prey to misjudging, too.
In Golf Architecture magazine, written by Misters Doak and Clayton, the eighth is one of their picks as a top hole - yet is unequivocally condemned by (nearly?) all who play it as the worst hole on the course.
I still don't think four at Barnbougle is any good - but yes, there are a lot of holes which people don't seem to get for various reasons.
Maybe context is one of them. Where a hole falls in a round, and what immediately precedes and follows it can have a lot to do with the overall excellence of a hole.
I also think many many golfers have become mollycoddled simpletons who expect everything handed to them on a platter - the slightest hint of unorthodoxy, quirkiness, or anything that may require you to think outside the square is condemned.
I was disappointed in Dornoch the first time I played it, then began to understand...
I thought TOC was, with the exception of three or four holes, a pile of crap the first time I played it, and, having played it since, and walked it a couple more times, I think it is an even BIGGER pile of crap than the first time...