Finally,
A is the 6th at Miromar Lakes, an Arthur Hills Signature course. This would qualify as the reviled one (at least around here).
So, what did I learn from this exercise in comparative architecture 101?
That people want the distances to the centre line bunker to be within their reach so that carrying the bunker is a real option. Multiple tee decks (and proper selection of same by the player) seems to be the answer to that.
People don't want water on the side that is considered the safe side. Desert is better. It escapes me why that is, except that maybe the TSN desert is mostly just hard pan from which recovery is possible. If it was inescapable, unfindable desert like say We-Ko-Pa where you're looking at a two stroke penalty rather than one, then perhaps desert isn't better.
If there are two routes, people seem to want them to both be wide (but not with water, even on the wide side). How much wider than the 100 yards that Hills give you on A would be ideal?
I was taken by how similar the holes looked in concept. There are nuances in the movement of the fairways, bunkering or water around the green, and the green complex, but the basic template is there in all three.
I'm not sure, based on this one hole, why architects generate such love or hostility. All three are reasonable quality holes based on the concept and principles. Where do the reviled architects fall down?
Finally, not to shill too much for Venetian, it is an interesting course for that part of the country from an architecture point of view. Clearly, Powell has been influenced by CBM.
There are a number of template holes or template features used. The holes are named, and amongst them are Alister Mackenzie, Short, Donald Ross, Elysian Fields, Punch Bowl, Valley of Sin, Cape, Biarritz, and Spectacles. A couple, Short and Elysian Fields, don't do it for me, but the rest are interesting attempts. What's also interesting is that WCI, in one of their residential communities, would have allowed an Architect the freedom to be creative in this way. I'm not sure of the Doak rating scheme, but if you're in the neighbourhood of Venice, FL go a little out of your way and play this course.
On the other hand, nothwithstanding C&C's status around here, I just don't get the love for TSN. It's a nice course, but a dreadful piece of property for a golf course. They made something out of nothing, and the bunkers are artistic, but otherwise its subtleties of design are just too subtle to me. If I had to choose between B and C, I'd choose C. If TSN as it is, was designed by an unknown architect, would it be so highly thought of?