[Michael_Choate]

Forgive me if this has been discussed already.  During the telecast this past weekend, the announcers mentioned  a couple of times that the tour pros think Quail Hollow is a very good course and hence the strong field, I believe 29 out of the top 30 showed up.   Never having played or seen the course in person, I am interested in hearing what makes it special and whether you think the tour pros find it special for reasons that are different from what the partcipants on this site might find special.

[BCrosby]

I wrote the following earlier this morning on another thread:

"I was struck by the number of half par holes at QH.

Every par 4 seemed to play as either a 3.5 or a 4.5. The par 5's seemed to play as 4.5's. And the 17th (the only par 3 I saw on TV) seemed to play as a 3.5.

Interesting approach to design. Keep all par 4's at yardages that are either on the low side or the high side for par 4 holes. Set the par 5's at the low end and par 3's at the high end.

You get lots of par 5's in the 490 to 520 range. Par 4's bunched at either short yardgages or long yardages (470 plus).

You minimize the number of holes that fall in the middle range of yardages for a given par."

Is that why the pros like QH so much? Are my TV observations in the ballpark?

Bob

[tlavin]

I'm sure the pros like the golf course.  The scores reflect a competitive course and the field reflects the popularity of the event.  The television announcers keep going out of their way to talk about the great hospitality of the event.  I get the distinct impression that the organizers do a great job of coddling the pros and their families for the week, much in the manner that Harbourtown does for the Verizon.  There is no doubt that hospitality can have an effect on the quality of the field.

[mike_malone]

 Bob,

    You may be onto something about the 1/2 par holes. This may account for the number of short shots that were the most fun to watch as players got themselves into awkward but recoverable places.

[Sean Leary]

I can't tell much about a golf course from TV for some reason especially  if it is a parkland  course.  Winged Foot didn't look particularly special during the US Open last year to me, although obviously it is.

[Matt MacIver]

Most of the green surrounds are shaved extremely tight and have swales that provide putt /pitch/chip options -- I saw several pros struggle with this choice on #7 and 16 all week.  

I heard a few players say that tee balls need to be properly positioned if you were going to attack a certain pin.  And the greens have a fair amount of undulation in them.  

There appears to be a few birdie holes for these guys, basically the par 5.  The rough was overall pretty benign, I'm guessing 2 inches or so.  Grow it to US Open height and I suspect Tiger's winning score of -13 drops by 3 strokes a round.  

[Ed Oden]

I was struck by the absence of any discussion this week on the board about Quail Hollow.  So I figured it had been covered before and went looking for older threads.  Sure enough, there were a number of them, the most interesting to me was this one containing Bob Crosby's insightful comments regarding the unusually large number of 1/2 par holes at Quail.  I think that is spot on.  Seems virtually every hole at Quail is either a birdie or bogey hole (sometimes both).  I think this lends the course to an environment that creates lots of excitement without being the total birdiefest at some tour spots.

I also noticed this post on a recent thread about ANGC:

I'd like to see ANGC get rid of the rough and shorten some of the par 4s, but a lot of this talk is ridiculous.  Because of the wind, Sunday's round at this year's Masters was extremely difficult--I don't think that makes it comparable to Shinnecock or Oakmont.  I think the more valid concern is that Augusta is starting to resemble something like Quail Hollow.  

I actually think maybe the opposite it true.  Perhaps Quail is starting to resemble what ANGC used to be like.  The 1/2 par holes are prone to plenty of birdies and bogies (i.e., excitement).  Yet the winning scores have all been between -10 and -13 under (i.e., a solid challenge without being a total survival test).  And, other than Joey Sindular, the winners have represented some of the best players in the game (Woods, Furyk, Singh, Toms).  Sounds a lot like what some feel has been missing from the Masters recently.  Any thoughts?

In case anyone is interested, here are a few pictures from Quail this past fall before the winter grass took hold.  I post these primarily to show that the green conditions we see on TV are often not present at other times of the year, lending to mostly fast/firm play.

#14

#16

#17

#18

[Bart Bradley]

Ed:

As always, great photos.  I think the pros like courses where excellent play is rewarded and marginal play is penalized.  Your description and those of the previous posters seems to confirm that Quail Hollow fits the bill.  Charlotte is also lovely in the Spring...which doesn't hurt at all.

As for ANGC -- I agree, it used to play more like that and now it just seems to penalize most shots.

Bart

[Greg Ross]

I've been a walking scorer at the Wachovia Championship for the past 6 years. I've scored for Nick Price, Vijay Singh, Phil Mickelson, Trevor Immelman, etc. They all have said that it's not a putting contest like many other PGA Tour stops. You have to work the ball both ways and the best shotmaker that week wins the tournament. The hospitality (especially for their wives) is a nice perk, but the golf course is more challenging than most they see on a weekly basis.

[Ed Oden]

Ed:

As always, great photos.  I think the pros like courses where excellent play is rewarded and marginal play is penalized.  Your description and those of the previous posters seems to confirm that Quail Hollow fits the bill.  Charlotte is also lovely in the Spring...which doesn't hurt at all.

As for ANGC -- I agree, it used to play more like that and now it just seems to penalize most shots.

Bart

Bart, thanks for the compliment on the pics.  Just to be clear, I don't think Quail is designed or set up like ANGC used to be.  There has always been rough.  And most of the easier holes are on the front nine.  Rather, I meant that the design and set up at Quail are condusive to creating the type of environment that I think people associate with the ideal ANGC.

A couple of other observations about Quail:

I never hear #14 mentioned when people are talking about great short par 4s.  But I think it is terrific and worthy of discussion.  It can be attacked in a variety of ways (i) mid iron off the tee and a short  wedge approach, (ii) long iron or hybrid just short of the green with a pitch or chip on, or (iii) attempt to drive the green.  There really is no advantage to any one, just whatever the golfer feels most comfortable with.  The water comes into play regardless of which option is chosen off the tee.  The slope of the green toward the lake means you can run a chip into the water if you are not careful, as Kenny Perry found out on Friday.  Bottom line is many options, all viable, all can lead to birdie or even eagle, all can lead to double.  That seems to me to be the essence of a great short par 4.

I have never understood why they maintain the strip on the left side of the creek on #18 as fairway.  No one would ever play there intentionally, although I have seen a few approach shots careen off the rocks over to this area.  It just seems wierd to me.

One final O/T thought, I followed Anthony Kim Friday for most of the front nine.  This was the stretch when he bolted to the top of the leaderboard.  This kid's got game.

[Carl Rogers]

I am begining to observe that in the world of high profile GCA, the medium distance par 4 seems to be out of favor on golf courses for the top 200 golfers.  Doesn't this hole type have as many possibilities that other hole types have?

What would be a good commonly known example?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()