Joe Passov's Dream 18

[Dan Kelly]

What do you think?

See  Joe Passov's Dream 18

[BCrosby]

Predictable, safe choices. Though just one hole from Scotland?

Is Passov a regular contributor to a mass circulation golf magazine by any chance?

Bob

[Tom_Doak]

Bob:  Joe is the architecture editor of GOLF Magazine now.  Plus, he has a famous brother-in-law.

Yes, they are mostly predictable, safe choices (except the Pacific Dunes hole), but most are hard to argue with.  I found it interesting that he didn't confine himself to keeping the hole in the place where it really falls in the round.  

Personally, I would not use a hole like the tenth at Riviera as #17 (where Joe puts it) ... at that point, the situation of the event is going to make your decision for you.  If you're a shot ahead, or even tied, you hit the iron off the tee every time, don't you?  To me a hole like that is better a bit earlier in the round (anywhere from #10 to #14) where you don't really know what you need to make on it, so there's more indecision in how to play it.

[Robert Kimball]

I knew him back when he worked for LINKS magazine. He is a Pine Valley freak, and also claims to have beaten Nick Faldo straight up in a pro-am at Harbour Town (that was some time ago).  

[wsmorrison]

Hardly inspiring.  No better than most and worse than some.  Outside of Pacific Dunes, it is pretty much the standard fare.  Who is his brother-in-law by the way?  I take it not Tom Doak  

[John Kavanaugh]

His brother-in-law is Ken Kavanaugh.  You might go to his web site www.KenKavanaugh.com

[wsmorrison]

Thanks, John.  I checked out the website; interesting.  

I liked Tom Doak's informative note of how a hole is likely to be played relative to different positions in the routing progression.  Tom, did you ever revise a routing progression or flip nines either in the planning stage or after a design was completed for such reasons?

[Dan Kelly]

I liked Tom Doak's informative note of how a hole is likely to be played relative to different positions in the routing progression.  

As did I.

Tom -- What other rules-of-thumb do you follow regarding hole-type placement in a round?

[Dan Moore]

Ditto on TPC 17 which is not nearly as dramatic as the 7th hole.  I guess the Road Hole works at 16 but could you imagine the Road Hole followed by TPC 17.  Yikes.  I think this underscores how important placement of a hole is in a round and relative to other holes.  

Though if that were a possibility I think I'd put TPC at 16 and the Road Hole at 17.  How you fared on 16 might then greatly influence the psychology of what you could handle at 17.  
Followed by PB 18 that would be an exciting and nerve racking finish, much better than Carnoustie I would think,  where the potential train wrecks would be followed by an opportunity for redemption.  

[Adam Clayman]

The first thing that struck me when reading this list was how Joe's opener is a sixth hole.

Shouldn't a Dream 18 have to incorporate the best opener & closer?

Other than they have played alot of places, what would this say about someone's gca accumen, if they were to try this exercise?

Would they include ebb and flows or just balls to the wall flow?

[JESII]

Can we talk about #18 at Pebble?

For those of you that have played the hole often...more than my two times...is this really one of the great holes or even par fives on the planet?

I would not want to cast my vote against it yet, but something seems lacking to me through this thick cloud that is my memory...

I might rather play #1 at Spyglass more often...

[Jim Colton]

Anybody else care to post their Dream 18 of courses they've played?  I had one from a few years back (hole # specific)...maybe I'll try to dig it up and dust it off.

[Tom Huckaby]

Can we talk about #18 at Pebble?

For those of you that have played the hole often...more than my two times...is this really one of the great holes or even par fives on the planet?

I would not want to cast my vote against it yet, but something seems lacking to me through this thick cloud that is my memory...

I might rather play #1 at Spyglass more often...

OK, let's talk about #1 Pebble.

All I see in it is this:

Tee shot from which one starts on a perch above the ocean; shot choices are cut over the ocean as much as one can, to shorten the hole, or play out more conservatively to the right.  If you do the latter, the risk is getting in a bunker, behind some small trees, or at worst go OB.

Second shot offers many choices depending on where one left the tee shot; in this day and age, MANY can now reach in two - that's very viable and effects the tee shot choice as well.  If one chooses to lay up, one still has to keep in mind ocean left, OB right, and not getting too close or too far right so one is blocked by the large green side tree.

Third shot, if it is a pitch or other approach, has bunker to clear, huge tree to avoid, and the ever-present ocean left.  On top of that, one doesn't want to go past the hole, because the green cants fairly severely back to front, and downhill putts are very three-jackable.

That's just the shot requirements. You'll note I've yet to mention the beauty or history that oozes out of ever blade of grass on the golf hole.

Nope, not much going on, not a very good hole at all.

Please.

For all that it has, all that it means, all that it is, it is the best finishing hole on the planet, the best par five on the planet, and in the small number that can make a straight-faced claim to best golf hole on the planet.

That being said, it surely has its detractors, those who say "it can be played 4-iron, 4-iron, wedge, what's the big deal"?  We've debated it ad nauseam in here.  To them I say, yes one can play it that way, but one can also play 16 CPC with a putter if one wants.  Such play rather misses the point.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Anybody else care to post their Dream 18 of courses they've played?  I had one from a few years back (hole # specific)...maybe I'll try to dig it up and dust it off.

I did so, basing it on hole number.  That is, best #1, best #2, etc.  It was fairly well-received.  But I made no attempt at ebbs and flows or creation of a viable course - it was simply the best holes I've played with that number.

[JESII]

Huckster...if you think there was no "OOZING" in the first half of that post you've separated from reality...

OK, OK, is the green really any sort of challenge at all? You say it's steep from back to front, is it even a fraction of the slope of #13 or #15?

Does any consideration need to be given to the fact that the rock wall is fake?

Do the condos on the right cancel out the view to the left?

Does the fairway itself offer any sort of interest? Is there even a 1% grade?

[Adam Clayman]

Sully, The detractors give little in the way of credible gca analysis. Even the famous Chip Oat's beef with the tree is so personal in it's inception that it isn't worthy of consideration.

 

I say the hole is a great hole. It's demanding, thought provoking, full of risk and reward. It's ground has subtle movement, accentuating the effect of the str8 line leftside, from 160 and in. Should the wind be up, or, the sea a rag'in, there's no better closer I know of.

[Tom Huckaby]

JES:

As you can see I do very much love the golf hole.  I TRIED to leave that love out of the first part... but it is difficult.  

But to answer your questions... my opinions are such:

OK, OK, is the green really any sort of challenge at all? You say it's steep from back to front, is it even a fraction of the slope of #13 or #15?
I find it to be a heck of a challenge, and as I watch so many missed putts each year in the AT&T, and each time the US Open is played there, it confirms my play, that's for sure.  It's not crazy steep like 13 or 15, and to me that makes it even better... it lulls players into a false sense of security, or causes lack of respect for a front pin... players then wonder why they have such tough first and second putts.

Does any consideration need to be given to the fact that the rock wall is fake?

Not by me - a wall is a wall and it's not like it was drop-dead gorgeous or anything as it was in it's natural state - look at old pictures - it's just a bunch of rocks.  To me the beauty lies in what's crashing beyond it - you know, that blue and white stuff?

Do the condos on the right cancel out the view to the left?
Please.  Only the most anti-Pebbleite could come up with that one.  First of all they ain't exactly ugly suburban condos - they're part of the Lodge and I find them decent enough to look at.  But again, if you're looking at those, you've rather missed the point of the golf hole.

Does the fairway itself offer any sort of interest? Is there even a 1% grade?
The fairway holds enough interest for me, just in the act of trying to hit onto it!  Sure it is relatively flat, but it does have some subtle movement and hell given the shots involved, some wacky grading would be overkill.  The land going down to the sea isn't rumpled, not at Pebble Beach.. it is what it is.  And I find that it works rather well.

Next!
 

[JESII]

OK guys then tell me this...if I were to decide to hit 4 iron - 4 iron - Wedge...would the hole be interesting...other than the pretty condos on the right, of course?

[Tom Huckaby]

JES:

If you decided to do that - outside of some VERY compelling competitive reason to do so - I'd wonder why the hell you bothered to play the course?  Tiddliwinks would be more suited to your mindset.

 

But to give a less smart-ass answer, I'd say yes, it would still be interesting.  In the world of 4irons hit, those two would be damn interesting for sure given what you're going around and/or over.  And the wedge would command your attention as well.  One would hope you'd take your eyes off the Lodge and perhaps look left, but given your golf mindset playing holes so cautiously, we'd assume you have no soul and play with your head down and/or eyes closed.

 

[JESII]

Alright...you've got it...

But is it a better par 5 than #14...

[Tom Huckaby]

Alright...you've got it...

But is it a better par 5 than #14...

"Better" would entail a lot of things.

#14 is a more difficult golf hole, #18 is better.

TH

[JESII]

TH,

Those smiley things were supposed to imply a needle/retorical question that needn't be addressed...

Thanks for the education boys...

[Tom Huckaby]

TH,

Those smiley things were supposed to imply a needle/retorical question that needn't be addressed...

Thanks for the education boys...

Well, it actually is a very fair and interesting question!

Because 14 is a damn good golf hole also... one of the few true three-shotters left that the big boys play.  Oh I know some do get there in two these days.... but not without huge risk, and rarely with score success.

[JESII]

Agreed...

I was actually surprised to see Tiger try in 2000...even though he was successful at least once, it seems unlikely to make four if you are 10, 15, 20 yards short of the green, no?

[Tom Huckaby]

Absolutely.  Unless you get it perfectly right of the bunker, left of the tree and can pitch up the tier, that is going to be one NASTY short pitch shot.  Given OB right, trees left, little if any chance to get a second shot to the top tier, it really seems odd to even try it.  But I guess if you're Tiger Woods or the like and 260 means a high feathery 4iron, why not?