Dave: duly noted and I am duly scolded. My error is thinking this is just between me and shivas, and that nothing said on this site matters all that much.
I think you are right to take that issue with shivas' position, though. Though my talk was meant in jest - and my error remains that I don't take anything said on here all that seriously, especially what I say myself - well... others might indeed create the adversarial backlash you mention. And they might take my words too seriously. I shall watch myself about this going forward.
TH
Not meaning to scold at all. Just pointing out that, for once, Shivas might not be entirely off his rocker, and that you and everyone else ought to try and see this place for yourselves if at all possible. There are some incredible golf holes, some like you have never seen before.
____________________________________
Matt,
The first time I played the 18th the conditions were less than firm and the hole did not meet my expectations (formed on earlier walk arounds.) But I gained much appreciation for the hole after playing it last week under much better (and firmer) conditions. I agree that if the golfer plans on going for the green in three there is not a huge premium on placing the drive beyond hitting the fairway (which is narrower for short hitters.) But if I were able to try to get home it two, I'd sure want to hug the creek on left, for the angle.
I've never played the 18th at Sebonack, so I cannot compare. Is the 18th at Sebonack the third best par 5 at Sebonack? If not, then how does the 18th at RCCC compare to the 3rd best par 5 at Sebonack?
My point is that, even if it is not world class, this golf hole is very solid; too solid to be dismissed as "filler"or compared as equal to the let-down one feels at the 18th at CPC. Not every hole can be world class, not even on a world class course. This is especially true when one approaches golf design from a perspective of making the most of what the site gives you.
Is your main objection to the hole is that it is the 18th? Would you find it less objectionable if it was somewhere else in the routing? This I would understand more, I guess, but might not agree.
As for Ballyneal vs. Rock Creek, I don't want to touch that one. I saw Ballyneal very early when conditions were not quite there, but still I thought it compared favorably to Sand Hills. I imagine Ballyneal is quite a bit more fun now that it was then.
But for what its worth . . . the site at Ballyneal reaks of golf and is only an ocean away from a near perfect setting. In contrast, while the RCCC course fits perfectly in the rugged terrain now, I think there may have been much greater challenges to overcome at RCCC than at Ballyneal. That the comparison is even suggested is a remarkable compliment to RCCC.