News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jimmy Muratt

  • Karma: +0/-0
In my opinion, what really separates the 6th hole at NGLA from other great short par 3's (and not just Macdonald/Raynor shorts) is the size and contouring of the green itself.  As the green is very large, even the high handicapper has an excellent chance of hitting the green, but that's where the fun really starts.  Many of my favorite short par 3's, such as the wonderful 9th at Myopia Hunt Club, are of the "do or die" mentality....hit the green or else.  That's not the case at National.  You can be in a more difficult spot being in the wrong place on the green as opposed to missing the green itself.  That's the true genius of the hole.

Early pictures and descriptions of the new Short hole at Old Macdonald seem to really echo the playing characteristics of the 6th at NGLA, I'm excited to see it.

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
From the review at Courses by Country:




6th hole, 135 yards, Short; One of Ben Crenshaw’s favorite short holes, the green is eccentric and a thorough original with nothing like it anywhere in the world thanks to a small mountain in the center which makes it effectively play as three small ones. A player on the opposite side of the green from the hole should happily take three putts. The front left corner of the green is quite good at gathering a ball and feeding it into the front bunker.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 09:55:13 AM by Steve_ Shaffer »
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
One thing about 6-th NGLA that you may be forgetting is that the green is not the “usual” squarish-shape you see on nearly all other Macdonald / Seth Raynor Short holes.

You have this great free-form shape that sets up so many different areas and angles - downwind, right front pin the most difficult.



I’ve always been of the opinion that CB did not want to see any version of “his NGLA holes” built later, be better than his original designs.

Very few were.


A question for all:

were any versions of his NGLA holes that were built later come out better than his originals?
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Anthony Gray



  George,

  Excellent  question. Possibly the Cape hole at Mid Ocean because the water hugs the entire faiway.

  Anthony

 

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
George

Great question

I think Chicago Golf Club has a better Punchbowl, Plateau, and Eden.

I think St. Louis County Club has a better Short.

I think Piping Rock has a better Redan.

Not saying NGLA isn't great though, there are just sporadic holes throughout other MacRaynor course that I think are just a little better versions.

With that said, the Redan at Piping Rock (and Chicago) are much much bigger and bolder.  And the Short at St. Louis shows little resemblance in my opinion to the Short at NGLA.

Chip

Jimmy Muratt

  • Karma: +0/-0
George,

I think the Eden at Fishers Island is superior to the version at NGLA.

Patrick_Mucci

George Bahto,

While the aerial you posted provides great insight, it doesn't show how insidiously that green feeds balls into the surrounding bunkers, which is a great feature.

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Pat, you know there is nothing like seeing and playing the hole.

That aerial pic was to demonstrate the non-squared look of most Short holes

good seeing you yesterday at WFW
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Tim Gavrich

  • Karma: +0/-0

Tom Gavrich:

I recall seeing a picture of the Short at The Greenbrier a couple of months back but and I did take note of the "thumbprint" but not much else - and the "else" is at least 80% of the hole (see above).

The penalties for missing the green at the Short at the Greenbrier are pretty stout.  No, the ball won't trundle 15 feet down a hill like at Lawsonia but is it an essential feature of a great Short hole that missing the green will result in an almost certain bogey?  The bunkers around the one at Greenbrier are going to make par quite a challenge anyway and besides, if they were really really deep, they would be incongruous with the surroundings, IMO.




Cheers.

--Tim
Senior Writer, GolfPass

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Chip,

I would think that the view of the green up against the water teaming with the green size hiding the four distinct greens--and giving false hope to golfers--is the short answer to your question.  The long answer involves mecca, heaven, purple rays of light following your ball, the lunch, the windmill, the bell at Alps, everything else that makes NGLA so special.

Patrick_Mucci

Chip Gaskins,

I hope to get to play Chicago Golf Club in the not too distant future, but, how is their Plateau better than the plateau at NGLA, especially given the prevailing wind at NGLA and how that affects the play of the hole, and..... the dramatic challenge provided by locating the hole on the top two tiers, especially the left tier/plateau.

As to NGLA's Eden, it's my theory that the hole was designed to replicate the approaches on both # 7 and # 11 at TOC, depending upon which tee is used.  IF that's the case, can any other Eden claim replication of the approach to that green from two distinct angles of attack ?
« Last Edit: October 15, 2009, 09:12:35 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Chip Gaskins:

Why do you believe St. Louis CC has a better Short than National?

Is your opinion based solely on the architecture on the ground?  If yes, please explain in five sentences or less.

Or, does your criteria include other considerations, as well?