10th hole at Lost Farm - favorite architects getting a free pass on GCA?

[David_Elvins]

I read with interst the comments on the 10th hole at Lost Farm in the ongoing thread. It has me concerned about my sanity.  

Here would be my review of the 10th hole at Lost Farm.



Like many holes in the world of golf you tee off from an elevated tee to a flat fairway in a valley below the tee.  The hole bends slightly to the left, giving a small advantage to the player who drives down this side of the fairway.  There is a large dune on the right side of the fairway, that might slightly block out those that drive too far right but the fairway is so wide that it is very hard to drive that far right.  There is no heroic decision, generous room for the mishit shot and no direct imperative to play close to a hazard.



The second shot is dead flat with no apparent hazards in the landing zone other than a bunker that guards the direct line to the green for the long hitters.  The mound to the right of the fairway about 350m(?) might come into play for the very short hitters.  

Tom Doak suggests that "players can get out of position to the right" with their second shot.  Brett Morrissey and Bill Brightly think that "the further right the better".   If you can conclude one thing from these comments it is that there isn't really any great imperative to approach the green from any particular angle.  For those not reaching the green in two, the second shot can be safely blasted away at the large expanse of fairway.  

The only real trouble on the hole is as described by Sven Nilsen as follows "On my first play, I fell victim to the right side danger, hitting a 3wood second shot into an unplayable lie in the small tree line to the right of the green"  That is right.  The primary hazard on this hole is a group of trees and shrubs that abuts the back right edge of the green.  I think there is a general reason why trees and shrubs are not used as hazards a metre from the edge of the green – because they are crap greenside hazards.



The green does have a considerable amount of contour that makes getting down in two from anywhere on or around the green a good challenge.  

The Lost Farm thread contained the following comments on the tenth hole: “I really liked the tee shot on this hole”, “another good hole...Nicely framed tee shot to a wide open fairway and a clever approach to the nestled green to the left”, “one of the coolest green sites on the course”, “strategic ... A very, very good hole IMHO”, “No doubt this is a very strong par 5”,

Now I would like to think that I have a reasonably good mind for golf course architecture, that I appreciate classic courses, subtle features, and clever design but how can this hole be anything other than a standard clichéd elevated tee shot with little immediate interest, a second shot with a flat paddock to aim for and a green guarded by the two of the most clumsy of hazards - a group of trees and bushes, and excessive green contour that doesn’t tie into the strategy of the hole.  How can I be so at odds with so many smart people?  Am I comptely losing the ability to analyse golf course architecture?  Or is there a general expectation on this board that if Bill Coore designed it, it must be good and all analysis works backwards from this presumption.  

[Patrick Kiser]

Good doesn't mean great.

There goes the theory of trees on the 18th at PB as being decent hazards.

What about the recovery area to the left and back of the green?

[Bill Brightly]

David,

I think yours is a very good post and you raise some valid points. But having played this course in a 4 club wind one day, and almost no wind two days later, I would say the architect has a very difficult balancing act. Kyle Henderson used a great word to describe the features employed on the 13th hole: "restraint." I think you have to realize that this course could be unplayable for 80% of the golefers in heavy wind if Coore add more hazards and had tight, picturesque fairways...  I think the expansive fairways are almost mandatory on this site. That makes it hard to view a hole like this in pictures alone, unless you happen to be in a wind tunnel with your laptop...

But lets break the hole down. Without wind, or with a helping right to left wind, long hitters can to try and reach this in two or get real close to the green. (And trust me, every single digit handicap thinks about reaching in two when he sees a par 5 on the card...) Sven paid the price for hitting 3 wood too far and brought the green side trees into play. But I am conservative (I hate screwing up simple holes and trust my wedge game) so after a very good drive on the windless day, I saw trouble if I pulled my 3 wood left as well as trouble right if I went too far. So I hit a rescue club to leave myself a full wedge and then had a reasonable 15 foot birdie attempt. I thought it was a nice balance between tempting me to be heroic, yet offering a simple and safe way to play the hole. And the green has enough "sections" to make full wedge accuracy very important, or you can bring a 3-putt bogey in to the equation. My 15 footer from the dead middle of the green left me a slightly downhill/sidehill putt that I may make one in ten tries.

The trees so close to the green did make me pause. It is usually a bad idea from a turf management perspective, but as long as there is good grass on the green, I think this is a rare example of trees serving a useful and interesting role. (Once on a course is my maximum...)

[Bill Brightly]

One more point David. Take another look at this photo...Do you really think there are "many holes in the world of golf" with a view like this? Man, I am stuck playing parkland courses 99% of the time and I would be be ticked off if this elevated spot was not used as a tee...

Like many holes in the world of golf you tee off from an elevated tee to a flat fairway in a valley below the tee.  

[David_Elvins]

Bill,

Thanks for the good reply.

David,
I think yours is a very good post and you raise some valid points. But having played this course in a 4 club wind one day, and almost no wind two days later, I would say the architect has a very difficult balancing act. Kyle Henderson used a great word to describe the features employed on the 13th hole: "restraint." I think you have to realize that this course could be unplayable for 80% of the golefers in heavy wind if Coore add more hazards and had tight, picturesque fairways...  I think the expansive fairways are almost mandatory on this site. That makes it hard to view a hole like this in pictures alone, unless you happen to be in a wind tunnel with your laptop...

I agree with you that wide fairways are mandatory on the site.  But at the same time there is wide and there is wide.  50 yards is a wide fairway.  60-70 yards is a very wide fairway.  Some of the fairways at Lost farm are in excess of 100 yards wide.  I don't think that anyone is suggesting that Coore should have built tight fairways.  But I don't think the wind should in anyway inhibit an architect from builidnign a wide fairway with a hazard on one side, for example.  I am not saying that this hole needs more hazards specifically but I do not think that we should cut the architects slack by suggesting that the windiness of the site limited their ability to create interesting tee shots.  I loved the tee shot on the first hole for example.  A wide fairway with a diagonal hazard on the inside of the dogleg that needs to be challenged to find position A1 on the fairway.  I think the tee shot on the first hole is a much better tee shot than the tee shot on the tenth hole, allowing for the wind whilst also providing challenge and interest.  

But lets break the hole down. Without wind, or with a helping right to left wind, long hitters can to try and reach this in two or get real close to the green. (And trust me, every single digit handicap thinks about reaching in two when he sees a par 5 on the card...) Sven paid the price for hitting 3 wood too far and brought the green side trees into play. But I am conservative (I hate screwing up simple holes and trust my wedge game) so after a very good drive on the windless day, I saw trouble if I pulled my 3 wood left as well as trouble right if I went too far. So I hit a rescue club to leave myself a full wedge and then had a reasonable 15 foot birdie attempt. I thought it was a nice balance between tempting me to be heroic, yet offering a simple and safe way to play the hole. And the green has enough "sections" to make full wedge accuracy very important, or you can bring a 3-putt bogey in to the equation. My 15 footer from the dead middle of the green left me a slightly downhill/sidehill putt that I may make one in ten tries.

Bill, 2 things stand out for me in your breakdown of the hole.  

Firstly, there is no mention of the tee shot.  The good par 5s that I have played generally offer a hazard on the tee shot that has to be challenged to reach the green in two. Think of the first hole at Lost Farm again.  To me, the tee shot here lacks interest.

Secondly, there is no mention of the challenges you faced with your lay up shot.  Once a golfer decides to lay up, he should not be given a free pass.  The best par 5s I have played always seem to have a cunningly placed hazard, right where you want to lay up to.  Here there seems to be a paddock.  

Anyone can design a green with 'no-go zones' around it that encourage the golfer to lay up.  But good par 5s offeri interesting challenges to the golf on all shots IMO.  In this regard, the 10th at Lost Farm fails.  

I agree with you that Coore (and Crenshaw) often get some great results by showing restraint.  I also feel though, that restraint is sometimes  used as an excuse for mediocrity, both by architects when they build courses, and people who review courses.  

[Matthew Mollica]

A few things-

Despite the absence of a hazard on the inside of the dogleg, the long player, or the confident player with the wind at his back, will want to hug the inside left of the hole on the drive, if the green is to be reached in two.

A short third (approach) shot is best played from short of the green, but can also be effectively played from short right of the green complex, depending upon wind, and pin placement. And even beyond the green, given the vast mown area at the rear. Pin high right is a bad miss. The bunker on the inside of the fairway betwen drive landing zone and green provides a good deal of illusion, appearing closer to the green that it really is. This makes the green appear more attainable that it may actually be from back in the fairway, and can easily trick the golfer. I think that sort of hazard placement is neat.

The width provided in the 10th fairway is consistent with the underlying theme of the course, and is appropriate for the course's location. It ensures playability for all classes of golfer, which is no doubt important from a commercial perspective, as Barnbougle will thrive if they are able to entice a broader demographic to visit.

The native banksia trees about the tenth green complex frame the green well, and provide a good looking green site IMO. Their canopies are sparse, they don't shed lots of leaves, and their old appearance suggests their root networks are deep and well established. These factors see their proximity to the putting surface as less of a risk in regard to turf health.

I understand where you're going with the thread David,. I agree #1 is better, and that #8 is better too. #16 is also way better than #10, but Lost Farm 10 is not a poor hole IMO.

If you were given the task of changing the hole David, what would you do?

MM

[Tyler Kearns]

David,

I think the lay-up shot on par fives seem to be overlooked far too often. If the sole point of the second shot is to advance the ball down the fairway I think it can be a dull affair. These holes often hold-up to scrutiny in the eyes of those attempting to reach the green in one less than regulation, but fail for those who don't. Think of all the memorable holes you've played in your life, I doubt three-shotters are proportionally represented on your top-whatever number of holes. Are they harder to design? We all know the land starts the strategic discussion of any hole, therefore, are architects sacrificing better holes to include the minimum standard of two par fives? Maybe that is why all those great classic courses are par-70 or 71? Does every hole need to be strategic?

TK

[Kevin Pallier]

David

Some interesting and quite valid thoughts. I think I said on the other thread words to the effect that the drive and green approach were OK but the second shot wasn't that great.

Is the hole any less appealing than #12 ?

[Ronald Montesano]

Valid thoughts...what part about over-cooking a right to left tee ball or right to left second shot into the gunga all along the left side does not qualify as hazardous?

I wonder if you are falling victim to "think like a pro" syndrome. This hole seems fraught with challenge all along the highway...stray left or right and you find yourself blocked or within or unplayable...and that's just from the photos.

Without knowing where this hole falls in the overall mosaic of the course (is it something of a breather 'twixt 9 and 11, does the wind change frequently...is it ever sideways on this hole?) I can't comment more, but as a wandering 5 handicap who often plays the tips, this hole looks plenty strong for me, and I ain't no John Smoltz

[Tom_Doak]

David:

Your complaints about the hole illustrate the problem with judging a course one hole at a time.  If Bill had done half the things you suggest here, I would be completely worn out from all the "strategy" long before I got to the 18th hole.  A golf course architect should pick his spots, instead of just throwing the kitchen sink at players from #1 all the way to #18.  And do remember, this is a resort golf course.

I played the tenth hole twice, both times with a strong tailwind, and even though I'm not a very long hitter at all, I was thinking about going for the green with my second shot on both occasions.  [NOTE:  I didn't play the back tee.  I don't think I could play the back tee, it looked very intimidating.]  Anyway, if that's going to happen a fair amount of the time, then putting in a bunker to give players something to do on their second shots would be hitting the B player over the head.  It would have no effect on the A player at all.

Also, your comment about the width of the fairway is especially wrong.  In a valley like this, you take what you're given.  Who wants to be looking for a ball in the marram 15 feet short of the dunes?

[Adam Clayman]

Tom touches on my thought, with the one hole context. But, no one has mentioned how this hole fits into the sequence of holes. Tom also suggests that this hole tempts the player to go for it in two. Since I haven't been to Tasmania, maybe i'm not allowed to comment, but, from the descriptions, and knowing the tendencies of players, (MK, C&C) what's wrong with a hole like this? If it's a breather in a tough sequence, it works. If it's about the view, it works. If it's one of those holes that the player sees on paper and thinks "easy" yet walks off with bogie or worse, what's wrong with that?

Perhaps it's a transition hole to get to a better hole or sequence of holes in the entirety of the whole?

So much to think about...

[David_Elvins]

Double post

[David_Elvins]

Is the hole any less appealing than #12 ?

Kevin,

I thought that the tee shot and second shot on 12 were fantastic.  A big wide fairway but the cross bunkers on the second shot make you desperately hug the left side of the fairway on the tee shot, taking on the drive bunker.  There is no such interest, temptation, or mental games on 10, imo.

[David_Elvins]

Tom Doak, 

Whislt I appreciate your passion for defending Bill Coore’s work, your post does a sterling job of misrepresenting my position.

I don’t think I made any complaints about the hole.  I merely described it for what I thought it was and my only concern is why people in the Lost Farm thread were coming up with totally different interpretations of what the hole was, and whether this was because of the architect. 

It seems that the same favouritism for Bill Coore that I suspect has led to this has also inspired a somewhat erratic and illogical post from you. 

Claiming that I have ever said that the fairway is too wide and marram grass should be grown on the flat portion of the hole is completely wrong.  I never wrote any such thing.  Or anything close to such a thing.  My only comment on fairway width was that whilst the site needs wide fairways due to the wind, using this as a reason for boring drives is not reasonable IMO.  The 12th hole, for example has a wide fairway and a very interesting drive.  Feel free to argue this point if you want but please don’t misrepresent me. 

Using the word ‘strategy’ in inverted commas is a bit pathetic, especially considering I have not used the work once in any of my posts on this thread.  Also stating that I want Bill Coore to significantly alter the hole is completely incorrect. Making up a straw man argument about throwing the kitchen sink at every hole completely misrepresents my position.

Using the “its a resort course” excuse for a series of boring shots and shoddy trees is illogical, IMO, and does not hold up when comparing to highly ranked resort courses such as Pacific Dunes and Barnbougle Dunes.

Using the “a fairway bunker on the second shot would only penalise the weaker player” line totally discounts players like Bill Brightly who can reach the green but choose not to, and also the times when the hole plays into the wind and no-one can reach  the green. 

Stating that a bunker on a 80 yard wide fairway would ‘hit player B over the head’ completely exaggerates the effect that a bunker in such a wide fairway would have on the average player. 

Now, if you want to argue that somewhat unchallenging tee shot and second shot (for the times the hole is played in three shots) and the trees with a yard or two of the green, are important in the flow of the course as a whole, then I do not have a problem with that at all.  But no-one in the Lost Farm thread, made this point. Instead we got a heap of praise for what a strategic, interesting and good hole it was.  Which was why I started this thread. 

I appreciate your passion for defending Bill Coore’s work, but please take more care when attributing words and arguments to other posters. 

[Kalen Braley]

David,

As one who agrees in concept that often times on GCA... similar holes will either be praised or crucified depending on who designed it, this hole doesn't appear to be one of them.

Granted I've never played it, so only going on what i see in the photos, but that looks like a pretty darn good tee shot visual.  The dunes, the long grass, the massive bunker on the far dune, the way the fairway gently bends to the left, the extended view across the open area, with the mountains framing it in the background...looks like pretty good stuff.  I wish I had more tee shots like that around here!

Ditto for the green site with how it appears they kept the surrounds intact, instead of blowing it up and putting in containment mounds.

Do you have a photo of what it looks like say 100 yards short of the green?

[Patrick Kiser]

Tom touches on my thought, with the one hole context. But, no one has mentioned how this hole fits into the sequence of holes. Tom also suggests that this hole tempts the player to go for it in two. Since I haven't been to Tasmania, maybe i'm not allowed to comment, but, from the descriptions, and knowing the tendencies of players, (MK, C&C) what's wrong with a hole like this? If it's a breather in a tough sequence, it works. If it's about the view, it works. If it's one of those holes that the player sees on paper and thinks "easy" yet walks off with bogie or worse, what's wrong with that?

Perhaps it's a transition hole to get to a better hole or sequence of holes in the entirety of the whole?

So much to think about...

Right on Adam.  I mentioned in the other LF thread the following in reference at the time to the 13th and 16th:

Agreed they break up the action and kind of build up the barometer for what's ahead.  Both of those holes feel more about the helping out the routing to me.

To me that's what it feels like on this stretch of "farm land" holes that kicks off the back nine.

The 10th through 13th kind of direct the routing back to the 13A / 14th.

Are they great holes?  No...  Good holes, yes.  Is the land great?  No..., but you explore the property more completely.  You feel like on a journey.

The question for me I guess is how many holes becomes too many holes between strong holes and tamer ones.  Three in succession might be one too many perhaps.  I liked how the 1st and 2nd kind of built up the 3rd.  I did not anticipate the 14th as much as the 3rd.


David,

Not criticizing, but asking...

Is there no challenge in ball placement off the tee?  That to me is the challenge off the tee on this hole.  I'm with Matt on this one.

If you go straight and too deep, you're in that pit of a bunker.  Go right of it ... and you can be blind going towards the green.  If you decide to cut the corner left and challenge the ridge ... you're taking a risk of not making it, but the payoff can be a chance at going for two into the green.

So you have to decide off the tee your strategy for the day.  Throw in the wind and maybe the decision becomes a little more simplistic, but I'm not sure.  We had nay wind that day.

That's why I liked this tee shot.

The placement and shaping of the green is pretty good I feel.  I agree with what's said about going right on the fairway as far down as possible to open up the green more.  Which means you would have had to have taken on the left ridge for your tee shot.  The other thing is the green from center fairway to left of center runs much wider than it runs deep and I'll venture to guess many will go for it in two shots not knowing this.  

So again on the second shot from a good fairway position, you need to consider if going for two is worth it.  If you're not further enough down the right, it's probably NOT worth going for given the risk.  You can easily lull yourself into a false sense of security I think if you're not too careful.

Agree about the trees.  Not a fan and never really have been of trees as hazards ... especially around greens.

But still ... a good hole I feel with a pretty good green within the routing back to the coast.  Just not great and probably not in a position to produce one of their best par 5s given the land to work with too I would say, but that's just a guess.


Kalen,

Here's a pic about 100 yards or so short of the green left along with a couple others as you move in close:

[Bill Brightly]

Maybe it is helpful if we couple this hole with #12, the par 5 we will play in two holes. On 12, Coore is going to really challenge my second shot lay up strategy. The safe lay up is too far back for me to have a wedge, so I chose to hit 3 wood and carry the central hazard. Hole 12 is fairly wide open around the green. I hit a good 3 wood that maybe carried everything by 5 yards, and had an easy 40 yards pitch.

Hole 10 presented all the risk around the green and gave me a break with a very easy lay up. However, that lay up spot is the area where 80% of all players will reach, so a hazard there is a big problem for them, and Coore is going to make them deal with that on Hole #12.

So I think these two par 5's are nice mirror opposites, and I like the variety.

For good players, the "effective" width of the 10th fairway is much smaller than it looks from the pictures. First of all, a pull or hook left in the marrum is a lost ball. There is fairway right of the large dune, but no way I want to be behind that. So my line is center of the dune or 30 yards left of it. All that "extra" short right fairway is for high handicap players hitting weak slices, and why kill those guys?

[David_Elvins]

Maybe it is helpful if we couple this hole with #12, the par 5 we will play in two holes. On 12, Coore is going to really challenge my second shot lay up strategy. The safe lay up is too far back for me to have a wedge, so I chose to hit 3 wood and carry the central hazard. Hole 12 is fairly wide open around the green. I hit a good 3 wood that maybe carried everything by 5 yards, and had an easy 40 yards pitch.

Hole 10 presented all the risk around the green and gave me a break with a very easy lay up. However, that lay up spot is the area where 80% of all players will reach, so a hazard there is a big problem for them, and Coore is going to make them deal with that on Hole #12.

So I think these two par 5's are nice mirror opposites, and I like the variety.

For good players, the "effective" width of the 10th fairway is much smaller than it looks from the pictures. First of all, a pull or hook left in the marrum is a lost ball. There is fairway right of the large dune, but no way I want to be behind that. So my line is center of the dune or 30 yards left of it. All that "extra" short right fairway is for high handicap players hitting weak slices, and why kill those guys?

that is an awesome point about the 10th and the 12th, Bill.  THanks.  After looking at Patrick's photos I could see a bit more similarity with 12 at Pacific Dunes too, as you mentioned in your earlier post.  It got me thinking that when I played pac dunes, the 12th was down wind so very reachable.  When I played Lost farm, the 10th was generally into the wind or still which for me made it unreachable.  I wonder if I would have been likely to reverse my opinion of each hole if I had played them in the opposite winds to what I did.  

I think after readding your and Patrick's last post (thanks Patrick for a cool post), I may have been a bit harsh on the hole, mainly to make a point. The really interesting question is how it fits in to the routing and I am really glad that you and Patrick have touched on that in this thread.  I think that Tom Doak is right when he pointed out that this is one of the dangers of reviewing courses hole by hole, that the interesting quesions about routing and flow can get skipped over a bit.  And I think there are plenty of interesting questions aand converstation points about the flow of the routing at Lost farm.  Maybe once the hole by hole thread is finished, a thread about the course as a whole, would be interesting.  

[Kalen Braley]

Thanks for the pics Pat,

I'm thinking very cool, a very neat hole at least how it shows in the pics.

[Mike_Clayton]

Some who are ctitical of the flatter holes at Lost Farm could well remember the Tillinghast quote.
'When I speak of a hole being inspiring it is not intended to infer that the visitor is to be subject to attacks of hysteria on every teeing ground.'
I think those who are critical of the course are expecting every hole to blow them away and if it doesn't its a let down.
It has always been the same argument about the 2nd at Barnbougle.
More than one visitor has commented that 'you can get away with too much.' He played it on a windless day - and that is not an unreasonable observation - but I am sure that if he played it with a 30 mph wind and off the back tees he would change his opinion.
It's a tremendous eighteen hole course - and so much fun to play.

And, if you hit it my distance - not short and not long -  you can get to the 10th in two but only if you rip it down the left, risking a lost ball in the dune, and then hitting  along second across the bunker.
If you want to play it in three you can hit it down the right and away from the bunker.

[Matthew Mollica]

The photos also confirm my suspicion David that the trees are more than a yard or two from the green.

MM

[Mark_F]

If you can conclude one thing from these comments it is that there isn't really any great imperative to approach the green from any particular angle.

Not true at all.  If you are on the left of the fairway, there is a great imperative to approach the green from the left.

If you are on the right of the fairway, there is a great imperative to approach the green from the right.

For those not reaching the green in two, the second shot can be safely blasted away at the large expanse of fairway.

The absence of a hazard can in and of itself be a hazard.

 
excessive green contour that doesn’t tie into the strategy of the hole.

But it does tie into the strategy of the hole.

 
The green does have a considerable amount of contour that makes getting down in two from anywhere on or around the green a good challenge.

It ties into the strategy that if you miss the green with your second or third shot you probably aren't going to make the score you hoped.