How important is the first hole in a designer's idea for the course?

[Peter Pallotta]

Ha! Good one, Tom - nicely done. No, I haven't seen a great movie like that, but I'd suggest that neither have I ever seen a great movie in which the first 3 or 4 scenes prove to be the best ones in the movie.  First, they don't need to be (i.e. the audience is there hoping to be taken on a wonderful journey, and is ready/willing to grant the filmmaker the benefit of the doubt as he/she introduces all the elements of the journey/movie);  but more importantly, the opening scenes can't be the best ones in the movie...literally, and by definition.  If a great movie is characterized by, for example, elements such as rich and nuanced characters, and depth of feeling, and richness of ideas/themes, and by the drama of unexpected twists and turns paced elegantly and for maximum effect, none of these elements can possibly be present in the first 15 minutes. In those early minutes/scenes, we don't yet even know who the characters are - their thoughts/feelings/desires -- nor do we know the situation they find themselves in and the problems they will likely face; and of course we have no idea in what sequence those problems will be faced nor how the characters will manage to solve to them.  In short, we can't possibly be as emotionally invested or intellectually interested in any element of a great movie in the first 15 minutes as we can -- and will be -- half-way though and (more so) at the very end.  (Casablanca is a good example. What impact would a great scene like "If you don't get on that plane you'll regret it - maybe not today or tomorrow but soon and for the rest of your life" have if we hadn't spent almost two hours learning about Rick, and Ilsa, and about their deep but ill-fated love affair?  I better stop, I'm making myself cry )  Anyway, I'm sure I've gone on too long, Tom, and stretched the analogy too much...but I'm suggesting that, while a great movie will have an interesting and engaging first 15 minutes, those early scenes better not be, and in some real sense can't possibly be, the best ones in the movie. And I'd suggest that architects who end up having the best hole(s) on the course fall within Nos. 1-3 have not realized/don't believe a) that golfers will give them the benefit of the doubt, and b) that the impact of great holes will be magnified exponentially only if they occur after golfers have had a chance to familiarize themselves with and embrace the 'characters' and 'problems' and 'pacing' of the journey they are experiencing.  
Peter

 

[Mike Nuzzo]

The one time I saw Pine Valley, I was disappointed there weren't more greens like #2.
Maybe it would be overdone if there were, but I was still looking or anticipating.

Bill
Tom said take the same holes at Macrihanish, reorder them, and it would be all world.
That is pure psychology of expectations or rewards.

I love our first hole.
It is a great introduction, and it says things will be different here.

I've only seen a couple, but I thought Stanley Thompson's first greens were bigger - i like that.

Cheers

[Alex Miller]

My favorite opening holes are of the George Thomas easy 5 hard 4 variety. They may not be great for pace of play, but I really enjoy having a little room for error on my first drive knowing that I can still reach in regulation.

Is the answer to the original question: Less important than the 18th hole?

[Tim Gavrich]

My very favorite movies delight from the opening seconds until the credits roll.  What is intrinsic to greatness such that 18 great holes in a row would be somehow less than superlative?  Which would we rather play: a course with 12 great holes and six very good ones or a course with 14 great holes and four very good ones?  Or a course with 18 great holes?

I say that if an architect has a chance to make the first few holes particularly excellent, he/she should seize it, even if it the land will not lend itself to the last couple holes being so excellent.  That's the way it goes sometimes.

[Sean_A]

I'm going with Doak.  Every course should start at the starting point which is the house.  Its more important to start from the shadows than it is to wow a player on the opening tee shot.  However, the course has to give me something in the opening 3-4 holes to grab onto.  It may be a matter of the accumulative effect, one stunner, an outrageous green or two (this I suggest is the thing to do in most cases because there isn't usually much opportunity to create a stunner on demand - they fall where they fall) as at Huntercombe, beautiful scenery etc.  Whatever it is,  have to have something to grab me or the course will forever have the sad label of "starts out slow" and this is hard to recover from if we are talking greatness (btw I see this aspect as totally different from a great film - they can start out slow and recover). 

Again, finishing is best done in front of the house.  It doesn't do much good to finish on a great hole where the house isn't in sight.  That walk will always be a letdown for me.  I don't need to have the finish grab me in the same way as I want from the start.  Nearly all courses have told their tale by the time I have reached #16.  The final three holes would have to be wonderful as a set to pull a course out of the fire at that point or to lift to greatness.  That said, North Berwick, Prestwick and TOC do seal the deal on greatness in the final three holes despite the many fine shots that come before.  I would also point out that the final holes merely serve to return to the house (in the case of TOC it doesn't matter unless you are an R&A member and that does irk me considerably).  None could be considered great except in how they close the course, act as a respite from the penultimate hole and bring the golfer home.  Every course should end at the starting point which is the house.

Ciao   

[mike_malone]

 Sean,

    I thought #1 at Burnham and Berrow was a proper intro with its angled dune on the left. I felt I was in for some interesting shots to come.

[Bill_McBride]

Again, finishing is best done in front of the house.  It doesn't do much good to finish on a great hole where the house isn't in sight.  That walk will always be a letdown for me.  I don't need to have the finish grab me in the same way as I want from the start.  Nearly all courses have told their tale by the time I have reached #16.  The final three holes would have to be wonderful as a set to pull a course out of the fire at that point or to lift to greatness.  That said, North Berwick, Prestwick and TOC do seal the deal on greatness in the final three holes despite the many fine shots that come before.  I would also point out that the final holes merely serve to return to the house (in the case of TOC it doesn't matter unless you are an R&A member and that does irk me considerably).  None could be considered great except in how they close the course, act as a respite from the penultimate hole and bring the golfer home.  Every course should end at the starting point which is the house.

Ciao   

Sean, there are a couple of other clubhouses in that line to the right of 18 at TOC, and they are much easier to access with advance application and a weekly fee.  Just be sure your street shoes are readily available, we had to go back to the B&B to change before going into the St Andrews Club.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

    I thought #1 at Burnham and Berrow was a proper intro with its angled dune on the left. I felt I was in for some interesting shots to come.

Mayday

Yes, Burnham starts well, finishes well and has interest and variety in the middle - a very solid course all round with plenty happening to entertain.  The only thing it is missing to claim outright greatness is a proper driveable par 4.  There are two which flat bellies can take on, but unfortunately none for those of lesser skills. 

Ciao

[Jim Eder]

I wonder if designers have ever "dumbed down" the first hole for fear that if the first hole is the best on the course they risk the player leaving a bit disappointed (almost like the idea of under promising and over-delivering). It seems to me that a course, if possible, should build to a crescendo (but it also depends on whether the course will be played mostly stroke play or match play as to where the peak is). But that is probably pretty unrealistic.

[Tom_Doak]

Jim:

First holes are often "dumbed down", if by that you mean they have fewer fairway hazards or shallower bunkers.  Heck, look at the first hole on The Old Course.  The burn creates enough challenge to make people play, but the tee shot is as open as can be.

[mike_malone]

 While it may be true that some first holes are "dumbed down" with fewer hazards I feel they should still set the stage or layout the theme. #1 TOC said to me " room off the tee but wrong positioning makes the approach tougher".

[Bill_McBride]

Sean,

    I thought #1 at Burnham and Berrow was a proper intro with its angled dune on the left. I felt I was in for some interesting shots to come.

Mayday

Yes, Burnham starts well, finishes well and has interest and variety in the middle - a very solid course all round with plenty happening to entertain.  The only thing it is missing to claim outright greatness is a proper driveable par 4.  There are two which flat bellies can take on, but unfortunately none for those of lesser skills. 

Ciao

10 and 16?

[Jim Eder]

Tom,

Thanks, very interesting that the designer is conscious of that idea. 

[Sean_A]

Sean,

    I thought #1 at Burnham and Berrow was a proper intro with its angled dune on the left. I felt I was in for some interesting shots to come.

Mayday

Yes, Burnham starts well, finishes well and has interest and variety in the middle - a very solid course all round with plenty happening to entertain.  The only thing it is missing to claim outright greatness is a proper driveable par 4.  There are two which flat bellies can take on, but unfortunately none for those of lesser skills. 

Ciao

10 and 16?

ACe

Flat bellies can take on 10, but its not something you will see often.  Its easier to layup and trust to the wedge for birdie when the angle of the tee shot for big hitters is angled left toward oob.  In addition to 16 is #3.  Laying up here places the approach in the lap of the gods.  If downwind flat bellies can drive the green and have the extra safety of the green being a punchbowl which works well for recovery chips. 

Ciao