I played Aetna Springs for the second time, with my wife, last spring. I'd hoped to do a complete photo tour--to make up for Keith's missing photos in this thread--but left with shots of only a few holes.
Aetna Springs presents a lot to learn for students of golf course architecture, and I'm surprised it hasn't received more attention on this website or more play. On the latter front, it's handicapped by being a nine-hole course in the middle of nowhere, and also by its yardage. Too bad more people don't have the ability to see what a great job Tom Doak and his team did with this property.
The third green and parts of three other holes, with the Aetna Springs pumphouse visible:
Lessons from Aetna Springs:1. Ways to maximize a small property: -
Build the best 9 (or 10) holes. Aetna has 9 very nice holes and a bonus hole of approximately 50 yards played toward the chipping green, and no practice range.
-
Don't aim to maximize scorecard yardage. At 3,057, Aetna was obviously never meant to "wow" anyone looking at this number.
-
Use crossing and centerline hazards to add length. Aetna has them in spades, at 1, 5, 8, 9 and--for someone who plays a draw with his 5-wood--the long par-3 second. A look at the yardage card will reveal how most of these work, forcing most players to take driver out of play or at least think hard about whether to hit it. And with regard to the second, I've realized after reviewing Keith's descriptions that playing it as a short par 4 and aiming right of the green might be the best possible play.
-
Options and variety. See above.
- Also note the semi-blind approaches at 3 and 5 and the rare downhill, fully blind approach at 6, all of which add difficulty despite the short yardage.
2. Challenge the strong player while allowing the weak to succeed. This became abundantly clear to me on my second play at Aetna, though I'd realized it on my first. My wife, a beginner, had 3 GIRs and had the best nine holes of her life by several shots. But it's not a particularly easy course in my own experience or in that of my friend who played there recently for the first time. Here are some features that give the course these qualities:
-
Use of dry ditches instead of ponds. I believe these ditches are manmade or RGD-augmented. They scream "don't go here" but don't present any real intimidation for a player who cannot carry the ball 50 (or 100) yards every time.
-
Subtle green contours. Particularly at 2, 6, and 8, the greens appear to be lay-of-the-land rather than artificially or severely tiered, and I've had a tough time reading them. Better players can generally handle severe contours much better than beginners. Everyone will score roughly the same on subtle greens.
-
Tee box placement. The shortest tees on the course always felt fair and never like an afterthought, even if they were placed in the fairway.
-
Judicious use of trees. On 5, players approaching from the far right side of the fairway will have to consider this tree guarding the green:
On 8, a third shot played from anywhere but the center of the fairway will find an aerial approach blocked by trees. In neither case can a weak player hit it high enough to worry.
3. Pretty green sites may be bad green sites. 
- Both times I played, the fourth green (above) was in trouble. The first time, all the greens had been aerified recently, except the fourth, where the grass was shaggy. The second time, the green was actually closed (hence I learned about the bonus hole) but the manager (Joel, the nicest man in Napa County) told us to go ahead and play it anyway. I think it must get terrible drainage--built on the side of a steep hill and surrounded by a natural creek--and little airflow, and sunlight may be a problem, too.