[John Kavanaugh]

I'm surprised at the love Winged Foot is getting on this thread with only one mention so far.  My gut, having never been there, tells me that 18 is a clunker.  I just hated watching all those collapses a few years back.

[Gene Greco]

Of the courses I've played:

Shinnecock: 6
Oakmont: n/a but 10 if I really had to pick one
Pebble: 16
Merion: n/a but 14 if I had to pick one
Sand Hills: 9

Winner: Sand Hills 9

   Sorry, but I disagree with all your selections.

A course is a sum of its parts.

#6 at Shinnecock is the 1 handicap hole.
It follows a short par 5 which almost always plays downwind, precedes a par 3 which preceeds a short par 4.

It is very appropriately positioned on the course and adds to the magnificent flow of this golf course.

It is a great strategic hole with multiple options and routes of play:

   a. 6 is usually played in a cross, head wind which hurts yardage off the tee. If you take the left corridor (safer) this leaves a longer and more accentuated diagonal approach over the front bunker from over 200 yds.
   b. If you take the more aggressive approach up the right side (which has been expanded a bit in recent years) it opens up to a more receptive approach. Wind is cross from the left which increases your chances of ending up in the right rough with less of a chance of reaching the green and the real possibility of ending up wet.
   c. An overcooked bomb off the tee up the left side could end up in one of the bunkers on the left "corner" and leave you in the uneviable position of a negotiating first clearing the water hazard. Or sensibly laying up to the right...but not too far.
   d. For shorter hitters it is a simple exercise in not being greedy and laying up your second well short of the water on the aforementioned better angle for the approach and trying for par that way.
   e. Piggyness on the part of the short hitter or the less skilled in attempting to go left of the water to get closer to the green will leave a difficult pitch for even the Mickelsons of the world to a fall away part of the green with the high end of Flynn's "potato chip" just over the bunker.


      
  
      

[Gene Greco]

I only have 9 of the 10, but I will go with #3 at Pebble Beach. The new bunkers just make it awful.

Now this selection makes sense.

[Alex Miller]

I'm surprised at the love Winged Foot is getting on this thread with only one mention so far.  My gut, having never been there, tells me that 18 is a clunker.  I just hated watching all those collapses a few years back.

My gut, having never been there, is that 18 is ok tee to green, but has a wonderful greensite.

[Mark Saltzman]

Gene, no need to say sorry... not the first time my opinions have been called wrong.

Shinnecock is the best golf course I have ever played.  Anything that I think is bad must be taken in that context... they are nitpicks.

I found very little to dislike at Shinney.

My two big issues on 6 were:

1) I think the fairway needs to be expanded to the right. 

2) I don't like the way the water interacts with shorter-hitters/high-handicappers.  Laying up short of the water, which given the normal wind-direction I would think happens fairly often, leaves a 140ish yard, into the wind, approach as a third shot.  That just bothered me (the one time I played the golf course, the three other members of my group were all forced to lay-up, and not one made better than 6).  I don't have a problem with hard holes, but seeing the way my playing partners interacted with the water bothered me.

[Tom Birkert]

I only have 9 of the 10, but I will go with #3 at Pebble Beach. The new bunkers just make it awful.

Now this selection makes sense.

Agreed. Those bunkers are ridiculous, and indeed offered relief for the pros in the US Open - would they rather have a shot from 130 yards from a bunker where they are able to get spin, or from heavy rough, where they had no chance of hitting and holding the green?

[Steve Lapper]

I'm surprised at the love Winged Foot is getting on this thread with only one mention so far.  My gut, having never been there, tells me that 18 is a clunker.  I just hated watching all those collapses a few years back.

John,

  18 at WFW is ANYTHING BUT a clunker.

   It demands a precision tee shot (see Phil's initial mistake) to find the fairway and split the area between left rough and right bunker. From there, it takes a carefully calculated approach shot to accurately gauge the proper distance uphill to one of the West's better greens (and that's quite a statement given the number of good ones)...see Monty's botched attempt. The 18th green plays narrow with a mounded front and sloped (back-to-front) rear, both feeding into a middle channel-like section that cant's left-to-right....especially difficult for anything other than a perfectly hit high fade landing just over the left front third. Anything missed in that vicinity with any spin falls off onto the collar or roughs.

  If there were to be a "clunker" on WFW, it would likely be either #15 or #4. I wouldn't cite either as such, but they are the least architecturally strategic holes to be found out there.

   BTW...I've played #'s 2-10 (and walked ANGC) multiple times.

[JNC Lyon]

have a question for those who object to the rough as a pnal feature on number 11 at Merion.
This is purely a question out of interest and not a slam on their opinion...let me get that out first.
Do you guys consider water down the side of a farway..ala #18 at Doral ? Pebble Beach, as a good architectural feature of strategy?
Of a series of bunkers located down the side of a fairway a sa form of strategy?

If you consider both of these options as accaptable...why cant punishing rough be used in the same manner....both require the golfer to play accurate tee shots...that is one of the primary features of a short par four isnt it?
If you hit the fairway you are rewarded, if you dont your options become more limited.

Every time I have played Merion...each time in a tournament where the score really matters, number eleven has always been one of my favourites...the anxiety of knowing you MUST hit the fairway..otherwise your second shot if going to be very very intimidating.
One in the fairway you have more options attack the pin or centre of the green.....to me a far superior hole to the one that follows it or precedes it....

Like I said before, rough is typically a maintenance feature, not an architectural feature.  The 18th hole at Pebble took the ocean on the left and made it a strategic architectural feature (although the OB and trees right have likely compromised this--don't want argue too much about it since I haven't seen Pebble in person).  The rough on the 11th at Merion is the opposite.  The hole never had rough to begin with, but it was imposed upon the hole over time.  Moreover, the rough there is penal from an architectural standpoint.  It simply punishes a bad shot, and the golfer gets no reward for challenging the rough on either side of the fairway.  While the ocean on 18 at Pebble is "penal" as a hazard, it is strategic in that a player gains a reward from successfully challenging it off the tee.

The scenario you describe in the last paragraph is a legitimate one, and I know it well (it's basically every hole on the East Course at Oak Hill).  However, I find absolutely nothing distinctive or outstanding about it.  Any architect can design a hole where you have to hit the fairway to reach the green in regulation.  It takes zero talent to design a golf hole like: just move the fairway mowing lines in and you've got a tough hole.  It's a physical challenge of swinging well that day, but it's not a mental challenge in the least.

What are the options on the second shot other than a high, lofted short iron that ends up somewhere on the putting surface?

[JNC Lyon]

John,

Have you played there yet?

Haven't played Merion East yet, as I stated above.  I know there are differences between playing a course and walking it, but after a couple days of walking the course during the Walker Cup, I feel like I got a really good sense of the golf course.  Overall, I loved the course, but I have a different take on it in that I think the best holes out there fly under the radar (2, 5, 7, 10, 14-15).

Five is one of the best par fours in Philly. I hope to camp out there in 2013 and watch some fun.

The 5th is a favorite of mine as well.  I remember watching a lot of action around the green during the Walker Cup.  One way to deal with technology is an old-fashioned bear of a green, and the 5th at Merion has just that.

[Mark Saltzman]

John,

Have you played there yet?

Haven't played Merion East yet, as I stated above.  I know there are differences between playing a course and walking it, but after a couple days of walking the course during the Walker Cup, I feel like I got a really good sense of the golf course.  Overall, I loved the course, but I have a different take on it in that I think the best holes out there fly under the radar (2, 5, 7, 10, 14-15).

Five is one of the best par fours in Philly. I hope to camp out there in 2013 and watch some fun.

The 5th is a favorite of mine as well.  I remember watching a lot of action around the green during the Walker Cup.  One way to deal with technology is an old-fashioned bear of a green, and the 5th at Merion has just that.

+the new tee 50ish yards behind the old back tee.  So much for flow.

[Mark Saltzman]

So Mark..
Perhaps just a wider fairway would be better?
Iwould have no problem with that, I think the right side of the hole could have the fairway widened by ten yards.
If you hit the far right of the fairway, you would still have a tough shot into the green but at least you would hav a shot as opposed to a lay up out of the heavy rough...I could go for that.

But at some point accuracy off the tee should be rewarded and that is certainly one of the holes that fits the bill.

Michael, I agree accuracy should be rewarded.  But, accuracy on strategic holes is rewarded... if you take the more aggressive line, and are accurate, you will be rewarded with a shorter approach/flatter lie/better angle of approach/etc.  If you are not accurate and miss your line, your approach will be more difficult.

That being said, I don't mind a couple of shots a round that are not 'strategic'.  I don't like when a non-strategic shot involves a forced-carry, but that is not the case at Merion 11, and I like the hole even if it is not strategic. Short hole, less than driver off the tee... hit the fairway and you have a chance at birdie... miss the fairway and you're probably laying-up since missing long is dead. I just don't want to do this for 18 holes in a row (see Oak Hill (E), sorry JNC)

[JNC Lyon]

John,

Have you played there yet?

Haven't played Merion East yet, as I stated above.  I know there are differences between playing a course and walking it, but after a couple days of walking the course during the Walker Cup, I feel like I got a really good sense of the golf course.  Overall, I loved the course, but I have a different take on it in that I think the best holes out there fly under the radar (2, 5, 7, 10, 14-15).

Five is one of the best par fours in Philly. I hope to camp out there in 2013 and watch some fun.

The 5th is a favorite of mine as well.  I remember watching a lot of action around the green during the Walker Cup.  One way to deal with technology is an old-fashioned bear of a green, and the 5th at Merion has just that.

+the new tee 50ish yards behind the old back tee.  So much for flow.

Who plays that tee other than Walker Cuppers or Open competitors?

[Mark Saltzman]

Who plays that tee other than Walker Cuppers or Open competitors?

The other guys in my group played it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm surprised at the love Winged Foot is getting on this thread with only one mention so far. 

My gut, having never been there, tells me that 18 is a clunker. 

WHAT ?

JAKAB

SOME DERANGED INDIVIDUAL HAS BROKEN INTO YOUR COMPUTER AND IS POSTING UNDER YOUR NAME

CHANGE YOUR PASSWORD, IMMEDIATELY

[JNC Lyon]

Who plays that tee other than Walker Cuppers or Open competitors?

The other guys in my group played it.

I guess that's their prerogative, but I'm guessing that new back tee is only designed for the most elite tournaments.

[Mark McKeever]

I used the back tee on 5 last time I played in the fall.  It's a beast from back there and after a good drive, I still had 230 left.  The only saving grace you have is that you can hit a three wood into the green if you throw it in from the front right.

Mark

[Adam Clayman]

#8 at Sebonack and the 10th at Sleepy Hollow jump off my page.

[Jeff_Brauer]

For the record, I have played or at least toured each of the courses mentioned.  Here is my take:


1.   AUGUSTA NATIONAL G.C. - probably 14, with its clunky uphill tee shot that is blind unless you hit it far enough.

2.   PINE VALLEY G.C. - Probably 11 for the short 90 degree dogleg.

3.     SHINNECOCK HILLS G.C. - 10 for the over the hill tee shot. 

4.   OAKMONT C.C. - Maybe 17, but I played it after Faz put 50,000 CY fill in the back tee to lengthen it a few yards to play as it used to.  Compared to others, BTW, I didn't care for the 16th green all that much.  Bunkers didn't fit right.

5.   CYPRESS POINT CLUB - Have to agree on 18.

6.     PEBBLE BEACH G. LINKS - Maybe the first five holes?  If limited to one, the first is most uninspired.  Understand those who don't like 11.

7.   MERION G.C. (East) - Sharp dogleg short 10th, much like the PV hole.  I know some have held it up as exemplary of short 4 and options, and it has those, but I cannot help but feel it was shoe horned in as part of the later rerouting to avoid road crossings.

8.   WINGED FOOT G.C. (West)  Its either 12, 13 or 14 that has a downhill lie in the LZ, which I found clunky.

9.   SAND HILLS G.C. - Agree on No. 9, although if the FW bunker had some support fill it wouldn't be terrible.  Also thought the green on 4, with its seemingly artifical fill on the right looked clunky to me.

10.   NATIONAL G. LINKS OF AMERICA - Only flaw I can mention is that 1-3 all have similar carry shots and felt one of them should be eliminated to avoid repetion.  Three is good and one is the opener, so I will call out No. 2

[Tim Gavrich]

#16, Yale. Not a bad hole, but sticks out against all the awesome ones.

[Kalen Braley]

18 at CPC didn't feel like a bad hole when I played it...

But I think the distinction should be is that it seems so out of character with everything else.  The other 17 holes play fairly wide open with a fair amount of width on each hole to take different lines and different approach angles.

At 18, it seemed to me it was try to hit it in the middle part of a narrow fairway with trees lining both sides and then hope/pray you have a line into the green that wasn't blocked by one or more trees.

[Jim Franklin]

Kalen Braley playing Cypress Point is the biggest clunker on the greatest course. Close the thread.














//Sorry buddy, but it was teed up and I had to swing at it.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen Braley playing Cypress Point is the biggest clunker on the greatest course. Close the thread.


//Sorry buddy, but it was teed up and I had to swing at it.

Ha ha, hard to argue against that. 

I actually had a chance to break 90 that day, but 16 did me in after putting two in the drink...

[Jim Franklin]

Kalen Braley playing Cypress Point is the biggest clunker on the greatest course. Close the thread.


//Sorry buddy, but it was teed up and I had to swing at it.

Ha ha, hard to argue against that. 

I actually had a chance to break 90 that day, but 16 did me in after putting two in the drink...

16 has done that to a lot of rounds.

[JNC Lyon]

#16, Yale. Not a bad hole, but sticks out against all the awesome ones.

That's a great choice, for sure.  Think about the run-up too: Alps, Redan, Knoll and Eden on holes 12-15, all of which are fantastic.  16 would really do well with a cross bunker on the second shot.

If we expand out from the top 10 courses, we get some better candidates.  I mean, I'm critical of holes like 1 and 11 and Merion, but they are by no means "clunkers."  One hole that really sticks from my golf over the last year is 13 at Lancaster.  Lancaster is a really solid layout top to bottom, but 13 sticks out like a sore thumb.  Another one I always pick is 8 at Addington.  Abercromby took a lot of risks with the routing, and most of them paid off beautifully.  But I find the 8th wholly unappealing.  Either you hit two perfect shots, or you make a 7.  What is this, a Florida housing course?

[George Pazin]

Oakmont: n/a but 10 if I really had to pick one

Wow, you are the first person I've ever read who doesn't think the 10th is a great hole. I think it's on more than a few people short list of great holes in golf.

George it has been several years since I've played Oakmont and I've only played it the one time.  I can't remember a bad hole.  Thinking more about it, I would probably change my answer to 13 (the par 3), but the reason I said 10 is because I remember it being very similar (perhaps too similar) to no. 1 and I didn't like that.  Does my memory serve me wrong? [wouldn't be the first time]

Sorry, forgot I posted on this thread. There are similarities between 1 & 10 - and I can't believe you didn't like 1! Obviously we look for different things, so I'll just leave it at that.

...4.   OAKMONT C.C. - Maybe 17, but I played it after Faz put 50,000 CY fill in the back tee to lengthen it a few yards to play as it used to.  Compared to others, BTW, I didn't care for the 16th green all that much.  Bunkers didn't fit right.

Jeff, see what Pat said to JK just a few posts ago...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()