[Carl Rogers]

Hole 18 at Riverfront ...
Short par 5 w/ hazard stretching across the entire width of the hole about 340 from the white tee.  Hazard carry varies from about 60 to about 90 yards.  If the handicapper's average drive is let's say 220, then a 180 to 210 yard carry is required for the second shot ... not very doable.  Some time the holes plays into the wind and the turf conditions are non-firm.  

In my older age, I have dumped a few ... I have seen (and been behind) many a 15 to 25 handicapper unload multiple balls into this hazard.  

The hole has had non-positive effect for the course.

The 2 most forward tees do play the hole about 90-100 yards shorter, but still must carry the hazard.  On this course, a lot of white tee golfers should be moving up a set of tees.

[Bill McKinley]

I'd say #17 at Pete Dye Club is quite contorversial.  I don't have any pics but the green is really crazy with tons of mounds and slopes on it.  I believe the members wanted to level it out but Pete Dye said that if they did anything to that green, that he would take is name off the course.

[Mac Plumart]

I'd say #17 at Pete Dye Club is quite contorversial.  I don't have any pics but the green is really crazy with tons of mounds and slopes on it.  I believe the members wanted to level it out but Pete Dye said that if they did anything to that green, that he would take is name off the course.

[Michael George]

I would argue that no course can be great without "controversial" holes.  A course without controversy can similarly be called boring golf.  In fact, I usually find the more controversial holes to be my favorites.  In controversy, I usually find myself using the words - fun, challenging, unique and desire to play again - all of which are my definition of quality golf course architecture.   I think the exception comes when a controversial hole is placed in an incredibly beautiful setting.

To illustrate my point:

Old Macdonald - #7 is my favorite hole and is also probably the most controversial (unless players give it a pass due to the beauty of the green setting).
Pacific Dunes - #6 and #16 are 2 of my favorites and probably the most controversial on the course.
Bandon Trails - #14 is my favorite and is certainly most controversial.
Bandon Dunes - I think the lack of controversial holes really limits the design.

Re: Pete Dye - #17 green is certainly controversial, but also is the most fun green on the course.  It is certainly playable as a slug like me parred it.

Further, I think the lack of pushing limits sometimes hurts Fazio and Nicklaus designs and gives them a "cooky-cutter" feel.

[Tom_Doak]

Hole 18 at Riverfront ...
Short par 5 w/ hazard stretching across the entire width of the hole about 340 from the white tee.  Hazard carry varies from about 60 to about 90 yards.  If the handicapper's average drive is let's say 220, then a 180 to 210 yard carry is required for the second shot ... not very doable.  Some time the holes plays into the wind and the turf conditions are non-firm.  

In my older age, I have dumped a few ... I have seen (and been behind) many a 15 to 25 handicapper unload multiple balls into this hazard.  

The hole has had non-positive effect for the course.

The 2 most forward tees do play the hole about 90-100 yards shorter, but still must carry the hazard.  On this course, a lot of white tee golfers should be moving up a set of tees.

Carl:

I would never have imagined that the 18th at Riverfront would make a list of "controversial" holes, though it's certainly not easy ... an 80-yard carry across marshland from the fairway is never easy for some players, but it's not impossible, either.

The part you forgot to mention is that a player can lay up on the second shot, and still have some chance of getting home in three.  How far is it to the green if you lay up [or if you're dropping after hitting your second into the marsh]?  I can't remember exactly, and don't have access to Google Earth right now.

[Jud_T]

I'll take controversial over fair any day of the week...Life's too short for there to be monotony on the golf course...

[Mac Plumart]

I would argue that no course can be great without "controversial" holes.  A course without controversy can similarly be called boring golf.

Michael...I am with you on this.  

[Carl Rogers]

Hole 18 at Riverfront ...
Short par 5 w/ hazard stretching across the entire width of the hole about 340 from the white tee.  Hazard carry varies from about 60 to about 90 yards.  If the handicapper's average drive is let's say 220, then a 180 to 210 yard carry is required for the second shot ... not very doable.  Some time the holes plays into the wind and the turf conditions are non-firm.  

In my older age, I have dumped a few ... I have seen (and been behind) many a 15 to 25 handicapper unload multiple balls into this hazard.  

The hole has had non-positive effect for the course.

The 2 most forward tees do play the hole about 90-100 yards shorter, but still must carry the hazard.  On this course, a lot of white tee golfers should be moving up a set of tees.

Carl:

I would never have imagined that the 18th at Riverfront would make a list of "controversial" holes, though it's certainly not easy ... an 80-yard carry across marshland from the fairway is never easy for some players, but it's not impossible, either.

The part you forgot to mention is that a player can lay up on the second shot, and still have some chance of getting home in three.  How far is it to the green if you lay up [or if you're dropping after hitting your second into the marsh]?  I can't remember exactly, and don't have access to Google Earth right now.

TD,
Yes one can lay up, but a short lay up. I was remiss.
It is about 180ish from a comfortable, not too close to the hazard, layup to the middle of the green.

[Tom_Doak]

Hole 18 at Riverfront ...
Short par 5 w/ hazard stretching across the entire width of the hole about 340 from the white tee.  Hazard carry varies from about 60 to about 90 yards.  If the handicapper's average drive is let's say 220, then a 180 to 210 yard carry is required for the second shot ... not very doable.  Some time the holes plays into the wind and the turf conditions are non-firm.  

In my older age, I have dumped a few ... I have seen (and been behind) many a 15 to 25 handicapper unload multiple balls into this hazard.  

The hole has had non-positive effect for the course.

The 2 most forward tees do play the hole about 90-100 yards shorter, but still must carry the hazard.  On this course, a lot of white tee golfers should be moving up a set of tees.

Carl:

I would never have imagined that the 18th at Riverfront would make a list of "controversial" holes, though it's certainly not easy ... an 80-yard carry across marshland from the fairway is never easy for some players, but it's not impossible, either.

The part you forgot to mention is that a player can lay up on the second shot, and still have some chance of getting home in three.  How far is it to the green if you lay up [or if you're dropping after hitting your second into the marsh]?  I can't remember exactly, and don't have access to Google Earth right now.

TD,
Yes one can lay up, but a short lay up. I was remiss.
It is about 180ish from a comfortable, not too close to the hazard, layup to the middle of the green.

Phew!  I was worried for a minute that I'd screwed up.  I suppose it would be a bit more forgiving if it was 150 yards instead of 180, as there are many seniors who can't get to the green from 180 yards after their lay-up.  But, the good ones can maybe get up and down.

Is that green as severe as I remember it?  We tried to make it big and complex, like something you'd find at St. Andrews.

[Jim Tang]

How about the opening blind drive at Black Mesa?  Or, the par 3 4th hole and the par 5 16th at Black Mesa?  Would one consider those holes controversial?  Personally, I loved Black Mesa and was glad to see the architect take some chances.  That is a really fun golf course.

The 9th at Kingsley is a good nomination.  I think it is a great hole, but it is on the edge of what many would consider acceptable.  I feel it simply requires a well executed tee shot.  I think you can avoid the ping pong effect of chipping back and forth by hitting your recovery shot into the high bank of the green.  If this means having to play a chip shot away from the flag, so be it.

[Garland Bayley]

#9 at Chambers Bay.

Maybe #18 with the addition of Chambers Bay basement.

If you want to bring Black Mesa into the conversation, and you want to say #7 at Old MacDonald is controversial, then you have to say #17 at Black Mesa as the predecessor of #7 at Old Mac is controversial.

I don't see #1 or #4 as controversial at Black Mesa. For me #12 and #15 are either controversial, or maybe just to ill-advised to be controversial.

[Tom ORourke]

I saw Pete Dye getting a mention or two. His hole at Old Marsh with the giant mound in front of the green should qualify here. I played it many years ago and still am not sure if it was a good hole or not but it fits this bill. I think most of Desmond Muirhead's later works have a few candidates as well. Jaws at Stone Harbor, the par 5 at Aberdeen with the island fairway, to name just two. The fact that Jaws was filled in speaks volumes to how that was received. Aberdeen was built right before Stone Harbor and has some of the same touches, like island sand traps and land forms in the holes. I have to give guys like them, and Stranz, credit for having the guts to try something different. Nothing wrong with a little variety, even if it is not always a success.

[Carl Rogers]

Phew!  I was worried for a minute that I'd screwed up.  I suppose it would be a bit more forgiving if it was 150 yards instead of 180, as there are many seniors who can't get to the green from 180 yards after their lay-up.  But, the good ones can maybe get up and down.

Is that green as severe as I remember it?  We tried to make it big and complex, like something you'd find at St. Andrews.
[/quote]
Yes, it is the largest green on the course, the most complex green and for me a summary of all the various green complexes that run through the course.  Particularly so because the 17th green is about the quietest green on the course.

You need to get back to play it sometime.

[Jackson C]

Borrowing from another thread -- how about North Berwick #16?
Certainly if built today, some would be up in arms over the green.
From my perspective, #16 is the single biggest reason to play Berwick, because it is so unique and fun.

[Ed Brzezowski]

How about the "pit " hole at NB?  I believe it is number 12.

Or any of the holes there when the wall is in play?

Great course with some really neat, well odd, features.

[Tom_Doak]

If you want to bring Black Mesa into the conversation, and you want to say #7 at Old MacDonald is controversial, then you have to say #17 at Black Mesa as the predecessor of #7 at Old Mac is controversial.

Garland:

I had to think for a minute about what the 17th at Black Mesa was like; I never thought of it when we were building #7 at Old Macdonald, but I guess it's somewhat similar.  Then again, I never would have picked #7 at Old Mac as a controversial hole.  It's a difficult hole, as it was hard to reconcile the steep climb to the green once we decided we were going to go for the ocean view; but I figured the view would quell any resentment over the difficulty.

Old Macdonald certainly has its share of controversial holes.  I would guess the most controversial to be #10, #12, #16, and #17, although at least 16 and 17 have their historical precedents to lean on.  That's probably the highest number of controversial holes I've built in a while -- which is testament to the input of the others on our design committee, and to Mike Keiser's increasing tolerance for a bit of controversy.

I agree with the sentiment that every course should have a bit of controversy, and I don't think it should be confined to just one hole, which some architects throw in as a token gesture every now and then to prove they can do it, too.  Getting the balance right is the difference between building a great course and missing the mark ... though, like everything else in golf architecture, the right balance is subjective.

[Garland Bayley]

Tom,

I would never pick #7 at Old Mac as a controversial hole either. It's just that I thought if others were going to pick it, then I thought they should be picking #17 at Black Mesa for similar reasons.

PS, I would pick 12 as the most controversial hole at Old Mac.

[Sean Leary]

#9 at Chambers Bay.

Maybe #18 with the addition of Chambers Bay basement.

I wouldn't pick 9 at CB as that controversial. I would say 1, 7, and 12 are more so....

[JESII]

Huntingdon Valley C-9 #2 would be a poster child for this...also my favorite hole on the nine...

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jackson

Great comment
how about North Berwick #16?
Certainly if built today, some would be up in arms over the green.
From my perspective, #16 is the single biggest reason to play Berwick, because it is so unique and fun.

Better still the point you make – just why aren’t the modern designers understanding the designs of the past and building upon them instead of stupid boring Island Greens, shallow bunkers and the lack of serious fairway bunkers to trap the long hitters.

Melvyn

[Matthew Essig]

#9 at Chambers Bay.

Maybe #18 with the addition of Chambers Bay basement.

I wouldn't pick 9 at CB as that controversial. I would say 1, 7, and 12 are more so....

That is why 1 and 7 have been torn apart and are being redesigned.

[DMoriarty]

Better still the point you make – just why aren’t the modern designers understanding the designs of the past and building upon . . .

Melvyn, this is pretty much what happened in America, and this approach brought about what most (you excluded) think of the "golden age" of golf course design, an era which still provides the foundation for quality work today.   Trouble is, you have been very critical of this movement over here in the past.

[Garland Bayley]

#9 at Chambers Bay.

Maybe #18 with the addition of Chambers Bay basement.

I wouldn't pick 9 at CB as that controversial. I would say 1, 7, and 12 are more so....

That is why 1 and 7 have been torn apart and are being redesigned.

It seems to me that the changes to 1 and 7 will leave the holes essentially the same, with an offending feature softened. The entire nature of 9 will be changed when you use the new tee being created.

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

My comments are not about their quality, good design, but the fact that we are calling this second stage, Golden. Perhaps second Golden Age, perhaps but the real Golden Age was 1840-1890/1900.  I have no beef with any of the Golden Age guys – as you call them and as I say the 2nd Golden Age, perhaps we should follow the Greek timeline in that the first were the Golden Age, the second (your Golden Age) be called the Classical were golf flourished all over the wold in a big way, noting that golf was already established in many parts of the British Empire in the 19th Century.

Not critical of the guys in the early quarter of the 20th Century, just calling their age golden.

[Kalen Braley]

Continuing along with this theme...

Is there a controversial hole at ANGC? 
Or how about Pine Valley?

Does a course need one to be great?

I'm not sure how many would be ready to anoint it great, but I can't think of one at Wine Valley.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()