[Jeff_Mingay]

In another thread on proposed changes at the Old Course, the esteemed Adam Lawrence writes: I think Sean echoes much of my reaction. Either you are for preservation, or you are for improvement, and it seems clear to me that, if the latter, the place to start would be with a redesign of the ninth.

This is a very interesting subject, the 9th hole at St. Andrews. To begin, I ask: In the context of the entire golf course, what exactly is wrong with the 9th hole, if anything? (I'll jump in later with my own thoughts, after hearing from others.)

Thanks,

[Adam Lawrence]

My fundamental problem with the hole is the lack of anything interesting going on. I really believe that the best holes are the ones that create the widest spread of scoring, and unless you completely nob your drive into the gorse, or skull a pitch, or you hit a bad putt, most people are going to make three or four on this hole.

It is part of the Old Course, and I am perfectly happy with the argument that it should be left alone. But if you are going to make changes, it seems to me the place to start. Not that I would necessarily assume any alterations would make a dramatic difference....

[Frank M]

I have no problem with the 9th as is and am one of the proponents of leaving the entire course as is. I would argue that the 9th has quite a bit of interest in that it is one of the few holes that lacks an incredible amount of interest. It serves as a bit of a breather even though the bunkers add some strategic merit. 

[Matt MacIver]

The concept of a "breather" hole comes to mind with the 9th.  Also after so many early blind tee shots I appreciate the straight-forwardness of it.  And nothing wrong with mere mortals having a birdie putt once in a while. 

[Brett Hochstein]

Jeff,

In the context of the golf course, the 9th (and 10th even) work pretty well.  They are a proper "breather" as Matt describes, a pleasant pause between what you have just experienced and that which is to come.  Visually, its flat setting gives support to the narrative of the Old Course being "natural," showing that if something wasn't there, nothing was really done to try and "create something."  From a design standpoint, I think it works for a modest hitter like myself, the second bunker making me question if I want to have a go at the green in firm conditions or just lay back.  Also, as flat as that green is, I have always had trouble reading it.  Count me in the camp of leaving it alone.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I like breather holes.
But I'd call the 9th at The Old Course more of a nap.
If the hole were better, the course would be an 11 - I'm not saying I'd change it, or let anyone else change it.
Cheers

[Tony Dear]

I think it's worth remembering that whatever changes are made can be unmade if necessary. What irritates me is years and years of discussion on topics like equipment change (bifurcation or no bifurcation) without any changes actually being made, and all the while courses having to be lengthened and otherwise altered to maintain the challenge. I wish the ruling bodies would just make a change...an educated change based on research of course, but JUST MAKE A CHANGE! I appreciate any change to current rules would be very expensive, but it might not be overstating the matter to say it could potentially save our game.
So, in the context of the 9th, I say go ahead and try your bunker scheme. But if, in two/three years' time, it becomes clear that neither the pro's nor paying customers like it then take it out.

[Greg Taylor]

For me the issue is that the terrain is flat making it visually unexciting and out of keeping with the rest of the course, even the 10th.

There's little strategic intent in the tee shot, ("shall I smack a driver or lay up short of the bunker - no that's for the ladies - give me the driver").

Plus, the R&A will not want to see the pros birdieing it more often that not. Not saying they're right, but that's the way they'll see it

Carve it up I say - what's done can be undone. Almost anything would be an improvement - within reason!

[Bill_McBride]

I spent about an hour by the gorse front left of the green during the 2005 Open.  The most interesting thing to see was the sad faces of those who made par, knowing they had lost the better part of a shot to the field.  This upped the interest, as normally risk-averse players like Monty pulled out the driver.  There is real trouble on the hole with thick gorse left and a minefield of fairway bunkers.  I have no problem with 9 at all, it's part of the loop that "must be caned."

[Ally Mcintosh]

Contrary to a few posts on here and other threads, I do not believe that what's done can easily be undone... Whilst it's not one of my favourite holes on the course, the ninth has its place and its use so I would rather see it left alone...

[Frank M]

Contrary to a few posts on here and other threads, I do not believe that what's done can easily be undone... Whilst it's not one of my favourite holes on the course, the ninth has its place and its use so I would rather see it left alone...

Ally I completely agree.

[Sean_A]

I am amazed at the folks who think the hole is worth while as is.  All the talk on this site about this and that minor detail and people want to say TOC's 9th is even remotely interesting in the company it keeps. I have heard it all.  Sometimes people can take their precious ideals of preservation for preservation sake a step or three too far.  Forget all the nonsense about TOC and breathing better.  For cryin' out loud.  The 8th and 10th are breather holes.  Who has the guts to actually say the 9th is good not just for a championship course, but a mediocre course?    

Ciao  

[mike_beene]

The pitch shot is tough to me because the lack of visual gives no depth perception. It is actually a very unique hole.I ended up in the fairway bunker to the left one time and ruined a score.Didnt even know it existed.I do now.

[Rich Goodale]

Anybody on this site (even me) could "improve" the 9th, but that's the point.  It makes any wannabe architect who can tell reverse from forward on a D-5 think that he can build at least one better golf hole than mother nature herself.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Anybody on this site (even me) could "improve" the 9th, but that's the point.  It makes any wannabe architect who can tell reverse from forward on a D-5 think that he can build at least one better golf hole than mother nature herself.

Great post, Rich, especially with the word "improve" in quotations.

I'm fortunate to being working on a number of interesting golf coruse remodel/renovation projects at the moment. And, there are so many people out there with so many dramatic (not necessarily bad) ideas about how to "improve" so many golf holes. I think the best golf architects, though, are so much more intelligent, thoughful, and talented in that area where restraint should reign. Some times it's difficult for those golfers who have more fanciful ideas to understand restrained recommendations as part of an overall scheme for golf course improvement. When to know when to leave well-enough alone, and when to accept that a super-unique, extremely distinct hole (with history), like the 9th at St. Andrews, might give up some "birdies" (?!) but is a really neat part of the make-up of a round of golf at any particular course is smart.

Hmmm... this only reminds me why the top courses in the world share one common characteristic: They're all distinct. And that there are really only a relative handful of truly great courses on this planet. Sigh, again.

[Scott Warren]

Matt McIver,

I prefer my breather holes to still have architectural interest. They can provide a breather from immense drama without being poor golf holes.

I'm thinking 14 at The Addington, 7 at Fishers Island and 6 at Barnbougle Dunes. All great holes that give the golfer something of a breather between dramatic stretches.

TOC #9 is just a crap golf hole. By all means leave it alone for history's sake, but it is what it is.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Scott,

I've seen way crappier holes than 9 at St. Andrews.

[Scott Warren]

As have I, Jeff. Plenty of them. But I'm sure I've not seen a hole as bad as 9 at TOC on another course in the world top 15 or so.

[Gary Slatter]

I always enjoyed the 9th (and 10th).  When you're on 9 tee you are looking forward to 3 - 3 and an Irnbru; when you stand on 11 you're wondering how you went 3 - 5 or 4 - 4 but rarely 3 - 3 !  

During our Thursday Club rounds a lot of people who never hook, hook on 9 or 10.  I've seen one of Bill Murray's amateur partners drive both greens, and go 4 - 4.   9 is a fun hole for any golfer, a hole where a mutt can beat a pro.  

As Rich says, anyone can improve the 9th hole, but I hope nobody does.   Go ahead, improve it on paper!

[Jeff_Mingay]

As have I, Jeff. Plenty of them. But I'm sure I've not seen a hole as bad as 9 at TOC on another course in the world top 15 or so.

Perhaps that's what makes the 9th at St. Andrews so unique, Scott

[Scott Warren]

Perhaps!

Like I said, for what TOC is and represents, I'd never get my heart rate up about changing the 9th at all. But of the 18 holes, it stands out in my mind as being incredibly mundane.

[Jeff_Mingay]

I get it, Scott. But imagine our expectations if you and I were in a match there, all square. I bet one of us would screw up royal, thinking we're destined for a three at worst! Brilliant.

[Bill_McBride]

Perhaps!

Like I said, for what TOC is and represents, I'd never get my heart rate up about changing the 9th at all. But of the 18 holes, it stands out in my mind as being incredibly mundane.

Wait a minute.  Where else do you stand on the tee of a par 4 and say to yourself, "Holy shit, I can make a two here!"

[Scott Warren]

Bill,

On quite a few holes. And on many of them, you also feel that if you try to make a two and get it wrong, you could make seven.

The 3rd at Kingston Heath is played over similarly unspectacular land and manages to be one of the finest short fours in the world.

[mike_beene]

What is the name of that crap golf hole?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()