News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« on: December 27, 2013, 11:27:56 AM »
Some highly regarded and much praised courses have holes that are inferior or weaker than the rest of the holes on their otherwise splendid course.

A couple of examples that come to my mind are -

the 16th hole at Royal Dornoch

holes 17 and 18 at Royal Portrush

I'd be interested to know what folk herein would do to these holes in order to improve them (assuming that is, you think they need improving).

All the best

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2013, 11:39:20 AM »
Thomas

Well, I think the finish at Portrush is unfortunate, but the holes themselves are alright, just in the wrong place in the round.

What do you do about 16 Dornoch?  At least the hole is unusual.

I would name TOC's 9th as a lame hole. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

David Whitmer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2013, 11:45:04 AM »
Thomas,

I rather liked the 16th at Royal Dornoch. I played it twice, both times into a strong wind. I thought it was eminently playable. The fairway is tremendously wide, and there is room to go left to avoid the two bunkers on the right. It's a mighty poke up the hill, but there is plenty of space to hit your shot...can run it on, miss short, right, or left. It's a brute, but I found it enjoyable.

One hole I thought was lacking on a great course is the 18th at The Golf Club (I had pictures, but my computer was re-formatted and I lost them all). It's a medium-length par 4 with the second shot all carry over a pond to a slender green. The pond is fronted by a stone wall that zig-zags right and left...it's the first thing I noticed when I reached my tee ball. Looked very strange to me. And a second shot par 4 all over water is awfully one-dimensional and therefore short of options in my opinion.

Jason Thurman

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2013, 11:48:18 AM »
12 at Pebble Beach is a pile of steaming hot garbage.
"There will always be haters. That’s just the way it is. Hating dudes marry hating women and have hating ass kids." - Evan Turner

Some of y'all have never been called out in bold green font and it really shows.

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2013, 11:51:19 AM »
Strange, I have always liked the 16th at RD but never thought much of the 10th (maybe this will change if Rich teaches me the bounce it over the bunker shot ;))

I will be interesting to see what a difference the changes have made but I would say that the 9th at TOC falls into this category.

Jon

Chris_Hufnagel

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2013, 11:55:40 AM »
Thomas, I think that is an interesting question and certainly agree with David's nomination for #18 at The Golf Club.  I would also throw out 5-7 holes at Pebble Beach - which begs another question (and not trying to highjack your thread) – what course has the highest differential between "world class" and "inferior" holes?  That is, what course(s) is considered great even though they have a number of pedestrian holes?  For me, the answer goes back to Pebble Beach.  I think #4-10 are amazing/very good along with #18 and to a lesser extent #17 – but #1, #2, #11, #12, #13, #15, & #16 are only good at best and for some perhaps less than good...
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 01:35:00 PM by Chris_Hufnagel »

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2013, 12:00:22 PM »
Crystal Downs #17 is the poster child for this category.  I think it was put there intentionally to provide a reality check so you realize just how great the other 17 holes are...   ;)
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2013, 12:07:22 PM »
12 at Pebble Beach is a pile of steaming hot garbage.

While that sentiment prevails on this site, I don't understand.  Why?

Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2013, 12:23:43 PM »
Perfection is not achievable in golf.  Connector holes were a necessity in classic design.  Variety and the flow of a good routing demand a mix of holes of different levels of difficulty, making the aggregate greater than the sum of the individual holes.  Tom Fazio is perhaps best known for his efforts to design courses with 18 "signature" holes, and how well regarded is he on this site?

Candidates:  #10 at my beloved CPC, #1 at Riviera, Yale #18.  

Mark McKeever

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2013, 01:08:10 PM »
To build on Lou's connector hole post below I would nominate two modern courses:

8 at Boston GC
3 at French Creek
Best MGA showers - Bayonne

"Dude, he's a total d***"

Mark Bourgeois

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2013, 01:18:15 PM »
The 2nd and 11th holes on TOC.
Charlotte. Daniel. Olivia. Josephine. Ana. Dylan. Madeleine. Catherine. Chase. Jesse. James. Grace. Emilie. Jack. Noah. Caroline. Jessica. Benjamin. Avielle. Allison.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2013, 01:33:14 PM »
#4 on Lake Merced (San Francisco). Long par-4 where the average golfer is hitting off a downhill lie to a very uphill green that is guarded almost completely by a front bunker. The green is severely sloped back to front and putting from above the hole is a very difficult
(impossible ;)) task.  
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 01:40:18 PM by David_Tepper »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #12 on: December 27, 2013, 01:36:46 PM »
The longer I've been around, the less these "inferior" holes tend to weigh on my evaluation of a course.  Nearly always, they add to the variety and pacing of the course in question, if nothing else.  

Plus, some of the holes nominated as "inferior" are not inferior at all.  It is the minds of their critics that are inferior.

The real question is, how many great and very good holes does a course have?

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #13 on: December 27, 2013, 01:41:26 PM »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #14 on: December 27, 2013, 01:42:29 PM »
The longer I've been around, the less these "inferior" holes tend to weigh on my evaluation of a course.  Nearly always, they add to the variety and pacing of the course in question, if nothing else.  

Plus, some of the holes nominated as "inferior" are not inferior at all.  It is the minds of their critics that are inferior.

The real question is, how many great and very good holes does a course have?

I always wondered which was more important to architects--a course having more good/great holes or fewer mediocre/bad holes.

Jason Thurman

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #15 on: December 27, 2013, 01:50:51 PM »
12 at Pebble Beach is a pile of steaming hot garbage.

While that sentiment prevails on this site, I don't understand.  Why?

Bogey

It's a nice section of land with good elevation change. It could have produced something really nice. And the basics are there. A green that falls away from the tee. A yardage that allows for a club that makes it hard to judge how much the ball will run out when it lands. Unfortunately, the execution just sucks. There's basically no room to run the ball on, which sorta defeats the whole purpose of a front-to-back green for me. The green is too shallow. It's a pure hit-and-hope shot. And yeah, I guess 17 has some similarities, but at least the front side of 17's green is fairly accessible and the rear section tempts you to hit a stupid shot. There's no temptation on 12. The right play is to always fire at the flag, since for the average player the only chance of stopping a decently struck shot is to hit the flagstick.
"There will always be haters. That’s just the way it is. Hating dudes marry hating women and have hating ass kids." - Evan Turner

Some of y'all have never been called out in bold green font and it really shows.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2013, 01:53:01 PM »
The longer I've been around, the less these "inferior" holes tend to weigh on my evaluation of a course.  Nearly always, they add to the variety and pacing of the course in question, if nothing else.  

Plus, some of the holes nominated as "inferior" are not inferior at all.  It is the minds of their critics that are inferior.

The real question is, how many great and very good holes does a course have?

I always wondered which was more important to architects--a course having more good/great holes or fewer mediocre/bad holes.

JM:  I try really hard not to build any mediocre / bad holes.  I would rather change my routing and give up a great hole if it meant that I could eliminate all the mediocre holes.

However, I don't like to judge others' courses that way, especially when it is all a matter of opinion whether a hole is "mediocre" or "good".

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2013, 02:03:32 PM »
TD,understood.

Architects,obviously,look at golf courses differently than laymen wannabes.Most of us only see holes through the prism of our own games.I like to think architects can see the bigger picture.

J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2013, 02:03:40 PM »
#6 at Olympia Fields North
#16 at Chicago Golf Club
#1 and #18 at Shoreacres
#18 at Fishers Island
#7 at Prairie Dunes
#1 at Pebble Beach
#18 at SFGC
Pedestrian holes on great courses IMO

Charlie Gallagher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #19 on: December 27, 2013, 02:06:35 PM »
18 at Ballybunion is a jarring conclusion to the round. I have never thought carefully about how it could be fixed, the Sahara bunker might have to go.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #20 on: December 27, 2013, 02:18:35 PM »
17 at Bandon Dunes and 5 and 18 at Whistling Straights are other obvious choices.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #21 on: December 27, 2013, 02:20:22 PM »

Crystal Downs #17 is the poster child for this category.  I think it was put there intentionally to provide a reality check so you realize just how great the other 17 holes are...   ;)


Sorry Jud.  I have to strongly disagree with that statement.

Any club from a driver to 5 iron works on the drive depending on how bold and committed you are.  The skyline green is dramatic and appealing.  Now that the white cinder block "house" on the hill right of the hole is gone, what's not to like??

Ken

Mark Bourgeois

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #22 on: December 27, 2013, 02:23:02 PM »
The 2nd and 11th holes on TOC.

?!!

They fit Thomas's premise by dint of their being improved. (My point being: don't be so sure what's not good and therefore in need of 'improvement.')

The longer I've been around, the less these "inferior" holes tend to weigh on my evaluation of a course.  Nearly always, they add to the variety and pacing of the course in question, if nothing else.  

Plus, some of the holes nominated as "inferior" are not inferior at all.  It is the minds of their critics that are inferior.

The real question is, how many great and very good holes does a course have?

On behalf of Wethered & Simpson, thank you.
Charlotte. Daniel. Olivia. Josephine. Ana. Dylan. Madeleine. Catherine. Chase. Jesse. James. Grace. Emilie. Jack. Noah. Caroline. Jessica. Benjamin. Avielle. Allison.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #23 on: December 27, 2013, 02:37:20 PM »

Crystal Downs #17 is the poster child for this category.  I think it was put there intentionally to provide a reality check so you realize just how great the other 17 holes are...   ;)


Sorry Jud.  I have to strongly disagree with that statement.

Any club from a driver to 5 iron works on the drive depending on how bold and committed you are.  The skyline green is dramatic and appealing.  Now that the white cinder block "house" on the hill right of the hole is gone, what's not to like??

Ken

Ken,

It's been beaten to death elsewhere so I don't really want to reopen a can of worms.  I get that members who've played the hole hundreds of times may have a soft spot for it's uniqueness and challenge. To most everyone else it's just a bit of a headscratcher.  Maybe it's really a poster child for why awkward connectors should be par 3's and not 4s and 5s in a routing.  I know Tom's going to go to his deathbed defending the hole, one just gets the impression that if it were on most any other course he might not be quite so generous.  
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 06:43:52 PM by Jud T »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Inferior holes on otherwise highly regarded courses
« Reply #24 on: December 27, 2013, 02:44:15 PM »
The real question is, how many great and very good holes does a course have?

Some very interesting thoughts and a good point made above, but alternatively how many top quality holes does a course need to have to be considered great? 18? 17? 16? 15?.......and thus does the presence of a weaker or inferior hole(s), irrespective of whether or not it's a connector hole, diminish the stature of an otherwise highly regarded course?

ATB

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back