[Scott Warren]

10 at Dornoch
13 at North Berwick West Links
4 at Royal Melbourne (West)
13 at Barnbougle Dunes
6 at Newcastle (Stockton)
15 at The Valley Club
6 at New South Wales
4 at Sand Hills

All the above photograph better than they play, and the former overpowers the latter.

I still think some are quite decent holes, but not as good as they are widely renowned to be.

[Joe Hancock]

All you guys are terrible at keeping a secret.

[Bill Gayne]

The Klondyke at Lahinch. Love the golf course but not a fan of the Klondyke.

[Tom_Doak]

My entry is the 9th hole at Turnberry (Ailsa).  Great setting for a tee; that's all it's got.  The crowned fairway is ridiculous, the approach shot and green are nothing special, and there is no strategic interest at all.  Just rip a tee shot or die.  If Mr. Trump wants to do something different, I'll volunteer to do the work for free.

So what do you make of the 4th at Rye?  I missed the 9th on the Ailsa to the right and from a blind lie,  hit a great rescue to the back of the green. Best shot I made all day.  Have missed the Rye 4th fairway each of the 5 times I've played it, never had a chance to recover.

Actually, I love the 4th at Rye.  The last time I played it, many moons ago, I hit a 1-iron off the tee and a 6-iron to the middle of the green.  You do have to hit the tee shot straight, but unlike at Turnberry, it's up to you how long you want to try and hit that straight shot.  Also, it's got a terrific green.

[Peter Pallotta]

TD - you know, we talk a ton around here about short Par 4s and their options; but we should invent a brand new category and then take years running THAT one into the ground -- "Holes that you can play 1 iron-6 iron"! I don't know the 4th at Rye, but that sounds utterly charming and like marvellous fun, in golfing terms, and somehow much more interesting than a drivable/short Par 4.

Joe H - ha, ha. you're right. I was gonna say we're like Truman Capote, but Truman Capote was like Harpo Marx compared to us!!

Peter

[Matt MacIver]

My entry is the 9th hole at Turnberry (Ailsa).  Great setting for a tee; that's all it's got.  The crowned fairway is ridiculous, the approach shot and green are nothing special, and there is no strategic interest at all.  Just rip a tee shot or die.  If Mr. Trump wants to do something different, I'll volunteer to do the work for free.

I'll disagree, I think after all those flat lies the crowned fairway comes at the right time in the round to get in your head. If that wasn't enough the green is wide open, what an easy shot...hell I could putt it on!  Come to think of it, why don't I...it's downhill after all...but I really haven't had a chance to play my link-sy 3w/putter special yet this round, but I'm actually too far out...  So, for me the second shot didn't dictate a better/best but it did offer the question of what club and shot I should try.

Ps - just checked their website they cite #9 as their Signature Hole, I'm sadden they even have one but also that I got it wrong...I would have guessed #10! 

[Mike_Clayton]

Scott,

Whilst 5 at NSW is spectacular and you never forget the first time you get to the top of the hill and see that view it can be a really odd hole to play. Into the wind you often can't get up on the flat deck on top of the hill and it's an awful blind second up and over the hill and downwind it many drives go off the deck leaving a wedge into the par 5.
It's the old 'take away the ocean' argument but I wonder if its the great hole some think it is.

[Scott Warren]

Mike,

Of the 5, 6, 7 stretch at NSWGC, it's 7 that I reckon is the best hole. But of course you play it with your back to the ocean so it gets SFA attention compared to the other two.

The best mix of quality architecture and golf porn on the course is probably 13.

[Bill_McBride]

10 at Dornoch
13 at North Berwick West Links
4 at Royal Melbourne (West)
13 at Barnbougle Dunes
6 at Newcastle (Stockton)
15 at The Valley Club
6 at New South Wales
4 at Sand Hills

All the above photograph better than they play, and the former overpowers the latter.

I still think some are quite decent holes, but not as good as they are widely renowned to be.

Imagine how 15 at the Valley Club played when the course opened and tee shots were shorter....about like mine these days!   After a 210 yard tee shot up the hill, you have an agonizing decision:  do I try to thread the needle between the spectacle bunkers set at just the perfect distance, or lay up and have a longer shot into that small green with its three fiendish tiers?   I think it's a terrific hole if you can't just blow your second over the bunkers up around the green. 

[Niall C]

I'll offer one up, for which I instantly qualify for moron status.  #10 at Riviera.  Never played it, though I attended a few LA Opens in the 1980s and 1990s.  My sense that it's overrated is based on two pieces of information:

1.  Bob Huntley was a member there, for years as I understand it.  A very good player, he wrote there was only one way to play the hole.  Lay up.  Going for the green was a fool's errand.  I'm pretty sure this was pre-ProV1 era.  

2.  Now with high-tech adding 30 or so yards to the average pro drive, it's the opposite, at least for top golfers.  This year I recall the pro's saying it was foolish NOT to go for the green.  

So before the long ball there was only one smart way to play; and same now.  A hole that mostly dictates the smart play seems to me overrated.  

Jim

Don't know the hole at all but I'm going to argue against what you said, partly because that's what I like doing, but mostly because I believe a great hole doesn't need to be strategic or have options. Exhibit A m'lud would be the Postage Stamp at Troon. There is no option other than hitting the green unless you enjoy bunker shots. It's a classic do or die. Not at all suggesting you would want 18 holes of that but throw one of those in every so often adds to the mix very well IMO.

Niall

edit for spelling mistake (or at least the one I spotted)

[Niall C]

On to the 18th.  Incredibly flat fairway.  Stupid trees in the fairway and green-side.  Dual penalty with fairway trees and first fairway bunker.  Saving bunker down the left for the second shot.  Encroaching cart path.  Surprisingly pedestrian housing.  Nice views and surprisingly good green, however.  I was let down big-time.

Bogey

Yes, and it plays straight into the setting sun, too.  I still have it down as a great hole, but maybe not as great as advertised.

My entry is the 9th hole at Turnberry (Ailsa).  Great setting for a tee; that's all it's got.  The crowned fairway is ridiculous, the approach shot and green are nothing special, and there is no strategic interest at all.  Just rip a tee shot or die.  If Mr. Trump wants to do something different, I'll volunteer to do the work for free.

Vandal 

[Niall C]

Tom:

When I first requested access to join the GCA discussion board (and it's frank and honest discussion of golf architecture), I wrote to Ran about my (alleged) credentials, and said among other opinions that I thought the 1st at Machrihanish was over-rated, relative to the rest of the front nine in particular. And he let me in!

The tee shot is a thrill -- no question. But the rest of the hole -- meh. The turf is pretty flat -- not the heaving waves of the rest of the front nine there, nor the wonderful micro-movement that makes the Old Course such a treat. The green sort of turns away from the ocean, rather than embracing it, and the green itself is one of the least interesting out there (especially compared to what immediately follows up the hill at #2). After the tee shot, it's a pretty dull hole.

Phil

On another thread I recently stated that sadly the 1st at Machrihanish isn't the hole it formerly was principally because with modern drivers, the tee shot is nowhere near as intimidating as it used to be. However when I think back to when I first played the hole, early one evening when the sinking sun showed of its contours perfectly I clearly recall playing an approach shot with a 5 iron (had bailed out to the right off the tee) and seeing a small depression some 10 yds in front of the green where I wanted to land the ball. If I landed on the downslope the ball would kick forward and if I landed on the up slope the ball would be held up some. Yes I could have played to the left half of the green (the hole position was to the right) however the green has a bit of a step change from left to right. Not huge but neither was the depression in front of the green, just lovely subtle contours that added greatly to the hole.

Niall

[Paul Carey]

I am ready to be crucified so here goes:  17th at Cypress Point.  I think the trees have become too large and make the second shot uninteresting unless you hit a perfect tee shot....often just a layup left or short of the green.  If they were trimmed back allowing for an attempt to hit an interesting and tough shot to the green it would be a fabulous hole.

[Ryan Coles]

Let me stress that I'm not saying it isn't great.

But, Foxy.

In numerous attempts, numerous conditions, several long straight drives.......

How on earth do you hit the green in two?

[Niall C]

Ryan,

Absolutely with you. Apart from the drive where advantage can be gained from a line down the left, the hole does nothing for me. There's much better holes with plateau greens and indeed Dornoch has a few. For instance the 18th at Moray is far, far superior IMO.

Niall

[Thomas Dai]

Can someone please enlighten me with a bit more history of the Foxy 14th at RDGC.

How long has it played to this length? Was it considered a 'bogey-4' before being a formal par-4? Was the tee angle always the same etc? What changes, if any have occurred over the years?

atb

[Steve Salmen]

Phil McDade,

I couldn't disagree with you more about the first at Machrihanish.  The hole is set up by the tee shot.  If you chicken out right, you will have a really long second into the green, from an awkward angle. Think 18 at Pebble.  If you pull it on the beach like I have a few times, you're pretty much laying up.  But it you hit a good drive, only then will you play along the relatively flat fairway to the green, which is well deserved for bravery off the tee.

[Steve Salmen]

Thomas,

Rich Goodale is the person here with probably the best answer.  I'm sorry I can't help much other than say it is a completely natural golf hole and no earth was moved.

[Patrick_Mucci]

On 17 at Pebble, I wish people would hold back judgment till the left side of the green is redone.  The bunker has encroached on the green through play over the years, the company recognizes this, and it is being rectified.  So, let's lay-off till it is redone.

Jim,

If played from tees commensurate with the golfer's game,  # 17 is a wonderful golf hole.
I suspect that the "price to play" is the lightening rod for dissent at Pebble Beach which is a spectacular golf course in a great setting.

On 17 at TOC, while I am not the biggest fanatic about the course in general, I love that hole--for its design, its history and its variability.

The green/surrounds at # 17 at TOC has to be amongst the best in the world.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery # 17 wins the lottery.
That green is simply brilliant and brilliantly simple in it's design.

It's a great hole with or without the railroad shed

[Tom_Doak]

Can someone please enlighten me with a bit more history of the Foxy 14th at RDGC.

How long has it played to this length? Was it considered a 'bogey-4' before being a formal par-4? Was the tee angle always the same etc? What changes, if any have occurred over the years?

atb

Thomas:

I do not think Foxy has been changed at all since Ross' day, though it probably would have been a bogey 5 back then.

When the course was extended after WW II, the new holes tacked on were 7-8-9-10-11 and 13.  The course in Ross' day used to go from #6 to #12, and then on to the first and last holes of the Struie.  But, as you may have noticed, the 14th tee is right behind the 12th green -- because it used to be the next hole, before #13 was added to get the new routing up to 18 holes.

[Thomas Dai]

Tom & Steve,

Thanks for your thoughts on the history of the 14th.

One of the things that got me wondering about the hole in the first instance was the thought of the walk-back to the tee. I also wondered if in times gone by, when mowing was perhaps aided by animal, whether you could have also played the hole in certain conditions along the top of the right hand ridge, not just in the valley, as this would have given a more level shot into the green?

Same course, different hole - the often slagged off, including by me - 16th hole. Was the tee always back to the left of the 15th green just above the beach or was it maybe to the right of the 15th green where I recall there seems to be quite a bit a tee-shaped mounding, although some now covered in longer grass? Just curious as that would change the basis of the hole quite a bit.

atb

[Rich Goodale]

Thomas Dai

Thomas Doa is not correct in his post above.

When Donald Ross played Dornoch regularly (1890's) there was no 6th hole (as we know it today).  1 and 2 were short par 4s (for those days ~230 yards), 3 was another short 4 heading perpendicularly towards what is today the upper fairway of the 17th.  The 4th was a longer 4, playing from what is now the high right side of the 17th fairway to the current green.  5 was what we now know as 3 and 6 was what we now know as 4.  7 was the the last 2/3 of today's 12th.  8 was today's 13th, although to a green in front of today's Foxy.  9 was today's 14th, but at 255 yards.  10 was today's 15th, 11 was today's 16th and 12 was a shortened (300 yard) version of today's 18th.  13 was today's 1st on the Struie course.  14 was a pure copy of the 1st on the Old Course (drive onto a farmers field and then negotiate a green tucked into a burn-you can see the green today next to the caravan site)).  15 was today's 4th on the Struie., 16 was todays 17th on the Struie, 17 (the famous "Witch") was todays 18th on the Struie, and 18 was a superb long 3 (~200 yards when I played it in the 1980's) from the trees to the left the Witch to todaysw putting green.

In 1906, the course was changed to eliminate the perpendicular 3rd, and to replace it the old 6th was created.  That was not the 6th we know today but a shot from what is now the 6th tee to what is now the 11th green.  My brother in law and I played the hole that way in April.  It was a great hole.  What is now the 12th (~500) was created (with a green in the hollow past and to the right of the current 14th tee), and what is now the 13th was left to sleep with the fishes.  As a result, Foxy was lengthened to 360 yards (with the original OTM green), and the rest of the course was the same.

In 1921, Ross visited Dornoch for the first time since flitting to America and helped John Sutherland redo 1 and 2 (moving the 1st green 100 yards forward-- Ross's idea, and building a new 2nd green well to the left of the original one--Sutherland's idea).

In 1940, old holes 13-15 (plus all of the Ladies Course) were appropriated by the Ministry of Defense for a relief airfield.  In 1946, the club brought in George Duncan to re-build the course and (with the considerable assistance of the local greenkeeper (Grant) and professional (McCulloch)) added today's 6th green (a push up into the hill and the gorse), today's 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th, a great new 11th going to the old 6th green plus a revivified 13th to create (essentially) the course we play today.

Ric

[Thomas Dai]

Rihc,

Thank you for this answer. Very informative and insightful.

That's an interesting hole the now 6th/tee to the now 11th/green that you played with your brother-in-law to re-create the olde hole. I'm sure there must be many holes played from an existing tee to a still used but no longer on the same hole green at various courses around the globe.

To get back to the Foxy/14th, if I've understood you, what we now know as the Foxy 14th green/hole was always played as is now although it played variously as 255-yds, 360-yds and now todays yardage.

Thanks again.

Doa!


PS - Was Dornoch WWII relief airfield included in the recent thread about other uses for golf courses?

[JNC Lyon]

I know what you're thinking: "nobody would dare do an eclectic 18 for this one."  Well, I tried, but then I realized I haven't played enough well-regarded courses to fill it out.  Here are a few that WOULD be included on my eclectic 18 holes if I actually sought out more overrated architecture:

1 at Royal St. George's.  This is the first hole in PWT's eclectic 18.  I thought it was the worst par four on the course.

2 at Garden City.  This is the most famous hole on the golf course, but I thought it was nowhere near as interesting as the neighboring 18th, which has both a more interesting tee shot and a much more fearsome green.

3 at The Country Club.  The tee shot over the cliffs is legendary, but the second shot is dead flat to a nondescript green.  I've seen better, and I prefer the rugged 5th on the same layout.

4 at Yale.  A Golf Mag top 100.  It supposed to be a Road Hole, but I can't figure out why the green angles the wrong way.

5 at Prestwick.  For all the great stuff at Prestwick, the Himalayas is a bit of a letdown.  Something about the uninteresting green…

7 at Oak Hill (East).  Golf Magazine rated this as one of the top 100 in the world. Tree issues and penal mowing lines make it one of the least interesting par fours on the course.

14 at Royal Dornoch.  I've only played it once, and it's a cool hole.  But I just didn't "get" it the first time around.

Every long par four finisher I've ever played.  I think is the most cliched design feature in golf.  Give me a par three (Garden City, my favorite finishing hole) or a short par five (Yeamans Hall, Dismal River White, Dunes at Seville) any day.

[Phil McDade]

Phil McDade,

I couldn't disagree with you more about the first at Machrihanish.  The hole is set up by the tee shot.  If you chicken out right, you will have a really long second into the green, from an awkward angle. Think 18 at Pebble.  If you pull it on the beach like I have a few times, you're pretty much laying up.  But it you hit a good drive, only then will you play along the relatively flat fairway to the green, which is well deserved for bravery off the tee.

Steve:

I think people over-rate Machrihanish's 1st based solely on the tee shot, and are willing to let slide the rest of its hole and its (relatively, compared to what follows) tame fairway and green. There are a ton of holes with forced carries in which if you bale out for safety sakes, you're left with a longer shot into the green. That's not a terribly novel concept in golf course design; Brancaster has well-regarded holes like this. Pete Dye builds at least one of these into every single course he builds, it seems.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()