What's with this "great holes should only require a putter" nonsense?

[Jason Thurman]

Sure, it's fun to play a hole with just a single club. It's also fun to fart in the bathtub. But what kind of lunatic would judge a hole on whether it can be played using a strategy that literally no one playing a serious game would ever use?

[Thomas Dai]

Sure, it's fun to play a hole with just a single club. It's also fun to fart in the bathtub. But what kind of lunatic would judge a hole on whether it can be played using a strategy that literally no one playing a serious game would ever use?

Didn't Sam Snead in a tournament once tee-off on the short par-3 7th at Pebble Beach with a putter?


Atb

[Adam Lawrence]

It's code for 'can be played, finished and enjoyed by golfers of all standards'.

[David Davis]

I think Adam would of quoted that directly but I'm thinking some Golden Age architect like Mackenzie coined a phrase about truly great holes being able to be played with a putter and apparently #16 at Cypress could also be played in this way.


Now I'm curious if I just made that up or actually read it in one of his books since no one posted it yet.


Must be getting old and losing my memory.

[Jason Topp]

I think Adam would of quoted that directly but I'm thinking some Golden Age architect like Mackenzie coined a phrase about truly great holes being able to be played with a putter and apparently #16 at Cypress could also be played in this way.


Now I'm curious if I just made that up or actually read it in one of his books since no one posted it yet.


Must be getting old and losing my memory.

I think you are correct.  It was Mackenzie and I think he was discussing the 11th at the Old Course.

[Jason Topp]

It's code for 'can be played, finished and enjoyed by golfers of all standards'.

That is what I mean by the phrase. 

[Zack Molnar]

So any hole with any element of cross hazard/cross bunker can't be a great hole?

[Keith OHalloran]

So any hole with any element of cross hazard/cross bunker can't be a great hole?

Zack,
You have to think outside the box. This guy (eventually) finished Sawgrass 17 with just a putter. Clearly it is now in the running for great holes.


http://espn.go.com/golf/playerschamp08/columns/story?id=3385374&columnist=sobel_jason

[Jason Thurman]

Indeed, if we're starting with the completely illogical premise that holes should accommodate a playing strategy that no one would ever use, shouldn't we also accept the illogical fact that even the most unplayable-with-a-putter hole can almost always in fact be played with a putter, as Keith points out?


Is it legal under the rules of golf to putt a ball into the boat at Couer D'Alene and then putt it out of the boat once in range of shore near the green?

[Josh Tarble]

Pine Valley sucks.  I don't think you can finish a single hole with a putter there.

[Jud_T]

Aside from providing ground game options for golfers to bunt it around, the phrase also implies good draining, firm sand-based turf, something that doesn't apply to 99% (?) of U.S. golf courses.  Food for thought frankly...

[David Davis]

Indeed and it naturally stems from a time that predates pure target golf (as in throwing darts into rings). Think 17th at Sawgrass, Island hole at Couer D'Alene etc.

On top of that perhaps it was just his philosophy and before it's dismissed as nonsense the guy applied this to some pretty decent courses pre heaving earth moving equipment.

Cypress
Royal Melbourne
Augusta
Maybe even Crystal Downs

To name a few. As far as I'm concerned without taking it too literally it's bloody genius. Pretty hard to argue against that list.

[Kalen Braley]

Other than a true island hole....like CDA

Balls can be putted:

Thru sand
Along cart paths
Over bridges
Thru rough

Might take you awhile, but it can be done! 

[BCowan]

David,

    I agree completely.  Unfortunately ANGC, Oakmont, and Old Town need to be bulldozed they weren't built on sand  .

   I think the phrase also implies a one cut type of design with no to limited rough and width.  Like TOC and ANGC

[Jud_T]

This from a guy who, at the drop of every hat, poo-poos clubs who spend a small fortune in maintenance to approximate what is naturally occurring elsewhere....

[Tom_Doak]

One of the crazy / neat things about the new course at Forest Dunes is that there are only five places between the first tee and 18th green where the short grass gets interrupted - mostly, at the par-3 holes.  So, for example, you could putt all the way from the first tee to the 3rd green!  There are not many courses where it works like that.

[BCowan]

An Oakmont built on sand is going to drop it's annual maint budget by how much a year Jud? 

Maint budgets are 1/4- 1/6 of the yearly budget for high end places yet it gets blamed for high monthly dues...

[BHoover]

Pine Valley sucks.  I don't think you can finish a single hole with a putter there.

Preach it, brother. Trees and target golf. I'll pass. That's why I have a no-thanks policy in place when it comes to any PV invites.

[Garland Bayley]

Sure, it's fun to play a hole with just a single club. It's also fun to fart in the bathtub. But what kind of lunatic would judge a hole on whether it can be played using a strategy that literally no one playing a serious game would ever use?

Alister MacKenzie would be the lunatic.
He also mentions the possibility of playing and winning the 16th at Cypress Point with a bogey as I recall (loaned book to green committee chair) after opponent finds the ocean.

[David Whitmer]

I was checking out Bethpage Black online the other day, and was surprised to realize that, by my count, only 6 of the 18 holes can have a ball run up on to the green. The other 12 call for a shot to carry either bunkers, a pond, or a hillside. May be 7 and 11 depending on how one characterizes the 4th hole.


I've never played it, and I'm not passing judgment or coming to a conclusion on its greatness...just saying I was surprised that golf course calls for so many forced carries. Perhaps I'm missing something.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Roberto de Vicenzo once played a proper course in Argentina with only a putter and recorded a 72.


Once, playing the 16th at TOC I hit my tee ball out of bounds. I put another ball down, took my putter and got a 4. Simple.

[Niall C]

I think Adam would of quoted that directly but I'm thinking some Golden Age architect like Mackenzie coined a phrase about truly great holes being able to be played with a putter and apparently #16 at Cypress could also be played in this way.


Now I'm curious if I just made that up or actually read it in one of his books since no one posted it yet.


Must be getting old and losing my memory.

David


I was looking for the quote a couple of weeks ago in Spirit of St Andrews and couldn't find it. The reason I was looking was I'd just got back from a trip where I was lucky enough to play Pasatiempo for the first time and couldn't imagine how you could play the 11th, 16th and 18th there with a putter unless you putted over the bridge. Great holes with great use of natural features but I did wonder how they fitted in with his philosophy as I remembered it.


Niall

[BHoover]

Jean Van de Velde once replayed the 18th at Carnoustie, maybe 6 months or so after the 1999 Open,  with only a putter and beat his score on the 72nd hole of that Open.

Surprisingly, he did not then use that putter to beat either himself or his caddie to death afterwards.

[Jay Mickle]

Back in the day, putters would have up to 7 degrees of loft making them just short shafted driving irons.

[Jason Thurman]

Jean Van de Velde once replayed the 18th at Carnoustie, maybe 6 months or so after the 1999 Open,  with only a putter and beat his score on the 72nd hole of that Open.

Surprisingly, he did not then use that putter to beat either himself or his caddie to death afterwards.

Reminds me of when Mark Calcavecchia went back to Kiawah Ocean and shot 75 from the back tees using only a putter, and parred 17 while never missing a putt inside 6 feet the entire round.


I assumed that we all were well-read enough to know the original quote had come from Alister Mackenzie. I also assumed we were all aware that many of Mackenzie's own favorite holes don't meet the standard. To Niall's point, I think we're oversimplifying Mackenzie's quip when we call it a "philosophy." He has plenty of work on the ground that shows it was more of a rule of thumb than a binding philosophical code.