[Erik J. Barzeski]

Most of the topics here about the Dormie Club seem to be old (except the one I just bumped) or deal with holes 14/15 only (like the one I just bumped). So I thought it'd be okay to start a NEW topic about the course.

I played it the Sunday after the Newport Cup (a Ryder Cup-style event), so, October 22.

We had the first tee time of the day (7:50) and the shop duo were actually kinda late to show up, so we hung out at the front gate until about 7:40. I didn't mind - we weren't planning to spend an hour warming up anyway.

Of the holes there, I really thought 14 stood out, along with 4, 8, 10, 16, and 17. I would rank 3 and 12 as the holes I liked the least. Three seemed like a layup short of the waste area to the right 210 yards or so (it's only 20 yards left of the sand, and 270 or so to carry it), and 12, not being able to see the green contours makes the hole bit goofy the first time you play it. It's undoubtedly a better hole the third or fourth time around, but two of the guys with whom I played had their balls hang up in the fringe above the hole, and could barely get the ball to stop 15 feet below the hole. I'm good with some "local knowledge" but this felt a bit much.

This was my first Coore & Crenshaw course, and so I'm not going to rank it or anything like that. Among the courses I like that I've played, I have Oakmont, the Ocean Course at Kiawah Island, Camargo Club, The Old Course, Caledonia, and North Berwick. I'm nowhere near as traveled as many here, but I've done okay for myself in the time I've had to play golf instead of teaching it.

I like courses that make you think from time to time, courses that give you a choice, and occasionally say "okay, here's the shot, let's see if you can hit it." Except for having a few too many right-to-left holes I felt the Dormie Club did this beautifully. When I realized we'd be playing from about 6700 yards, my host said "yeah, there are a few 480-yard par fours here" I scoffed, thinking he was over-stating it because he's kind of short off the tee. But, there were a few of them, no doubt, and a few short ones to make up for the yardage eaten by the beasts.

In particular, I loved the swooping draw second shot I had to play to the 8th hole. I loved the tenth, too, which just dared you to let the shaft out (with a little control on the second shot). I liked the blind shots (my second shot on six, the 11th IIRC I played too far to the left away from the sand, so I couldn't see the flagstick) for the most part, except maybe the 12th (and that's only "blah" the first time around).

I liked, of course, the way the course sat upon the land. The conditioning was great. The bunkers (no rakes) felt natural. I apologize if I sound like a newb saying that. I am.

I loved the greens. I grew up playing some greens built in the 1950s, with a lot of contour, so I've come to appreciate putting on good greens. I appreciated using the contours of the greens - and the run-up areas in front of them - to help get the ball to the hole in ways that are unlike a lot of aerial U.S. golf. (One of my favorite shots ever was a 6I I hit to The Road Hole that flew about 90 yards and bounced and rolled the other 90.) I liked that the fairways were wide, but there were clearly better sides to play from (I just wish so many of them weren't from the left).

I enjoyed everything about the day. The clubhouse was perfect. The weather was perfect. We played in about 3:30 (despite two players in our group, well, they looked for a lot of balls, let's put it that way).

I posted in the other topic about the 14th and 15th, so I'm hoping we can talk about some of the other holes in this topic.

Some photos (and a little bit of commentary):


Waiting outside the club at 7:15 or so in the morning.


The view out the large windows of the small eating area of the finishing hole, a par four.


The second hole, one of many right-to-left holes.


The "meh" third. It's pretty to look at, but it felt like a somewhat boring hole to play. Bunt it out there, hit a wedge to the proper section of the green (lots of motion on this green).


The "first and a half" shot to the sixth. I didn't know how much this hole narrowed, and my ball bounded into the small bunker left. Fortunately I was able to chip out onto the green from there. A good hole, which requires a very good second shot. Not many par fives are "second shot holes" but I feel this one is - how much (with a 3W or hybrid) do you really want to push toward the green?


The bunker guarding the inside of the turn on the 8th hole. I hit an "okay" drive, but had 205 yards or so to the pin toward the back of a very deep green. I hit about a 50-yard draw to the left fringe, pin-high. One of the cooler shots I have played in awhile, and I like that Coore and Crenshaw asked me to hit it.


The second shot on the loooooong 10th. I liked this hole a lot - it gives you a chance to let the shaft out, and is a true three-shot par five, where most players will still not even have a wedge in for their third. I thought the landing area for the second shot was a bit generous - I had no problems hitting a 3W over/left of the "nose" bunker out there.


The 12th. I'd have loved to see a bit more of the green contours here… though now that I have played it once, at least I'd know on return trips how severe the back-to-front slope is.


14 from the tee. 60 yards wide, and 300 yards or so gently uphill.


The ideal spot is a few yards ahead of where I was standing in this photo.


I over-drew my tee shot but had a perfectly decent shot from left of 14. I'm convinced the play here is to get the ball as close as you can. There are strokes to be saved, and laying up is a wimp's play on this hole. My group had a long conversation about this hole, and everyone hit a different club.


The tee shot on the 15th. I played at the left-hand bunker with a slight cut.


And I was rewarded with a look at most of the green from only 80 yards out. I used the slope left to funnel the ball down onto the green for about a 12-foot birdie putt (it lipped out).


The second shot to the 500-yard par-five 17th plays about 50 yards uphill. I had 216 yards or so to the flag…


…and I hit a pretty good shot from there. (The eagle putt stayed a bit more right than I'd read. Bummer, a tap-in birdie.)


The clubhouse/pro shop/grill room as seen near the back of the 18th green. All you need. Perfect.

[Adam T]

This is a really nice write-up, Erik. Your early morning, November, Sandhills pictures are just splendid and capture Dormie Club so well. I wouldn't sell your list of courses played short at all. Have you played many other North Carolina Sandhills (or NC) courses to compare? Thanks for putting this photo tour together!

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Have you played many other North Carolina Sandhills (or NC) courses to compare?

Thanks for asking. I don't want to get off topic, but as I live in Erie, I've only played about ten or fifteen of the courses around there. Tanglewood, Anderson Creek, Mid Pines (pre-renovation, darn it), Salem Glen, Pinehurst #2 (pre-reno, darn it), Pine Needles (pre-reno again, :sigh:), Mid South, Talamore, Longleaf, Dormie Club now, The Cradle , and about five I'm probably forgetting.

Dormie Club was pretty easily in the top… uhhhh… five of that list. Maybe top three somewhat easily, though that's with two pre-renovation courses on that list.

Really enjoyable day.

[John Foley]

Eric - great report. I am a HUGE fan of Dormie.  There is a lot of great golf on the ground there. I love the short 12th hole and yeah being in the wrong place or shelve on that green will really leave you scratching your head as to how to make par. The long 4's are another good point. I like how in each case they are not overly bunkered (especially 8 & 13) so the ground option is wide open. I also think that the course would benefit from a white / blue mashup of tee boxes.

[Joe Bausch]

Thanks for the excellent write-up on Dormie, Erik.  I've played Dormie once and hope to see it again.

[Carl Rogers]

Erik, I assume from your descriptions is that you are a low to scratch handicapper.


Have played Dormie 5 times now over a 3 year period am an older distance challenged straight hitting high single digit handicapper.  My view of the course has evolved.  If you can stay away from short siding or going long on approach shots, the ability to score and avoid high numbers is achievable.  Dormie easily accommodates a good mix of the aerial and the ground game.

I have agreed with other threads that the par 5's, holes 6, 10 & 17 are the weak holes.  Hole 11 is a very good hole that gets little mention.  I am no fan holes 14 & 15, either. Hole 7 is very good, too.

However, when I travel to the Sandhills, Dormie is a must play.

[Sean_A]

I was much less enamoured with Dormie on this recent visit.  I simply don't think the 5s work on most levels, the walk is shit and there are too many left to right holes with turbo boosts.  The course just doesn't gel as well as it might....still Dormie is a comfortable 6, maybe a 7 if a I knew it better..simply because the variety of holes is off the charts. 

Ciao

[BCowan]

I was much less enamoured with Dormie on this recent visit.  I simply don't think the 5s work on most levels, the walk is shit and there are too many left to right holes with turbo boosts.  The course just doesn't gel as well as it might....still Dormie is a comfortable 6, maybe a 7 if a I knew it better..simply because the variety of holes is off the charts. 

Ciao

10 is an awful par 5, but 6 and 17 are really really good/great holes so i disagree with u there.  The green location of 8 is awful and the trees on the left are poor, but I love the tee shot.  3 green would be much better if trees were whacked behind the green enabling it to firm up. Requiring a chippy low lofted shot to get to proper tier.  Dormie needs tree removal.  Erik played the course in peak weather, Arble u don't go to NC in August. Northern Michigan then. 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Erik, I assume from your descriptions is that you are a low to scratch handicapper.

When I get a chance to play, it's to about +1 to 1.

Have played Dormie 5 times now over a 3 year period am an older distance challenged straight hitting high single digit handicapper.  My view of the course has evolved.  If you can stay away from short siding or going long on approach shots, the ability to score and avoid high numbers is achievable.  Dormie easily accommodates a good mix of the aerial and the ground game.

The guys with whom I played benefited from the ability to run the ball on… but I'd be lying if I said I didn't appreciate the options too. I'm a big fan of the ground game, and playing the ball off slopes or bumps or around bunkers, using the contours even on the greens to help feed the ball to certain areas.

10 is an awful par 5, but 6 and 17 are really really good/great holes so i disagree with u there.  The green location of 8 is awful and the trees on the left are poor, but I love the tee shot.

I disagree with you on 10 and 8. I loved the second shot I had to play into 8 (except that it was yet again a right-to-left shot). There's room to bail right if you can't turn it over, but that big draw was one of the more enjoyable shots I had to plan and then execute that day. The tee shot was good too… the better play is out to the right, but I heeled/pulled mine a little, and had to pull off a creative second to get my par.

10 lets you - nay, makes you let out the shaft a little, and even then you're going to have 100 yards in. If you get out of position, or don't catch one, I think you're working hard to give yourself a birdie putt. I played the hole about as well as I could (I didn't get all of my drive, but it wasn't bad). For many, that "nose" bunker probably forces them into a big decision, and if they are back of a great drive, they may have to play well back and well out to the right. One of my playing partners hit an 8-iron in… for his fourth, and he was never out of the fairway. Just played it way too far around to the right.

I think it's tough to make a three-shot hole that impresses with its scale, while still being a bit unrelenting, and yet causing some thought. I wasn't aware until after I'd hit my second how narrow the area got. I played left of the nose, but on repeat trips, would be forced to play a bit closer to it, lest I feed down too far left into the scrubby area.

I'm not going to defend the heck out of the place. I only toured it once, and from a cart at that. But I definitely didn't hate the 10th. Or the 8th. The 8th, man, I really liked the second shot into that one.

[Sean_A]

I was much less enamoured with Dormie on this recent visit.  I simply don't think the 5s work on most levels, the walk is shit and there are too many left to right holes with turbo boosts.  The course just doesn't gel as well as it might....still Dormie is a comfortable 6, maybe a 7 if a I knew it better..simply because the variety of holes is off the charts. 

Ciao

10 is an awful par 5, but 6 and 17 are really really good/great holes so i disagree with u there.  The green location of 8 is awful and the trees on the left are poor, but I love the tee shot.  3 green would be much better if trees were whacked behind the green enabling it to firm up. Requiring a chippy low lofted shot to get to proper tier.  Dormie needs tree removal.  Erik played the course in peak weather, Arble u don't go to NC in August. Northern Michigan then.

When bermuda gunge is removed from the picture it makes Carolina golf enjoyabe 12 months a year.  I didn't have a beef with the conditions; Dormie was in acceptable nick despite the heavy rain of the previous night.  Its lovely to play golf in the best conditions possible, but unrealistic.  Plus, the only proper way to assess the merits of a course is to see it in all seasons...again, unrealistic in most cases.

I agree, 8 is a troublesome hole.  If there was more swing from the right it would make for a better hole.  However, the main issue is the turbo boost for big hitters. 

One other issue I don't care for is a par 3 not showing up until #7.  This crunches all the short holes into a 10 hole stretch.  Mind you, the 3s are a good and wonderfully varied set and that is the most important thing. 

I think the bottom line for me is if the walk was sorted, I would like Dormie much more than I do now.  I feel like with the disjointed walk I am nit-pickin' reasons to mark Dormie down.  It is a great pity because Dormie delivers so many positives.  I think with a new look at the drawing board a better (for me more simplified would equal better) course could be had using the same routing. In the future Dormie will be a filler course for an area trip because Mid Pines, Pine Needles, #2 and I am told The Road are significantly improved and take the poll positions.  Pinehurst/S Pines is truly a premier public golf destination these days...one of the few that it is easy to escape the dreaded resort climate.

Ciao

[David_Madison]

I've always thought that Dormie had a lot of very fine holes with a superb set of wonderfully varied greens complexes. It's usually in very good playing condition, it offers a good mix or aerial and ground game options, but it'll always belong in the second tier of Sandhills courses. Not bad considering the number of decent courses in the region, but still a course that had so much more potential to be truly outstanding. It feels terribly disjointed (especially for a C&C course). In my mind it's the rare course that in its entirety is less than the sum of it's 18 individual pieces. Sean is right - the walk sucks. But that's more a matter of fully finishing the course, but it is what it is.

Some specific issues that I don't think can be addressed... The course rewards longer players with too many power boosts, especially on the long par-4's. What starts off as a 20-40 yard driving advantage quickly becomes an 80-100 advantage if the course is running as it usually does. #10 and #17 are two par-5's that favor longer hitters way too much as a good chunk of golfers playing these holes are forced to lay-up their second shots and then are left with absolutely no chance to get to or even near the green with their thirds. I get it on a very long hole like #10, but #17 is short for a par-5 yet still unreachable in three for many players. And what's the deal with #18? I don't get it that the final hole has a forced lay-up off the tee. It's a good hole, but to me seems terribly misplaced in the routing.

[BCowan]

I've always thought that Dormie had a lot of very fine holes with a superb set of wonderfully varied greens complexes. It's usually in very good playing condition, it offers a good mix or aerial and ground game options, but it'll always belong in the second tier of Sandhills courses. Not bad considering the number of decent courses in the region, but still a course that had so much more potential to be truly outstanding. It feels terribly disjointed (especially for a C&C course). In my mind it's the rare course that in its entirety is less than the sum of it's 18 individual pieces. Sean is right - the walk sucks. But that's more a matter of fully finishing the course, but it is what it is.

Some specific issues that I don't think can be addressed... The course rewards longer players with too many power boosts, especially on the long par-4's. What starts off as a 20-40 yard driving advantage quickly becomes an 80-100 advantage if the course is running as it usually does. #10 and #17 are two par-5's that favor longer hitters way too much as a good chunk of golfers playing these holes are forced to lay-up their second shots and then are left with absolutely no chance to get to or even near the green with their thirds. I get it on a very long hole like #10, but #17 is short for a par-5 yet still unreachable in three for many players. And what's the deal with #18? I don't get it that the final hole has a forced lay-up off the tee. It's a good hole, but to me seems terribly misplaced in the routing.

Dormie is in the 2nd tier because it wasn't finished.  The course is not disjointed IMO, there is lack of walking paths because lazy ass cartballers don't walk, so its a low priority for them.  With a bold site like Dormie, Old Town, and ANGC all have speed slots.  With Minimalism you let the gravity take over (lay of the land) and add in juiced equipment you have courses playing less then they should.  #17 favoring long hitters, I mean it's 500 yard hole from the tips, the shaping in the bunkers is incredible.  My 30 handicap father in law likes Dormie the best of PN, MP, SP, Old Town, and Dormie.   Anyone that can hit the ball average can play the 17th at Dormie.  Hell Belvedere's 4th hole is a 240 yard par 3 with hickories, that was considered a 3.5 hole.  Golden age archies didn't have this everyone gets a trophy (hits the green in reg) attitude.  #17 at Dormie is one of the best par 5's I've played in the US.  #18 is a great driving hole for it gives you the feeling of tighter then it actually is, I recall of always hitting driver off the tee from the tips and might have hit 3 wood last time I played.  I more concerned about them thinning out the elephant grass to the left of the fairway.  Love the 2nd shot on #18 at Dormie.   

My father law would struggle with a hole like #7 at MP where he had to carry a mind field of scrub right off the tee.  I've always hit a driver I think off the 18th. 

[BCowan]

10 is an awful par 5, but 6 and 17 are really really good/great holes so i disagree with u there.  The green location of 8 is awful and the trees on the left are poor, but I love the tee shot.

I disagree with you on 10 and 8. I loved the second shot I had to play into 8 (except that it was yet again a right-to-left shot). There's room to bail right if you can't turn it over, but that big draw was one of the more enjoyable shots I had to plan and then execute that day. The tee shot was good too… the better play is out to the right, but I heeled/pulled mine a little, and had to pull off a creative second to get my par.

10 lets you - nay, makes you let out the shaft a little, and even then you're going to have 100 yards in. If you get out of position, or don't catch one, I think you're working hard to give yourself a birdie putt. I played the hole about as well as I could (I didn't get all of my drive, but it wasn't bad). For many, that "nose" bunker probably forces them into a big decision, and if they are back of a great drive, they may have to play well back and well out to the right. One of my playing partners hit an 8-iron in… for his fourth, and he was never out of the fairway. Just played it way too far around to the right.

I think it's tough to make a three-shot hole that impresses with its scale, while still being a bit unrelenting, and yet causing some thought. I wasn't aware until after I'd hit my second how narrow the area got. I played left of the nose, but on repeat trips, would be forced to play a bit closer to it, lest I feed down too far left into the scrubby area.

I'm not going to defend the heck out of the place. I only toured it once, and from a cart at that. But I definitely didn't hate the 10th. Or the 8th. The 8th, man, I really liked the second shot into that one.

Erik,

   Couldn't disagree with you more about both holes.  The 8th has a wetlands/marsh along the whole left side.  It's double jeopardy with hitting a hook around trees with a green site located in a wetland.  Can't believe how dry it was left of the green.  The green site looks more manufactured (Pete Dye) then minimalist C&C.  Move the green 25 yards to the right and it would be one of the best holes on the site.  Also tree removal to the left to air out and firm up the fairway. 

   #10 is just plain awful.  Most would agree its the worst hole on the course.  Nothing like a cape with water, how original  .  3 shot par 5's are much better defended at the green (with a great green IMO).  The 12th is also mailed in, like a short par 3 Donal Ross hole you have seen 100 times.  Dormie's 12th is set in an arb.  Would love to see a short C&C hole without bunkers

[David_Madison]

Ben,

1. I get it about speed slots. Long, accurate driving gets rewarded. It seems to me that if players are using the correct set of tees they should have a chance to access them. Further, there should be some risk associated with missing them if you try to get to them, for example running out of fairway and screwing yourself if you take the aggressive line and then miss the line. If you are going to use Dormie, OTC, and ANGC in the same sentence, please make sure the features line up. For example, #10 at ANGC has perhaps the most famous speed slot in golf. But miss it right and you are in the woods. You don't even have to be at a great course to see this dynamic. Just go to Duke's course and you'll see on the first two holes and lots of others there. I see no such calculus in play at Dormie;

2. The course is disjointed. Yeah, it would be better if it was finished as we all think it should be, but we could say that about practically any course that doesn't have an unlimited budget. There's always something missing or that could be improved, and here we have the potential for making the walk work better. But the fact is that it's not;

3. I've seen a bunch of players hit good drives (for them) on #17 and then have no choice but to lay up with short to mid-irons because they can't carry the hazard. And then they have no way to get to the green, and we agree that it's a short par-5. It's a wonderful hole for longer, better players, but it's not for others as it really gives them no chance;

4. I'm not a fan of taking driver out of a player's hands on the final hole, or at least giving them the choice of using it but at some risk. I'm not unusually long and I've reached the edge of the junk with 3-wood. I totally agree with you that it's a very good second shot hole, and as I said I like the hole. But just not at that point in round.

[John Foley]

Dormie is in the 2nd tier because it wasn't finished. 

Why do you say this?

[BCowan]

Dormie is in the 2nd tier because it wasn't finished. 

Why do you say this?

John,

   For people on GCA who walk, the walking paths used to exist or there never was any walking paths for walkers making you become disconnected from the design going around holes (very similar experience playing Greywalls in a cart vs walking).  I think money ran short on tree removal, but many NC courses have that problem (over treed).  It's just not what it could be with it's amazing land. 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I get it on a very long hole like #10, but #17 is short for a par-5 yet still unreachable in three for many players.

Unreachable? In three? For "many" players?

10 yards short of the sand to the middle of the green is 110 yards. Following the dogleg, it's under 400 yards to that point from the back tee. I think it's reachable for just about everyone.

Couldn't disagree with you more about both holes.

That's fine. I think the second shot to 8 was fine, one of the most enjoyable I've had in a while. Nothing was "marshy" when I played there - not in the areas in which you're supposed to keep the ball, anyway. Maybe well left of the bunker off the fairway. And I'm not going to defend #10 by saying it's a great hole. It may be the weakest one there (though IMO #3 is rather blah), but I don't think it's a bad hole, either.

[BCowan]

I get it on a very long hole like #10, but #17 is short for a par-5 yet still unreachable in three for many players.

Unreachable? In three? For "many" players?

10 yards short of the sand to the middle of the green is 110 yards. Following the dogleg, it's under 400 yards to that point from the back tee. I think it's reachable for just about everyone.

Couldn't disagree with you more about both holes.

That's fine. I think the second shot to 8 was fine, one of the most enjoyable I've had in a while. Nothing was "marshy" when I played there - not in the areas in which you're supposed to keep the ball, anyway. Maybe well left of the bunker off the fairway. And I'm not going to defend #10 by saying it's a great hole. It may be the weakest one there (though IMO #3 is rather blah), but I don't think it's a bad hole, either.

Erik,

   I agree completely in regards to #17.  Also it's a case of Mackenzie esc, using change of elevation to mask numbers on a scorecard. 

   Every November when I have played Dormie the greens are fast and soft, and the fairways are dormant firm.  I think the trees behind 3 assist in making the green too soft and take away from it's fun limiting options.  Oct/Nov is 1/2 of Sandhills peak season  and the days are short, the tall pines don't help.  The tee shot on 3 is rather blah. 

[John Foley]

Ben


What are the walking issues other than #15? There was a path on 7 I took and other than having to walk around on 15 I don't see any issues. Yes you have to get from the 6th green to the 7th tee but it's pretty east to jog behind the 14th tee box.


BTW - I LOVE that 10 demands you to hit a fairway wood for your second shot and then you still have to hit another full shot. That IMHO is GREAT architecture. Fins me another course where you have to do that?

[BCowan]

Ben


What are the walking issues other than #15? There was a path on 7 I took and other than having to walk around on 15 I don't see any issues. Yes you have to get from the 6th green to the 7th tee but it's pretty east to jog behind the 14th tee box.


BTW - I LOVE that 10 demands you to hit a fairway wood for your second shot and then you still have to hit another full shot. That IMHO is GREAT architecture. Fins me another course where you have to do that?

John,

   The walking issues at Dormie don't bother me, ask David Madison.  My beer gut needs as much exercise it can get.  We will have to agree to disagree in regards to #10.  Using water to make an extremely difficult hole for the average golfer is poor architecture.  Water Capes are so overused.  I hope there isn't another course that has that bad of a hole.  I'm sure if I played more Pete Dye tracks I could find a 5 where he does this.  I really like Dormie, it's about a 6.4 now. 

[David_Madison]

Ben - Agreed that you don't mind walking at Dormie. I also suspect your tolerance for walking and being happy about it even when the walk isn't all that great is probably higher than most. And that's a good thing. Much of Dormie is an okay walk, but there are a few holes where it seems you have to do a half-circle in order to get from the tee to the fairway. It just leads to a sense of disconnectedness that runs counter to the idea or a primary benefit of walking (which should give a much more connected feel than cart-balling, which is one of the big negatives of using a cart).

Erik - On #17, the players who can't get over the grunge on their second shots can't then get reach the green from their lay-ups. I don't mind stronger players having to choose to lay-up on a par-5 and then playing it as a 3-shotter, but I specifically don't like per-5's and long par-4's holes where weaker players have to hit short-iron second shots and are then left with third shots where they can't get to the green with even their best shots.

[BCowan]

David,

   In prior posts I agreed with you in regards to the disconnected issues with walking the course.  The difference is it's lower on my list of things I'd fix then yours possibly. 

   Your stance on 17 doesn't make sense.  If the weaker player lays up, he has an 110 yard uphill shot to the green.  The average player should be able to get it to the green.  Plus the bunker is maint very well for recovering it up.  The weaker player should NOT be in that bunker after their 2nd shot.  So for a 30 handicaper it maybe a tough hole but a 22 handi or lower shouldn't have a problem getting home in 3.  There is no water on the hole, it has an excellent green, the bunker hazard is brilliantly placed. 

   How is laying up on 18 at Dormie any different then a flat belie hitting 3 wood off the 1st at Old Town?  Its all due to technology.  What holes at Dormie with speed slots lack strategic value?  I don't agree with a hole being okay early in a round and wrong at end, if we are going by lay of the land, its what the land gives you.   

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Erik - On #17, the players who can't get over the grunge on their second shots can't then get reach the green from their lay-ups.

David, I'm not understanding. It's 400 yards to the spot 10 yards short of the hazard on 17 from the BACK tees. It's less than 110 yards from there to the MIDDLE of the green. I don't understand the math you're doing, or something…?

[David_Madison]

Ben and Erik - Re: #17, I'll take another look when I'm next out there. I didn't think it was only 110 or so from the lay-up to the green but you may be right. Could just be the extreme hill making it play much longer.

Ben - As I've said earlier in this thread, #18 isn't a bad hole. It's a good hole, but I don't like it in this position in the round. We'll just have to agree to disagree about where certain holes show up on the card having an influence on the playing quality of the course.

Holes with speed slots are great. But if only a subset of players can get to them, they should suffer if they don't hit it accurately. If everyone can reach them, even from different tees, then accurate driving alone should be rewarded and there doesn't have to be an associated risk. I'm just not into reward/reward holes,which in my mind is how the speed slot holes set up at Dormie.

And how the heck can you even begin to compare #1 at Old Town to #18 at Dormie?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Ben and Erik - Re: #17, I'll take another look when I'm next out there. I didn't think it was only 110 or so from the lay-up to the green but you may be right. Could just be the extreme hill making it play much longer.

I simply measured on Google Earth. And of the guys I played with, two laid up (tee shots were in the scrub), and they hit 9I or wedge. The elevation change is just over 30 feet: 441 feet to 474 feet.



Eminently reachable by the majority of players.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()