number of par 3's in nine holes-Pacific Dunes

[Wayne Freeman]

I recently played Bandon/Pacific Dunes both of which I thought were great.  I particularly liked Pacific and think it is deserving of it's high ranking. However,  I thought it was a little odd to have 4 par 3's on the back nine of Pacific and wondered if Tom Doak has received any criticism for this.  Wayne Freeman

[Forrest Richardson]

Pacific works great. The holes "had" to be there in order to take advantage of the landforms. Any dislike is outweighed by the result.

How about this: 4, 5, 5, 5, 3, 4, 3, 3, 5 = 37, and, continuing on the back, par 3, 5, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4 = 35. That's Bishop Aukland, a "weird" routing in Northern England. A strange-but-true layout which evolved as a result of land, an added nine and some local advice.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Forrest Richardson,

Pacific works great. The holes "had" to be there in order to take advantage of the landforms.

You're not suggesting that the course, as it is presently configured, is the only configuration that could have provided an excellent golf course, are you ?  

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I am sure Tom had numerous options much like any piece of land or imagination will provide. I found it interesting the first time I played Pacific after it was finished. I thought about it and as I played it again felt Tom did a great job of taking what was there using his creativity balanced with the owners needs and desires and created one of the great 18 hole courses in the world, certainly the new world. I noted this too after only seeing 11 holes during construction. I have found or feel there is no perfect blending or formula for laying out hols as to par. I think it is something you feel when the balance and flow is there combined with good well designed holes. No one would put 10 and 11 back to back yet it works for they are both great holes. I think there is space to have made 10 a short risk reward par 4 too. One can always find changes to anything. My regret is that Pacific Dunes is far enough from me that one trip a year or every other year is all I will get.

[Forrest Richardson]

No, Pat. That's why is placed quotes west and east of "had". But, the architect — when it comes to routing — becomes the one who draws lines in the sand. Saying, sometimes, is simply "has" be done this way. I believe Tom D. commented on an older thread on the fact that he had several options...he just went forward with the "best". I've been there as well.

There comes a point when you simply cannot relate the long list of positives and negatives about a routing — at least not to a client or bystander. Why? They might consider you nuts and obsessive for spending such time thinking about such things. Yet it is a reality. We are obsessive!

[Bill_McBride]

I found one of the best and most interesting features of the routing at Pacific Dunes was how Tom Doak built three complete holes  (#4, #11, #13) and one green (#10) on the ocean, and they are IMHO the best holes he could have built there.  The fact that one serious par 4 runs north to south and the other south to north is really good.  Regardless of which prevailing wind is in force, either #4 or #13 is going to be a beast!  

It didn't bother me a whit that there were four par 3's on the back nine.  Who had time to notice?!  

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

yes, Bill how would you notice when it is one great hole after another. I love them. Frankly, I think it is a great match play course too.

[Bill_McBride]

Agreed that Pacific Dunes is a great match play course.  But be careful with that lingo, I mentioned in a post that I thought Black Mesa was a great match play venue (primarily because a player of my erratic nature would find it difficult to post an official medal play score!) and was roundly chastised by one of our GCA Gods!

So exactly what do you mean by "great match play course?"

[GregRamsay]

Actually, this is Tom Doak, using Greg's computer from Barnbougle.

Wayne,

I did the routing for Pacific Dunes over several visits to the site.  On the last, I came up with the present configuration (except for one change) late one night, and we went out and walked it with Mike Keiser the next morning, and everyone agreed they loved it.

It wasn't until we went back in for lunch that I realized how weird the scorecard would be ... I jotted it down on a piece of paper while everyone was eating, and then showed it to Mike.  I thought he might have a problem with the four threes in nine holes, and I could think of no comparable example on a great course.  But we had all just walked the routing and loved the flow of it, so Mike decided to ignore the weirdness of it.

I'm glad he did.  Among other things, having so many fives and threes on the back nine makes it a pretty easy nine holes to shoot a low score if you're going good.  Mike says people come up to him all the time beaming to tell him they shot their best nine-hole score on the back.  They have no idea why!

[Paul_Daley]

The emergence of architects prepared to dismiss routing/hole configuration paradigms is positive.

One paradigm that I'm hoping can be kissed goodbye is, the tedious expectation that the closing 4-6 holes must be murderous.

[Tim_Weiman]

Wayne:

I don't have any friends who went out to Bandon and complained about Pacific Dunes having four par 3s on the back. In fact, I don't recall anyone even mentioning it.

A golf course needs its own character.

Why travel thousands of miles to see something where the architect/developer didn't implement what they felt was the best overall routing just to avoid departing from convention?

[Mike_Cirba]

PD has four par threes on the back nine??!??!

Playing it twice, somehow I missed that.  I must have been having too much fun.  

[JohnV]

Wayne, I suppose it would have been possible to change the order of the holes so that the current #8 would have been #1 with #7 becoming #18.  If that was done, the course would have 3 par 3s on the front and 2 on the back with pars of 35 and 36.  Would it have been a better course or a worse course?  Probably neither, although I do like the current order with the two par 3s coming in the middle of the round rather than at the 3rd and 4th holes as they would have then.

I was having dinner with another member of the Mid-Am committee last night and he said that Bandon Dunes has no bad holes, but Pacific has two.  He didn't like 9 and 18.  I looked at him with my jaw dropped.  How could anyone not like those two holes?  Different strokes I guess.  Of course he was from Texas so why should I be surprised.

[TEPaul]

I didn't exactly register with me either there were four par 3s on the back nine at PD.  

The holes just sort of seemed to flow great from one to the other in that interesting enviroment. Matter of fact it occured to me I really wasn't that sure where I was on the property after a while--another aspect I thought was pretty cool. I also had very little idea what the routing might look like from the air and that night following the round asked Tom Doak to draw it on a piece of paper. My first thought was, "Wow, that's what it looks like?" I had the same sensation when I first looked at an aerial and routing map of NGLA after playing it a few times!

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Bill, being Pat lol. I feel a great match play course has a large number of high risk reward holes which create drama in a match play but maybe not as much in medal play until the event comes to the last day and become match play at the end if the fact situation allows for it. The back nine at ANGC is an example of that. It would be a great for match play and on the last day of the Masters that all comes into play.

[Brad Klein]

Inwood CC, in NY, where Bobby Jones won his first US Open in 1923 has an opening nine sequence of 4-4-5-5-5-3-3-4-4.

My experience is that such odd routing sequences are more memorable than the standard par 36-36 with each nine having 5-4s, 2-5s and 2-3s. I have even had architects tell me that among the rules of thumb for routing are that you should avoid having 5/3 or 3/5 sequences. Folks who follow "rules for routing" rarely do work that's worthwhile because they're following formula, not the land.

[Tim_Weiman]

Wayne,

The responses to your initial post suggest a consensus of opinion that we don't want architects to "follow a formula", as Brad Klein put it.

So, it has me wondering: do you really take a different view? Would you prefer that architect do follow a formula? If so, why?

P.S. Rather than put the burden squarely on Wayne, I'm also wondering if anyone else thinks architects SHOULD follow a formula. Anyone?

[TEPaul]

The only formula I'd recommend an architect follow is to never slavishly follow a formula--except that all golf holes need greens and tees. (But actually if you look at Friar's Head's #7 or French Creek's #1 I'm not sure one could say all golf holes need tees!).