9th Hole at Clubhouse

[Ira Fishman]

When and why did it become conventional practice to have 9th Hole return to the Clubhouse? Many of my favorite courses do not. Some are old Links courses so I know it was not common practice: Lahinch, Ballybunion, RD, Brora, Nairn, Golspie. But some are just old: Woking, Pine Needles, CPC, and Swinley Forest. And a couple are throwbacks: three of the courses at Bandon. I assume architects would prefer the flexibility, yet at some point, other factors seem to have become more important.


Ira

[Mike Bodo]

I think having the 9th hole return to the clubhouse became fashionable in the U.S. I suspect someone thought that it would be good for private clubs financially speaking to have the 9th hole return to the clubhouse to allow members to take a bathroom break, get some food and libation in them for the back nine and treat their caddies to a meal and refreshment as well. I could be completely wrong, but it makes economic sense when you think about it. In addition, it wasn't feasible or practical to have a standalone half-way house in the golden age separate from the clubhouse.

[Tom_Doak]

Making the course come back to the clubhouse at the 9th hole eliminates 80-90% of potential routings.  Sometimes it works out as the best solution, other times you are forcing it.


If you make it come back to the clubhouse somewhere, but it doesn't have to be the 9th, then you only eliminate some of the options.  [The exact % depends on the shape of the property and whether the clubhouse can be somewhere central.]


Dr. MacKenzie wrote in 1920 that the course should be arranged, if possible, in two loops of nine holes.  When he went back and revised his thoughts in The Spirit of St. Andrews, in 1931-32, he said that he wished he had never made that observation, because so many committees insisted on it even where it didn't work well.


It's a long time since I have thought about what % of my courses return at the 9th.  Both courses at Stonewall return at the 8th . . . the first one because I'd modified the original Fazio routing, and for the second that's just how it was working out, and I knew they could live with it.


Courses that do return at the 9th:  High Pointe, Legends, Barnbougle, Ballyneal, Tara Iti, Cape Kidnappers [Mr. Robertson insisted, on the grounds that Shinnecock Hills returned at the 9th]


Courses that return, but not at the 9th:  Stonewall [8th, x2], Pacific Dunes [7th], Rock Creek [15th]


Courses that don't return until the end:  The Loop, Old Macdonald, Stone Eagle, St. Andrews Beach


Courses that don't return at all    [size=78%]:  [/size][/size]Black Forest, Dismal River[size=78%]

[/size]Of my new ones:  Memorial Park and St. Patrick's return at the 9th.  The new ones in NZ and Wisconsin do not.  It's really easier to figure them out when you don't care one way or the other!![size=78%]

[Matthew Rose]

I'd always thought that Muirfield (HCEG) was the first, but that it was accidental.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I'd always thought that Muirfield (HCEG) was the first, but that it was accidental.

Muirfield and Portmarnock were two of the first to use circular routings. I don’t believe either was accidental.

[Thomas Dai]

Doesn't the shape of the land and the access point have a significant effect, especially in olden days?
In yee olde times by the seaside play was often essentially 'out' from the edge of the town/village along the narrowish patch of dunes and turn around at some appropriate point and come back 'home' again. If the dune area is wider rather than just long-n-thin then more variety becomes possible. Back in time access across brackish ponds and wetlands inside the dune complex, which are pretty common, to the links would have been difficult. Indeed weren't some courses even accessed by rowing boat?
When the shape of the land is different, whether it be seaside or inland, or the edge of the local settlement moves or something like a railway station comes along then routings can be curlier. And some original out-n-backs have adjusted over time.


atb

[Anthony Butler]

Courses that don't return until the end:  The Loop, Old Macdonald, Stone Eagle, St. Andrews Beach

The Loop has a pretty decent 'halfway' house at the far end of the property... to the point I had to wonder if it also served golfers playing Forest Dunes.

[Sean_A]

I gotta believe the main reason for the 9-9 split is two starting points.  Which obviously leaves open the question of the need for an even 9-9 split.  In the US, with the popularity of 9 hole green fee, it makes perfect sense for public courses.  I have long wondered why more UK courses don't adopt this green fee system.  That said, if visitor choice of green fee isn't a big deal, I much prefer an uneven split if 4-6/12-14.  Not only does this split potentially offer more options for the archie, its very handy to have a more varied choice of loops.  Prestwick always comes to mind first when thinking of the great 15-18 boozers loop.  Okay, Prestwick is an extreme example because those four holes are so cool, but to me its absolutely worth giving up a potentially better 18 hole course for the better overall experience of golf which two starting points can provide. Too much is invested in the 18 hole concept...I think to the detriment of golf as a game.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Yes, its two starting points and unless a really spectacular site (those do exist where a returning nine is impossible) or a destination resort where all play will be 18 holes, they make a lot of sense.


CCA and Robert Dedman tracked it, and on courses with returning nines, they clocked an average of 3500 more rounds annually.  At $50 per golfer that's $175K of revenue forgone because the architect wasn't creative enough to figure out a return routing.  Nothing to sneeze at!


Add in 9 hole rounds (and I am sure that those were a portion of the 3500, reducing potential revenues to maybe $100K), leagues, etc. and the cost of building a halfway house, not to mention the convenience of an existing bathroom and ability to sell food and golf merchandise probably makes that up.


At Cowboys, the land configuration prevented the 9th from coming back,  By the time the utilities were run to the halfway house (and they saved money by going septic) it was over $200K in 2001, probably double that now.  If you need a halfway house, hopefully it is somewhere near an existing road that has required utilities.


Wild Wing Avocet course is the only other one I didn't return nines.  There, the owner wanted 90 holes and there wasn't going to be enough room for all to return to the clubhouse with the over sized range they also needed.  And, a Myrtle Beach resort isn't going to have many 9 hole rounds, and our restroom was shared with another course.   I have proposed a 10-8 or other splits at times, but few owners go for it. 


And, I can't think of too many times when I couldn't come up with some routing that worked just fine with returning nines.  Like I say, I wish I had a few more spectacular sites where it was an issue!

[Edward Glidewell]

Wild Wing Avocet course is the only other one I didn't return nines.  There, the owner wanted 90 holes and there wasn't going to be enough room for all to return to the clubhouse with the over sized range they also needed.  And, a Myrtle Beach resort isn't going to have many 9 hole rounds, and our restroom was shared with another course.   I have proposed a 10-8 or other splits at times, but few owners go for it. 

I assume the original developer later sold the property? Or maybe it just didn't work out the way he hoped?


I remember playing there once probably a decade or so ago. Don't remember which course we played, but I do know that they've all been closed now other than your Avocet course and one other 9.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Edward,


Yes, he sold the property for development, keeping only Avocet while torching the Rees Jones course and 27 of 36 holes of Willard Byrd's design.  I think that was because it roamed out to the main road providing entry and easier development of golf course housing, but am not sure.



And, as you might guess, every time I see Rees I remind him they kept the "good" course.  He is more gracious about my constant ribbing than I would be, so kudos to him.  Class guy.


Wow, just looked at the Bing Aerial view.  They haven't removed a single bunker or even changed too many mow lines since opening in 1994. I wish all my designs were preserved that well.

[Edward Glidewell]

I just looked at the aerial too -- doesn't seem like the development plan went too well. I see roads, but very few houses and a lot of obvious former hole corridors that just sit empty and unused. But I guess they're saving the money that would have been spent on maintenance.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Agree with Jeff Brauer.

11 times I have managed to get returning nine 9 times not.


Massively better for financial reasons to get two nine hole loops.


I would say it is the most important thing to consider outside of the holes themselves.

[Peter Pallotta]

A 'yes' from me to the two starting points and the quick '9s' this engenders/accommodates.
But I'd never thought of Sean's point, ie that '9' doesn't have to be 9.
I can imagine the marketing of, say, the 'Prestwick 12' -- with social media and blogs and podcasts (ie by people smarter than me) I can see it really becoming a thing.
The 13th hole is where I start to get a little tired (or lose focus) these days anyways, so the 'Prestwick 12' is just the thing!
(Hey, and that would leave the 'Ploughman's 6' -- which I suppose is more inclusive than the 'Banker's 6)

[Adrian_Stiff]

A 'yes' from me to the two starting points and the quick '9s' this engenders/accommodates.
But I'd never thought of Sean's point, ie that '9' doesn't have to be 9.
I can imagine the marketing of, say, the 'Prestwick 12' -- with social media and blogs and podcasts (ie by people smarter than me) I can see it really becoming a thing.
The 13th hole is where I start to get a little tired (or lose focus) these days anyways, so the 'Prestwick 12' is just the thing!
(Hey, and that would leave the 'Ploughman's 6' -- which I suppose is more inclusive than the 'Banker's 6)

Only a tiny percentage would think a 12 hole/6 hole loop is better. There is no logical reason why it should not be if commercial reasons are not applicable other than the tradition that 18 holes is the set number, and people pop out for a quick nine. Any extra returning hole does give multiple options of course and is better than nothing. I wonder if anyone's ever thought about three six hole loops for better commercial reasons than twin nines, or if they have just come up with 'No'.

[Tom_Doak]

Agree with Jeff Brauer.

11 times I have managed to get returning nine 9 times not.

Massively better for financial reasons to get two nine hole loops.

I would say it is the most important thing to consider outside of the holes themselves.

I understand that "conventional wisdom" is conventional because it is generally the correct way to go for most projects.


And I'm damned glad that not all of my clients are stuck on conventional wisdom:


Stonewall had a real flaw in the original routing because they'd tried for two loops of nine; going to 8 and 10 fixed it and made the course demonstrably better. 


Pacific Dunes could have returned at the 9th, just by changing the sequence of holes, but it would not be as good an experience to start on #8, or to go from #18 to #8 at the turn.  And at Bandon, having returning nines meant very little to total revenues.


You and Jeff and every other architect are certainly welcome to make every course return at the 9th.  It will just ensure that I can consider better options for my designs than you do.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Tom - 9 of the 20 I have done did not return at the 9th. So I could only get it to work 55% of the time, the other times I went for BEST HOLES. Of the 9 courses I could net get twin nines. I had close returns : 12th x2, 10th x 3, 4th x1 and no return at all x3.


The return at the 10th is very frustrating but to correct just resulted in a lesser course overall.


Q to Tom: How many of yours have twin return nines?

[Jon Cavalier]

I understand that "conventional wisdom" is conventional because it is generally the correct way to go for most projects.


And I'm damned glad that not all of my clients are stuck on conventional wisdom:


Stonewall had a real flaw in the original routing because they'd tried for two loops of nine; going to 8 and 10 fixed it and made the course demonstrably better. 

Thank you, Tom. VASTLY better routing, and beverages a hole early - best of both worlds, as far as I am concerned.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jon,



Please explain your post and graphic.  That course appears to return at 9. Previous routing before TD became involved?


Edit, never mind, found the aerial.  It is easy to tell that the par 3 nine along the pond is a better use than having it blind on the uphill approach on the old 18, that's for sure.

[Tom_Doak]

Q to Tom: How many of yours have twin return nines?

19/35, not counting two par-3 courses.


5/7 out of those in the top 100 rankings, though!  All except Pacific Dunes and Old Macdonald.  Makes me wonder just slightly if my next-best courses (Tock Creek, Dismal River, St Andrews Beach, Stone Eagle) get knocked a point for not returning at the 9th?

[Tom_Doak]

Jon,


Please explain your post and graphic.  That course appears to return at 9. Previous routing before TD became involved?

Yes, that is Tom Fazio’s routing for Stonewall.


I reversed the 10th and 18th holes, breaking his 18th into two shorter holes, and then the best option to get back to 18 holes was to eliminate #4, which put eight holes before the turn and ten after.

[Jon Cavalier]

It’s hard enough for me to imagine what the hell that 4th hole was supposed to be and how it would have fit in there, but turning Fazio’s 10th and 18th into the present 9th, 10th and 18th should qualify you for a Nobel Prize.




As a side note, I like also like the fact that (due to this routing change) Stonewall Old has no back to back repeating pars until par-4s at 12-13-14, and that is the only time on the course where consecutive holes have the same par.

[Sean_A]

Tom

For mine, one of the best things about Renaissance Club is the starting points off the clubhouse. One can start at 1, 3, 6 or 16 and all the loops they entail.  For a member's club, this is a huge bonus.  The interaction of the house and course convinced me the course is great.

Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

Always interesting posts, Sean.
I don't need oceans, and certainly not mountains, and I care little about bunker styles or even the absence (or prevalence) of trees -- and yet I think I can understand how for you a great relationship between 'the house' and the course is a factor in deeming the course itself (not merely the 'club') great too.
It may be simply that I have a fondness both for you and for quixotic ideas (such as this one), but I do 'hear you' here.
P

[Tom_Doak]

Tom

For mine, one of the best things about Renaissance Club is the starting points off the clubhouse. One can start at 1, 3, 6 or 16 and all the loops they entail.  For a member's club, this is a huge bonus.  The interaction of the house and course convinced me the course is great.

Sean:


Interesting.  We actually kind of backed into that. 


I knew when we started that it was possible we would build holes on the point someday, so I made two early loops (the original 1-3, now part of the practice area, and 4-5 which are now 1-2) come back to the clubhouse, that we could discard from the main routing if we could get permission to build two new holes, or three.  And then in just worked out that #8 instead of #9 came back to the clubhouse, with a short 9th [now 6th] playing toward the water, and the 10th tee [now 7th] within walking distance if you wanted to start on the back.  So, on the original routing you could start on 1, 4, 6, 9, 10 or 16!


Had I focused instead on getting the 9th green by the clubhouse, the effort would have been wasted when the new holes were built and the numbering changed.