How do you like your opener?

[Anthony Gray]

 The 1st at Royal Dornach was just described as a “hand shake”


 Do you like the first hole to be easy?


 A test right off the bat?


 Do you have first hole jitters?


 What’s your ideal first hole?

[Ally Mcintosh]

We’re talking generalisations, right?


Then I like the beginning of the routing to give you some excitement straight off. Not overly fussed whether it’s a gentle handshake or not. I just think a routing benefits from periods of good-great holes and that the starting period is important to have some of the better holes.


I don’t prescribe to a weak start building the whole way round. People have already made a lot of their judgement on the course after the first hour.

[Tom_Doak]

I don’t have many rules for my designs, but I consider the opening hole to be very important.


The one “must” for me is that you don’t want anybody out there looking for their ball and holding you up when it’s time to tee off.  By that standard, the first at The Old Course is hard to beat.


I used to be fond of par-5 openers [see George Thomas’s book], but am not as big a fan anymore because it’s more likely you’ll have to wait on the tee while someone ahead waits for the green to clear before they hit their second shot.


My favorite opening hole of my own is the first at Old Macdonald.  It’s a wide open tee shot but can be a difficult approach depending on the hole location.

[Tim Martin]

Everyone hates making double bogey on the opening hole. Getting beaten over the head on number one doesn’t set a positive tone for the round so offering the player a solid chance for bogey with a less aggressive line of play is appealing for most players.

[Bill Gayne]

Close to the locker room, range, putting green, parking lot, and grill room.

[archie_struthers]

 


Have given this a lot of thought and think the answer varies with the facility and who your clients will be. For a member club pace of play is so important, particularly at a vibrant , busy golf course. Same with public that serves a lot of clients. You NEED to get the players off and moving, because once it slows down early inevitably a four hour + slog is sure to ensue. It's so important to be able to promote pace of play as a reason to make this your place to play!


If you are at a resort or high end private that is more of a destination this becomes less important. I personally abhor slow play but if you are at Pebble Beach or Cypress for instance it goes so fast you don't mind looking around a little more and drink it all in. So if you are there even the speed demons among us probably are ok with less thought to pace of play!


Two of my favorite golf course in our area have extremely challenging holes to start on Pine Valley's first needs no introduction and is quite a difficult starter. It's perfect though in that it sets the "mood" and is an inkling of what's to follow. Likewise the first at Galloway is quite difficult, not for it's length but for the need to hit a very precise tee shot followed by a second that challenges even a short iron. It's a gorgeous hole also and that might make for another thread on openers.


We are just talking about the opener here but certainly a part three and par five early tend not to work , at least for me . Back to that pace of play stuff, you know


 


  which brings me back to Woodcrest CC where many of my best friends to this day started as caddies. Ownership built a new clubhouse years ago with some nice outside space. They likely thought it would be fun to watch golf while dining or drinking. However they then switched the nines to have the view of the 18th ....it was and is a bad decision..but I've already opined on that

[mike_malone]

An introduction to the style of the course is good.

[David Wuthrich]

I prefer and gentle handshake.  Shinnecock or NGLA come to mind right off the bat.  Not overly difficult driving hole, but you must put the ball on the green in the correct spot.  Gets you in the flow of the round.

[Thomas Dai]

I'll likely be condemned by some for saying so but my preference would be a mid-length par-3 that isn't particularly difficult from the normal tees, ie the tees Mr and Mrs Average who are straight out of the car and don't warm-up beforehand usually play from, with some other tees at awkward/challenging angles should an event be held.
atb

[jeffwarne]

I'll likely be condemned by some for saying so but my preference would be a mid-length par-3 that isn't particularly difficult from the normal tees, ie the tees Mr and Mrs Average who are straight out of the car and don't warm-up beforehand usually play from, with some other tees at awkward/challenging angles should an event be held.
atb

Has the added benefit of being the perfect spacing mechanism, avoiding the pitfall of multiple groups teeing off as soon as the group in front is clear, inevitably clogging the flow of play as more strokes are played(on a yardage basis) on and near the green in subsequent holes.

[Mark Molyneux]

I do prefer the Ross "gentle handshake". I don't typically get first tee jitters (Merion East as a possible exception with the brunch crowd just left of the box) but particularly in the case of a course with no range to warm up, it's probably better to be able to swing freely off the opening tee box and avoid issues around "Breakfast ball... okay?" There once was a club near Philly (Ashbourne) with no range and an opening hole that was narrow, tree-lined and lengthy at over 400 yards. I finally got to a point where I regarded it as a par 4 and a half. That's a less than satisfactory introduction to the day's round of golf for me and for the people standing on the tee behind us as they have to wait for tee shots, possibly "breakfast balls", then punch-outs from the trees and still a third shot to the green. Another thought... OB shouldn't be an immediate concern from the 1st tee since nobody wants to be waiting on their 10:40 tee time at 10:42, when after a search for a ball "down the left, near the OB" proves fruitless and someone from the 10:30 group comes trekking back to retee. As someone mentioned, the Old Course has a beautiful opening hole.

[archie_struthers]

 


Mark , welcome back and I know of what you speak at Ashbourne.  Enjoyed your thoughts on Merchantville and was wondering if you are familiar with Woodcrest and my issues with the flipping of the nines?

[Bret Lawrence]

I think a good first hole should also be a good 19th hole for matches that extend beyond 18.  Willie Park made some really good openers with a lot of room off the tee and just enough interest in the greens to holdup well as the 19th holes. 


Did Ross really say a “gentle” handshake or have we left out part of the quote over time.  Was Ross really looking for a limp noodle handshake for the first hole or did he say a handshake between gentlemen?

[Mark_Fine]

Worst is a “drivable” par four.  Never a good starting hole for many reasons. 

[Steve_Lovett]

Worst is a “drivable” par four.  Never a good starting hole for many reasons.

I don't know. I like the first at Royal Dornoch. If the group behind waits for the group ahead to clear the first green it creates great spacing. I'd rather wait on the first tee for the green to clear than to hit a drive and have an extended wait in the fairway right off the bat.

[Tom_Doak]

Worst is a “drivable” par four.  Never a good starting hole for many reasons.

Don’t go to Melbourne then, mate.  Victoria and Royal Melbourne East both have them, and we will be restoring the great opening hole at Commonwealth, when COVID allows.  The only problem with that hole was/is the number of stupid golfers who think they are going to drive the green!

[Mark_Fine]

Tom/Steve,
That is the problem, too many golfers who think they can drive the green.  It creates spacing and place of play problems. One group thinks they can drive the green so they wait then the next group doesn’t then you have those who don’t know what they can do and someone knocks their drive into the group on or around the green.  It becomes a safety issue as well especially if it is not a private course.  I love drivable par fours but don’t think they are good starting holes even though I have played many (more these days with golfers hitting it so far). 

[Mark Molyneux]

Note to Archie S.- Thanks for the welcome back! I only played Woodcrest one time, some years back. I recall being very favorably impressed by the one-shot holes. I remember some centrally located hazards and I enjoyed the strategy involved in tacking my way around them on my way to the greens. I knew its pedigree and I was thankful for the chance to be there. I recall finishing on a par 5 that I thought was an excellent hole for concluding matches... length, hazards and a challenging green surface. I also think it was the approach shot on that par 5, visually reminding me more than a little of the finisher at Green Valley (formerly Marble Hall CC) in Lafayette Hills.

I searched a couple threads and saw that you disliked the switching of nines at Woodcrest but I'm not sure if I played the old or the revised routing. I couldn't locate your rationale for feeling that maybe they should've left well enough alone. Sounds as though you had a history with the original nines and I am interested to know why you favored the classic arrangement over the revision. I also saw that we agree about Rolling Green being an absolutely exceptional golf course in the Philly Section. I don't mind finishing with an audience on the balcony, as I do at Merchantville (or even with a beer infused crowd at a place like True Blue in Myrtle). I have worked through the flipping of the nines at my league's venue, Lederach, even though I believe the original #18 was a better finishing hole. I think the rationale at Leddy was nothing more than to bring the final hole on the outward nine directly past the beer and hot dog stop. Can you point me toward a thread where you give substance to your thoughts on Woodcrest or just a brief summary of why Golden Age designers knew best? For the record, I believe they did.

[Kalen Braley]

I'll likely be condemned by some for saying so but my preference would be a mid-length par-3 that isn't particularly difficult from the normal tees, ie the tees Mr and Mrs Average who are straight out of the car and don't warm-up beforehand usually play from, with some other tees at awkward/challenging angles should an event be held.
atb

Has the added benefit of being the perfect spacing mechanism, avoiding the pitfall of multiple groups teeing off as soon as the group in front is clear, inevitably clogging the flow of play as more strokes are played(on a yardage basis) on and near the green in subsequent holes.

Jeff,

You may be onto something here. Pacific Grove doubled down with back to back par 3 openers, (although likely not on purpose, what else could they have done?  A tight 90 degree par 4 opener?)  Only played it 3 times, but seem to recall while the first two holes were slow, it was all smooth sailing the rest of the way...

[Peter Pallotta]

edit.

[Steve_Lovett]

For the opener I'm equally interested in the context. - the first tee experience. The relationship of the first tee to the clubhouse/pro shop/putting green and to the surrounding environment.


When you have to travel from the clubhouse to the first tee, it's usually a disappointment - no matter how good the first hole is.


Places like the Old Course, Portmarnock, Pinehurst #2, Merion, and others like it are memorable. Sometimes it's the clubhouse, or a starters shack like County Down or Portrush. I played the Ocean Course in Kiawah last week and the first hole (although a very good starting hole) was diminished (to me) by the quarter-mile cart ride from the clubhouse area to the first tee.

[Anthony Gray]

 There are some players that don’t want a patio full of people watching them tee off.


 Seems like Scranton has a tee box close to the lunch goers.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I do like a nice par five opener like County Down, St Enodoc, or Westward Ho! I can see that the opener at St. Enodoc could slow up play with ten minute tee timers. I never felt it slowed up play at RCD or RND and I have played Westward Ho! fifty times when I had an overseas membership. Few could go for the green in two. Four Streams has a par five opener but is reachable for a bunch of guys, but with 15 minute tee times it didn't slow up play.

[Jeff Schley]

I really didn't care for the opener at Walton Heath Old which is a long par 3 with OB right and long.  Bunkers short left/right. Very slow to wait for everyone to not only chip/putt out on a very long par 3 (up to 235), but then taking their lives in their own hands crossing the very busy road with cars flying along. Just poor opener and have been trying to move it to the other side somehow for years with the clubhouse.

[Jim Sherma]

My preference is always a longer par 4 with enough width to open the shoulders and have two full shots on both the drive and the approach. A tight first drive is never fun and I'd rather be swinging with a full club for the approach as opposed to a 3/4-wedge. It's fine if the hole is a half par hole upwards. Most players miss greens anyway, so missing with a hybrid or mid-iron is no different than missing with a wedge as far as pace of play goes. No one wants a lost ball on the first hole - and I'd rather have a shorter scoring opportunity later in the round once I'm a little bedded into the round.