[Dan Kelly]

In the one-hole-for-the-rest-of-your-life thread, I laid out my requirements for a rest-of-my-life hole -- a hole that would be fun to play from my unfortunately current middle age through my even-more-unfortunate dotage:

-- No need for a heroic drive.

-- No long forced carries, from tee to green.

-- An approach shot interesting from any distance, and which CAN be played on the ground.

-- A green with lots of pin positions.

-- A green that produces lots of interesting chips and putts.

Which great holes meet these requirements?

Did/does any particular architect tend to design a notably high number of such holes?

Should there be more such holes?

[Jeff_Mingay]

Dan,

1 thru 18 at the Old Course, St Andrews  

[THuckaby2]

Great question, Dan.

I'm sure there are lots of holes that meet all of those requirements, so it's easier for me to think of great holes people talk about and see where they fail.

An example is #10 at Riviera, unquestionably a great golf hole.  But it fails in that there aren't many pin positions available on such a small, highly-sloped green...

18 Pebble and 16 Cypress each fail the forced carry issue....

It goes on and on.

Off the top of my head the only hole mentioned that meets all of the requirements is #12 on The Old Course.  

Should more holes like this be built?  Hell yes... why not?

TH

[THuckaby2]

Jeff:

Nope.  There's most definitely a forced carry on the approach to #1 over the burn (not long, but long enough), and dare I say on the tee shot on 17 as well... yes one can hit it way left in the rough to avoid the carry over the wall, but that's stretching things in that it's such a bad way to play the hole.

So make it 2-16 and 18 and then we have something, with #12 being the best example.

 

[John Nixon]

Pebble Beach, #9 or #10. No forced carries, some kind of water or something to the right to be a constant reminder to stay focused. Run up possibilities. Good ocean view.

TPC Sawgrass #16 or #18. I don't remember, 16 doesn't have a forced carry off the tee, does it?

[THuckaby2]

Nixer:

I am one of the world's most fanatic of PB fans, but I'm not sure either 9 or 10 meet all of Dan's criteria.  To me, neither green is all that interesting... they both slope pretty much from back to front angled toward the ocean with nothing much else to them (thank god, more internal contour would make each hole way too difficult - they are each hard enough as they are).  I'm also not sure they'd meet the "lots of interesting chips and putts" criteria - they pale compared to TOC on this, anyway.  Finally, while a heroic drive isn't required, it sure helps on each hole....

TH

[John Nixon]

Tom -
Yeah, I was kind of just thinking out loud with PB 9 and 10. Seems like a good two holes to spend a lot of time on, for the view if nothing else. I hadn't thought much about the greens there, but you're right. Lots of slope, but not  much interest.  

I would have to go with a par 5, for a wide variety of layup/approach possibilities. On days when I'm not feeling particularly strong I could lay up, and go for it on the good days, however often that might occur  

[THuckaby2]

Gotcha, Nixer.  Just to make clear, hell yes I'm with you I could spend years playing each of these two holes and never tire of either... All this talk with lawyers and other word parsers lately just has me in a very strict mood about criteria and definitions.

 

[Brian_Gracely]

Dan has pretty much described Pinehurst #2.  

[THuckaby2]

Dan has pretty much described Pinehurst #2.  

Hmmm.. never been there, but you're right, aren't you?  Are there any spots anywhere on the course that fail any of these criteria?  

[Brian_Gracely]

#9 plays like a traditional Ross par3, from high spot to high spot, so there is some carry involved, but it's only over rough.  and I'm sure there is a closer set of tees.

#10 is a long Par5 that has a decent amount of carry (over rough) from the back tees, but I'm sure the shorter tees are on the other side.

If they mowed some of the areas of rough between the tees and fairway, I honestly think you could play Pinehurst #2 with a putter.  There is only one hole with water, #16 has a small..out of place pond...think #17 at RCD, except not in the middle of the fairway.  

[JLahrman]

I was thinking specifically of hole #2 on Pinehurst #2.

#13's green is a bit elevated.  I think you could probably still run it up but with the way the other holes invite you to roll it up #13 looks like a huge hill.  Is 17 a bit elevated as well?

If these are the holes that are unapproachable by ground, it's only relatively speaking.

[Dan King]

I was thinking more along the lines of one of the holes that inspired Mr. Ross, Foxy at Dornoch. Not a lot of pin positions, since it is a relatively small green, but otherwise it meets every one of Dan's criteria.

I was going to mention it as one of my holes I wouldn't mind playing for the rest of my life, but the only thing it is possibly missing is any sand hazard. If you play the hole for the rest of your life you might grow to miss the explosion from the sand hazard.

Dan King

We can get so much out of golf. I know I have, and I'd like to see the same for you. Golf is the game of a lifetime, one in which you can get better and better. It's not what you do that counts, but what you attempt to do.
 --George Knudson

[CHrisB]

#14 on The Old Course!

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom,

You can bounce it over the Swilcan at the first! I've seen it done... and, you said it yourself, play way left, away from the buildings, at seventeen.

That said, I'll stick with my original post  

[Brian Phillips]

Tom,

You could putt over the swilcan burn on the first at St.Andrews....even my four year old could get over that carry so I would have to agree with Jeff 1 - 18 at TOC. If three yards is a long carry then I would love to know your definition of short carry.....

Unlike that other place that you love so much...

Brian

[BCrosby]

1. The front nine at ANGC. If you don't consider the carry at 16 (a 7i from member tees) a "long forced carry", include the back nine too.

2. N. Berwick, R. Dornoch, W. Gailes and lots of other Scottish courses

3. Myopia

4. As noted above, Pinehurst no. 2 and lots of other Ross courses

Bob

[THuckaby2]

Jeff/Brian:

I know how wide the burn is.

The fact is though, you have to clear it... and as age comes, the clearing will come from a longer and longer distance away.  The day will then come when you're forced to lay up short of it, even knowing that bouncing over it can occur (I too have seen this).

To me, sticking strictly to Dan's criteria, for this reason it fails.  The clearance exists and must be accounted for.

Same goes for 17 - sure one CAN play left into the rough, and thus not have to clear the hotel wall at all, but what kind of life is that when such things must be done?

Nope, give me the other 16, sure.  But these two fail.

And I do love this course more than that other one, Brian.  I just love that other one also.  I am a shameless slut in love of golf courses.

TH

[Brian Phillips]

Tom,

Can't wait to meet up with you one day.  If you ever decide to do a tour of Scandinavia, we have a few mad courses over here including a few by myself and Graeme Webster.

We just got one recently that looks like you are playing on the moon.  I will post pics hopefully in three weeks time when we should know if it is going ahead this year or not.

Now, back to the criteria:

he said long carry....

There is not one 'long' carry on TOC.

Brian

[Dan Kelly]

Guess I need to step in here and clarify.

Brian Phillips is correct. Swilcan Burn does not qualify as "long carry."

Old Man Me could lay up to burn, pitch over, sink my putt and break the hearts of my muscular young fellow-competitors (and we'll be sure to Compete, so that we will be playing Golf).

Or, as on the one occasion when I've played TOC No. 1, I could, in fact, bounce it over the burn!

Don't know about putting it over the burn. I'll try that next time!

[THuckaby2]

Brian - I look forward to that as well.  Something tells me we will have a VERY good time.  

And sure, go strictly by the language, OK.  Of course that's exactly what I said I was doing, but now I am gonna change course completely, as the fickle slut that I am.

Dan did say "long carry" and now even he steps in and misses the point of his own question (kinda hard to have someone else tell you what you really mean, but Dan can take it).  

The point isn't "can you make the carry", the point is "would you want to play a hole like this forever where such exists."  Since "no long carries" is the first criterion, it is a very fair assumption that in his perfect golf hole Dan would, or should since he can't help himself here, not want ANY carry at all.  And say what you will about that wee burn, if you think it's an easy carry or doesn't effect the golf hole, then you either have no fear or haven't played there.  The carry exists big time and in fact defines the hole.

So I, as self-appointed Guardian of What Dan Kelly Really Means, hereby declare both of you wrong.  #1 at the Old Course doesn't make this list.

Case dismissed.

 

[TEPaul]

Dan:

The things you said in your initial post put me in mind of a hole at GMGC that last year was considered pretty mundane to a lot of members. We did some interesting things to it but not all that much. The green was redesigned (to mimic Maxwell) and some trees were removed to expose and bring into play a helluva natural feature, and a fairway bunker was switched from one side to another. To be honest, I'm just astounded by the reaction. Some are still getting used to it but those that have absolutely love the hole now compared to what it was last year--and again in toto we didn't to all that much but what we did had a helluva impact. In this way architecture can really be something else sometime---little things if they're good things can have a huge impact!

[Bill_McBride]

A hole I played several times recently and meets Dan's criteria perfectly is #5 at Cuscowilla!  It's only 320 yds and most of the fairway is one gigantic mother of a bunker, wild and gnarly.  But you don't have to carry it, you can play either left of the bunker or right of it (lots more room to the right, the Elysian Fields of Cuscowilla!), and then you can hit a wide variety of little shots into that plateaued green.  The green is narrow and not terribly deep, with a small plateau down the spine.  The orientation of the spine is, of course, directly at the giant fairway bunker, so the approach shots from the side have to be either fabulous lobs to stop on top, or accurate little bump and runs.  Long chips that aren't quite bold enough trickle down the slope to the right of the green.  Those that are too bold run over the green and now it's a ticklish little chip back.  For a hole that looks pretty simple on the card (320 par 4), it's a real handful but always fun to play.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()