|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 27, 2020 11:42:51 GMT -5
Didn't really know what to call this one really, but I am going for trying to think of the best golf holes in the world that DON'T have a prevalent water hazard. If this exists somewhere previously, somebody please direct me that way.
If you look up "best golf holes", a significant majority of them will have an ocean, lake or river on them. Water obviously provides drama and strategy to golf that most other hazards cannot, but at the same time I find that a lot of these holes rely on that water hazard to give you a great hole. Remove the water, and it might just be a pretty standard hole.
I am not here to say that these holes are overrated, or that I am downplaying the greatness of holes like 7 at Pebble Beach or 13 at Augusta, or any hole on the course for that matter, but I just find that when I am trying to study golf architecture, I have spent plenty of time researching template golf, and it is obviously great knowledge, but I find the "core" templates to be relatively limiting after awhile, as there are infinite strategic ideas in our game. I find this especially prevalent on par 3s. As much as we all love Redans or Biarritzs, every course cannot have one or it would get rather repetitive, and a lot of the "best par 3s in the world," are on an ocean or a river.
So by this thread, in theory, I am trying to formulate a more cumulative list of golf holes. Holes that test a specific aspect, or a group of aspects, of your game, while doing it on a more average landscape. Not every course can be built with beautiful natural hazards, or if they do, they still might have some inland holes. After all, Pebble Beach has 8 holes with no ocean in sight. This thread could even include a hole with water on it, but a hole that without the water, would still be considered to contain great strategy. In that respect, I might consider 13 at Augusta to be a "template hole", with a frontal bunker or ditch/ravine.
I guess in summary, I am trying to think of "templates" of golf, that aren't currently considered template holes.
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 27, 2020 11:46:15 GMT -5
I would like to get my own thread started with 2 hole ideas that everybody who studies golf should know.. The amazing drivable 10th at Riviera: And the Coore/Crenshaw template, "Left to go Left", used in a few locations but my favorite has always been 16 at Sand Hills:
|
|
|
Post by tpetro on Aug 27, 2020 15:28:35 GMT -5
Looking through the "Best Hole in Golf" thread, aside from the easy picks that have water (Augusta 13, Pebble 8, Cypress 16), I noticed an interesting trend.
Many of the water holes mentioned in the thread are picks that make absolutely no sense. I'm guessing this has something to do with the golfer's general fascination with water, and they let it elevate their perceptions of otherwise vanilla golf holes. A few picks I saw:
Sawgrass 3: a boring par 3 with framing water short and left Belfry 18: a cool diagonal tee ball over a pond but there's no strategic interest provided. Bay Hill 17: I mean... come on. Firestone 16: Even worse. Just a crappy par 5 with a gimmick pond.
Most of the rest of the holes mentioned don't actually have water in play. Tons of nods to dry courses (Shinnecock, St. Andrews, Crystal Downs, Pine Valley, Royal Melbourne, Merion, Sand Hills, etc.) where the actual designs of the holes are on full display.
|
|
|
Post by sandsaver01 on Aug 27, 2020 17:23:07 GMT -5
Another great course where water doesn't come into play would be Bandon Dunes. Sure there are holes on the ocean, but you have to really screw up to get in the water. There is a lake, but it is not in play at all.
|
|
|
Post by bbolin9 on Aug 27, 2020 20:13:29 GMT -5
Postage Stamp at Troon
Every hole at Olympic Club (ironically the Lake Course) I personally like 3-6
Road Hole at St. Andrews
17/18 at Firestone
16 Scottsdale (atmosphere obviously)
3/4 Oakmont
All of Shinnecock and most of Bethpage
11 at LACC
|
|
|
Post by bbolin9 on Aug 27, 2020 20:15:43 GMT -5
Looking through the "Best Hole in Golf" thread, aside from the easy picks that have water (Augusta 13, Pebble 8, Cypress 16), I noticed an interesting trend. Many of the water holes mentioned in the thread are picks that make absolutely no sense. I'm guessing this has something to do with the golfer's general fascination with water, and they let it elevate their perceptions of otherwise vanilla golf holes. A few picks I saw: Sawgrass 3: a boring par 3 with framing water short and left Belfry 18: a cool diagonal tee ball over a pond but there's no strategic interest provided. Bay Hill 17: I mean... come on. Firestone 16: Even worse. Just a crappy par 5 with a gimmick pond. Most of the rest of the holes mentioned don't actually have water in play. Tons of nods to dry courses (Shinnecock, St. Andrews, Crystal Downs, Pine Valley, Royal Melbourne, Merion, Sand Hills, etc.) where the actual designs of the holes are on full display. 16 at Firestone is a phenomenal golf hole
|
|
|
Post by tpetro on Aug 27, 2020 21:11:45 GMT -5
Looking through the "Best Hole in Golf" thread, aside from the easy picks that have water (Augusta 13, Pebble 8, Cypress 16), I noticed an interesting trend. Many of the water holes mentioned in the thread are picks that make absolutely no sense. I'm guessing this has something to do with the golfer's general fascination with water, and they let it elevate their perceptions of otherwise vanilla golf holes. A few picks I saw: Sawgrass 3: a boring par 3 with framing water short and left Belfry 18: a cool diagonal tee ball over a pond but there's no strategic interest provided. Bay Hill 17: I mean... come on. Firestone 16: Even worse. Just a crappy par 5 with a gimmick pond. Most of the rest of the holes mentioned don't actually have water in play. Tons of nods to dry courses (Shinnecock, St. Andrews, Crystal Downs, Pine Valley, Royal Melbourne, Merion, Sand Hills, etc.) where the actual designs of the holes are on full display. 16 at Firestone is a phenomenal golf hole
|
|
|
Post by rjwils30 on Aug 27, 2020 22:54:46 GMT -5
9 Cypress 17 NGLA Closing holes at Friars 4 Bethpage 6 and 16 at pacific dunes 14 at Dornoch. Pretty much most links and heathland courses Royal Melbourne 5th and 6th.
Honesty this could go on and on. So many great courses and holes on sandy sites without water.
|
|
|
Post by rjwils30 on Aug 27, 2020 23:02:09 GMT -5
I think the perception that water holes are better or at least more memorable is that they are perhaps the most dramatic when watching PGA golf on TV. The subtle nuance and variability of the dry holes is obviously much more difficult to appreciate on TV. Water is a nice and easy to understand, if not overused, hazard for TV golf. The penalty is clear and immediate.
16 at firestone is a slog with a pond in front. Blah. 13 at Augusta, now we’re talking!
|
|
|
Post by mattyfromcanada on Aug 27, 2020 23:28:47 GMT -5
"Oh wow 16 at Firestone! I'm sure excited to play it! I heard its a phenomenal hole! How should I play it?"
Well, just hit the fairway on your drive.
"Any side in particular?"
No, doesn't matter. Also see those bunkers? They serve no purpose really.
"Ok, now what about my second shot?"
Just...just hit the fairway again. Anywhere really. It's narrow, so again, literally anywhere will be just fine.
"Must be a really beautiful golf hole hey?"
Uhhhh....it's fine? Nothing special really.
"The greensite must be super original!"
Well....here's the thing, no. Literally thousands of holes have super similar designs. Pond in front, bunkers behind, not exactly ground breaking.
"Huh."
Yuuuuuup.
|
|
|
Post by theclv24 on Aug 28, 2020 7:34:04 GMT -5
Water holes are for sure the most photographed, and they definitely stick in the memories of most golfers. A water hazard as a strategic feature, however, is perhaps one of the most boring hazards you can create, because there is no chance at recovery or redemption. When you hit into a scrub area at say, Pinehurst, you can have a horrific lie, or nothing worse than a glorified bunker lie. Either way, you still have a chance at pulling out a miracle. Water is an automatic penalty and drop, and then it's just a matter of if you are getting up and down, or taking a double (or whatever).
I would also push back on the par 3's, about Redans and Biarritzs being repetitive. Think about your typical TPC design, or typical resort course. If 4 out of the 4 par 3's aren't "bunker left, bunker right", then 3 out of the 4 are. We're just so used to it that we don't notice. We literally don't remember most par 3's at courses like that unless they have 1) a major elevation change, or 2) a water hazard. Personally I'd take creative plays on Redans, Biarritzs, Edens, and Shorts all day.
That's just my take anyways. I don't think template holes are here to save the world, or that water holes can't be memorable, I just think the "hit it here or else" approach is the more boring of the two.
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 28, 2020 8:57:19 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies everyone this is great!
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 28, 2020 9:00:53 GMT -5
Postage Stamp at Troon Every hole at Olympic Club (ironically the Lake Course) I personally like 3-6 Road Hole at St. Andrews 17/18 at Firestone 16 Scottsdale (atmosphere obviously) 3/4 Oakmont All of Shinnecock and most of Bethpage 11 at LACC LACC is a great one that I almost completely forgot about so thanks for reminding me there! As far as Olympic goes I think there are a couple of good holes in 4, 5, and 7, but overall I am not sold on it as very strategic. I have been lucky to play it 4 or 5 times as I grew up in SF, and I find it to be more target golf than anything, rather than trying to play for angles. The pros did play for more angles in the 2012 US but they are just so good it's a different game. 7th hole is definitely my favorite as it's a driveable uphill par 4 haha.
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 28, 2020 9:03:34 GMT -5
I think the perception that water holes are better or at least more memorable is that they are perhaps the most dramatic when watching PGA golf on TV. The subtle nuance and variability of the dry holes is obviously much more difficult to appreciate on TV. Water is a nice and easy to understand, if not overused, hazard for TV golf. The penalty is clear and immediate. 16 at firestone is a slog with a pond in front. Blah. 13 at Augusta, now we’re talking! Couldn't agree more.. I was trying to find some inspiration on a new course I'm working on for a couple of transition holes that is not in a flat area on my plot and google searching just gives me dramatic holes with major water features, which is useless.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Aug 28, 2020 13:13:59 GMT -5
|
|