[Craig Disher]

The comments on 14 are curious.  The hole strikes me as extremely strategic with the best place to be on the dangerous left side and tons of room right leaving nearly a progressively more difficult shot the further right one goes. While not a terribly exciting or attractive hole (visually it does look a bit weird), I don't understand why its an issue if some golfers choose the layup off the tee much of the time.  For me its certainly tempting to gain the distance advantage with the driver because it can potentially offer me the option of ground or air. 


15 is practically the exact opposite in that it is an extremely penal hole with the long carry. There is no question that for my game going right is not an option.  I have to aim for the bunkers which will not leave a good angle of approach and it will be blind.  That said, if one is confident with the yardage, middle of the green does the job nicely for a relatively simple two putt.  Missing anywhere but short is very troublesome. To me, this is an execution hole pure and simple.  Do what you are told and tickity boo.  Nothing wrong with that sort of hole once in a while.  Like others have said, the big issue which spoils the hole is the walk...and for me, this is the biggest issue with the course...a disjointed design which takes the golfer away from the field of play way too often. 


Ciao

Agree on 14. When the hole is cut on the right half of the green - which it usually is - the left side of the fairway is where you want to be.

I think 15 is less a good hole than a solution to a problem. Somehow the course had to get past the long stretch of wetland that run between the two lakes. The green site is so good that the drive is a throwaway - play something safe and move on. Your point on the walk is exactly right. Early on, there was a maintained path, bridge, and rock steps over the wetlands which gave almost a straight line to the fairway. It hasn't been maintained in years. Same with a path to the right of the wetlands on #2.

[Joe Zucker]

I think the 14th is a great short par 4 because the penal aspects of the hole do not appear to be that difficult, but they actually are.  Even when your tee shot is out of place on the right, a recovery doesn't seem far fetched.  But for me, a 60-70 yard pitch from right of that bunker is incredibly difficult because of how steep the right side of the green falls off.


I like the hole because of how tempting it looks from the tee with only one trap staring at  you.  It tempts you into being aggressive because of the width and then it is very easy to make bogey when your second shot is only a short wedge.  If this hole were narrow the decision on the tee would simply be an iron, but the width gives the player too much confidence on the tee and this can lead to a more aggressive play.  I was tempted into hitting driver, then had the pleasure of leaving my pitch short and watching it roll back to me...

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The comments on 14 are curious.  The hole strikes me as extremely strategic with the best place to be on the dangerous left side and tons of room right leaving nearly a progressively more difficult shot the further right one goes. While not a terribly exciting or attractive hole (visually it does look a bit weird), I don't understand why its an issue if some golfers choose the layup off the tee much of the time.  For me its certainly tempting to gain the distance advantage with the driver because it can potentially offer me the option of ground or air.

I'm with you on this one Sean_A. But perhaps some of the misunderstanding from those who think it's a bad hole comes from the false perception that a 110-yard wedge shot is easier than a 40-yard wedge shot? There's an increasing benefit to being close to the green.

When I played it, I considered a 4I, Hybrid, 3W, and driver. I hit a 3W that I intended to hit toward the bunker - a bit right or left and I would be fine, too. I over-drew it left, got a reasonable lie on the edge of the scruffy parts, and chipped to 20 feet from 30 yards out or whatever it was.

Were I to play it again, I'd try driver, and probably settle on the play I made: a 3-wood. The area near the front of the green is nearly 60 yards wide, and there's a good fraction of a stroke to be saved being closer to the green. Even being in the greenside bunker isn't a terrible spot - it's not got Riviera's 10th green behind it, and in fact, it slopes slightly toward the bunker.

So laying up with a hybrid or long iron only ever makes sense if you're having a really bad day with your 3-wood/driver.

15 is practically the exact opposite in that it is an extremely penal hole with the long carry. There is no question that for my game going right is not an option.  I have to aim for the bunkers which will not leave a good angle of approach and it will be blind.  That said, if one is confident with the yardage, middle of the green does the job nicely for a relatively simple two putt.  Missing anywhere but short is very troublesome. To me, this is an execution hole pure and simple.  Do what you are told and tickity boo.  Nothing wrong with that sort of hole once in a while.  Like others have said, the big issue which spoils the hole is the walk...and for me, this is the biggest issue with the course...a disjointed design which takes the golfer away from the field of play way too often.

I played a cut at the left bunker. The ball rolled up the hill a bit, down, and finished on a flat area even with the farthest edge of the farthest bunker, with a view of about 3/4 of the green. I used the slope left to funnel the ball down to about 10' from the front-right hole location.

Again those suggesting that the play is simply to bail out way left are overlooking the fractional strokes gained by not only hitting the ball to 80 yards instead of 130, but having a view of the green, too.

Decent golfers, generally speaking, play too safely. They leave themselves longer clubs in than they should, and they under-estimate the value of being 20 yards, or 40 yards, or even closer, particularly when it's a partial wedge. I have a lot of data on this, and at every level of the game, generally speaking, the closer you are to the hole before the shot, the closer to the hole your shot will finish, on average. That's not true for everyone, but it's true far more often than it's not.

14 is mediocre. There's a certain crowd that wants to proclaim every par 4 under 320 yards as a stroke of genius, but I don't see it here. Personally I'm with Mark - it's not a very interesting hole for me. Lay it up, pitch it on, move on with life. This nonsense about playing to the left and then hitting a 70 yard bump-and-run is the kind of thing architecture nerds like us do for kicks, but it's not a reasonable way to play the hole in any kind of competition (including a friendly wager) for someone better than a 25 handicap.

Yeah, I don't agree… And I'm a +1. I'd play it with driver or 3W every time. There would almost never be a time when I'd "lay it up." Statistically, that makes very little sense. Only if you couldn't hit a 60-yard wide area with a 3-wood or your bunker game is literally among the worst ever seen should you try to leave yourself 90+ yards out.

I don't think the issue with 15 lies in the severity of the angle at which the hazard crosses or the length of the carry. Instead, I think it's a simple issue of the playing corridor being too narrow. A good drive for me can make it to the first of the two twin bunkers. At that distance, the entire corridor is only about 30 yards wide.

It's not 30 yards wide in the direction of the tee shot. It's nearly 80 yards "wide" on that line. And, there's a big slope that makes the landing zone "deeper" too.

For bigger hitters who can get up to the second bunker, the corridor is about 20 yards wide. Anything missing the fairway is either lost or completely hosed. It looks like a strategic and interesting hole from the tee, but in reality it's target golf with highbrow aesthetics and the only place to hit a tee shot is the 40 yard wide oval of fairway between the scrape bunker on the far left of the hole and the first of the two twins. It has the look of a postmodern minimalist strategic marvel, but the playing qualities are straight out of an early '80s Nicklaus design.

Again, I think you're under-valuing what 45 yards of additional gains can get you.

Maybe, for your game, those 80-yard shots are just terrible. But being closer to the hole - 80 yards instead of 125 - is worth a fraction of a stroke. (And I'm not talking about 1/1000th. On the PGA Tour, 125 to 80 saves over a tenth of a shot.)

That's not to say that either of the holes are bad, but they follow a stretch of very difficult and/or repetitive golf from 8-13, which is full of sloggy holes interrupted only by a pair of uphill par 3s. By the time you finish 13, you're ready for something different and excited for the scoring opportunities promised by 14 and 15. And while they're certainly easier than the holes that came before, the fact that they just aren't all that interesting is a disappointment.

My group found them very interesting. We had a long discussion, most of us chose different options based on our games, and we measured many things in coming to the conclusions we each came to. The wind when we played it was mostly into us on 15, and thus across from the right on 14.

[Brian Finn]

This is a timely bump, as I will be at Dormie this weekend.  I've played it a half dozen times (and love it), but the other 3 guys in my group have never been there.  They have varying skill levels and length, and aren't gca nerds.  I'll be sure to get their views and report back. 

[Tim Martin]

This is a timely bump, as I will be at Dormie this weekend.  I've played it a half dozen times (and love it), but the other 3 guys in my group have never been there.  They have varying skill levels and length, and aren't gca nerds.  I'll be sure to get their views and report back.

What sort of debriefing and confidentiality agreement are you going to require of these guys at the end of the weekend? I’m pretty sure that when there are “civilians” in the group with a 3/1 non nerd to nerd ratio that the interviews are historically held in Roswell, New Mexico. Safety first!

[Erik J. Barzeski]

This is a timely bump, as I will be at Dormie this weekend.  I've played it a half dozen times (and love it), but the other 3 guys in my group have never been there.  They have varying skill levels and length, and aren't gca nerds.  I'll be sure to get their views and report back.

Most of the discussion here has been about either holes 14/15 or whether the club was private or not (a really old topic). I am probably going to create a new topic here that's more up to date and deals with the course in general. I have a few more recent pictures, too.

So if that's okay maybe it'll be up by the time you're done playing this weekend. Have a great round! I hope the weather is as great for you as it was for me.

[Peter Pallotta]

As others have noted, this really was a terrific thread.
But I have to say, I must’ve badly ‘misread’ C&C’s intentions for 15, because no one except Erik mentioned playing the hole the way I assumed C&C wanted/expected it to be played.
On reading about it, my first thought was that C&C were giving the average golfer a break, ie recognizing that the majority of average golfers are much more likely to fade than to draw their tee shots, they designed a hole with the shortest carry on the left side, and a fairway canted down from left to right — so that just about everyone could take the safe route, enjoy watching their ball easily carry the hazard and start fading safely to the right (there being no likelihood of anyone actually hitting it as far/into those bunkers on the left), and then happily see it being helped down further right (to the preferred angle of approach) by the slope in the fairway.
And all this as a kind of gift to the average golfer, after having many other holes bending to the left and thus asking for a draw.
As I say, I thought that’s how the hole was designed to be played, ie to look much harder than it actually plays for the right-handed average golfer.
But it seems from reading the responses that, ironically, it was only Erik, the very good/+1 golfer, who saw it/figured it out and reaped the benefits.
Peter

[Jerry Kluger]

I was recently down to Dormie and I was told the course has been sold - anyone know if it is true and what is to be expected with new ownership?

[Sean_A]

Pietro

I think you are being led down the garden path. The carry from the white tees is close to 220 yards online to the double bunkers....very few golfers can even attempt this shot let alone going further right.  The average golfer, shpuld he be playing one of the tees on the far side of the shit, is simply hoping to clear it.  The main bit of the slope right is from the far side of the fairway and will not offer a view of the green. See below for a tee shot fairly far right online with double bunkers.  I think this is one of the best holes at Dormie, but not the piece of piss people are selling it as.  Anything to the left side of the fairway leaves a very difficult, blind approach with trees crowding from the left.  People are suggesting this hole is strategic, but the carry makes it an overwhelmingly penal hole which favours big hitters quite a bit.   



Ciao

[Niall C]

FWIW I like the look of the 14th. There are holes like this at both Carlisle GC and Downfield GC (as I remember them). Short par 4's played slightly uphill with left to right slope and tree belt on left. Can't recall whether Carlisle and Downfield have one or two guarding bunkers front right but they perform the same function. Anything hit to the right of the fairway means hitting into the face of the slope of the green but you do have to play over the bunkers, while a drive up the left gives a clear view but then you have to make allowances for the pronounced left to right slope of the green with your approach.


A simple design and that's fun to play. You have to give credit I think for resisting the temptation to overly bunker a short par 4.


I also like the look of the 15th. The advantage of an approach from the right is I suppose having to allow for less slope. Looks good to me.


Question to Mark, several years down the line since you started this thread and presumably you've played the course a few more times, have your views changed ?


Niall



 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()