News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
If the course played the exact same way but started on 16 and ended on 15.


You don't need to have played it to give your opinion on this, it was only chosen because of the spatial coherence, greatness of the holes in question, and their location in the round. (yes, this is influenced by the worst first hole thread)
« Last Edit: March 22, 2023, 01:59:48 PM by Charlie Goerges »
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ben Hollerbach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2023, 02:38:33 PM »
I certainly would not want the tee shot on the 16th to be my first shot of the day. Probably a lot of layups played there.

The 18th probably wouldn't get as bad of a wrap if it played as the 3rd. It could actually become beloved for its quirk.

The 15th sure would be a stunning closing hole. How many courses open and close their rounds on par 3's?

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2023, 03:50:26 PM »
I see three not directly golf related issues:


1. It would take away one of the great walks in golf.
2. It would take away hitting your first drive while staring at a row of hedges.
3. It would push back the chocolate chip cookies until too late in the round.


Yes, this post is entirely a not so humble brag.


Ira

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2023, 04:15:29 PM »
I certainly would not want the tee shot on the 16th to be my first shot of the day. Probably a lot of layups played there.

The 18th probably wouldn't get as bad of a wrap if it played as the 3rd. It could actually become beloved for its quirk.

The 15th sure would be a stunning closing hole. How many courses open and close their rounds on par 3's?


I see three not directly golf related issues:1. It would take away one of the great walks in golf.2. It would take away hitting your first drive while staring at a row of hedges.3. It would push back the chocolate chip cookies until too late in the round.Yes, this post is entirely a not so humble brag.Ira



I like the thoughts you're both bringing up so far, a combination of tangible and intangible things. The walk is important, and 15 to 16 would be lost, at least partially. I'm also curious about what happens to opinions of the current 18th. I have a pet theory that part of the reason it suffers now is simply players who are sad their round is over and they're already missing the course and those sad feelings are transferred by association over to the hole itself (who knows though).

You guys are doing well so far, considering Cypress might be a bad example. Would it be like starting Beethoven's 5th partway through the fourth movement or something to that effect?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2023, 04:17:41 PM by Charlie Goerges »
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

JohnVDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2023, 05:04:41 PM »
The second time I played CPC, it was a busy (for them) day. The ladies club championship was starting on #1 so the pro was sending out the men there to start off various holes.


My host came up and said we were starting on 15. I was a little disheartened to think we would be getting those three great holes out of the way first.  Then he said, weíll play 15-18 and then 1-18 , but weíll have to give the caddies a little extra.  :D


It was a great way to do it, but I donít think Iíd want to start on those all the time.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2023, 10:11:52 AM by JohnVDB »

Ben Hollerbach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2023, 05:05:48 PM »
For any high profile course you run through this exercise, the known order and flow that order generates is virtually impossible to separate for future analysis. It almost leads you to think through the course in the way you're familiar with a hard break at the new 18/1 exchange, and hard additions where the old 18/1 exchange is fit in.

Flipping the 9's at Augusta might be the best example for this analysis. If the 9's were preserved as they originally were played and the Masters finished on the current 9th, our perspective about the course could be entirely different. Amen Corner as we know it today would have never appeared on TV until the late 90's. Scoring opportunities early in the back nine at the par 5 11th, short par 4 12th, and the long par 3 13th may have become the new amen corner. The creek that use to flow across the current 6th probably would not have been buried, but rather expanded into a pond that would have looked great on TV in front of the par 3 15th. The finish with the par 4 16th, par 5 17th, and par 4 18th would have presented 3 unique challenged for any leader/chaser to overcome. Imagine a traditional Sunday pin position on 9th near the front. Needing a birdie to win a player would have to attack the pin, risking spinning the ball well off the front of the green, leading to a near certain 5.

Would our appreciation of the course and tournament be different, certainly; would it be worse, probably not.

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2023, 06:25:42 AM »
I think this is a great question and the only way to answer it is to have a GCA tournament that starts on 16 at CPC. ;D
Somebody set that up and post a sign-up thread. You could even call it the King's Putter 2023 or 24 and add some other courses like MPCC, PB and Spyglass. I will buy the first round at the Lodge bar or Spanish Bay. 8)
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2023, 09:50:16 AM »
Some more good points (I'm all for running the experiment Tim).


I had multiple questions in mind when I asked this, including:

  • Why do people dislike par 3 starting holes and finishing holes?
  • Why is it that the first hole is so seldom the best hole on the course? Statistically speaking it should at least sometimes happen... unless it's a conscious decision by the architect.
  • How much does the order or "symphony-like" nature of the course matter?
Ben's ANGC example is a good one. Another one I thought of is back before NGLA built the clubhouse, the first hole was the current 10th for a time. How would your round differ if the current 18th was your 9th hole of the day?
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ben Hollerbach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2023, 10:05:50 AM »
I believe more courses should start off with a medium to long par 3, One where most players would hit a long iron or hybrid, but the green site is relatively generous. It would reduce the chance for someone to start off with a blow up, and greatly help spread out groups early in a round. But it would also force tee time intervals to be greater than many courses may prefer.

If match play was more standard in the states, a shortish and challenging par 3 would make for a fantastic closing hole, for matches that end on the 17th, the proximity to the clubhouse is a plus. For those players who's match made it to 18, they would be faced with a nervy shot to close out the match. Since stroke play is much more common, a par 3 18th can seem like a lacking crescendo on the round. 

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2023, 11:59:34 AM »
Some more good points (I'm all for running the experiment Tim).


I had multiple questions in mind when I asked this, including:

  • Why do people dislike par 3 starting holes and finishing holes?
  • Why is it that the first hole is so seldom the best hole on the course? Statistically speaking it should at least sometimes happen... unless it's a conscious decision by the architect.
  • How much does the order or "symphony-like" nature of the course matter?
Ben's ANGC example is a good one. Another one I thought of is back before NGLA built the clubhouse, the first hole was the current 10th for a time. How would your round differ if the current 18th was your 9th hole of the day?


Charlie,

I'll take a stab at this:

1st bullet - For whatever reason I guess people want to stand on the tee, driver in hand and give it a smash.  But the more practical reason would be the delay it causes.  I've always felt par 3s work best after a long hole to avoid groups getting backed up.

2nd bullet - I mentioned this in the other thread, but I'd guess this is the case because the architect is often locked in to a starting point based on the location of the clubhouse/pro shop.  So you get what you get so to speak.

3rd bullet -  This is really the reason why starting on 16 is a not so great idea IMO.  Do people really want to hear the best part of the symphony at the start or be gently coaxed and eased into it, letting the anticipation build and crescendo as you go.  This has consistently been the biggest criticism of the course just over the hill from there Spyglass. Why start with the best stuff first?

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2023, 12:29:04 PM »
Some more good points (I'm all for running the experiment Tim).


I had multiple questions in mind when I asked this, including:

  • Why do people dislike par 3 starting holes and finishing holes?
  • Why is it that the first hole is so seldom the best hole on the course? Statistically speaking it should at least sometimes happen... unless it's a conscious decision by the architect.
  • How much does the order or "symphony-like" nature of the course matter?
Ben's ANGC example is a good one. Another one I thought of is back before NGLA built the clubhouse, the first hole was the current 10th for a time. How would your round differ if the current 18th was your 9th hole of the day?


Charlie,

I'll take a stab at this:

1st bullet - For whatever reason I guess people want to stand on the tee, driver in hand and give it a smash.  But the more practical reason would be the delay it causes.  I've always felt par 3s work best after a long hole to avoid groups getting backed up.


I agree with the first part, I think you're right that there are people who think that way. For the second part, I think it might better for the the delay to occur at the first tee, when the course can be in control of the line rather than, say, the second or third hole when there is nowhere for anyone to go. It might also force the course operator to properly space their tee times for maximum enjoyment.


2nd bullet - I mentioned this in the other thread, but I'd guess this is the case because the architect is often locked in to a starting point based on the location of the clubhouse/pro shop.  So you get what you get so to speak.


I could agree with the "locked in" issue, if the hit rate was equally as bad on 18th holes, but it really doesn't seem to be. So why is the hit rate so bad on first holes then? I realize I'm not going to get a bunch of architects on here admitting they make the first hole worse on purpose, but it is food for thought I think.


3rd bullet -  This is really the reason why starting on 16 is a not so great idea IMO.  Do people really want to hear the best part of the symphony at the start or be gently coaxed and eased into it, letting the anticipation build and crescendo as you go.  This has consistently been the biggest criticism of the course just over the hill from there Spyglass. Why start with the best stuff first?


To me also, this is the best reason not to start CPC on 16. The question was about the things I mentioned, but also, other than the first hole, the sixteenth tee is the closest tee to the clubhouse, so it could also be feasible (different than say, starting Pebble on 7 or something which would be far from the club house).




Thanks for engaging everyone.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Marty Bonnar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2023, 03:55:47 PM »
Itís kinda difficult starting a round of golf in a priapic condition.
The White River runs dark through the heart of the Town,
Washed the people coal-black from the hole in the ground.

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2023, 09:38:24 PM »
Pendleton Creek, known as the Cypress Point of western New York, begins and ends each nine with a par three hole. Each is the equal of 15 and 16 at Cypress Point. In other words, you get twice the thrill.

Some of what I just typed is fact.
Maybe for 2022
~Eden Valley
~Hillview
~Pinehurst (NY)
~Kis 'N Greens
~Pine Meadows
~18 Mile Creek
~Greenwood
~Shawnee
~Leroy
~

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2023, 09:19:41 PM »
"Worse" is, of course, relative.  It would still be pretty good!


I once started with a couple of friends at the tenth, when Jim Langley sent us off and didn't want the members on the first tee to ask any questions.  Getting to 16 even that early in the round was unwelcome, especially when my caddie handed me a 1-iron because it was downwind at that time of the morning.  I did not do it justice.  [On the other hand, 8 and 9 were a fun finish, except for the fact that we had to get back in the car after that, and 10-11-12-13 was a pretty cool start.]


Architects spend a lot of time thinking about the sequence of holes and how it's best experienced, so as a general rule we hate it when clients ask to switch the nines or move the proposed clubhouse to a different spot.  But at the end of the day, you're building pretty much the same 18 holes and the choreography of the "flow" cannot be considered a huge factor in the overall rating.

Ben Stephens

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2023, 03:39:28 AM »
Would the 16th as an opening hole be better as a short par 4 as opposed to a long par 3?


Did a photoshop image showing a proposed alternative 18th green way back in 2010  :o which is located near the 16th tees a while ago. 18th seems to be the weakest link and the plan shows that the original green is also kept.






Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2023, 09:32:40 AM »

I like your graphic Ben, I know it would have virtually no chance of getting permitted though.



Architects spend a lot of time thinking about the sequence of holes and how it's best experienced, so as a general rule we hate it when clients ask to switch the nines or move the proposed clubhouse to a different spot.  But at the end of the day, you're building pretty much the same 18 holes and the choreography of the "flow" cannot be considered a huge factor in the overall rating.




(Emphasis added) I'm pretty surprised at your last statement. In a way, it makes sense...just build the best 18 holes you can and let the chips fall where they may (i.e. if the course owner decides to move the clubhouse or switch the nines or something). But the symphony analogy still exists (did you use it in the CG entry for CPC?), and a lot of regular players like me subscribe to it. It makes me curious if CPC would still be a 10 if it started on 16?
« Last Edit: March 27, 2023, 09:44:36 AM by Charlie Goerges »
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2023, 10:10:28 AM »
This is a great discussion topic.


If you asked me the same question about Friars Head, starting on the 16th hole and ending your round on 15 green, Iíd say it probably doesnít change the overall experience of it for me. You might miss the boardwalk to heaven kinda feel, but I really think the course stays the same in my mind, i.e., really friggin good.


CP would still be really friggin good if you started on 16. Itís probably #1 in my personal rankings. But I actually donít think it would stay there if you started on 16. I canít explain why.


Where I live we say that people come for the winter and stay for the summer. CP is a lot like that. In many ways, people come for the ocean and stay for the world class holes leading up to those big three. The flow and crescendo are important.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #17 on: March 28, 2023, 07:05:28 AM »
Itís:


Itís all subjective, but if you say you think Cruden Bay is the best course in the world because of its flow and sequence, people are going to hammer on comparing the individual holes to Pine Valleyís.  Nobody ever says PV had the perfect flow; itís #1 because of the individual holes.


So, do I think the flow is important?  Yes, I want to arrange the sequence of holes for the best experience.  But how many really good holes would I sacrifice for that?  Not many - and especially not if the client was interested in a ranking!


Funny, though, that my highest ranked course now is Tara Iti, and I believe that owes much to the experience.  Hole for hole I donít think it would beat some of my other courses.

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2023, 07:24:29 AM »
IMO the 16 as the 16th is perfect.


Late in the round is best for this hole, everyone that plays the course is dreaming about it, the whole quality of the hole is amplifed by its positioning in the round.


It is a hole that needs to be on the back nine.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Greg Smith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2023, 08:58:12 AM »
This same sort of thing happened to Banff Springs when a new clubhouse was constructed, right?  That new clubhouse location took away one of the most exciting 1st tee shots on the planet and made it the 15th.  It also meant that a very dramatic finishing sequence of holes became the 10th through 14th, with the new ending being rather anticlimactic.  And, the most spectacular hole on the course (the 8th) moved back earlier in the round to the 4th.


I think the consensus on these changes is that they really did affect the experience at Banff negatively.  It's not like Banff Springs isn't one of the greatest courses in Canada.  But there's no question there has been an effect.


I think that would happen overall at CP as well.  But I think the greatest impact would be to the actual play on the 16th.  There's just no way golfers are gonna be as ready to try that carry on the very first shot of the day.  For the most part, that hole (as the 1st) would play as a 233-yard layup and pitch.  Still the greatest layup and pitch in the world, maybe -- but that represents a significant change.
O fools!  who drudge from morn til night
And dream your way of life is wise,
Come hither!  prove a happier plight,
The golfer lives in Paradise!                      

John Somerville, The Ballade of the Links at Rye (1898)

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2023, 11:09:25 AM »
I really enjoy what Ben did a number of years back with the alternate ending to CPC, as much as it would be heresy to change it.  But that rendering seems pretty damn compelling.

PS.  Going back to the musical analogy with starting on 16, I couldn't imagine the 1812 Overture starting with the cannon shots, unless it was to make sure the audience was awake.. ;)

Jim_Coleman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2023, 11:17:33 AM »
   Other than to start a thread like this, why would you?

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How much worse (or better) would CPC be if it started on 16?
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2023, 11:30:10 AM »
   Other than to start a thread like this, why would you?


Why would you what?
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back