« on: August 11, 2008, 01:56:36 PM »
I dont think the design is so far fetch, I believe the design was tryin to utilize more of the elevation rather than the trees. Though I do believe there should have been more thought incorporating the trees. BV's layout has seemingly been very widely discussed since its erection. I think the only puzzling thing about it is the fact that there is NO HOLE UNDER 300ft. YET you call them par 3's. When if you look at the SSA on most of those supposed par 3's you'll find they rank around 3.5. Which to a pro is a scratch three. Or in other terms... BORING. In the reconstruction I ask only one thing.. Be a true "golf" course and give it 7 REAL par 3's And I dont mean hole #10's version of a par three.
If your going to wear people out playing at least make it a fair course which allows golfers to walk away saying MAN that was a challenge but boy was it fun to play. Most of the time people walk off and say... Well nothing cause they are tired and ready to sleep.