|
Question #39 - On Hole #8, the architect recommended "re-grading of the fairway as it transitions down to the creek crossing to make it receptive to holding either long tee shots or lay-up shots. |
# |
Response Date |
Comment: |
1. |
4/3/2008 2:44:00 AM |
I like #8 |
2. |
4/3/2008 3:40:00 PM |
High cost for small improvement. |
3. |
4/3/2008 5:17:00 PM |
not needed |
4. |
4/3/2008 9:39:00 PM |
Yes, absolutely! |
5. |
4/6/2008 3:11:00 AM |
Not necessary. |
6. |
4/6/2008 6:54:00 AM |
This is what currently makes #8 one of the best holes on the course. This is what makes golfers thing about each and every shot on this hole, how to lay up and where, or how to go for it, and the penaty. |
7. |
4/6/2008 6:28:00 PM |
Okay as is |
8. |
4/8/2008 5:22:00 AM |
It's a great hole the way it is |
9. |
4/11/2008 11:16:00 PM |
Keep some fun in the game. |
10. |
4/13/2008 6:24:00 PM |
Cost & Not necessary |
11. |
4/15/2008 9:53:00 PM |
Cut the rough longer to hold the ball. |
12. |
4/16/2008 12:08:00 AM |
not a big deal however |
13. |
4/16/2008 8:36:00 PM |
play course as you find it! |
14. |
4/19/2008 5:46:00 PM |
Depends on cost impact and downtime estimates |
15. |
4/20/2008 1:16:00 AM |
I like it the way it is. Don't make it too appealing to lay up. |
16. |
4/21/2008 4:42:00 PM |
wasted spending |
17. |
4/21/2008 7:38:00 PM |
Better club selection is a better option |
18. |
4/21/2008 11:20:00 PM |
Isn't that the challenge? |
19. |
4/22/2008 9:57:00 PM |
More challenging as it is now! And still playable for most players. |
20. |
4/23/2008 7:52:00 PM |
don't make the hole easier |
21. |
4/23/2008 11:11:00 PM |
Not sure if this would be a value added expenditure. |
22. |
4/25/2008 2:37:00 PM |
cost..not in house |
23. |
4/25/2008 2:59:00 PM |
unnecessary expense |
24. |
4/25/2008 10:31:00 PM |
add berm or levee on fairway side of stream |
25. |
4/27/2008 9:17:00 PM |
Not needed |