MoWillie #13 is pretty bad also - erosion has taken almost all the landing area. What's left is either (a) hitting out of a divot or (b) trying to avoid the tree at the dog-leg.
Hancock #3 and #5 see a lot better than #6,7,8 IMO. Why do you disliike#3 and #5, just because they are so dangerous (blind shots with tons of high handicappers and duffers)?
3, because the green is built into the side of a cliff, and is about 15' wide. Even if you're on the green, there's a 50% chance your putt will roll into the second fairway. 5 is just a stupid and dangerous hole. Small green sloping down into a gully (miss your putt here, and it could be 2 shots before you're putting again), with the road behind it, and the only thing you can see from the teebox is the practice green. 6,7,8 are boring, short, unimaginitve, and repetitve, but I always break par on the three of them, so I can appreciate them for that
The two Hancock's are awful. I also dislike #12 at Muny. I am always hitting a 70 yard second shot to a sucky landing area.
#12 is a great risk/reward hole when I hit a decent drive and think about going for it in two (esp., when it's playing downwind). Otherwise, it can be pretty awkward. I guess that happens when technology outdates a course.
I kinda like #3. It plays well to my slice. Although once I was standing near the ladies tee waiting for Mrs. Guapo to tee off and I got whacked in the head by a ball from the group behind us trying to hit up on the #2 green. Every single time I've played Hancock, I've hit what I thought was a good shot off the tee on #5 and I have yet to find even one of my balls. I don't know if they go too far and bounce over the parking lot or if they veer deceptively left and run off in the woods. Plus there's nothing like seeing a half dozen 7 year olds on the practice green, directly in your slice zone. But because of the creek and the uphill slope you have no choice but to launch it. I agree, it's a dangerous hole. How about #4 at Butler Pitch & Putt? The slightest pull and you've taken out a windshield. I'm not sure which hole #'s but there are 3 or 4 sloping fairways at Crystal Falls that should be outlawed. Even a perfect shot ends up rolling off the damn cliff.
There are a couple at Crystal Falls MGC in Leander that are pretty bad. A drive that splits the middle of a fairway can roll sideways down the slope, over a berm and into the cedar trees. Good times.
#3 at Hancock is the worst. You have a short shot into a very narrow green off a hardpan fairway. #5 is also a joke. I had 7 putts on those 2 holes last week. If the city would spend $500k on that course it could be really nice. Instead it is going to hell. #12 at muni is a good hole. I have made about 20 eagles on it over my lifetime. The Hogan hole however can bite my ***... #9 at Lago Vista (my house is on the tee box) is another 'interesting' hole.
Crystal Falls is the winner - I especially dislike #9 - everything rolls left towards the creek, and the hole sits back left behind a big-*** ******* tree. It's just a poorly designed hole - there's potential, but it's a shitt hole. I'm not a huge fan of #16 at Kizer, or #16 at Muni. On the flip side, #9 at Blackhawk is a fantastic hole - I wish they kept better care of that golf course. It's better than it gets credit for, and they seem to have just given up in the face of Star Ranch and Forrest Creek.
17at kizer always gets me. 2 at Highland lakes is a beast, especially when the pin is placed on the front.
Two major problems in going for the green on 12 at Muny. 1) I suck at golf. Going for it usually entails a 220 yard shot over a ravine. There is a big *** tree to the left side, and a big *** canyon right of the green. The only place you can miss is long left, and I can't go long from there. 2)Even if I could pull off this shot with any sort of reliability, at Muny I'm usually going to have to wait 20 minutes to hit this shot. Which means I'm going to top it into the drink, after making the teebox wait 20 minutes. Admittedly, some of the problem is I suck, but a good hole will never not have a reasonable alternative to a 200 yard carry.
I knew what you are going to type before I even read this thread. Hancock - so freaking dangerous coupled with shity golfers
Man, if you go to Hancock and ***** about ****** golfers then go somewhere else. A course that ****** is where bad golfers should go. That course is SO bad that if you are any good, playing there can only hurt your game. Man that course is a waste of money
Been there and done that. Hey, funny that you live on 9 at Lago Vista. I like that hole in a vacuum, but always am scared that I'm about to be beaned if it's crowded. Also, I always putt WAY short going from the back of the green to the front. I know it's an optical illusion but can't help it.
I live on the other side of the tee box, so you aren't hitting it over my house If you aim jus to the right of the tree on the right hand side of the fairway and hit a slight fade you are in good shape for driving the green. I drive it all the time with a 3 wood.
Many of the holes at Hancock suck...but if you know what you're getting into, it can be fun...a lot of risk/reward. Muni 16 has always killed me...they should move that tee box back about 50 yards...although given the layout, I'm not sure it's even possible. I just hate hitting a 4-iron or so to layup into a downhill fairway, hitting back uphill. 18 is also a POS...what a terrible finishing hole. Mo Willie No. 12 sucks, although I did eagle that hole once. I think about 20 years ago someone was murdered on that hole. 17 at Kizer is a hole that if properly designed and had good landmarks and definition could be a pretty nice hole. As it is, it also sucks. To throw out a couple of other suggestions besides what has been mentioned. No. 3 (or 12) depending on which nine they have first now at Jimmy Clay is a waste of earth. Tree-lined on the right, creek (and huge bunkers) to the left, fairway slopes to the left, and you have to hit a mid-iron off the tee. Granted, I haven't seen the course in probably 10 years, so maybe they've made some improvements, but with a decent design, they could make that into a great golf hole. There are many others. I used to play at Great Hills, and I would hate to own the house on the left side of No. 3...that thing has to get hit a dozen times a day. And before they totally re-hauled 9, 16, 17, and 18, those were absolutely awful holes. 9 was just brutal. 16 was a terrible par 3 straight up a hill. 17 was a blind tee shot over a hill (3-wood just to get it up quick enough), and 18 (after it was shortened because of the road/firehouse) was a near-drivable par 4 with absolutely no distinction. Now those holes are really good holes (with the exception of the completely blind approach shot at 9). I'm trying to remember other holes...I believe there was par 3 at one of the Balcones courses (Spicewood) that was over water, very shallow green, and at least a 40-50 ft dropoff right behind the green. No bailout area, bad design. But pretty much every hole on both those courses sucked. Wow...lots of memories.
#9 at Lago Vista kicks *** because more often than not I slice the **** out of my drives. On that hole, that means driving the green.
Which hole is it at Hancock that runs alongside the road? The one if you really belt it, you can clear the other street and land in yards? That one rules. Damn, it's been nearly 15 years since I last played there.
But #5 has the charm of hitting some poor sucker on the practice green (since that is the optimal landing spot anyway).
I love 16 at Kizer! A long 3 wood, or sometimes a Driver, and you're left with a 20/30yd chip! unless you get luck and it rolls up the right side of the fringe. Kizer #10 with the wind is the toughest par 4 in the world.(pying from Blue or tips) There's no way you can make it to the green in 2. No chance in hell.
don't you mean #11 at Kizer? 10 is a somewhat shortish par 4..11 is the real monster. I also hate #13 at Plum Creek in Kyle, esp when it was 1st opened and they had a bunker you had to carry. Used to be impossible to fly that and keep it in the fairway.
