NoyGonnaDoIt

It is.

Check the PTS and see if you can find the reference to being required to use one of the recommended patterns (hint: there isn't one).

I found the reference I mentioned earlier. The April 1994 issue of AFS-600 Designee Update Vol. 6, No. 2,
"A quarterly publication designed to serve the Examiner, Designee, and
Instructor Community" has this to say:

==============================
HOLDING PATTERNS

***

Another question frequently asked, "Must the pilot examiner test the applicant using the recommended holding pattern entry, or can the applicant use any desired method? In the past, an applicant would have been required to use one of the three recommended procedures; however, a change has occurred.

The January 6, 1994, issue of the AIM, page 5-3-7, paragraph (d), now states: "While Other entry procedures may enable the aircraft to enter the holding pattern and remain within protected airspace, the parallel, teardrop and direct entries are the procedures for entry and holding recommended by the FAA."

If an applicant elects to use holding pattern entry procedures other than those recommended by the FAA and, in doing so, remains within the holding pattern airspace to be protected, the procedure would be acceptable if accomplished safely.
==============================

16 years ago. Old habits die hard.

The "catch" in the context of the checkride is that while the use of other patterns is ok, the PTS does require that the applicant

==============================
Explains and uses an entry procedure that ensures the aircraft remains within the holding pattern airspace for a standard, nonstandard, published, or nonpublished holding pattern.
==============================

Not much to "explain" with the recommended patterns and probably easier for most applicants than the answer to, "So tell me, how does this entry you made up guarantee that you will remain unprotected airspace?" for a truly unique entry.