next »

[Jerry Kluger]

As of now, I haven't had the opportunity to play these gems and I was wondering if Sand Hills is a better course and why.  As I said I haven't played either one so I'm just trying to find out if the private course is better from an architecture point of view and is there a difference in maintenance quality. Has Ballyneal opened and how does it compare to these two.  

[A_Clay_Man]

Jerry, The differences between SH and WH are probably closely linked to their operating structure. As a private course SH gets away with being more dramatic, more penal, and, in any sense of the word, just plain bigger.
SH is also much more remote. The topography is somewhat similar, but WH is slightly more sedate, elevationally dramatically speaking.  One of the big differences, on the ground, is around the greens. At WH, Josh Mahar spends extra time and $ to keep the low mowed fescue green surrounds immaculate, which is integral to the designed-in playability of the greens. The slight difference in relative humidity (and the lack of cart traffic makes growing the fescue easier too)
The lack of a shared fairway is another difference. WH has one and SH doesn't.

As for Ballyneal, it has not opened yet, but I find that Mr. Doak has created a thoughtful design that appears, and is, part of it's enviornment.

Both SH and WH have what I describe as slow rollinh hills. At Ballyneal there are those but also a choppier sand dunes look. This choppiness has been used by team Doak with unparalelled effeciveness. Creating a canvas that will provide the core principles of unpredictability and roll-out unseen on most region's best.

[Tony Petersen]

 :)I've had the pleasure of playing both a number of times, and would have to say that Sand Hills is a grander vision relative to Wild Horse. Don't get me wrong, Wild Horse is a FANTASTIC golf course, and the green fees are one of the greatest bargains in golf today. Easily walkable, lots of shaping and subtleties to the greens, great routing, FUN 3's and 5's, all-around a course that I would be more than happy to play on any given day of the week. The thing with Sand Hills is the routing is superior, the greens are tough with more undulations and shaping that those at Wild Horse. The bottom line is in my honest opinion, Sand Hills is bigger and better than Wild Horse

[Jerry Kluger]

It's great to know that an outstanding public course can exist within a reasonable proximity of an outstanding private course. I wonder why this example cannot be followed in other areas around the country.  

[Mike_Cirba]

One major distinction in my mind is the simple fact that Sand Hills has 3 of the top 10 par fives on planet earth.

Beyond that, as has been noted, the scale and scope of Sand Hills is simply indescribable, like trying to explain the concept of infinity.  The mind simply reels at such an expansive, untouched landscape in every direction.

Finally, I can think of no other course in America where one's play from the tee is more exacting in the way it can ultimately differentiate scoring.  Think about it.

Wild Horse is wonderful, but Sand Hills is almost unique...so far.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

wow The difference between Sand Hills and anywhere is tough. Sand Hills is one of the great courses on earth period. The land is more dramatic than WH or Bally Neal. The holes are much stronger than WH. The golf experience is not comparable. Yet to say anything negative about WH is not fair. It is a wonderful course and a great golf experience as well. It is also one of the best values in golf. I have walked the holes at Bally neal which were grassed in last September. It is a very good course but doubt it will make it to Sand Hills stature inho.

[RJ_Daley]

I don't consider there is any "vs" in the discussion.  One is private, one public.  One is in authentic, dramatic sand hill territory and climate, one is at the edge of that.  One is isolated back country territory and one is in a small town and has housing.  One has dramatic blow out after blow out naturally occuring bunkers, one has a judicious stategic placement and crafting of sand blow out emulating bunkers and a very few naturally occuring ones.   One has wide greens surrounds more relavant to approach strategies than the other.  

I don't agree that SH has more drama in the greens than WH.  

Once BallyNeal is underway for a few years, the discussion will more logically become SH vs BallyNeal, not WH.

[Michael_Hendren]

At Ballyneal there are those but also a choppier sand dunes look. This choppiness has been used by team Doak with unparalelled effeciveness. Creating a canvas that will provide the core principles of unpredictability and roll-out unseen on most region's best.

Careful, Adam.  Any farther up there and you'll need a miner's head-lamp to find your way out.

Mike

[Jerry Kluger]

I think that the conclusion that I have come to is that SH is perhaps the best modern private course in the U.S. and WH is the best value in the U.S.

[Larry_Keltto]

I've played Ballyneal three times (it opened for member play in October), Sand Hills approximately five times, and Wild Horse approximately three times.

There's no doubt in my mind that Sand Hills is superior to Wild Horse.

Some will prefer Ballyneal and some will prefer Sand Hills. Generally, if you enjoy terrain like that found at Ballybunion, you will prefer Ballyneal. If you fancy Royal Dornoch, then you'll go for Sand Hills.

Rolling Stones/Beatles, Beethoven/Mozart -- Ballyneal/Sand Hills will be one of those types of debates.

[David_Tepper]

Jerry -

Based on the little bit I know about the development of Wild Horse, there are 3 issues that would make replicating a course like it difficult (but certainly not impossible) elsewhere in the U.S.

1) Land in that part of the U.S. is VERY cheap relatively to most anywhere else.
2) The land there was also very suitable for laying out a golf course  and did not require the effort and expense of pushing a lot of dirt around.
3) Much of the construction was done on more or less a volunteer basis by members of the community. Farmers donated the use of their tractors & graders, among other things, to help out with the building of the course.      

While it was not exactly the same situation, the conception and development of Stevinson Ranch in central California does have a certain similarity to Wild Horse.

It certainly can be (and is being) done elsewhere in the U.S., but it takes a somewhat unique set of circumstances to happen.

DT

[Mike_Cirba]

I think that the conclusion that I have come to is that SH is perhaps the best modern private course in the U.S. and WH is the best value in the U.S.

Jerry,

You can probably drop the "modern private" descriptors and the statement will remain accurate.

[A_Clay_Man]

Hey, I only toured the course, too, but it wasn't after multiple days of carousing around SH. I believe I have much better speculative powers than J.B..  

The shot demands, from the abundance of awkward stance possiblities, will be so thrilling, and so mind consuming, that it will be no surprise to me, if a majority of golfers don't "get it". Their loss.

And the art work is phennominal.

 How someone as well travelled as JB can't see the forest through trees is way beyond me.

Bogey, The only butt boy i will ever be confused with is not an individual, but a quality of workmanship and principles vastly superior to most.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I do not find the comparison between Sand Hills and Bally Neal to be the same as I see it. Sand Hills is in a totally remot almost sureal world, whereas Bally Neal is on the edge of an area of rolling features. There is a main highway on the horizon from Bally Neal as well. The sand hills at Sand Hills are huge and much closer to Cruden Bay than anywhere I have been before.

[Tom Huckaby]

You guys, don't you remember the Muccian Dogma?

All that matters is what's on the golf course.  All this talk about expansiveness, totally remote surreal world... for shame... do you guys REALLY want yourselves down in the gutter with me, believing that things like this matter?

 

God I hope Mucci sees this thread.

Re WH v. SH, talk about a comparison that's been beaten to death... Of course I come down exactly like JB said, that it's unfair to WH to even make the comparison.  And of course I got torn a new ass for saying that the last time this came up.  So methinks the less said the better.

We shall see what we shall see re Ballyneal... God I hope to see it, and soon.  Methinks also that the SH/Ballyneal battle will come down just like Larry K. says.

Mike Cirba - from your words here do I take it that at long last Pine Valley has been toppled from the pinnacle for you?  If so, welcome to the brotherhood.

 

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Huckaby,

Yes, my last fall's look at PV cinched it.

The combination of fine-tooth-sandpro-grooming of the sandy wilderness combined with a plethora of trees still in play and blocking original strategic routes have dropped it from the top echelon, IMHO.

You must have missed it...back then I wrote that it's crying out for a "RESTORATION".

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom Huckaby,

Yes, my last fall's look at PV cinched it.

The combination of fine-tooth-sandpro-grooming of the sandy wilderness combined with a plethora of trees still in play and blocking original strategic routes have dropped it from the top echelon, IMHO.

On the one hand that's kinda sad, given that PV fell... what I wanted more was SH to rise.

But we'll take it however we can get it.  The brotherhood does need more members.

 

[Mike_Cirba]

On the one hand that's kinda sad, given that PV fell... what I wanted more was SH to rise.

But we'll take it however we can get it.  The brotherhood does need more members.

 

Well, I guess one can argue that you have to knock out the champ to take the title, but in this case it's feeling more like watching Muhammad Ali deteriorate against Leon Spinks and others in the late 70s.

What's there now is a shadow of what once was, and only differs from my example in the promise of what it still could be.

[Jerry Kluger]

Mike: I still very much believe that the modern and classical should be considered in their own right - those that have withstood the test of time and the manner in which they were built requires that they receive the respect which they have earned.  You cannot compare a Duesenberg to today's top vehicles but by no means does that diminish what the Dusenberg was and will always be.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jerry Kluger,

The golf courses aren't remotely close to one another, they're hours apart, and if you don't catch the 15 second freight train gap at the Brady crossing, it could be days.

I think Wild Horse is a fabulous, underrated golf course.

It's certainly far, far easier to walk than Sand Hills.

Since Huckaby has brought up the surroundings, the views,
Sand Hills enjoys are pristine, natural views unencumbered by man made structures, except for that fellow who objected to the windmill well on # 18.  Wild  Horse has homes adjacent to the property which taint Huckaby's views.

You couldn't go wrong playing either golf course, to the exclusion of others, for the rest of your life.

The unfortunate thing about both, is getting there.
Perhaps the addition of Ballyneal will make the trip more attractive.

Bandon has the advantage of three or more courses immediately adjacent to one another and on site lodging to accomodate rounds at all three, whereas, playing the other courses requires moving.

Mike Cirba,

That's rather lofty praise for Sand Hills's par 5's.
You must not have found the need to chip, and therefore elevated their rankings to new heights.

[A_Clay_Man]

One other key difference between the two courses has to do with how one plays their approach shots to the greens. At WH there are few opportunities where hitting the green on a fly is the right choice. In other words, the player must be aware or have knowledge of forethought to play to a spot usually short of, or to one side or the other, to get the ball close.
SH, as I recall didn't promote that kind of game, as much. Please correct me if thats incorrect.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jerry,

I'd agree with you that different means of construction, evolutionary factors, and the test of time make it difficult to compare courses across eras and generally one needs to consider those factors when undertaking an exercise in cross-referencing them.

Understanding that dilemma, however, I do feel it's possible, even as an admittedly flawed exercise, to compare and contrast what is presently on the ground today between courses of different eras.  

If a course that was viewed as the best course on the planet for its rugged natural features, grand width and scale, and strategic options of play is allowed to stray from that model through neglect or modern notions of fairness and challenge over time, then in my mind it is not the course it was in the past, however great that legacy may have been.

Patrick,

Funny guy!  

Actually, one of the reasons I'm so fond of the par fives at Sand Hills is exactly the reason you stated.  Not only does the intense requirements of the approach shot put pressure on the golfer all the way back to the tee, but the intense recovery options that exist once one misses on that approach make them all staggering in their complexity and challenge.

Can you name 10 better par fives?

[John Kavanaugh]

The combination of fine-tooth-sandpro-grooming of the sandy wilderness combined with a plethora of trees still in play and blocking original strategic routes have dropped it from the top echelon, IMHO.

You must have missed it...back then I wrote that it's crying out for a "RESTORATION".

Mike,

I guess you know this from the study of pictures taken long ago...The same could be said for the evolution of Sand Hills less the trees...every year it appears to get cleaner and cleaner.  How long before your fickle eye demands a like restoration for this gem.

[Mike_Cirba]

John,

Sand Hills as a micro-environment differs widely from Pine Valley.  Not only is it completely exposed to anything and everything Mother Nature might dish out, but high winds and shifting sand are an ongoing challenge, I'm sure.

However, I can never imagine it becoming so stabilzed that it would be groomed and polished as the latter course is doing, either in terms of environment or philosophy.

It's reached the point where clumps of vegetation growing in the formerly sandy wilderness have to be interspersed far enough from each other to drive a sandpro through.  

[Jerry Kluger]

Gentlemen: What I am getting from this discussion is that SH is clearly worth the trip on its own while WH is great but questionable as to whether it would be worth the trip on its own. So now lets make the question tougher - 3 rounds at SH or one round at each of the Bandon courses.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jerry,

As I'm sure you know, both destinations are so remote that they require a real leap of travel to get there.  That being the case, the courses had best be quite special.  

Sutton Bay has the same challenge, as well, I'm guessing.

That being said, it's probably true that the average golfer would venture to the middle of nowhere, Nebraska to play Sand Hills, but might not do the same for Wild Horse.  Given that, it still does not diminish Wild Horse for me as a great course.  After all, Dick Daley makes frequent trips to WH and loves it so much he's got property there.

Your next question is largely a matter of perspective.  Myself, I am fascinated by seeing various courses designed by multiple designers so if I'd played neither, and all things being equal, I'd opt for the 3 at Bandon.

However, all things aren't equal.  With money and time, you could play Bandon anytime.  The private nature of Sand Hills is such that if you receive an invite, you'd better get your butt on a plane!  

[Jerry Kluger]

Mike: I appreciate your input and I would like you to expand on your comments concerning PV - exactly what has happened to the course which has you so down on it - I'm probably going to see a friend who has been club champ there a number of times and I'd like to run your comments by him.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Jerry,

I must admit, I feel like the man who lives in paradise and complains that the clouds are too fluffy.  As a Philly/Delaware Valley guy, I'm blessed with local proximity to just a wealth of wonderful golf courses, including two in everyone's top ten.

To criticize PV in any way seems almost blasphemous, especially around here, but I also think that myths are meant to be questioned and valid opinions offered, even if it rattles the china at the dinner party.  Stealing Tom Doak's line about great art needing debate and criticism to remain vital, I've probably said more than I should in the past about practices at some of the local shrines.  

However, I truly believe that any worth I may have on this board is simply that people know I'll call it as I see it, right or wrong, controversial or not.

My quibbles with PV are minor, but let's remember that we're trying to split hairs in contrasting and comparing some of the greatest of the great.  In and of themselves, these things don't make PV less than a great course, but in my opinion, do make it less than it could be.

I also believe that this is what virtually every other GCA guy from the region would tell you privately after a couple of beers.  

First, the trees;  even with many removed over recent years there are still way too many impeding former trails and avenues for golf.  Case in point is #12, where the hole could be markedly improved by clear-cutting the whole lot of them out to the ridge.  As it stands now, there is only one way to play the hole, and any temptation for risk/reward is off the table because a forest has overgrown that side.  Similarly, trees cut off the hole left side approach of #13, and walking around the course I defy anyone to find less than 500 trees that stand where bunkers, waste area, or even fairway once stood.

Next, the former sandy wilderness waste areas.  The once feared pits of doom, where literally anything could happen due to their raw and uncertain nature, are GROOMED with a Sandpro daily.  Rakes are the logical next step.  Areas of vegetation that used to be sprinkled randomly throughout now exist only in patterns wide enough to drive machinery through.  More formalized bunkers that were plainly "unfair", such as the left side of number 10 where a play backwards or sideways was often the option have been widened, and groomed in a way where the ball will always roll down to the bottom, instead of in an awkward sidehill, downhill, or uphill stance.  One can literally find as much ruggedness in bunkering at faux imitations such as World Woods than exists presently at the Valley.

Finally, a handful of the new tees, such as the abominable elevated altar at 14 are incongruous, or require play that differs from historical lines.  

All in all, not much when one considers the overall greatness of the holes there, as well as the wonderful flavor of the club itself.  However, as I said, it's not what it could be and it's probably not what it should be, in my opinion.  

[Jerry Kluger]

If I see my friend next week I'll try and get his thoughts - I will be very interested in seeing what he thinks as he has been openly critical of the amount of play the course gets and I think that some of the concerns you have might be a result of the amount of play and how much of it is guest play.

[A_Clay_Man]

it's probably true that the average golfer would venture to the middle of nowhere, Nebraska to play Sand Hills, but might not do the same for Wild Horse.  

Mike, You can never go wrong with qualifiers like "probably" and "average" golfer.

While it is only a tiny quibble, I would say that the average golfer who seeks out new and interesting public (affordable)designs, does get in the car and treks to Gothen city.

I have met such, here at Pinon Hills, while on their travels. They love golf and cant' afford the hoity toity CCFAD's.
Another reason that Gothen City gets average players is it's prox to I-80.

Like I said a small quibble almost semantical, BUT, when you see an average Joe, after playing a course like WH, they are forever altered due to their limited exposure to those design styles most found in metro areas.

[Mike_Cirba]

Adam,

That's exactly why I used qualifiers like "average" and "maybe".  

Because I know there are nuts like you and me who would drive 8 hours each way to play courses we're excited about!  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

I could, but, what would the point be ?

Suffice it to say that they're good holes that fit well with the others.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba,

I could, but, what would the point be ?

Suffice it to say that they're good holes that fit well with the others.

Patrick,

I daresay they're great holes and I'd be hard pressed to name a group of 3 par fives that are better.

I'd really like to hear which par fives you think are superior, even if you just want to submit 3.