News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff_Stettner

Links of North Dakota
« on: July 08, 2001, 07:08:00 PM »
I wanted to wax poetically about my round in rural North Dakota today, but the words I want aren't finding their way to the surface. I played a round of golf on a course that's a really fine example of what is right in the world of contemporary golf construction.
The Links of North Dakota is much like Sand Hills and Wildhorse in that it stands in the middle of nowhere. The town of Williston, small by anyone's standards, is 27 miles away, and one must take about five miles of unfinished road to reach the layout.
Which is just really good. The routing is strong, flowing effortlessly across some very unique farmland. A wide section of the Missourri river stands off in the distance, offering remarkable views while allowing for some serious wind. The greens are humpy-bumpy fun, with swales and rolls that make for intersting putts on every green. The bunkering, while lacking artistic flair, is very well placed, often dictating alternate routes. My only real complaint woulf be the finishing holes, 17 and 18, which run along power lines and the entry road. After 16 serene holes, they are a decided letdown.
I played The Links with my father, a 26 handicap golfer who doesn't share my passion for golf course architecture. Even he walked off 18 wondering how such a course ended up where it did.
Holes of note:
2. A short par four split into two fairways by a bunker complex that forces the golfer to bite off as much as he can chew. Most architects would have stopped there, by Kay then builds a green overlooking the river that is flanked down the left by three more bunkers and divided by a legitimate ridge. Serious fun, and while I won't go into this kind of description on every hole, the thought Kay put into the design exists everywhere.
3 and 11.
Two great short par 3's that have top-notch greens. 3 runs sharply off the back while eleven is a neat punchbowl.
12-16.
A wonderful stretch of par 4's that range from 350-475. While five par fours in a row can be tiring, here it's not. The pacing and direction of the holes ensure that difficulty is never overwhelming, using the wind and rolls in the ground to make sure that four-irons and wedges will both be needed on approach shots.

The round cost $75 for my father and I (combined) and they had a fleet of pull carts available. One gentleman ran the whole ship, from greens fees to food.
Everything I like about golf was present at the Links. A good course that was walker friedly. No tee-times (you don't need them there). Affordability. Fun.


Ron_Whitten

Links of North Dakota
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2001, 11:21:00 AM »
I agree with almost everything you wrote, except I wouldn't classify the bunkering as "inartistic." Each artist has his own style. These were apparently dictated by budget, simple shapes meant to be low maintenance. Part of the reason why Red Mike is so affordable is that it's low maintenance. Gnarly faces, banks and edges may look more "artistic", but they're high maintenance items. Ask Coore and Crenshaw what it takes to retain those features long term.

Frankly, the bunkering seemed to fit the simplicity of the site. If Stephen Kay had tried to do massive Sand Hills-style blow-out bunkers, and made them basically oval, then I'd agree with you. But what he installed in North Dakota seemed to be just right.

As for 17 and 18, I thought 17 was a good par-3 that played nasty into the wind. I agree 18 was the most ordinary hole on the course, but the same can be said of many, many courses, old and new. Nothing one good set of cross bunkers clear across the fairway couldn't rememdy.


Josh_Mahar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Links of North Dakota
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2001, 03:31:00 PM »
Jeff,  I am glad to see you enjoyed a good golf course for a decent price out on the prairie. I work at one of those types of courses and appreciate people who can appreciate such courses.
Ron, I do have to disagree with the idea that the ragged gnarly edges of bunkers are high maintenance.  After working at Sand Hills and Wild Horse I have yet to touch a bunker edge with an edging tool.  They are very simple to maintain-- just leave them alone.  
The key for any of you who might be doing bunker renovation or construction is to use fine fescues (when agronomically possible) for your bunker edges.  Very little creeping and bunch type growth creates excellent looking bunkers.

Tommy_Naccarato

Links of North Dakota
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2001, 01:45:00 PM »
Ron,

Personally, I think the C&C method is what most manufactured bunkering should look like, but that is my personal preference. I just don't see where this style of bunkering requires constant maintenance which as you know only loses its ragged-look after a given time because of the insistence to make it pretty. (Hence Riviera and many others.)

Personally, I don't like the term "Artistic" for this style of bunkering because in actuality it is more natural, even though it has been constructed. It also seems to be more evolved and thus even more intimidating. In my thinking (No matter how deranged it is) I would liken RTJ-style bunkering as Artistic. It surely isn't natural-looking is it?

Asking a question if I may, I have seem to take notice that the Ron Whitten personal-like is the cleaned edge/RTJ-style of bunkering. Is this corect?

Realizing this is all about personal taste, what is it that YOU like all aspects of a golf course to look like in say any paticular environment? (Sand, putting surfaces, etc.) From my guessing from past posts, you like Sand Hills, but you aren't crazy about it and you didn't care for Talking Stick enough to the point you labeled it "Architorture."

What type of design can be considered the Ron Whitten prefered style of golf architecture?

(Please trust me, that I'm not going anywhere with this.)

I would also like to add that in all of the times I have read your writings, this is the first time I have heard you mention anything about maintenance. While I'm sure you probably have written much more in great lengths, I have never seem to remember it from a standpoint of you which you are taking here.


Gene Greco

  • Karma: +0/-0
Links of North Dakota
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2001, 06:23:00 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Ron W. has put in his will the wish to have his ashes spread at The Sand Hills Golf Club. I guess he MUST like it.
"...I don't believe it is impossible to build a modern course as good as Pine Valley.  To me, Sand Hills is just as good as Pine Valley..."    TOM DOAK  November 6th, 2010

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Links of North Dakota
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2001, 07:06:00 PM »
Or, if he lives long enough to put latches on the will and change the ash top dressing to the "Irish Alps" north of Kearney, if he'd ever get busy with that one!  
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Tommy_Naccarato

Links of North Dakota
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2001, 12:06:00 AM »
Gene,
I will say this once again, just to get it across better.

"I'm not trying to go anywhere with this."

I am however asking the question(s) of Mr. Whitten from previous postings in GCA, One he claimed that there are several people that don't care for Sand Hills. (I'm assuming panelists or Fazio-designed course owners) When Ron wrote in this forum, it came across to me and others that he didn't really care for Sand Hills, judging from the tone.

Since you are answering for him, why not answer the rest of the questions for him?


Ran Morrissett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Links of North Dakota
« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2001, 09:16:00 AM »
Jeff, You mention that it's on "farmland" - I take it that the soil isn't quite as sandy as the two in Nebraska? Nonetheless, I assume low running shots are possible/encouraged? How far is it from Jim Engh's new course?

Jeff_Stettner

Links of North Dakota
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2001, 10:30:00 AM »
Ran:
I've not been to Sand Hills or Wildhorse, so I cannot compare the soil base. Most of the surrounding areas are farmed; either land grazed by cattle or crops of some sort (I'm a big city kid and couldn't recognize anything other than corn). The course did play firm and fast, though not as much so as I imagine the Nebraska courses. I would speculate that the lack of play has led to a slightly lower conditioning budget than the owners would like, and the course is still suffering from some winter freeze. Still, the greens putted well, and differing shot options existed on almost every hole.
Hawktree is 3-4 hours away by car, and due to it's location in Bismark, with an area population of 100,000, a much busier facility. I played Hawktree as well, and while I thought the course was well-routed and fun to play, in my mind it pales next to The Links. Engh did do a great job fitting the course into some neat natural corridors, but the bunkering, with the black slag, looks really manufactured (the bunkers are really small and snake-like) and the greens were somewhat monotonous. If the Links is an 8, and I think it is, than Hawktree is a soild 6.  

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back