Melbourne's Heineken Classic Moved To Oregon Coast

[DMoriarty]

Well not really . . . .

But what if we created a composite course at Bandon, like they do at Royal Melbourne?   Which holes would make your composite 18, and why?  

Another way of looking at it . . . what holes at Bandon would you move to Pacific and what holes at Pacific would you replace?  Or visa versa.

Let's assume that we ignore the logistics of impossibly long walks.  [In other words, let's think like most architects.]  And let's leave out phantom courses.

[Gerry B]

The last Aussie open was held at The National Moonah Course outside of Melbourne - even though the Old Course at The National is better (IMHO)in terms of great holes. Do not like composite courses - or altering hole sequences on existing 18's - ie Olympia Fields at the last US Open. The USGA thought the prevailing winds would come into effect on the finishing holes based upon thier revised sequence  -and  they were wrong. In the case of Royal Melbourne their lofty world rankings is based upon a composite course -which is in my opinion unfair. Imagine if Olympic,Winged Foot, Oak Hill,Medinah, Baltusrol, Sunningdale, Walton Heath and other great clubs with multiple courses utilized this practice? The same goes for Bandon and Pacific -both great in their own right. Might as well put Cypress / Pebble  and
Shinnecock / NGLA together - I think not! Let them each stand on their own merit.

[Chris Kane]

Gerry B,
The last Australian Open WAS NOT held at the The National's Moonah course.  It was held at the nearby Moonah Links, which is an entirely separate facility

[Gerry B]

Chris:

I stand corrected. I thought The Monnah course at The National was the site of the Auusie Open. Played there in October. Could not understand what the fuss was all about as I thought The Old Course was much superior - now I know.

[DMoriarty]

Thanks for the correction.  I've changed the title accordingly.

Anyone care to try a composite course at Bandon?

[Dan Grossman]

I have a hard time w/ this thread because the courses are so different, in my opinion.  I feel that Bandon has more of a Scottish flavor while Pacific Dunes has an Irish feel.

What is the goal here David, the hardest course or the best course architecturally?  If I had to substitute holes on PD, the only ones I would look to replace are the par 5s (Save 18).  While I personally enjoy them because I like reachable par 5's, they are probably the least interesting.  But, I'm not  sure that the par 5s on Bandon are that much more interesting.

I think the Best holes on Bandon Dunes are #4, 5, 11 and 17.  But, I'm not sure where I would slot them in on Pacific.  If difficulty is the main driver, then maybe replace #1, #2, #6 and #16?  

Other thoughts?

[Gerry B]

Here is my take on the par 3's

Would take #15 at Bandon (nice bunker front right) and from Pacific #10 and  #11  -(as the prevailing wind makes for interesting club selection - last time I played there the 11th -138 yards was playing 190 yards)and #17 - simply a great one shotter.

[DMoriarty]

Dan,

They are very different stylistically, but I guess I am asking you to set aside the overall styles and instead focus on the quality of the hole.  

I had in mind to create best course architecturally (setting aside consistent styling),  but it might be interesting to see how a composite based on difficulty compares to a composite based on quality.  

I wouldn't replace any of PD's par 5s.  Not only do I like like PD's long holes,  but I also find BD's par 5s to be by far the weakest link on that course.

It is easy to pick quality holes at Bandon, but it becomes harder when you have to trade out holes at Pacific.   I'll try one . . .

I agree with you that BD 5 might be a solid contender.  But where to put it, that is the question . . . How about to replace PD No. 10?  This would relieve some of the discomfort people feel about the uneven nines and the back-to-back short holes.   Plus, I must confess that I am not a huge fan of PD 10 from the top tees.  A very good hole . . . but it feels a little too much like yet another drop shot par 3 . . . it somehow doesnt distinguish itself as 'unique' like the others at PD.    

My problem with this exchange is that (1)  I dont mind the back-to-back 3s or the imbalanced card, and (2) I very much like the PD 10 from the lower tee.  But since the markers are only on the lower tee part of the time, I guess I will reluctantly make the switch.  

[Chris Kane]

I hereby nominate this as the "Worst thread title on GCA".  Any competition?

[Danny Goss]

I agree Chris. Sure made us Aussies take a look at this thread pretty quickly!!
Why try to upstage the RM composite?
I'd ask....is there a better course anywhere in the world that permits a pro tournament each year? Composite or not?

[DMoriarty]

Nothing I said was meant to disparage or upstage Royal Melbourne (which by the way I would like to see more than any other course in the world.)  I mentioned it because it is (they are) excellent course(s) which are sometimes set up as a composite.  

Also, I thought the headline might draw some attention and indirectly generate some responses about Bandon.  I was apparently mistaken.

[By the way, the original heading inaccurately jested that 'the Australian Open moves to Oregon.'  Perhaps this heading, while incorrectly connecting RM with the Australian Open, conveyed that the heading was in jest.]

Geez, I never imagined that Australians were so quick to take offense.  You guys dont rate for Golfweek Australia, do you?  

While I do think your responses are rather a stretch, I am sorry if I truly offended you.

David

[THuckaby2]

Interesting excercise.

And man, I think I am gonna have to eat some humble pie here.  I've always maintained that Bandon Dunes is a damn fine course, and that those who say that if one has 10 rounds at the resort it should go 10 PD, 0 BD are off their rockers.  I've always put it more at 6-4 or 7-3 at most, in favor of PD.

Well.... I tried this exercise David suggests, and I only came up with four holes from BD that I thought HAD to be on the composite course.  Those are the par 3 12th and par 4 5th, 11th and 16th (yes, I put 16 on here - as much as I bitch about the impossible tee shot in the summer wind, the hole does intrigue the hell out of me so I want it in the composite).

So ok, that alone says a lot in that I only came up with 4 holes from BD as mandatory... and it gets even worse for my former position... that means I have to replace one par 3 and 3 par 4s from PD... and I can do the par 3 - I can live without either 5 or 10... but I can't find a single par 4 at PD that needs to give way for one of these BD holes!

So hmmmm... if basically all the best holes are on PD... well... OK, I'm not that humble - I still think BD is great fun and deserves playing, but if you want to say 8-2 at least I won't say you're off you're rocker.

Humbly,

TH

[Chris Kane]

DMoriarty,

I don't know why I'd be offended, and my comment has nothing to do with the courses at Royal Melbourne.  It has everything to do with a thread title which has absolutely nothing to do with the content of the thread!

Also, I thought the headline might draw some attention and indirectly generate some responses about Bandon.  I was apparently mistaken.

You were mistaken - highlighting an Australian course on this Ameri-centric discussion group is hardly going to generate more interest than a thread title like "Bandon-Pacific Composite Course?".  In fact, in my experience, any mention of an Australian course on any thread tends to kill the thread pretty quickly.  

[DMoriarty]

So your one change is BD 12 for PD 5 or PD 10.  

Interesting . . . I would have never picked 12.  To me it may be the poster eye candy hole.  Beautiful yes, and it presents an exciting tee shot.  But I find the green to be rather inartful given the setting.  For example the big dune on the right seems wasted, with the collection area at its base killing any real tie-in with the green.  In short, the green just seems to fight the surrounds a little, where it very easily could have gone with the flow.   A good hole? Yes.  A missed opportunity?  I think so.

Tom, make it easier on yourself, feel free to trade par 4 for 3 if you like.  PD would still make sense if one par 3 (or even 2) were replaced with a par 4.  

_______________________

Quite a few of us have played these two courses . . . anyone else want to take a shot at a composite course?  

[peter_p]

RM works a lot better because the two courses are intertwined, PB&BD only come together with the seam at BD6,7,8 and PD 7-11. The big difference is the the RM confluence is at their clubhouse, and that is not the case in Oregon.

Two routings which work on the ground at Bandon and have some allegiance to infrastructure but little thought to hole strength or par breaks at the 7th holes.  Start playing Bandon at the 1st hole and continue through the 7th, then play Pacific Dunes 8th to the PD pro shop. The other starts on PD #1, goes through #7, switching to BD at the 8th and continuing on BD through 18.

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty,

I don't know why I'd be offended, and my comment has nothing to do with the courses at Royal Melbourne.  It has everything to do with a thread title which has absolutely nothing to do with the content of the thread!

Mr. Kane,

I assumed that this group was astute enough to catch the reference to the Oregon Coast.   Apparently you dont think so and judging  by the level of response you may be right.

Nonetheless, I like the reference to RM because it makes the concept of a quality composite course seem more feasible.

Thank you for the literary critique and the suggested alternate title.  Again, you are probably entirely correct.  Yet still I'll stick with my heading, as my tastes run toward esoteric and away from banal.  

So you think it a bad idea to bring Australia into a discussion, if only as an example, because that might kill the discussion?   I guess I'd rather try not be quite as "America-centric" as you'd have me be, even it means being ignored.  
___________________

Peter,

I agree that the logistics and routing issues guarantee that a composite course will never work at Bandon.  But nonetheless, I think it an interesting exercise to create a fictional composite course based solely on the quality of the individual holes.  

Perhaps if you look at it this way . . . We could just as easily try to create a composite course between PD and Pebble.   If only a can think of a heading that will throw everyone off track . . . .

[THuckaby2]

David:

It's been awhile since I played these courses.  There's a par three on the back nine at Bandon that has a damn sinister pot bunker right in front, and plays toward the ocean.  It's not eye candy at all - not to me anyway - because it really doesn't look like much... at least from what I recall, the ocean isn't in view nor is anything else placed on this hole to look at that doesn't come into play.  I thought this was 12, but maybe I am wrong.  In any case, I REALLY liked that hole because we played it nearly all the time in a strong right to left wind, which made of all sorts of creative shot possibilities to get it around or over that pot bunker... the same thing would occur in the reverse wind as well... And the bunker itself is very deep, reminiscent to me of many in Scotland.  If this isn't 12, my bad.  But whatever the hole is, that one is a keeper for sure, to me.  

If I have the hole correct and your criticisms apply to this hole, then well, we shall agree to disagree.  I think the bunker alone makes the golf hole and the green sure seemed tough enough to me.

So OK, you're right - we sure can replace a par 3 from PD with a four from BD... so put me down for removing 5 and 10 on PD and adding 12 and 5 from BD.  

I somehow do want to get 11 and 16 BD into this mix also... and the more I think of it I do like #1 at BD also... I just can't find holes at PD I'm willing to give up for any of these.

And again, bear with me here - it has been quite awhile since I played either of these courses.  But you were getting so little response here, I thought I'd at least try!

TH

ps - are you gonna give an answer, or are you taking the Mucci approach?

[peter_p]

Tom,
#12 is a downhill redaninsh 180 yarder directly at the ocean with a bunker guarding the green. #15 is a uphill 150 yarder playing NW with a very deep recessed bunker, the floor probably 15 yards below green level.

Dave,
There are some very good holes left off the RM composite course because they're not in the home paddock, holes which some judge superior to some included ones.

[DMoriarty]

We are talking about the same hole.  I recall the tee being elevated and the ocean in view.  

The left bunker does make the hole difficult, but I dont really equate 'tough' with great.  

As for eye candy, there is that ocean thing.  Plus the big dune to the right becomes somewhat cosmetic-- it isnt blended into the greensite but rather seperated from the green by a small collection area.  

But to each his own.  

From the Bandon website


I did answer I think.  I would trade BD 5 for PD 10, reluctantly.  

Didnt your original message contain a reference to the green being tough enough because of the bunker?  

[THuckaby2]

Peter:

Thanks.  OK, 12 it is.  I just looked at the pic on the Bandon website though and man the angle there seems all wrong to me... I recall playing more AT the bunker than having it along side.  Maybe I am dreaming.

I just recall my buddies and I staying on this hole for 1/2 hour one afternoon playing shot after shot after shot and really digging it... Maybe we just couldn't get over the eye candy!

Thinking about this more, I also like 14 at BD - the way the green sets back against the shrub-covered dune also reminded me of some great holes overseas.  The bunkering on this hole is quite treacherous as I recall also.  #4 at BD is a damn fine golf hole also.

But like the others, I can't think of a hole on PD either of these would replace.  This is just more evidence to me of the greatness of PD...

TH

[Chris Kane]

David - fair enough, I now understand where you're coming from.  In the spririt of the "new" GCA, I'm going to drop the issue.  

Chris.

[THuckaby2]

David:

I too don't equate tough with great - you know that.

But I do equate "fun" with great - and that bunker makes this a very fun golf hole, because it allows for such a variety of shots.  I still don't get the eye candy point either... there sure are prettier views of the ocean on many holes at both courses (as I recall anyway).  I don't even remember the big dune on the left - isn't it way out of play?  I guess that could be tied in better... but man the dune on the right is in play enough that I can live with the break of a collection area on the left.

So in any case, our only differences here are on one extra replacement - I wasn't aware trading 10 PD for 5 BD was your complete answer.  But that's cool... and it remains pretty amazing to me... I really thought I'd come up with more potential replacements.  As I say, this was an interesting exercise - thanks!

TH

[Danny Goss]

David,

It would take more than that to offend most of us!!  

Back to the topic...........

[THuckaby2]

David:  my post crossed with your edit.  Thanks for posting the pic - that's the one I went and looked at.  Man I sure remember the hole playing from an angle far to the left of that pic - do I have it wrong?  I really remember going more OVER that bunker than around it... that is, it was right in our line, and one had to play a roping hook to go around it.  Maybe I am way off and if so, delete this from the replacement list!

And I did say, and never edited:

".  I think the bunker alone makes the golf hole and the green sure seemed tough enough to me."

By that I mean the bunker is so cool to me that I could live with a green that is relatively flat - because I thought you felt the green was boring.  To me the green is fine how it is and given the difficulty of the tee shot, I don't want the green to be any tougher.

Again, bear with me, it has been a long time.
 

[DMoriarty]

Tom, I meant the dune on the right.  It is in play, but not really incorporated, IMO.   As for the eye candy thing, I just dont see this hole being a favorite if that ocean thing wasnt set directly behind it.  

I thought I'd come up with more changes as well,  but just couldnt pull the trigger on getting rid of much at PD.  I think PD 5 is terrific.  

[Tags:]

Tags: