[Sean Leary]

If Sandpines hadn't been built and that property became available now to build a course (and assuming Rees was still the architect), would he do it completely differently based on the success of Sand Hills, Bandon, Ballyneal, Dismal etc?

When it was built, it was listed as the number 1 best value course in America by Golf Digest.  As the current en vogue minimalist style on duneslike land hadn't really taken off yet, it was initially deemed a success based upon what else was out there.  

Is Sandpines built on the same "platform" so to speak as, say Atlantic was (I haven't played and don't know much about it, but it was built around the same time by Rees), and could it be reasonably be said that that course may have turned out differently as well ,based upon the prevailing style if it were to be built today, no matter who the architect.

I don't think Nicklaus Design would have built Dismal the way they did without the change in prevailing style of the times. Don't you think Rees would try to incorporate the dunes more now at Sandpines based upon the current trend. In a nutshell, was it the architect, or the current style that prevailed by which we now deem Sandpines to be a failure.

[Patrick_Mucci]

If Sandpines hadn't been built and that property became available now to build a course (and assuming Rees was still the architect), would he do it completely differently based on the success of Sand Hills, Bandon, Ballyneal, Dismal etc?

Have you played Sandpines, Bandon Dunes, Pacific Dunes, Bandon Trails, Ballyneal and Dismal River ?

The properties listed above are so similar to the property at Sandpines.  In fact, they're almost identical, totally interchangeable, so I'm sure that he'd do it differently.

Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River are private golf courses and Bandon is a resort hotel, so again, the similarity continues.
[/color]

When it was built, it was listed as the number 1 best value course in America by Golf Digest.  As the current en vogue minimalist style on duneslike land hadn't really taken off yet, it was initially deemed a success based upon what else was out there.  

Is Sandpines built on the same "platform" so to speak as, say Atlantic was (I haven't played and don't know much about it, but it was built around the same time by Rees), and could it be reasonably be said that that course may have turned out differently as well ,based upon the prevailing style if it were to be built today, no matter who the architect.

As a private or public facility ?[/color]

I don't think Nicklaus Design would have built Dismal the way they did without the change in prevailing style of the times.


Do you think Dismal River would have been built if Sand Hills wasn't already there ?[/color]

Don't you think Rees would try to incorporate the dunes more now at Sandpines based upon the current trend.


How familiar are you with the characteristics of Oblique Dunes ?

Again, the "dunes" at Sandpines are identical to those at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, aren't they ?
[/color]

In a nutshell, was it the architect, or the current style that prevailed by which we now deem Sandpines to be a failure.


Who is the "we" you refer to ?

Perhaps the owner/developers should be included in the mix.

Ross said, "Drainage, drainage, drainage"

Who said, "Location, location, location" ?

Do you equate the location and qualities of the properties at Bandon and Sandpines ?[/color]

[Sean Leary]

If Sandpines hadn't been built and that property became available now to build a course (and assuming Rees was still the architect), would he do it completely differently based on the success of Sand Hills, Bandon, Ballyneal, Dismal etc?

Have you played Sandpines, Bandon Dunes, Pacific Dunes, Bandon Trails, Ballyneal and Dismal River ?

I have played all except Dismal River

The properties listed above are so similar to the property at Sandpines.  In fact, they're almost identical, totally interchangeable, so I'm sure that he'd do it differently.

Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River are private golf courses and Bandon is a resort hotel, so again, the similarity continues.
[/color]

When it was built, it was listed as the number 1 best value course in America by Golf Digest.  As the current en vogue minimalist style on duneslike land hadn't really taken off yet, it was initially deemed a success based upon what else was out there.  

Is Sandpines built on the same "platform" so to speak as, say Atlantic was (I haven't played and don't know much about it, but it was built around the same time by Rees), and could it be reasonably be said that that course may have turned out differently as well ,based upon the prevailing style if it were to be built today, no matter who the architect.

As a private or public facility ?[/color]

Either. I understand that different things can be done with regards to the routing if it is a private course and there is less play.

I don't think Nicklaus Design would have built Dismal the way they did without the change in prevailing style of the times.


Do you think Dismal River would have been built if Sand Hills wasn't already there ?[/color]

No way.  The success of Sand Hills as a remote private course allowed the possibility of DR and BN existing.

Don't you think Rees would try to incorporate the dunes more now at Sandpines based upon the current trend.


How familiar are you with the characteristics of Oblique Dunes ?

Again, the "dunes" at Sandpines are identical to those at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, aren't they ?
[/color]

I don't know that, but they certainly could be. Sandpines certainly doesn't feel as dunes-ish as the bandon courses

In a nutshell, was it the architect, or the current style that prevailed by which we now deem Sandpines to be a failure.


Who is the "we" you refer to ?

Those that feel that it isn't what it could be.

Perhaps the owner/developers should be included in the mix.

From what I have heard, it hasn't been a huge commercial success, and ownership has changed, has it not?

Ross said, "Drainage, drainage, drainage"

Who said, "Location, location, location" ?

Do you equate the location and qualities of the properties at Bandon and Sandpines ?[/color]

Can't say for sure but I would say no, based on the proximity of the water. I think if the first course at Bandon was built inland without views of the water, it never would have been successful as quickly as it has been, no matter how good the course was.

[Jordan Wall]

Some Sandpines pics, unfortunately my camera ran out of battery after 7 holes.

Perhaps Sandpines isnt necassarily a bad course, but for the site it was given I think a fair assessment was a mediocre to bad job was done.  I think that with the site their could have been 18 good or great holes.  If Sandpines was on the same site as say, the Nile, perhaps I would look at the course differently but the site was really world class.

#1 ... I didnt like all the mounding which was up and down either side and the length of the hole.  The best angle is from the left and I think fairway bunkers would have been better on that side of the fairway, and closer to the green.

#1 again ... what a good looking kid!

#2 ... this had a potential to be a great hole.  Mounding on the right of the hole, and water surrounding the green.  With the holes given length there should be some better risk vs. reward option to get closer to the green than over water to a fairway about 10 yards wide, at least over and to the right of the water.  I still question the bunker in front of the water.  Seems Hillsish to me.

#3 ... not a bad hole really, not really great either.  I think putting fairway bunkers on the inside of the dogleg and a bunker or two to challenge the lay up could make this a great hole.

#4 .. A weird hole with bunkers left and right of the fairway at the 250 yard mark from the tee and water right of the right bunkers and to the right of the fairway.  Kind of a weird hole.

#5 ... very similar to #17 with a peninsula tee and a forced carry to a relatively flat green.  No run up area or real bail out area, which would be nice on a 180 yard hole over water.

#6 ... A really great hole that reminds me of the pictures of Royal Melbourne #6, but with a lesser dogleg and on a lesser scale.

#7 ... One of the biggest dissapointments on the course.  To the left of the mounds left of the fairway there is absolutely beautiful dunesland.  Its a shame the entire hole is surrounded by containment mounds, because it was be nice to at least get  view of the dunes.


Out of batteries now.

[Craig Sweet]

There's those white socks again...

The course looks pretty bland.

[Tim Pitner]

From the pics, it ain't no Bandon Trails and that's what the terrain reminds me of.  

[Jordan Wall]

I aint dumb, the course isnt too much to look at.

Its not fair to say I dont like it for its containment mounds because one of my home courses which I like very much is full of them -- Harbour Point.

I just think that there was no need for such mounds on every hole, especially with such a great site.  There was no need at all for them, and they really detract from the course.  Last time I checked, I would rather look at some nice dunes then soime nice mounds.  But, whatever.

[Sean Leary]

Pictures are worth a thousand words, but it isn't exactly Aidan Bradley taking these pics either  

[Jordan Wall]

Pictures are worth a thousand words, but it isn't exactly Aidan Bradley taking these pics either  

Sean at Sandpines I dont think even Aiden could have done much better...

[Mike_Cirba]

Jordan,

Are you sure it was the batteries, or did your camera commit suicide?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Leary,

Research Oblique Dunes, then get back to us.

Jordan Wall,

Without the mounding seperating the golf course from the Oblique Dunes, there would be no golf course.

Holes 2 thru 6 are terrific.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

The course is bland, so bland it is hard to believe the GD guys even gave it note. Nice pictures of blandness Jordon. You captured the course in its finest light on a good day.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tiger,

I wouldn't call it bland.

Over mounded, yes, but, not bland

Sean,

How different would Sebonack be if Doak wasn't involved ?

How different would Sebonack be if Nicklaus wasn't involved ?

[Michael Dugger]

If Sandpines hadn't been built and that property became available now to build a course (and assuming Rees was still the architect), would he do it completely differently based on the success of Sand Hills, Bandon, Ballyneal, Dismal etc?

Who knows, if it was wouldn't that just mean he was a copycat???  Let's get Rees in here and ask him.

When it was built, it was listed as the number 1 best value course in America by Golf Digest.  As the current en vogue minimalist style on duneslike land hadn't really taken off yet, it was initially deemed a success based upon what else was out there.

Does anyone really care what Golf Digest writes???  And what is the point of the above statement???  Again, why be a follower???  Rees could have been a trendsetter, if you believe it is really a "trend."

Is Sandpines built on the same "platform" so to speak as, say Atlantic was (I haven't played and don't know much about it, but it was built around the same time by Rees), and could it be reasonably be said that that course may have turned out differently as well ,based upon the prevailing style if it were to be built today, no matter who the architect.

Even if Sandpines was to undergo a "bunker renovation" as Atlantic recently underwent, it wouldn't make much difference, IMHO.  

I don't think Nicklaus Design would have built Dismal the way they did without the change in prevailing style of the times. Don't you think Rees would try to incorporate the dunes more now at Sandpines based upon the current trend. In a nutshell, was it the architect, or the current style that prevailed by which we now deem Sandpines to be a failure.

I don't like all of this talk about "current style" that I've been reading around here lately.  Pine Valley is like a 100 years old, so what is so "trendy" about all of this?  Merion is old.  Cypress Point is 80+ years old.  The bottomline is that natural looking courses are more appealing for a variety of reasons, how and why designers ever got away from it is topic worth discussing.  If naturalism isn't a preference, then why do architects go to great lengths to make them look like they are???

I think this is an issue of semantics.  Is Sandpines the second coming of Fernandina Beach Muni.?  Hardly.  But does any 'ol shmoe with an inkling of gawf running through his veins look at that property and think, "hmm, I could have done better."  You bet, everyone does, and if you don't you are a Rees nuthugger.

[Sean Leary]

Pat,

What are you looking for me to research exactly?  I looked at a couple of websites that talk about how they are created, but I am not sure what I am trying to research, exactly..

[Michael Dugger]

Sean

His point is that oblique dunes are rather "shifty," similar to his argumentative style.

The gist of the deal is that these dunes move around a lot and make growing turf on them difficult.

Interesting, however, that on this very thread he pointed out that Dismal, Sand Hills and others are built on the same type of dunes.  Somehow those courses turned out about a million times better than Sandschwag.

Don't deny it, Pat!!!  You wrote, "Again, the "dunes" at Sandpines are identical to those at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, aren't they?"

[Sean Leary]

Pat,

I don't know enough about Sebonack to speak intelligently about it.

Mike Dugger,

Naturalism wasn't a preference for a long time until the last 10 years, despite all the great courses you mentioned. Why is that?

As for Sandpines, did you play the golf course right after it opened and think that you could do better, and what a wasted opportunity it was?  Or did you look at it based upon what you saw elsewhere (above courses mentioned) and questioned what had been done.  I was the second scenario, myself.

[Michael Dugger]

Mike Dugger,

Naturalism wasn't a preference for a long time until the last 10 years, despite all the great courses you mentioned. Why is that?

As for Sandpines, did you play the golf course right after it opened and think that you could do better, and what a wasted opportunity it was?  Or did you look at it based upon what you saw elsewhere (above courses mentioned) and questioned what had been done.  I was the second scenario, myself.

Sean,

I totally disagree with what you are saying.  Like I said earlier, "naturalistic courses" since there really isn't a more apt term to describe it, may be "en vogue" or whatever you are thinking, but not really.  

Pine Valley has been around for nearly a century.  Same with Cypress.  Same with Merion.  During this "black period" when natural courses were apparently not hot shit, did the masses think Pine Valley was a goat ranch?  Merion sucked???

Hardly......it is so utterly NOT THE CASE.

I think what has happened is Doak, C & C et al have come along and woken up the masses.  They said, "Hey y'all, you ought to get yer head out of your booties and demand better than RTJ Sr. gave you for three decades.

Hence, a renaissance.

You might be impacted by what the masses think but I never joined a frat in college, I do not shop at Abercrombie and Fitch and I did not think Sandpines sucked only once others said it does.  

Quite the opposite, actually, the truth is I am quite unpopular with many folks around here for saying as much.    

[Sean Leary]

Mike,

I am not disagreeing with much of what you say here.  However, new courses for a long time did not get built in the naturalistic syle, from RTJ through Dye, Nicklaus and Fazio. Nicklaus changed his style with dismal river.  Fazio's Pronghorn seems to be a departure in style from what he has for a long time, No? Did they just randomly decide to change their style?

My original question was if Rees were doing a course on this property now, would he do it the same or would he do it differently closer to a more minimalist.  I think he would do it differently based upon what has been done on similar sites, that is all.  The same could be said for many architects, not just Rees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean

His point is that oblique dunes are rather "shifty," similar to his argumentative style.

The gist of the deal is that these dunes move around a lot and make growing turf on them difficult.

Interesting, however, that on this very thread he pointed out that Dismal, Sand Hills and others are built on the same type of dunes.  Somehow those courses turned out about a million times better than Sandschwag.

Michael Dugger.

You can't be that obtuse.
You need to understand the nature of sarcasm.
The dunes at Sandpines do not remotely resemble the dunes at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, in form, function or creation.[/color]

Don't deny it, Pat!!!  You wrote, "Again, the "dunes" at Sandpines are identical to those at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, aren't they?"

You can't be that dense .......  ?
Did you miss the words, "aren't they"  Did you not connect the dots ?  See the dripping sarcasm ?
[/color]

[Michael Dugger]

Sean,

These are my thoughts on the matter....

Again, if Rees wants/wanted to be a follower and not a trend setter, than indeed he would/should design Sandpines in a different manner.  

But I have to wonder, why does it matter?  What happened to building a golf course in harmony with the existing terrain?  What about building a golf course that is fun to play, challenging and embodies those atributes which make golf fun?  Why take a gorgeous dunesland site and build another golf course that could be built ANYWHERE.  Old Tom Morris did not do this with dunesland.  Tom Simpson did not do this with dunesland.  

Pat Mucci has long argued that a wise designer designs to his clients wishes.  I agree, as tragic as that may be (not agreeing with Pat but agreeing with the premise)  It makes me wonder if Rees didn't try and convince those Japanese developers otherwise?  It makes me wonder why he didn't pass of the job if they didn't see eye to eye on what type of course ought to be built there.  I've heard of a couple of different designers that have passed on jobs because they didn't see eye to eye with the developers.  I understand it is a business, indeed I do, and bills need to be paid, but the gist of what I am talking about is a moral issue.  The land deserves better.

RE: Fazio's Pronghorn.  I am the one who brought those images to everyone.  As someone pointed out, Da Faz did Pine Barrens over a decade ago.  Pronghorn isn't necessarily a course built in accordance with the most recent "trends," I'd like to believe it is a course built in a style most harmonious with the pallet given to him.  Thankfully, the developer and he saw eye to eye on that "vision."

RE: Nicklaus & Dismal.  Again, I'd like to think he built a golf course in the style which that type of land calls out for.  Throwing down another Bear's Best over that crumbled dunesland would have been as big a tragedy as what was done at Sandpines.  I agree, to some degree, with the premise that golf course development must pay attention to the wishes of the masses, however I've always been of the opinion that the masses are really mindless drones.  Advertisers, otherwise known as brainwashers, convince the weak minded that they want X, when really it might not be the case.

If not, how else can you explain how and why RTJ courses and all the other "signature" guys of the 60's-80's made a living???

I am with Tommy N. on this matter.  As a testament to the property, as a caretaker of good mother earth, Rees ought to return to Florence and give the people and the earth a type of golf course that majestic setting rightfully deserves.  

I imagine he has enough "cheddar" to make it happen.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Dugger,

Would you include the adjacent industrial complex, buildings, condos, enourmous water tower and houses part of the Majestic setting ?

[Michael Dugger]

Michael Dugger,

Would you include the adjacent industrial complex, buildings, condos, enourmous water tower and houses part of the Majestic setting ?

You see that from one point on the course, the 8th tee.

Pretty low impact in my book

[Michael Dugger]

Michael Dugger.

You can't be that obtuse.
You need to understand the nature of sarcasm.
The dunes at Sandpines do not remotely resemble the dunes at Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River, in form, function or creation.

You can't be that dense .......  ?
Did you miss the words, "aren't they"  Did you not connect the dots ?  See the dripping sarcasm?

As we all know, chat rooms and the written word makes it difficult to understand context, sarcasm and inflection.

I did think you were being serious.  My bad.

It is here I bow out.  Gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em.  

I need another argument with you like I need another opportunity to play Sandpines.

[Jordan Wall]

The course is bland, so bland it is hard to believe the GD guys even gave it note. Nice pictures of blandness Jordon. You captured the course in its finest light on a good day.

Thanks Tiger.  I did my best.

See Sean, I am not the only one who thinks this way about Sandpines.


Sean, you play on a great golf course several times a week, and apparently having joined another one you will get the privelege of playing another great course many times.
Thus, you know what a good golf course is and plays like.
So, why do you like Sandpines?

I dont get it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()