[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Tom,
You described 16 as a beast of a hole in the summer and Tim mentioned his driver-three wood-5 iron approach.

Then you said that in the winter it is a do or die go for it approach (which as you mention still leaves the option of going for it in two.

Imagine Augusta's 13th with wind that plays predominantly in two directions. One, you are hitting five iron over Rae's Creek with your third and the other you are debating whether you have the balls to hit a rescue club into the green.

It feels like you are describing a great hole to me, which is precisely how I felt 8 days ago when I played the hole and was not mired in a blizzard.

Bill, Bill, Bill,
I would not have found your post so ridiculous if you did not reference architects with different styles, such as MacDonald and Mackenzie.

MacDonald built template holes - while NGLA is my favourite course in the world - I cannot believe he would be the model for variety. True he could not built the Redan hole everywhere with the elevation that NGLA provided, he may have tried if he could.

You mention Mackenzie's bunkering as trademark (which I assume is the antithesis of variety), but save him because he worked across various terrain. Assuming you think C&C have a formulaic bunker style and by my count have worked across a greater variety of terrain than Mackenzie, what difference have you established between them?

Also, you mention that other architects that try different things. In the GW Modern scale, I feel that there are six courses in the U.S. that could be considered 10's and C&C did four of them, so I am not sure why they desperately need to change.

However, my greatest point of contention is that you somehow see Old Sandwich, Hidden Creek, Friar's Head and Bandon Trails as having such similarities. I do not find them repetitious, which is what you must if you find them stagnating. To the contrary, I have not seen holes like I did at Bandon Trails anywhere else and to me that is a great compliment.

As for your friend who was bored by Sand Hills, please tell me what he does like so I can strike them from my next fifty. I only wish more people shared his sentiment and the waiting list was not so long...

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,
You described 16 as a beast of a hole in the summer and Tim mentioned his driver-three wood-5 iron approach.

Then you said that in the winter it is a do or die go for it approach (which as you mention still leaves the option of going for it in two.

Imagine Augusta's 13th with wind that plays predominantly in two directions. One, you are hitting five iron over Rae's Creek with your third and the other you are debating whether you have the balls to hit a rescue club into the green.

It feels like you are describing a great hole to me, which is precisely how I felt 8 days ago when I played the hole and was not mired in a blizzard.

Ben - first, I too was never mired in a blizzard.  Weather was fine both playings for me.  Second, you oversimplify my issues with the hole.  My issue is it that the smart play down wind is very, very boring.  It's just so severe to the left of the green, and everything funnels down to it - that to challenge it from long distance is pretty silly.  Yet there you are at 175 or so and it remains hard to lay up from that distance with wind behind.

You might enjoy smart plays of wedge-wedge.  I admit I do strongly prefer that choices are there to be made.  But when a smart play is such a boring safe play, well... that's just no fun.  And to me it's particularly awkward when a seemingly simple fix could solve all issues.

I do like the hole overall.  I'm just having a hard time calling it great, for these reasons.

Does that make better sense?

[Bill_McBride]

Bill McBride (and anyone else)

First off remember I sang the praises of We-Ko-Pa bringing the "new style C & C" to the masses".

Kapalua is a great example of a variety (other than frilly bunkers) we don't see enough from the local deity.  There is to me too much similarity in concept and execution, style if you will in most of the recent stuff. They haven't done anything even remotely like Kap for a while.

Great architects with lots of variety:

Tillie - almost no two alike
Ross - not so much a definable style - that's why we argue about his bunkering, greensites, etc. and some of the restorations feeling "sterile"
Macdonald et.alia - "template holes" but each course has a difference in the interpretations of the concept, combinations of the principles and to a more novice interested in architecture - challenge in rooting out some of the templates and concepts.
Mackenzie - tackled vastly different properties but had "trademark bunkering" more than most.

Who is the most homogeneous of the "great old dead guys?

Perhaps Flynn (believe me no one knows that better than me). Never built a stinker, rarely even a suspect hole.  But almost instantly recognizable.

C & C by limiting to just two hand built low-lying properties/golf courses yearly are they limiting themselves?  Are they challenging themselves enough?

Don't get me wrong, they are among the best, but for example every time I see something new from Kelly Blake Moran I always see really different things, different concepts - whereas I don't see surprizes from  (especially here where there is such reverential treatment - and very little criticism) C & C. I just hear "I want one iin my backyard.  And public!

Rees Jones and RTJ, Sr. as well as Fazio get knocked for similarities in approach and appearance yet are beloved - except here - no worries.  I respect their work and C & C's, but other modern architects are more varied - Moran, Doak, Hanse - just to name a few.  Some take more chances than the others.

I am sometimes reminded of my old friend in Colorado's take on Sand Hills in calling it "The most boring course I ever played - all the holes look the same".

In some ways Mike has been proven right more than not.

Perhaps I'm just hoping for a little breakout one of these days.  Like I said, call me a heretic, but it is my opinion - which also contains great respect for the work even if it's not my favorite. I'm definitely more into quirk then they seem willing to do and they are even more instantly recognizable than our beloved Flynn.

Tell me what's so similar about Talking Stick and Friars Head and  Cuscowilla - to me they are quite varied in hole designs.  Listing the Golden Age architects who created varied designs doesn't change that!  C&C seem to me to relate to the different environments they work in just like the Golden Age guys did.  I really don't see any "template holes," do you?

[SL_Solow]

Bill;  I am also troubled by your "criticism" of C&C's decision to work on a limited number of projects at any given time.  Their willingness to sacrifice $$ that would come from producing more courses in order to spend the time to hand craft their courses is to be admired.  Almost all of us have been critical of architects who spend their time globe trotting and therefore spend inadequate time on individual sites.  This is not to suggest that their work is beyond criticism or that it will be everyone's cup of tea.  I have not yet seen Bandon Trails (2nd week in May scheduled) but I have played several and while I can see certain similarities, the differences in greens and surrounds, bunker placement and fairway undulation makes each of them unique and enjoyable.  They are certainly more varied than the Mac/Raynor courses although I have loved each of those that I have played.  In short, while they have a style, it does not become repetitive and their courses are challenging and enjoyable.

[RJ_Daley]

Wild Bill and Ben, not to mention Notre Dame's course and Austin CC...

I think if we divide the actual courses C&C did since about 1994 by 13 years, we might get a few more than 2 per year.  Then figuring Ben's statement that he thinks 6 courses in US could be considered 10s, and C&C did 4 of them... well that is the kind of production that shouldn't be accelerated, IMHO.  As long as they are fine with their income and production, why chide them to earn more by building more at the risk of building less quality?

[Bill_McBride]

Wild Bill and Ben, not to mention Notre Dame's course and Austin CC...

I think if we divide the actual courses C&C did since about 1994 by 13 years, we might get a few more than 2 per year.  Then figuring Ben's statement that he thinks 6 courses in US could be considered 10s, and C&C did 4 of them... well that is the kind of production that shouldn't be accelerated, IMHO.  As long as they are fine with their income and production, why chide them to earn more by building more at the risk of building less quality?

"Wild Bill?"  You guys are talking to redanman, right?  

[Mike Benham]

I really enjoyed BT but it was also the course that I played the most (3 times vs. 2 at PD and 1 at BD) so I know it the best out of the three.

Ran's write-up is very very good and I wish he would have put it online last week, it would have been more helpful ...

If BT is going to be the Black Sheep of the family, I am OK with that as it will leave more openings for those that want to play it late in the day, squeezing in a few more holes.  

The best moments I had (other than an all-world birdie at PD #9 in gale) was a late afternoon round, the weather was perfect, broken clouds, sunshine streaking through, barely a breath of wind resulting in peace and quiet (no other golfers were playing) on the middle third of holes.

The only complaint was the pesky creatures they had on the course ....


One last question for Ran, the write-up mentions all the visionary work by Coore, to find the routing of the course, how involved was Crenshaw?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Ben - first, I too was never mired in a blizzard.  Weather was fine both playings for me.  Second, you oversimplify my issues with the hole.  My issue is it that the smart play down wind is very, very boring.  It's just so severe to the left of the green, and everything funnels down to it - that to challenge it from long distance is pretty silly.  Yet there you are at 175 or so and it remains hard to lay up from that distance with wind behind.

You might enjoy smart plays of wedge-wedge.  I admit I do strongly prefer that choices are there to be made.  But when a smart play is such a boring safe play, well... that's just no fun.  And to me it's particularly awkward when a seemingly simple fix could solve all issues.

I do like the hole overall.  I'm just having a hard time calling it great, for these reasons.

Does that make better sense?

Tom,
I meant I am sitting in Toronto in a blizzard, weather was a lovely 46 degrees when I played the Trails.

You said that I oversimplified, but I do not think I did. My point was largely that it is a lot to ask of a hole that in its off-season wind it present the same greatness it does in the season it is designed for.

Perhaps C&C have gotten so good that they need to design two holes in one.

Second, I was not advocating laying up from 175 yards. In mentioning Augusta, I was implying that from 175-200 yards, you would have far more of a do-or-die hole. I do not expect you would lay-up from there, but it requires a more exacting shot into the green than does the 16th at BT. If you are going for a green in two on a reachable par five, why should it not have to be a great approach?

[redanman]

Think about this post:

In the GW Modern scale, I feel that there are six courses in the U.S. that could be considered 10's and C&C did four of them, so I am not sure why they desperately need to change.

The golden age architects I mentioned were on a continuum, BTW.

Ben I propose, just propose (god knows I never get around and have rigid rock-hard tastes and that my judgment can't be trusted) that you possibly (only a slight possibly) don't understand "tens" and your tastes are not broad enough.

n.b.
Doak himself only gives Friar's Head a 9 and don't forget that he created the system.  Maybe I grade too hard but perhaps you ought to consider that you grade C & C too easy because of your tastes. There's an old thread on here started by Doak entitled "RUSH TO JUDGMENT" about how quickly tippy top accolades are lauded on every new thing on gca (partially inspired by Cary L. labeling Lakota Canyon "Top Ten in the World"). Wise words from a man wiser and wider traveled than I.

I agree that they have done a few different things, but not lately ......

redanman

p.s. I love ya man. I played a "10*" in Atlantic City yesterday in 46* weather whilst there was 6' of snow on the ground in Allentown.

* seasonably adjusted

[Adam Sherer]

My only question about C & C as time goes on is are they in danger of being a one-trick pony?  

No matter how good the trick is that a good idea?  Holes appear picked from Old Sandwich, Hidden Creek, Friar's Head, We-Ko-Pa sans cacti.  Or am I just an atheistic heretic? (Haven't played yet.)

DIRECT LINK

(I haven't played either)

However,

Good question, I don't think so, but it makes you think: Can you succeed by doing one (1) thing well?

Have the Rolling Stones done anything really drastic in their forty years (excluding "Satanic Majesties Request"), or have they done the same thing (very well)?

[Adam Sherer]

I'm just not sure the hole works all that well downwind.

TH

Allen Iverson:  "Practice? Practice? We're talking about practice?"



Tom Huckaby:  "Downwind? Downwind?  We're talking about downwind?"

[Tim Pitner]

Have the Rolling Stones done anything really drastic in their forty years (excluding "Satanic Majesties Request"), or have they done the same thing (very well)?

Exile on Main Street, my friend--it's their Pacific Dunes (and the only album that competes with London Calling in the stratosphere).  

BTW, don't be dissing AI--he's a Nugget now and, in a great American tradition, remaking himself in the West.

[Adam Sherer]

Exile on Main Street, my friend--it's their Pacific Dunes (and the only album that competes with London Calling in the stratosphere).  

You just proved my point! (8 points)

1. First: You just proved my point

2. The Rolling Stones did one (1) thing very well, and did it well for forty years, and if C & C are a "One Trick Pony" as expressed earlier in this thread by_______ then

3. Exile on Main Street was the same record as the two before it and the one (or two) after it; and it is a prime example of the Stones "doing one thing, and doing that one thing well for forty years."

4. Had the Stones done something extraordinarily different over the years (and not just "one thing well" as C & C are a "One trick pony" [which is a good thing] in this case) then the Stones' "Exile On Main Street" was more than just "Pac Dunes".  Exile could be a 5 record set (Let It Bleed, Beggars Banquet, the two sides of Exile, and Stickey Fingers). The Stones had a run in the late 60s and early 70s when they hit their stride and exemplifies their stand as a band that always did well but never really changed musically (except for "Satanic" as expressed before).

5. Do five records (courses), all of which could be from the same recording (design) session/era signify that the band (designer) is doing one thing, and one thing very well?

6. Let It Bleed: Sand Hills,  Friars Head: Beggars Banquet, Bandon Trails: Exile, etc, etc.

7. i'm getting confused with the musical / golf comparison in terms of "Doing one thing and doing one thing very well"

8. All I know is that if I were C & C and I received critical acclaim for a course that I did after forty years in the business (A Bigger Bang) then I would be happy.

[Josh Smith]

Ran,

        Enjoyed the write up.  A couple of weeks later the sun was out, here is a photo for those who just gotta have the color.  Plus, it is the least controversial hole.

         If only Julian Grahams Cypress photos could be redone with color, and the Hogan one iron at Merion, how great would that be in color.     Call me old fashioned, but I love the whole black and white situation.  Friars Head profile is my favorite for this reason.
         These rough edged courses can look amazing in black and white, but don't show me no Muirfield Village in bw.

[Smokey_Pot_Bunker]

Gentleman,

A fantastic review of a great course.  Josh the painting of three is my screensaver now.

The B&W photos are equally impressive and I only have two months before I get back out to Bandon.

Carmen

[Sébastien Dhaussy]

Ran & Josh,

Thanks for the great review and for the photos.

Bandon is on my list of "US golfing areas to discover" but I think I will wait until Old Mac Donald has been built, just to make my own "Grand slam" : Pacific Dunes, Bandon Dunes, Bandon Trails & Old Mac Donald  

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Think about this post:

In the GW Modern scale, I feel that there are six courses in the U.S. that could be considered 10's and C&C did four of them, so I am not sure why they desperately need to change.

The golden age architects I mentioned were on a continuum, BTW.

Ben I propose, just propose (god knows I never get around and have rigid rock-hard tastes and that my judgment can't be trusted) that you possibly (only a slight possibly) don't understand "tens" and your tastes are not broad enough.

n.b.
Doak himself only gives Friar's Head a 9 and don't forget that he created the system.  Maybe I grade too hard but perhaps you ought to consider that you grade C & C too easy because of your tastes. There's an old thread on here started by Doak entitled "RUSH TO JUDGMENT" about how quickly tippy top accolades are lauded on every new thing on gca (partially inspired by Cary L. labeling Lakota Canyon "Top Ten in the World"). Wise words from a man wiser and wider traveled than I.

I agree that they have done a few different things, but not lately ......

redanman

p.s. I love ya man. I played a "10*" in Atlantic City yesterday in 46* weather whilst there was 6' of snow on the ground in Allentown.

* seasonably adjusted

Bill,
Before you make a thinly veiled condescending post , perhaps you could read my post. I did not say Doak 10, I said GW Modern 10 (it is right there in the quote box you attributed to me). I used the GW because I know you are/were a rater with that publication. I believe that scale was more of Brad Klein's doing than Tom Doak's and last I checked a 10 meant it could be considered 1-5 in America's top 100 modern courses.

Anyway, I still find it bewildering that you think Old Sandwich, Friar's Head and Bandon Trails are so similar and again, I would love to hear what it is you find so repetitious.

Also, I still do not understand how you created separation between Mackenzie/MacDonald and C&C, but I would love to see you expand on that.

[Jeff Doerr]

Ran & Josh,

Thanks for the great review and for the photos.

Bandon is on my list of "US golfing areas to discover" but I think I will wait until Old Mac Donald has been built, just to make my own "Grand slam" : Pacific Dunes, Bandon Dunes, Bandon Trails & Old Mac Donald  

Sebastien,

Living as close as I do (PDX), I will wait for Old MacDonald by going back year after year until it opens!


Ran, thanks for the great profile. It will be a great tour guide for my upcoming trip to Bandon.

[redanman]

Ben

Of course I was sarcastic, you know well enough that I like sarcasm.  Condescention?  Your take, not mine.

What I originally had in the post and took out but clearly should have left in is summarized in this comment:

I have played at least 700 American golf courses.  I have never seen fit to give a 10 modern, 9.5 is as high as I have gone. You seem to be giving 6 "top five" votes and four of them are by the same architect. I'm just going to let this go because it's not like we're curing Kidney Cancer or saving babies lives and you do have the power to delete me.  It's only opinions and we have different ones.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Ben - first, I too was never mired in a blizzard.  Weather was fine both playings for me.  Second, you oversimplify my issues with the hole.  My issue is it that the smart play down wind is very, very boring.  It's just so severe to the left of the green, and everything funnels down to it - that to challenge it from long distance is pretty silly.  Yet there you are at 175 or so and it remains hard to lay up from that distance with wind behind.

You might enjoy smart plays of wedge-wedge.  I admit I do strongly prefer that choices are there to be made.  But when a smart play is such a boring safe play, well... that's just no fun.  And to me it's particularly awkward when a seemingly simple fix could solve all issues.

I do like the hole overall.  I'm just having a hard time calling it great, for these reasons.

Does that make better sense?

Tom,
I meant I am sitting in Toronto in a blizzard, weather was a lovely 46 degrees when I played the Trails.

You said that I oversimplified, but I do not think I did. My point was largely that it is a lot to ask of a hole that in its off-season wind it present the same greatness it does in the season it is designed for.

Perhaps C&C have gotten so good that they need to design two holes in one.

Second, I was not advocating laying up from 175 yards. In mentioning Augusta, I was implying that from 175-200 yards, you would have far more of a do-or-die hole. I do not expect you would lay-up from there, but it requires a more exacting shot into the green than does the 16th at BT. If you are going for a green in two on a reachable par five, why should it not have to be a great approach?

Ben:

Well, C&C knew very well that the site they were using has two very defined prevailing winds.  I don't think it's at all too much to expect that they make each hole work well in each wind.

And as for a long second shot into this hole, well... hey I'm all for do or die shots from time to time - they're fun, and you're right, if you're going for the green in two on a par five it should be a difficult shot.  I just do believe that either by design or by wear over time, the left side of that green has become absurd.  Did you see any balls go over there?  There is indeed a funnel effect... every single miss from anywhere basically funnels into the walking path and down to the 17th tee.  It's just kind of silly.  To me it's so silly that it makes going for that green in two a very, very bad play.  And forcing such a bad play from such a relatively short distance (ie where one can get to off the tee downwind)... it just makes the hole awkward to me.

As I say, I don't at all think it's a bad golf hole.  I just can't call it great, for this reason.  And it speaks volumes to me that in Ran's review, he highlights the tee shot (very fun no matter what) and the green itself (brilliant).  How one gets to the green is not addressed.  The silence is speaking volumes, I think.

 

[George Pazin]

Good question, I don't think so, but it makes you think: Can you succeed by doing one (1) thing well?

Thank you, that's all I am trying to say.

This is actually a pretty interesting statement, probably deserving of its own thread.

I would certainly say yes, in all things - life, business, golf, art, whatever. But maybe my definition of succeed is different than others.

[Eric Morrison]

I know I am new here...but lets show a little love for the "munis"!

[Tim Pitner]

Adam,

I don't want to go too far OT here re: the Rolling Stones, but I see a lot of variety within Exile on Main Street.  If you're saying there is similar variety in their other albums of about the same vintage, I guess I'm not sure what a one-trick pony is.  

Bandon Trails is the only C&C course I've played so I can't comment on their tendencies.  I really enjoy BT.  I'd rate it above Bandon Dunes and, while there are those on here who would view that as sort of faint praise, I'm not one of them.  

[Peter Pallotta]

George Pazin:

I agree with you. My POV on your question is this, and to make clearer the jazz analogy I've been using:

Louis Armstrong and Charlie Parker are both instantly recognizable, in part because they used their same favourite note choices/riffs over and over again. The VARIETY of music they produced comes from the fact that they played hundreds/thousands of DIFFERENT SONGS, so that the total effect of their familiar choices in the service of different songs made for great music.

Similarly, C&C have a marked and familiar philosphy, but the philosophy is played-out on many different PROPERTIES (as Ben Dewar notes: Friar's Head and Bandon Trails, and We-Ko-Pa), so that total effect of a bedrock and 'familiar' philosphy in the service of different properties makes for some great courses.

It's in that sense, and in that sense only, that I think that both Parker and C&C are "one trick ponies" - a compliment in my way of seeing things.    

But of course, IMHO, since the actual experience of the music or golf course is a matter of taste/opinion, one could argue that the different songs/properties played by these greats don't always "add-value" to their familiar approach, and that the end results do vary.

Peter

[Adam Clayman]

I'm with ya Peter.

If OTP means painstakingly utilizing  core principles making use of every inch of elevation change to make great golf, I want more one trick ponies.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()