[PThomas]

for those who have played both which do you prefer and why?

I've only played WH, and if PR is better that is saying a helluva lot!

[George Pazin]

I've only played PKR, but having read Dick Daley's wonderful piece on Wild Horse, I'd hazard a guess that comparing the 2 is like comparing apples and oranges. Surely the bulk of differing opinions would simply come down to personal preference.

[Jason Topp]

I enjoy them both but prefer Wildhorse by a wide margin.

Firm conditions
Walkability
I prefer relatively level golf over mountain type golf

[Craig Van Egmond]

I'm with Jason, Wildhorse by a wide margin.

Of course we are talking about 2 different beasts entirely. PKR is a fine resort course, but there are a lot of those, while Wildhorse is one of most exciting public courses built in the last 10 years and a bargain to boot. Wildhorse plays unlike any public course I have ever played, an absolute joy to play.

No contest in my book.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Who said Paa-Ko is better?

[Matt_Ward]

Jason / Craig:

Please -- c'mon -- nuff of the "wide margin" drivel.

Paa-Ko Ridge is a well done course -- see the ratings from Golfweek and a few other pubs to back that up.

When people say "wide margin" you make it sound like Paa-Ko Ridge is nothing more than a second tier layout. That's far from the case.

I'm not disputing the qualities of Wild Horse and I will add that I see WH as the better overall course but this silly talk of the differences between the two being that "wide" is really clueless chatter IMHO.

[Craig Van Egmond]

Whoa there pardner,

               Paul asked for a preference and I PREFER Wildhorse by a wide margin, not even close, no hesitation, nada.   

               I also preferred Black Mesa over PKR. 

[Adam Clayman]

The wide margin is appropriate, not silly, if one prefers the type of golf WH offers that PKR does not.
That includes non-dictational. recoverable golf with more interesting short game scenarios on firmer turf.
Personally, I use to have a full 2 point difference, now it is only one.

PKR is still a value at it's rate.

[Craig Van Egmond]

New Mexico is blessed to have such outstanding public access golf and at very reasonable prices.

Everyone should go there and have fun.

[Matt_Ward]

Guys:

Please put down the kool-aid glasses and take a deeeeeeep breath of fresh air. I am just about falling off the chair with laughter with the inane "non-dictational recoverable golf" -- sounds akin to Clemens saying that Petite "mis-remembered."

I concede Wild Horse is the better course but Paa-Ko Ridge is well done by Ken Dye and it's overall ratings (if you care for such things) does support the totality of what you find there (though I am not a fan of the repetitive long par-3 holes. I have no doubt about the firm turf conditions at Wild Horse but the Nebraska layout isn't bulletproof from a design perspective. A good bit of the fanfare for the Gothenburg layout is tied to the prices charged which is great for the masses.

Craig:

Glad you still believe Black Mesa is better than Paa-Ko. I'll let you in on a secret -- Black Mesa is better than Wild Horse too.

I do agree with your last comment on NM golf but that only applies to a select few courses.

[Adam Clayman]

Add repetitive approachs with formulaic bunker schemes and maybe you fall down the stairs.

[George Pazin]

Am I the only one who thinks Matt calling out folks with kool aid comments is hilarious?

[Kalen Braley]

George, you are not alone...

[Joe Hancock]

The "me too" pop culture phrases are the easiest to dismiss.

Joe

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

I would rather play Wild Horse than Black Mesa any day, even though I liked Black Mesa.  We can agree to disagree on that one. 

I would rather play Black Mesa any day than Paa-Ko Ridge ... in fact I doubt I would ever go back to Paa-Ko Ridge, as I found it a fine layout but completely straightforward in its design.  What details of the design would warrant a return visit to Paa-Ko Ridge? 

There is nothing wrong with it but just being well-drained and "tough but fair" doesn't float my boat. 

[Matt_Ward]

Tom:

Fair enough -- we agree to disagree on WH v BM.

I never said Paa-Ko was bulletproof but I did say that any conclusion that says Paa-Ko is miles and miles behind Wild Horse stems from a good bit of what type of "look" and "presentation" people favor.

I see repetitive elements at Paa-Ko and as I noted previously the bunker capacity is more about just throwing sand down rather than applying a more meaningful strategic pattern.

George:

Let you in on a secret -- I am one of the few on this site that has played all the courses in question (e.g. Paa-Ko, Wild Horse, Black Mesa).

I'll say this again -- for the deaf and dumb ears that patrol GCA waters -- I favor Wild Horse over Paa-Ko. Never said otherwise. But when people use terms like "wide margin" then a bit of overall perspective needs to be added. Earth-to-George, when people make wild statements about course differences then I just simply called them on it.

Paa-Ko Ridge is manufactured in plenty of spots -- Adam touched on the bunkering dimension and do concur. But there are folks on this site who only see bunkers having a particular "look" and anything other than that one particular formula will NEVER be acceptable to those folks.  

Paa-Ko does have plenty of solid holes but I did add the caveat that the sum of the par-3 holes there is repetitive. I also don't like the inane par-3 4th with it's nonsensical three-part putting surface. However, the idea that a number of the approach shots is similar doesn't hold water either. There's enough differences in plenty of spots. Frankly, the totality of the par-5 holes at Paa-Ko is quite good.

Wild Horse benefits from being looked upon as the poor man's Sand Hills -- although there is little tie between the two. Having affordable rates is also a plus and I do believe that element does help with the courses's overall likeability. But let's be clear -- there are several holes at Wild Horse that are pedestrian in their overall character - people have a tendency to elevate such holes when encountering a 40-50 mph wind! I like the course a great deal but if one held WH against Black Mesa I know which one I'd be rating higher.

[Joe Hancock]

[Adam Clayman]

God forbid you should consider that your evaluations are pedestrian. Wolf Creek indeed!

[Jason Topp]

Jason / Craig:

When people say "wide margin" you make it sound like Paa-Ko Ridge is nothing more than a second tier layout. That's far from the case.

Matt:

I too like Paa Ko but I would put the difference at 7-8 (WH) v. 6 (PK).  That is a wide margin in my book.

[Matt_Ward]

Adam:

I've always opined Wolf Creek is not for the dedicated must toe-the-line classical school of zombies that inhabit GCA. It's certainly offbeat and no doubt quirky to a big time degree. What's so funny is that people will gush about the Cashen Course at Ballybunion (see related thread) because it happens to be in Ireland but if the same sort of course is in the States it gets panned as being ridiculous. Ah the utter consistency ...

Joe:

Great post !

I really like the book by a "wide margin"

Jason:

Check out the following ...

Golfweek rated the top 100 modern ...

Wild Horse is #22 -- Paa-Ko Ridge is #40. Wow, that's really a "wide" split given only 100 courses can be listed and the spread between them is only 18 spots.

Golf Magazine rated the top 100 you can play and has them at:

Paa-Ko Ridge #30

Wild Horse #50

I still see Wild Horse ahead of Paa-Ko but again the fanciful thought that it's a "wide margin" doesn't seem to ring true when other sources are thrown into the mixture. Just something to think about.

[Andy Troeger]

I've only played PKR, but having read Dick Daley's wonderful piece on Wild Horse, I'd hazard a guess that comparing the 2 is like comparing apples and oranges. Surely the bulk of differing opinions would simply come down to personal preference.

Me thinks George speaks wisdom on this one. Having only played Paa-Ko I'd be shocked if there is a wide margin, especially as I was going to site the ratings that Matt mentioned. Paa-Ko wins 2 out of 3 (GD, Golf). I'm not surprised Wild Horse does better with GCA'ers, but I would guess Paa-Ko would be preferred by the general public. Comes down to what you like.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Check the spread on Golfweek Modern -- it's not WH is listed and Paa-Ko isn't. They are fairly close to one another.

What's amazing for me is how Black Mesa doesn't rate higher on that particular poll.

There's no doubt the styles / feel / architectural contributions are vastly different between the two courses but Paa-Ko is not some sort of waste of time layout. And I'll say this again I do favor Wild Horse over it -- just not the margin argument said by a few here.

[Garland Bayley]

Am I the only one who thinks Matt calling out folks with kool aid comments is hilarious?

George,

Matt is always hilarious.

[Garland Bayley]

Joe,

Did you learn to make fun of everybody in that book? If so, I gotta have it.
 

[Jason Topp]

Adam:


Jason:

Check out the following ...

Golfweek rated the top 100 modern ...

Wild Horse is #22 -- Paa-Ko Ridge is #40. Wow, that's really a "wide" split given only 100 courses can be listed and the spread between them is only 18 spots.

Matt:

Some of those courses have Wolf Creek rated highly as well.  Just because it is in a magazine doesn't mean it is right.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()