[Tim Leahy]

John K, Tim L:

Don't agree with you on the Stone Eagle v Rock Creek debate.

If you take just the par-4's alone -- Rock Creek wins convincingly. I see the combination of par-3 and par-5 holes at the Palm Desert layout also being nothing more than a draw with the Deer Lodge course.

I'm not in like mind agreement w Jonathan about his low number for Stone Eagle but I don't see the CA-based layout offering as many unique and challenging tee-to-green elements. On the green front I'll call them a wash but I think, in my heart of hearts, that Rock Creek also has the edge there as well.

Rock Creek goes a bit beyond what you see with Stone Eagle for me.

 Matt you must have misread my reply-I have never seen or played Rock Creek, so I cannot rate it, I just feel that Stone Eagle, which I have played, merrits a higher rating than a 5, I would definitely make a special trip to see it and did, and I feel it may be the best in all of Palm Springs.

[jkinney]

Stone Eagle gets top marks for the most unwalkable, ill-suited-for-a-golf-course piece of land in RGD's portfolio.  TD did a fine job with a marginal site.  Architecturally, both RCCC and AS are light years ahead of SE.

Robert - I admit my inconsistencies.  Oakmont is a 10 even with the turnpike cutting through it - it's that good and I've played it a bunch.  I mark down SFGC because of all the road noise on the back nine.  Lost Dunes suffers more than SFGC.

Instead of numbers let me place the Doak course I have seen in groups.

Pac Dunes            Top 10
Barnbougle Dunes            Top 10
Cape Kidnappers            Top 25
Ballyneal               Top 25
Sebonak               Top 50
RCCC               Top 75
(Atlantic City)            Top 75
Apache Stronghold            Top 100
Stonewall               Top 100
(Yeaman's Hall)            Top 200
Lost Dunes            Top 200
Legends- Heathland         Top 200
Stonewall - North            Top 200
Beechtree            Top 200
Stone Eagle            Top 300
Black Forest            Top 300
Tumble Creek            Top 300
High Pointe            Top 500
St Andrew's Beach            Top 500
Riverfront               Top 500

Your comments on Stone Eagle are rubbish, IMO. Marginal piece of land ? PLEASE !!

[Jim Nugent]

Jonathan, when you say Pacific Dunes is Top 10, do you mean Top 10 of all courses you have played?  Top 10 in the world?  Same question on the other courses. 

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

If you really believe Lost Dunes is on par with Ballyneal you'll need to explain your reasoning on that one. Ditto the idea that TPC / Sawgrass and Spyglass are better than the CO layout. You'll need to really spell out your reasoning on those fronts as well.

Ballyneal is loacted on a superior piece of property, is routed with great expertise to take you to all corners of that site and possesses, in my mind, a sheer array of diverse and uniquely interesting holes. I liked Lost Dunes but suffice to say I see more of the challenge tied to the greens alone and less in the tee-to-green component.

John Kirk:

Help me out -- you say Stone Eagle is "more intense" than Rock Creek. I define intensity as a measurment of overall difficulty. John, candidly, if you think Stone Eagle is a more demanding course than Rock Creek you'll need to really explain yourself on that point.

You'll also need to say more than a token statement on how Rock Creek is beyond the likes of Sebonack. While Rock Creek has the better array of par-4's -- the margin is not that great. Where Sebonack demonstrates greater consistency is the combo par-3 and par-5 holes.

Tim L:

I liked Stone Eagle a lot. I just see the site as one that is really squeezed into a very demanding and difficult site. I salute Doak and his talented team for providing a layout in such a tough environment. However, there are a number of so-so par-4 holes at Stone Eagle. In sum -- a few of them are all green and nothing else. Rock Creek doesn't have such holes among its cumulative par-4's. They are all challenging and inspiring to play.

I do agree that Jonathan's grade out on Stone Eagle was a low but candidly I don't see Stone Eagle being just one point behind Rock Creek. At minimum it's at least two -- and could be likely three.

Jonathan:

AS can't be really assessed UNTIL things sort themselves out. That may or may not happen anytime soon. Doak deserves credit for all the work that was envisioned for the place but frankly the layout is deficieent because turf conditions -- at least from the last two times I was there which for the purpose of full disclosure was nearly three years ago -- cannot maximize what it has been designed to provide.

If and when that should happen I could see a rating number having some semblance of credibility.

[Adam Clayman]

Matt, Are you unwilling or incapable of evaluating/appreciating the architecture without turf considerations?

[John Kirk]

To clarify, I meant Stone Eagle was a shorter, but more intense walk.  In terms of difficulty, I think Rock Creek is slightly more difficult.  They're both medium difficult.

[Matt_Ward]

John K:

Thanks -- but try to help me with your statement that Rock Creek is ahead of Sebonack.


Adam:

For the record, I have been to AS on three SEPARATE occasions. The first time I was impressed with the course because the promise of what it could provide was on its way.

The second time showed me a complete reversal.

The third time showed me how little was done from the second time -- in fact, the third time showed me a further movement down the slope. If one were to criticize me it surely cannot be for attemtping to understand AS on a number of different occasions.

I appreciate architecture from an actual play perspective and the integration of turf is part and parcel of that assessment. Not as some theoretical exercise by players envisioning what it can be. If that's how you assess architecture from such a removed role then so be it. Knock yourself out and stay on a computer and only opine on photos or drawings.

Adam, I don't place conditioning as the first among equals but I do expect conditioning to reach a level where quality shotmaking is rewarded when executed properly. I'm more than willing to return to AS in the future BUT only when I hear from enough people that the pre-existing situations I have encountered are past oriented and no longer present day frustrations when there.

[Andy Troeger]

Andy:

If you really believe Lost Dunes is on par with Ballyneal you'll need to explain your reasoning on that one. Ditto the idea that TPC / Sawgrass and Spyglass are better than the CO layout. You'll need to really spell out your reasoning on those fronts as well.

Ballyneal is loacted on a superior piece of property, is routed with great expertise to take you to all corners of that site and possesses, in my mind, a sheer array of diverse and uniquely interesting holes. I liked Lost Dunes but suffice to say I see more of the challenge tied to the greens alone and less in the tee-to-green component.

Matt,
I like Ballyneal a lot, but on the GW scale I'd give it a 7.5 or possibly an 8. That appears to put it in the top 20-25 modern courses in the USA, and for my preferences I'm comfortable with that. I've spelled out why on another thread a couple weeks back (under a Chambers Bay thread). I'm not going to rehash the conversation, I've had it 4-5 times now including IM's. I consider Lost Dunes to be a bit underrated in the GolfWeek list and about right by Golf Digest.

[Jerry Kluger]

I think Andy's position is the reason why we should not have GCA rankings - this is a discussion group and people have their opinions based upon what they feel is important to them.  I don't agree with him but that does not make him right or wrong, but if there were rankings then the person who agrees with those rankings would be viewed as correct. 

Getting to Ballyneal, I cannot see how anyone could rank it lower than 9.5.  Sand Hills clearly established the standard for outstanding modern golf course architecture.  Along came Wild Horse to demonstrate that brilliance can come in small packages.  Then Rupert decides to build Ballyneal and insists that it be a walking only course, which would certainly require brilliant routing to make it a success.   The routing is the best I have ever seen - it works beautifully with the land while making it a comfortable walk and allows you so many options should you decide to play less than 9 holes or just want a variety.  The greens and greens surrounds are some of the most interesting and challenging you could ever encounter.  The holes themselves have tremendous variety and nearly every hole can be played from any tee and be a fair challenge to most players.  I am wondering how it would not be rated at least a 9.5, unless a course must be along with water to achieve that rating. 

[Matt_Ward]

Andy / Jerry:

Agree -- there is no 100% right or wrong answer.

However ...

Lost Dunes is more about unique and compelling greens on a number of the holes. The land site pales when compared to Ballyneal -- I mean that's a no brainer from where I sit. Ditto on the routing element which Jerry alluded to. Doak takes you to all corners of the property with little in terms of basic repetition or mundane holes. To top it off - you can easily traverse the property by foot.  Then you have the ultimate end game -- wonderful holes that change pace, direction and length at-will and call upon a consumate game to hit all the shots.

In regards to Spyglass - I see the layout as a testament to a routing that got it wrong. The best part comes early in the round and beyond the difficult meter the rest of the course is a fairly predictable Trent Jones layout. If anyone really believes Spyglass is beyond Ballyneal is beyond me -- the only clear attribute is the ocean view (which is limited) and the superb par-4 4th hole.

Andy, I can see saying Lost Dunes is underrated -- but not at a level equal with Ballyneal. That's a big time stretch in my book.

Jerry, your last point is what gives the trio of courses at the Bandon complex a bit of an added push. The proximity of the Pac Ocean. Now, let me say that the qualities of Pac Dunes are not my main reason for a frontal assault -- but the ocean's connection does allow for a few more brownie points to fall the way for the original 18 and even the Trails which is hidden from the ocean save for a few holes early and late in the round.

[Tom Huckaby]

Doesn't this all prove the adage "to each his own"?

Some say one course is the best, some say another.  Some prefer one course, some another.  There's never going to be any reasoning anyone can give to change another's opinion - not when it comes to the hair-splitting required when trying to separate these top-level courses.  So Andy doesn't rate Ballyneal as high as others.  He has what he values, and to him it didn't quite reach that.  Do any of you think you are going to change his mind?

But I guess this is what this forum is all about more or less:  splitting hairs.  Hopefully we can learn from each other a bit while so doing.

So, to that end, I must ask Jerry Kluger:  did you really find Ballyneal to be a "comfortable walk"?  I enjoyed the course tremendously and will praise it to the high heavens in nearly every way - man I agree with nearly every word you stated about the course, my God is it fun and brilliant and wonderful - just not that one, not particularly.  I found the walk to be pretty difficult.  Perhaps that was because I was playing a lot of back tees, and many times that required a trek backwards from a previous green, which got tedious after awhile.  No green to tee hike was bad, that's for sure... except from 18 green up to the clubhouse that is... but heck that's OK.   I'm just curious as to how much you really mean by it being a comfortable walk... I'd call it medium hard also, like many other courses discussed here.  Thus this is not a negative - no way.  I'm just wondering what I missed!

You do highlight a very cool part of the course too - the many options one could do if one wants to play less than 18, or less than 9.  We did a bit of that and man the possible combinations seem endless.  That is one of the many really, really cool aspects of the course... great point.

TH

[John Kirk]

John K:

Thanks -- but try to help me with your statement that Rock Creek is ahead of Sebonack.

I'm absolutely swamped with little things I need to get done right now, so I can't devote a great deal of time.

My first thought about your question was a simple "I just like it better."  Driving the ball is less stressful and exacting at Rock Creek.  Sebonack is brutally difficult for a player with my skill set.

Other than that, Rock Creek is a more beautiful walk, and I am not convinced that Sebonack is built on a great piece of land for golf.  It has the correct elevation changes, but the landforms aren't that compelling.  They're better next door, in either direction.

Mainly, I like Rock Creek better because I do.

[John Kavanaugh]

Ballyneal is a simple walk.  What's the deal Huck, were you rested or did you play after a long car ride?

[Tom Huckaby]

Ballyneal is a simple walk.  What's the deal Huck, were you rested or did you play after a long car ride?

JK:  I was plenty rested.  Got there on a Fri night, played all day Sat, all day Sun.

I just wouldn't call it a "simple" nor "comfortable" walk, that's all.  Oh, it's surely not bad and don't get me wrong, it's absolutely no negative and I mean it as no knock... I just found it to be harder than you guys, I guess.  JK, did you play many way-back tees?  That seemed to be what tended to tire me - going backwards up to those a few too many times.  But oh well, I guess I am just a wuss.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

John K:

Having a bit more detail helps me and likely others -- when you or others answer questions with a "just because" rationale it's really limiting because there's no depth to stand with it.

The fun of this site comes from a though-provoking commentary.

John, you state that Sebonack doesn't have landforms that aren't "compelling." Can you explain that. Did you miss the nature of how Doak / Nicklaus used the sequence of holes on the front side - with the parallel but wonderfully different 2nd and 3rd holes? What about the sweeping uphill nature of the 9th -- or the marvelous usage of the hilly area as you leave the 10th tee and walk over to where the fantastic 11th begins and it sweeps down the hill with the Peconic off to the side. Shall I go on?

I admit Sebonack doesn't have the Flint Range to go with it but a solid case can be made that the land Sebonack has is even better than the land Shinnecock and NGLA have.

John, when you say Sebonack is "brutally difficult" - your comments might have more to do with the fact of a unique wind pattern that happened on your sole play. It's also possible you may have played from tee boxes in combo with the weather that really added to the torture you faced. I know of people who have played Shinnecock on such tough days when the wind does howl and then on a second visit they really began to place their original comments in perspective.

Just something to consider.

[Jerry Kluger]

Matt:  The quality of a piece of property as a site for a golf course can take more than one form, i.e. it doesn't have to be on the water to be great.  Ballyneal is on a great piece of property just as PD is.  It may not look out on a great body of water but it is still a great piece of property - rolling chop hills, wind, etc.  So if we have two great pieces of property do we have two great architectural designs - the simple answer is yes.  Can we say that PD is significantly better than BN - simple answer, no.  That is not to say that it may be viewed as better, but not significantly;  they have to be within .5 of each other.  Ratings are by their very nature subjective, not completely, but surely to a significant degree; if you don't admit that when you are failing to recognize reality.

Huck:  I am quite a bit older than you and I really felt it was an easy walk.  Maybe it was because I was enjoying it so much.  I played it last July and it was pretty hot out and I was still ready to go out for more after playing 18 in the morning.  We mostly played back tees and I didn't notice more than a couple of holes where you had to walk back to those tees. 

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck:  I am quite a bit older than you and I really felt it was an easy walk.  Maybe it was because I was enjoying it so much.  I played it last July and it was pretty hot out and I was still ready to go out for more after playing 18 in the morning.  We mostly played back tees and I didn't notice more than a couple of holes where you had to walk back to those tees. 

Jerry:  very cool.  Just don't get me wrong - I was ALWAYS ready to play more golf after playing 18 there - I guess I just have a definition of comfortable or easy, that's all.  My home course is basically flat, no large green to tee walks at all - that is what I call easy.  So I suppose it's just a matter of standards.

TH

[Adam Clayman]

The only holes at BN where one has to trek back, uphill, are #'s 10, 11, & 16. If one stops at the turn, you can remove #10. That leaves two holes.
If I can make it around in my physical condition it ain't hard. Although, I will admit that if one is not paying attention on how they traverse every hole, they could have significantly more and ups and downs than someone who does.

Andy, I'm very sorry I missed your analysis of Ballyneal. Is there a reason you put it on a Chambers Bay thread? And/or won't re-hash it? Was it controversial? I know we spoke about your 5 club round in no wind and concluded the course was too easy because that's what you have to do as a DG panelist. The only question I have is, with all the really good and great players who have played there, why is the CR still 67 if it's so easy?

 

I admit Sebonack doesn't have the Flint Range to go with it but a solid case can be made that the land Sebonack has is even better than the land Shinnecock and NGLA have.
 

Matt, Are you aware that Tom Fazio passed on the site? And why?

[Tom Huckaby]

Adam:

Thanks for the clarification.  I guess it was just the trek back up to 11 that got me... and we did it also playing the crazy back tee for 13... and then again on 16... and way over to the side on 18....and since it was all on the back nine, well, that's what left the impression.  I am in decent physical shape and it never wore me out, for sure... I just still have a hard time calling it comfortable or simple.  But yes, it ain't all that hard.  And in the end good lord is it worth it.

As for the course being easy, my God was it not this past weekend.  Add any wind to the equation - and the firmness and quickness of greens we saw - and Ballyneal is all the test one could possibly want.

TH

[Adam Clayman]

Tom, I sense from the sound of your tone the first round was brutal. That NW wind on Sat. was special wasn't it? Did you have the good fortune to play your next round at a more reasonable length? I can assure you, you would have had more fun from shorter, because of interface and temptation factors.

 Since you and Andy are both GD'ers, perhaps you could share what resistance to scoring score you gave the course and Andy could do the same?

[Tom Huckaby]

Adam:

We played a constant mix of tees over our four rounds there, and three different formats, all match play:  better ball, 2 man scramble, chapman.  It was fantastic fun.  The problem was it was winners pick tees, and my partner and I being the shorter hitters, and losing way too often, well we did end up playing a LOT of back tees!  But no one round was any more or less brutal than the others - all were fun, and all were determined by how the matches were going.  Re the wind, what we got was pretty constant, what the caddies referred to as a "winter wind" - it made 17 and 18 each dead against and each very very very hard.  I gather that's not the normal?  Only for one round did it subside.... and that was cool because we got to see the course a little differently.

In any event, I was there as a golfer, not a rater.  I went with a friend who had bought a weekend of golf at a charity auction.  So I may or may not submit a rating - I sure as hell don't have to.  I guess I will.  But I have to give it a lot more thought.  In any event, the course surely will score high as I see it on resistance to scoring.  As I say, get any wind and play the back tees and it's all a scratch player could want or need.

TH

[Andy Troeger]

Adam,
My resistance to scoring score for Ballyneal fell in the middle of our "very good to excellent" category. Since we're told not to divulge numbers I'd rather not get any more specific, but I think you can get the idea. As someone said above, this is splitting hairs to an extent.

I discussed the course on the Chambers thread because you asked me to because you had information that it did not make my top five. I'm admittedly curious as to who told you that in the first place since I had not made that comment outside of what I thought were private conversations. Given all that, I'm choosing to tread very carefully with what I say, even though I did really like the golf course. I don't see what I'm saying as particularly controversial, but its not as glowing as the other comments on this board. I don't see significant drawbacks at Ballyneal that I'm going to criticize--there aren't any that I see. I just wasn't as inspired by the course as I have been at a few other courses. Maybe that's my fault for something that's there that I missed, but I have to rate courses the way I see them, not based on others thoughts or what they are currently rated. One thing I will say since I am a GD panelist is that Ballyneal is one of the 2-3 most UNDERRATED courses on our current listing--Kingsley Club is the other one that comes to mind immediately.

[Bart Bradley]

Andy:

I think Ballyneal is one of those places that can be so different depending on the wind that a single visit makes it hard to judge.  On my first day we had sustained winds over 35mph and some gusts to 47mph.  Resistance to scoring that day would have to be a 10.  I think you are slightly missing the boat on Ballyneal, but like you said, you must grade them as you see them.

Tom:

I walked Ballyneal 27 on Sun and 18 on Monday with a torn meniscus in my right knee and am 6 months post Achilles rupture in my left ankle.  The wind was blowing 40mph.  I thought it was an incredibly pleasant walk.  If I could even make it, the walk just wasn't that hard.

Bart

[Tom Huckaby]

Bart:

Sorry I missed you Sunday!  I was there all day.  Walked 36 myself.  I'm a short fat guy.

And well... I guess we all just have different standards.  There's no way I can call that course an incredibly pleasant walk.  No way.  Now if you want to call it an incredibly pleasant, incredibly fun round of golf - that I will back you on until the cows come home.  But the walk?   I guess my standard for that is flat courses with zero walks backward to tees.  Again, I am absolutely not saying BN is a bad walk in any way, nor is this meant to be negative at all.  It's just interesting to me the different standards we all have.

Look at it this way:  a few on here called Pasatiempo a pleasant walk also.  Good lord are those standards different than mine.... one only covers about 1000 feet of elevation change there (exaggerated, but hopefully you get the point).

TH

[Mike Benham]

My ranking of Doak courses are as follows:

1.  Pacific Dunes
2.  Stone Eagle


That wasn't so hard now was it ....

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()