News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #50 on: March 26, 2009, 07:27:13 AM »
My Prairie Dunes Review

   In some ways Perry Maxwell may be my favorite architect. And that is sort of odd because I’ve seen only a course or two by him. Most of my experience with Maxwell is his redesigned holes here and there, including my own course, Gulph Mills in Philadelphia. Of his redesigned holes, almost without exception those holes or parts of them, particularly greens, are some of my favorites anywhere. I’ve said I think he may be the best green designer and builder ever, and I pretty much do mean that.

I’d heard about Prairie Dunes for years and I’ve seen it on TV during some USGA national championships. I went there for three days last month and I expected a lot and I wasn’t disappointed.

As is often the case with expectations compared to first seeing courses, the things I expected to be impressed with were not the only things I was impressed with or even impressed with the most. (The same was very true when I saw ANGC for the first time in person this year).

Before sharing my opinions on the architecture and each hole I should preface by saying we played the course three times in three days in some pretty good wind and we played it each day from the back tees which other than one in our group was probably not the ideal strategic tees for our length. Nevertheless, I am well enough aware of good play and the basic game and length of good players today to completely understand the strategic ramifications of the course for them---as well as everyone else.

I should also preface by saying I mentioned on a thread on GOLFCLUBATLAS that I thought Prairie Dunes just may be the most sophisticated application of some of the best architectural “principles” I’ve ever seen anywhere. And in a general sense here’s why, as well as some reasons I was so impressed by things I didn't expect;

1.   Many to perhaps most of the holes (whether Perry or Press) use diagonals, angles and “turns” of all kinds on the main body of holes as well as around greens and their surrounds.

2.   Combined with the green shapes and internal contours of the course these diagonals, angles and “turns” just constantly flow in such an overall natural look in and of themselves and with everything else out there. In a phrase, this kind of thing creates what I might call total architectural elegance in both small and large ways. The bunkering very much becomes part of this “over-all”.

I stress those two points above because not only do they combine to look so good in a natural sense out there, but they are also the “principles” of architecture that make golf and great courses play so strategically, so multi-optionally in the context of any golfer’s game. With only a few exceptions, the par 3 2nd and 10th, one feels he can create his own roadmap in play with both conservatism combined with a little creative “makeup” next. And in a real way, I think that’s what good golf architecture is all about.

Hole #1:
   The opening hole is a great example of all of what I just said above about Prairie Dunes. The direction and flow of the hole turns right to left around and behind a low hill on the left. The fairway seems to be set on a diagonal rather than as an arc to accommodate this “turn” and the golfer cannot see where the green is---he must sense it. Always for a first time golfer this creates mystery and makes him wonder all the more what he’s supposed to do, what he should do on the drive, particularly directionally. After the drive it’s not hard to tell the strategic choices on the tee shot are excellent combinations of distance and direction always off the diagonal line of the fairway particularly along the left which is bordered by ball eating gunch. If your drive is not long enough you pay for it with a blind to semi blind approach to the green that accommodates this kind of blindness with a lot of fairway or chipping area around the green (again most of which can’t be seen from some of the approach area. If one is long and gets too aggressive with a drive (or even a recovery second shot) without the proper direction you can get too far to the right of the diagonal fairway to be left with having to deal with a little bosky of trees on the right about 75 yards from the green.
   Hole #1 is basically what we call a natural landform hole---eg only the green itself is very slightly propped up off pre-course natural grade although its sides flow out naturally and well. The green internal slopes and rolls are classic Maxwell although by no means as intense as some of what comes later on the course. One does need to be mindful of the green, though, so as not to get above or to the side of some pins to be left with something too quick or breaking. This hole in its over-all is a great example of what I mean by simple yet sophisticated elegance in both architectural look and in strategic play.

Holes to follow


TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #51 on: March 26, 2009, 07:28:35 AM »
Hole #3:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,30677.0.html

Are you all like me and have a few select holes in your mental inventory from your life and travels in golf that when you stepped on their tees the first time you just felt like you wanted to hit tee shots all day long? Well, if you are like me that way, this one might rank high on your list; it sure does for me.

(John Mayhugh is a really fine golf hole photographer but his photo from the tee doesn’t show this tee shot quite as well as Ryan Simper’s does probably because there is more sunlight in Ryan’s. To me neither photo shows the fairway and what’s out there visibly and otherwise and scale-wise as it appears to the player on the tee. Like many photos of golf holes both photos seem to sort of “reverse telescope” things to me).

The above is just a preface to introduce my opinion that this tee shot might be one of the finest I’ve ever seen in golf for both exhilaration and what I consider to be a whole host of really fine architectural principles and architectural concepts all rolled into one!

First, you are fairly high up above your target and as a number of golf architects have claimed, that alone can make a golfer feel stronger and more powerful. I think that’s true, and you really feel that on this tee.

Second, you’re looking down on a fairway that is set between tee and green on what I consider to be the ideal “diagonal” or axis for strategic golf (the old “bite off as much as you can chew” adage). It is, in fact, what some of the early architects and including architectural critic, Joshua Crane, called the “double diagonal”----eg you can run out of room on the outside (or far side) with a conservative line as easily as you can fail to reach the fairway on the inside or aggressive line.

Third, the aggressive inside line of the fairway on the left is basically blind as the rolling ridge covered with ball-eating grunge obscures it from sight.

And fourth, and perhaps best of all, at least to me, it seems you can see a piece of the green out on the left about 350 yards away right on that aggressive blind left tee shot line. I believe that kind of thing (the ultimate target, the green (on a par 4), being off-set and in view from the tee) psychologically pulls the golfer’s concentration and perhaps even his aim at it even if he instinctively knows that line is too aggressive!

Fifth, and last on the tee shot, and perhaps even better yet than the fourth above, if the golfer would only stop and think that despite all the foregoing that just fuels his inclination to bust the ball as hard and far as he can down that aggressive, blind, potentially ball-eating left tee-shot line, he really doesn’t need to do that because this hole is only about 350 yards long and anything into the middle of that fairway will not leave him much club on the approach anyway.

I just love these kinds of holes that I sometimes refer to as strategic or risk/reward “fakeouts”----eg for various reasons they seem to tempt and then sucker you into some huge risk on one shot when you really don’t even need it for the next shot.

Sorry guys, but my memory is a bit hazy and I don’t think I can remember everything about the approach shot  and the green on this hole (I seem to recall basically hitting something lofted like a wedge in there all three times), other than the green is fairly big for a short par 4 and it has some pretty good slope coming from back to front and I think left to right. But what I think I remember pretty well about it is that the left side of the green is beautifully covered by a left side bunker or rise that sort of blinds the left side surface and best of all blinds the diagonal fall-off in the left rear which is hard to recover back onto the green from!
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 07:39:46 AM by TEPaul »

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #52 on: March 26, 2009, 07:57:49 AM »
Pat, where did you get the idea that SH was so much better than PD. Doak gave one a 9 and the other a 10. Many think PD is a 10 also. Doak has Crystal Downs as a 10 and it is a close cousin to PD. CD has better short 4's, the long 4's are ~ draw, PD has better par 3's and the two best par fives are #8 at CD (awesome) and #17 at PD (what a green) The best holes of the 2 would be the best course in the world, I suspect Tom might agree with that. I consider SH and PD to be a draw, 2 of the best 10-15 courses in the world.

The work done (C&C/Axland/George) at PD over the past 5 years is wonderful, a few new tees, cart path reduction, 9 mowed down greensite chipping areas and a few new bunkers.

Perhaps "better" was the wrong word. I just find it interesting that Sand Hills is so highly regarded in the entire golf world while PD seems to fly under that radar a bit. At least to me.

It seems that most on here agree that the greens at PD are some of the best in the world. Does SH benefit from having a more dramatic landscape?
H.P.S.

corey miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #53 on: March 26, 2009, 08:13:19 AM »


Maybe the dramatic landscape and the feeling of isolation but in the last few years I have seen, chronicled on this website, such Sand Hills positives:

1. Isolation

2. lodging
3. food
4. atmosphere
5. pretty caddie
6. logo
7. Ben's porch
8. drinking at Ben's porch
9. view from Ben's porch
10. Burger at Ben's porch
11. seasoning on burger at Ben's Porch
12. Man who makes burger at Ben's Porch
13. 1/2 mile trek from clubhouse to 1st tee
14. sign at entrance to club
15. warm-up range

Maybe a comparison of the course on a different thread, I would prefer to see the last 15 holes reviewed from Tom Paul.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #54 on: March 26, 2009, 08:27:24 AM »
A major difference in SH & PD is the feeling of freedom. PD chooses to have narrower fairway lines surrounded by long rough. One of their justifications is to stop balls from entering the real gunk defining the corridors. It's evident on at least two of the best holes, 8 & 17, fairway rolls that are now shrouded in the lush stuff.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #55 on: March 26, 2009, 08:32:39 AM »
PatC:

I've been to both Prairie Dunes and Sand Hills and for about the same amount of time at both (around three days) but I'm just not into a discussion of which one is better, and I never have been. Both of them are just right up there near the pinnacle in American architecture and from my perspective that's about all we need to know. No reason not to individually analyze them both in detail but I've just never seen the benefit or even the point of discussing and debating which of them is better. They are both so good, and perhaps some of the differences between them that still make them both so good is the more appropriate discussion to have.

If a discussion of which one is better is being done so you can decide which one to go to, you could probably just flip a coin because no matter which one won you can't go wrong with it.

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #56 on: March 26, 2009, 08:35:22 AM »
Adam,

Good point and an issue with all courses that give back to the USGA. PD and that wonderful course in Philly would be better (more fun/strategic) with slightly more fairway width. #17 is the best example.

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #57 on: March 26, 2009, 08:38:49 AM »
Adam:

How do you know the reason they have those ultra wide rough swaths on some of those holes was done and is being continued to prevent balls from going into the gunk? Did someone out there who has something to do with the golf course tell you that?

I asked Bill Coore about that one time and he said he wishes they would take those fairways out to the gunk and I think he said he thought those swaths may've just been left over from the last USGA championship there or something. I think he even said: "Don't you have some friends at the USGA, so why don't you call them up and tell them to call PD and ask them to consider taking them back out to the widths they were probably designed to have?"

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #58 on: March 26, 2009, 08:43:38 AM »
In my opinion, the order of priority to get rid of those wide rough swaths would be something like this:

#17!!!
#8!!
#5!
#6
#18
but there are others particularly those with fairways set on a good diagonal or axis
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 08:45:20 AM by TEPaul »

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #59 on: March 26, 2009, 08:44:26 AM »
TP, there are at least 2 former USGA board members that are National members at PD. Moving out the fairways would be great.

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #60 on: March 26, 2009, 08:45:42 AM »
TP-agree completely.

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #61 on: March 26, 2009, 08:46:28 AM »
Brad:

I know; I went to PD with two of them!   

And thank God for the third guy because he played so good the whole time it actually showed me how that course can be played and should be played. ;) In three days there I don't believe he even came close to missing a single tee shot. Well, actually just one time in three days----on #11.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 08:53:46 AM by TEPaul »

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #62 on: March 26, 2009, 08:53:17 AM »
PatC:

If a discussion of which one is better is being done so you can decide which one to go to, you could probably just flip a coin because no matter which one won you can't go wrong with it.

That isn't the case at all Tom. I was just curious as to the differences / similarities as I feel I have heard more about SH in the past.
H.P.S.

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #63 on: March 26, 2009, 08:58:19 AM »
" I was just curious as to the differences / similarities as I feel I have heard more about SH in the past."


Pat:

Well, I guess that's understandable as SH is definitely one of the most unusual looking courses and one of the most unique over-all auras in the entire world of golf.

Also the way they went about finding a routing out there and designing (more like just finding and analyzing) some of those holes is pretty unique too in the annals of golf course architecture.

There is something left over from that time I got permission to copy and take home with me called "The Constellation Map" which is one of the God-damnedest things you've ever seen. Pat Mucci was so jealous of me for having it that without me realizing it, he pick-pocketed my ticket right out of my back pocket and threw it on the floor at the Denver airport thereby creating his usual type of North Jersey confusion! But that was nowhere near as potentially problematic as what he did at the small airport from which we flew into Denver from. Had I not saved his ass during that security snafu I believe he would still be imprisoned at that terrorist base in Dominican Republic!
 
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 09:10:25 AM by TEPaul »

Chris_Clouser

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #64 on: March 26, 2009, 09:25:58 AM »
Tom Paul,

You are correct in your summation of what Press originally tried to do on the front nine.  That was based on what Perry supposedly had laid out.  But they had some significant drainage issues from what all of the reports during that period indicate.  The back nine is a greater mystery.

Now this is just my speculation and nothing more, but I think Press went further away from Perry's original plan on the back side because he had already changed things and did not want to run into the same issues potentially that he had on the front nine.  I believe Perry would have basically used the area to the west of the current 11th for a few holes and the entire sequence from 11 to 16 would have been entirely different.  But again that is just pure speculation on my part from my one visit to the course and studying a lot of other Maxwell courses.  I did piece for Paul Daley that made it into his 4th Golf Architecture book on this.

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #65 on: March 26, 2009, 09:34:24 AM »
"I believe Perry would have basically used the area to the west of the current 11th for a few holes and the entire sequence from 11 to 16 would have been entirely different."


Chris:

Interesting. I'm sorry but for some reason I generally lose my sense of direction when on a course or in a place I'm not that familiar with. Which way is west once at the tee of #11? Is it to the right or left? Nevertheless, Perry always had to get the 16th green about where it is to hook back up with the existing 17th, right?
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 09:36:13 AM by TEPaul »

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #66 on: March 26, 2009, 10:01:08 AM »
I believe Chris is talking about area left of 11th green looking from fairway. I believe Bill Coore had looked up in that area about adding another 9 holes, but felt the new ones could not live up to what is already there.

TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #67 on: March 26, 2009, 10:06:40 AM »
brad:

Aren't the maintenance buildings sort of down in that area? Maybe not that far down the 11th but I know they're down to the left because I went down there a few times. What do you find if you go past the maintenance buildings?

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #68 on: March 26, 2009, 10:25:35 AM »
Aerial for reference - area in question squared in yellow.  The maint. sheds are behind the 10th green and alongside the 11th tee beyond the pond.  Definitely not room for 9 holes there, though.


PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #69 on: March 26, 2009, 10:52:51 AM »
Aerial for reference - area in question squared in yellow.  The maint. sheds are behind the 10th green and alongside the 11th tee beyond the pond.  Definitely not room for 9 holes there, though.



Doesn't seem like there is anything really around the property other than a few holes. What is stopping them from buying more land in the area? Can't be too expensive.

However I understand that one great course is usually more than enough.
H.P.S.

K. Krahenbuhl

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #70 on: March 26, 2009, 11:05:03 AM »
Aerial for reference - area in question squared in yellow.  The maint. sheds are behind the 10th green and alongside the 11th tee beyond the pond.  Definitely not room for 9 holes there, though.



Doesn't seem like there is anything really around the property other than a few holes. What is stopping them from buying more land in the area? Can't be too expensive.

However I understand that one great course is usually more than enough.

It might be the perfect spot for a neat little short course.

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #71 on: March 26, 2009, 11:11:26 AM »
Aerial for reference - area in question squared in yellow.  The maint. sheds are behind the 10th green and alongside the 11th tee beyond the pond.  Definitely not room for 9 holes there, though.



Doesn't seem like there is anything really around the property other than a few holes. What is stopping them from buying more land in the area? Can't be too expensive.

However I understand that one great course is usually more than enough.


It might be the perfect spot for a neat little short course.


Amen to that! But would there be demand for it considering the 18 hole course only gets 30,000 rounds?
H.P.S.

Wayne Wiggins, Jr.

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #72 on: March 26, 2009, 11:43:09 AM »
I might be incorrect, but I think the land to the west of number 5 is also PD property, as is the land to the east of 14 green/15 tee.

John Mayhugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #73 on: March 26, 2009, 12:33:16 PM »
Hole #3:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,30677.0.html

Are you all like me and have a few select holes in your mental inventory from your life and travels in golf that when you stepped on their tees the first time you just felt like you wanted to hit tee shots all day long? Well, if you are like me that way, this one might rank high on your list; it sure does for me.

(John Mayhugh is a really fine golf hole photographer but his photo from the tee doesn’t show this tee shot quite as well as Ryan Simper’s does probably because there is more sunlight in Ryan’s. To me neither photo shows the fairway and what’s out there visibly and otherwise and scale-wise as it appears to the player on the tee. Like many photos of golf holes both photos seem to sort of “reverse telescope” things to me).

The above is just a preface to introduce my opinion that this tee shot might be one of the finest I’ve ever seen in golf for both exhilaration and what I consider to be a whole host of really fine architectural principles and architectural concepts all rolled into one!

First, you are fairly high up above your target and as a number of golf architects have claimed, that alone can make a golfer feel stronger and more powerful. I think that’s true, and you really feel that on this tee.

Second, you’re looking down on a fairway that is set between tee and green on what I consider to be the ideal “diagonal” or axis for strategic golf (the old “bite off as much as you can chew” adage). It is, in fact, what some of the early architects and including architectural critic, Joshua Crane, called the “double diagonal”----eg you can run out of room on the outside (or far side) with a conservative line as easily as you can fail to reach the fairway on the inside or aggressive line.

Third, the aggressive inside line of the fairway on the left is basically blind as the rolling ridge covered with ball-eating grunge obscures it from sight.

And fourth, and perhaps best of all, at least to me, it seems you can see a piece of the green out on the left about 350 yards away right on that aggressive blind left tee shot line. I believe that kind of thing (the ultimate target, the green (on a par 4), being off-set and in view from the tee) psychologically pulls the golfer’s concentration and perhaps even his aim at it even if he instinctively knows that line is too aggressive!

Fifth, and last on the tee shot, and perhaps even better yet than the fourth above, if the golfer would only stop and think that despite all the foregoing that just fuels his inclination to bust the ball as hard and far as he can down that aggressive, blind, potentially ball-eating left tee-shot line, he really doesn’t need to do that because this hole is only about 350 yards long and anything into the middle of that fairway will not leave him much club on the approach anyway.

I just love these kinds of holes that I sometimes refer to as strategic or risk/reward “fakeouts”----eg for various reasons they seem to tempt and then sucker you into some huge risk on one shot when you really don’t even need it for the next shot.

Sorry guys, but my memory is a bit hazy and I don’t think I can remember everything about the approach shot  and the green on this hole (I seem to recall basically hitting something lofted like a wedge in there all three times), other than the green is fairly big for a short par 4 and it has some pretty good slope coming from back to front and I think left to right. But what I think I remember pretty well about it is that the left side of the green is beautifully covered by a left side bunker or rise that sort of blinds the left side surface and best of all blinds the diagonal fall-off in the left rear which is hard to recover back onto the green from!


Tom,
I take a lot of photos to help me remember courses and features, but I always do it while playing so I'm limited with what I can do photography wise.  I agree 100% that photos often are misleading and may not do the best job of communicating what the eye really sees. 

Here are a couple of other photos that I think help illustrate your point.  I took my photo from the tee and cropped it to show a bit more detail of the hole.  The second photo is a google earth aerial with yardage marked at 240 from the tee.  This helps illustrate the angles.  That nasty gunsch doesn't look so bad from a satellite!



TEPaul

Re: Prairie Dunes CC
« Reply #74 on: March 26, 2009, 02:48:51 PM »
JohnM:

Don't get me wrong; I think you're a wonderful golf course photographer and I certainly thank you for all the explanatory photos you've provided on this website.