[Richard Choi]

Michael, I wasn't making an "argument" as much as making an observation. It was bit rambling, but I guess I was inspired. I wanted to make following points.


• The new generation of architects are building great American links style course that feature wild undulating greens, severe blowout bunkers, and very wide fairways.
• There are varying degrees of risk/reward scenarios offered by these courses based mostly on topography (and how much the architect took advantage of that topography).
• Flatter courses like Rustic Canyon most relies on approach angles for strategy.
• Rolling courses like Wine Valley Golf Club employs additional elements like uphill, downhill, and sidehill lies and blind approaches.
• The very best examples like Ballyneal makes difference between good and bad tee shots more acute by more severly punishing indifferent shots and making the ideal position smaller or benefits larger.

And finally that I LOVE playing them.

[Garland Bayley]

Richard,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but just a few posts ago, you claimed Pacific is a 9 and Chambers is an 8....perhaps I just got the wrong impression of which one was the better course.     But perhaps you meant to say PD is 8.6 and CB is 8.4.

Kalen,

You suffer from the misconception of thinking of the Doak scale as linear instead of logarithmic. 8s are close to 9s, and 9s are even closer to 10s.

[Richard Choi]

The conditioning is not up to snuff with the Bandon courses.

Why do I get a feeling that this over-rides everything else...?

[Kalen Braley]

When you say region do you mean Washington State or the Pacific Northwest?  I know this is getting a bit specific, but if Bandon is apart of the same region, then most would claim from what I've read here that CB is not better than what is found there, specifically Pac Dunes.

Bandon is 500 miles away.
Everyone here advises against trying to do both in a trip.
Now, you tell me.

Garland,

This is why I asked you to define what you had in mind by the word "region".  A region can be as large as the entire middle east or as small as a town.  When I think of the context as found in the official Doak Scale...two courses within 400 miles of each other are likely in the same region. 

P.S.  Bandon is only 400 miles from CB, not 500. 

[Michael Dugger]

The conditioning is not up to snuff with the Bandon courses.

Why do I get a feeling that this over-rides everything else...?

Your feelings on the conditioning all well-known around here, Richard.

Don't get me wrong, Chambers Bay is a fantastic course.  But the conditioning does matter.  EVERYTHING matters.

If the golf course does not allow for the bump and run game, as the architecture wants for it to, then Jay Blasi may as well have desgined a bunch of miniture push up greens and created a target golf course.

[Norbert P]

Richard, glad you had a great time in Walla Walla.  The drive isn't so bad. Did you stop off at "The Brick" in Roslyn for a beer?
How were the winds that day?
How many rounds did you play?
Did you walk or ride?
Which tees?
And how'd you play #4 (the short par 4)
  ... and 15?

I think you bring up a good point and emphasize a trend that goes in a better direction than pre-Sand Hills and Bandon golf course expectations.
Will this "Links Style" with your criteria be a timeless and recurring theme?  Time will tell. But if the land allows for them and the designers and shapers can accentuate the positives, then I think they have and will hold their places as inspiring and epiphenal golf courses for years to come.

[Michael Dugger]

Just procured a few nice images of CB taken a few weeks ago.  You can tell the dozer tracks are disappearing.  Looks great!

[Garland Bayley]

When you say region do you mean Washington State or the Pacific Northwest?  I know this is getting a bit specific, but if Bandon is apart of the same region, then most would claim from what I've read here that CB is not better than what is found there, specifically Pac Dunes.

Bandon is 500 miles away.
Everyone here advises against trying to do both in a trip.
Now, you tell me.

Garland,

This is why I asked you to define what you had in mind by the word "region".  A region can be as large as the entire middle east or as small as a town.  When I think of the context as found in the official Doak Scale...two courses within 400 miles of each other are likely in the same region. 

P.S.  Bandon is only 400 miles from CB, not 500. 

I often mix up Brookings, OR and  Bandon, OR. Therefore the mileage mistake. However, I think you get the point. You don't do both in the same trip.

[Andy Troeger]

Wyatt,
No worries--the humor went over my head on that one, although I originally wrote an equally sarcastic response that I deleted when I figured it wouldn't be read correctly either. 

[Norbert P]

Interestingly counterintuitive fairway mowing direction in that third picture. 

[Garland Bayley]

Interestingly counterintuitive fairway mowing direction in that third picture. 

Isn't that just a mowed grassy area that is not part of any fairway?

[Jim Colton]

I'm going to petition to Tom to make the fairways at Ballyneal even wider, because I've only hit them about 40% of the time.  That is mainly because my golf game has gone down the tubes (I blame the economy), and partly because even when by chance I happen to hit one solid and relatively straight, if it's not in the right part of the fairway, on many holes it can bound into the rough.  Rich mentioned #10 as a great example, #4 is another if you go anywhere left of center.  With some wind, hitting the right part of the fairway is a challenge.  Get it off line and best case scenario is you have a blind shot...not a huge deal but an added challenge, especially with greens that require precision approaches.  Worst case scenario is you're in a yucca plant and you're lucky if you make double bogey.  Anything can happen out of the vegetation, I'm probably the in-house expert.  Personally, I think the fairways are the 'right' width given the conditions, the style of play (options galore), and the random penal nature of the vegetation if you go way off line.

[Jim Franklin]

The routing at Chambers Bay is not as sophisticated as Pacific.

The strategy of the golf holes is not that of those at Pacific.

The conditioning is not up to snuff with the Bandon courses.

Nor is the aura, the scenery, the vegetation, etc......that of the Bandon courses.

IMHO, all three of the Bandon course best CB, it's not a huge disparity, CB is sweet, but it's like saying Whistling Straits is "close" to Pacific.

The folks at Golfweek rate Pac Dunes and Whistling Straits fairly close.

[Niall C]

Niall,

With respect to Kingsbarns, what you speak of is the reason I deferred to the courses in the US as the leaders of the genre.  I can think of just a half dozen or so "new links" overseas that I would put with the 15 or so that are making an large impact here in the states.

It goes without saying that genesis of the movement lies in the courses designed by C&C and Renaissance.  Others are making courses that are starting to impact the genre as much as the earlier efforts.  Gil Hanse, Chris Brands, Dan Hixon, Graham Marsh, Mike Nuzzo are but a few of the emerging contenders in "new links" design.  

I think the underlying crux of this argument stems from my belief that there are two types of golfers.  Score golfer and fun golfers.  It seems to me that the score golfers defend penal golf courses because of their ability to protect par and exact a tough task for them.  Fun golfers defend strategic links designs because they allow for errors--what some call options--and also allow for creativity.  Score golfers are the first to bash strategic links golf courses for their ease of play without referencing playing conditions and "rub of the green".  Fun golfers are the first to bash penal golf courses because they exact punishment and are option--or error--limited.

Pick your poison.  I personally love the "new links" style and have started a quest to study them as much as possible.  Some think they are just a good excuse for hackers to enjoy a golf course.

Ben

I picked Kingsbarns because it was mentioned as an example of the genre in this discussion and because it was the only course mentioned that I had played. It is designed as a links and plays fairly fast and firm when the conditions allow. It also typically has wide open fairways. I will leave it to others who have played it and the other courses mentioned to say whether it merits inclusion within the genre.

That said, my point/question remains, why do we need 50-80 yard wide fairways to make a course strategic ? Can't you incorporate strategy within 30/40 yard fairways ?

Regarding fun golfers v. stroke golfers, my friends will tell you that I'm a pitch and putt merchant and have even taken to hitting a 2 wood off the tee to keep the ball reasonably straight. I play off a 10 handicap having just gone up from 9 so I am not one for penal golf courses. However when you have wide open fairways where you can simply take a slash with your driver and still have a shot, it does take a lot of the challenge and therefore fun out of the game for me. Just a thought.

Niall

[Garland Bayley]

I think if you are going to talk about "links style" courses, you have to include wind in the discussion. As Melvyn (correctly I believe) would have us understand golf is a man against the elements game. If you have huge stands of trees that eliminate the wind as in many parkland courses, you have eliminated one of the elements of the game. If you ride a cart, you have eliminated another. If you make greens that are always sloped to accept shots, you have eliminated yet another. Go too far, and you have a driving range with cart transport. But, for many of us that may be OK. After all, the Huckster and I can have a lot of fun on a driving range, or parking lot.

[Carl Rogers]

Tom D may take exeception of my modest assertion that Riverfront may represent a step along the historical path to the courses mentioned on this thread ... If you can overcome the housing development and the slower and maybe overwatered bermuda fairways.

I may convince some of you to make the effort to tee it up in Suffolk, VA.

[Richard Choi]

Richard, glad you had a great time in Walla Walla.  The drive isn't so bad. Did you stop off at "The Brick" in Roslyn for a beer?
How were the winds that day?
How many rounds did you play?
Did you walk or ride?
Which tees?
And how'd you play #4 (the short par 4)
  ... and 15?

Slag, it was just great, the whole experience of it. The drive went surprisingly fast. It is a gorgeous part of the country and having a good partner in crime always helps. Did not stop by the Brick, but I did stop by a winery for a quick tasting and bought a bottle.

The winds weren't too bad. I would say about 10mph steady, just enough to make you think about it, but not really enough to affect your strategy. I would love to try the course again when it is blowing 20 or 25.

I played 36 holes, I walked the first 18 since I really wanted to get a closer look at the terrain and we took the cart in the afternoon so that we can play fast (long drive back!).

I played the first 18 from the black tees (6750 yards) and I found that with my drives (about 270 to 280), I couldn't reach most of the nasty fairway bunkers off the tee. I played from the blue tees in the afternoon (6350) and those bunkers were much more in play. I actually ended up shooting 89 for both rounds (*#$#ing' 3 PUTTS!!! #$%(#$!!!!!). Man, greens were fast, especially after playing at Ballyneal and Chambers Bay before.

In the first round I hit a driver on #4 to see how close I can get to the green. I hit a great drive to the right plateau and had a 50 or 60 yard pitch which I promptly hit fat. The second time around, I hit a 4 iron and pushed it WAAAAY right into trouble. That is a fun hole.

15th is a great driving hole, I think the first time my approach faded a bit to the right and I made a par there. The second time, I think I hit a 5 iron approach that found the front bunker (nasty), but I hit a GREAT sand shot and saved a birdie!

Personally, I thought #7 was the best par 5 I saw there. From 100 yards in, it has one of the most interesting features on the entire course. And that big punchbowl green is a KICK!

[ed_getka]

Niall,

With respect to Kingsbarns, what you speak of is the reason I deferred to the courses in the US as the leaders of the genre.  I can think of just a half dozen or so "new links" overseas that I would put with the 15 or so that are making an large impact here in the states.

It goes without saying that genesis of the movement lies in the courses designed by C&C and Renaissance.  Others are making courses that are starting to impact the genre as much as the earlier efforts.  Gil Hanse, Chris Brands, Dan Hixon, Graham Marsh, Mike Nuzzo are but a few of the emerging contenders in "new links" design.  

I think the underlying crux of this argument stems from my belief that there are two types of golfers.  Score golfer and fun golfers.  It seems to me that the score golfers defend penal golf courses because of their ability to protect par and exact a tough task for them.  Fun golfers defend strategic links designs because they allow for errors--what some call options--and also allow for creativity.  Score golfers are the first to bash strategic links golf courses for their ease of play without referencing playing conditions and "rub of the green".  Fun golfers are the first to bash penal golf courses because they exact punishment and are option--or error--limited.

Pick your poison.  I personally love the "new links" style and have started a quest to study them as much as possible.  Some think they are just a good excuse for hackers to enjoy a golf course.

Ben

I picked Kingsbarns because it was mentioned as an example of the genre in this discussion and because it was the only course mentioned that I had played. It is designed as a links and plays fairly fast and firm when the conditions allow. It also typically has wide open fairways. I will leave it to others who have played it and the other courses mentioned to say whether it merits inclusion within the genre.

That said, my point/question remains, why do we need 50-80 yard wide fairways to make a course strategic ? Can't you incorporate strategy within 30/40 yard fairways ?

Regarding fun golfers v. stroke golfers, my friends will tell you that I'm a pitch and putt merchant and have even taken to hitting a 2 wood off the tee to keep the ball reasonably straight. I play off a 10 handicap having just gone up from 9 so I am not one for penal golf courses. However when you have wide open fairways where you can simply take a slash with your driver and still have a shot, it does take a lot of the challenge and therefore fun out of the game for me. Just a thought.

Niall

Niall,
    I am curious if you find Kingsbarns less interesting now because you know where you can miss and where you can't. Thus the wider fairways seem too easy. Do you go for the green when you are out of position in the fairway? Or do you put your ball in a safe place where you still have a chance to make par, but you eliminate the potential for a big number? I have a lot of experience with Rustic Canyon which is known for its width, among other attributes. I almost always shoot my lowest scores of the season there, because I know the course so well. It is the rare golfer that can show up at Rustic Canyon and play to their handicap the first couple of times around, especially if someone isn't explaining all the features to pay attention to. Like you I think you should be challenged off the tee as well as in every facet of the game if a course is great. So I mark down Rustic a notch for the wide fairways. It is too late at night for me to effectively make my point. I'll try again tomorrow.

[Norbert P]

Richard, glad you played it twice and from different tees. I think that's the way to play a new course when you've got the time, curiosity, and skills to adjust.  Sorry about the 3 putts -- but you're in the majority there.  Also glad you walked it. Perhaps you can give Rob Rigg the walking man lowdown. He may go out this weekend to play it, but I'm sure he'd appreciate your take on the walkability.  Kye'll be happy to read your praise of #7; he really thought it turned out nicely but he wasn't around long enough to get to play it - at least with grass on it.  I presume it will relinquish many eagles over time. 

  Y'all come back now, ya hear?
 
 
 

[Jim Nugent]

Richard,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but just a few posts ago, you claimed Pacific is a 9 and Chambers is an 8....perhaps I just got the wrong impression of which one was the better course.     But perhaps you meant to say PD is 8.6 and CB is 8.4.

Kalen,

You suffer from the misconception of thinking of the Doak scale as linear instead of logarithmic.

Neither, just a ranking system: a > b >c, without telling you by how much. 

[Niall C]

Ed

The reason I find Kingsbarns less interesting isn't because I know where to go and where not to. Its because in a lot of instances it makes no difference. A case in point is the long par 5 12th (?) which sweeps round the bay. Yes theres plenty of movement in the land and the green is interesting but frankly it makes no difference whether you go up the left, the middle or right. Likewise for the approach shot, apart from when the pin is up the back and then you don't want to be coming in from the left as you have to carry a bunker on the left side of green, I don't think there is any particular advantage to which direction you approach from. BTW the green is something like 90 yards and is designed like an elongated road hole bunker but not nearly as testing to hit.

In fairness to Mark Parsinen he designed it with the intent of it looking hard but playing easy, presumably mindful that most golfers playing it would only be playing it once.

The courses 

[Niall C]

another premature finish !

What I was going to say was the courses I largely play are traditional members courses that were designed/built in a totally different era. Consequently they are much narrower but that doesn't mean they are all devoid of strategic challenges or are overly penal, although some are.

Niall

[Carl Nichols]

CB is definitely an 8. It is THE best course in the region. It is worth traveling to see.

This has probably been discussed on here before, but what the heck.  The Doak scale could be read to suggest that a course gets a higher rating if it's the best (or one of the best) in its region -- but that can't be right, can it?  Chambers Bay obviously wouldn't be the best course on 17-mile drive, but that can't mean it deserves fewer Doak scale points than it gets in Tacoma.

[Adam Clayman]

Niall. You appear to be suffering from the mindset that created the dark ages of GCA. The rationalization that constantly narrow is more testing and that width has no place in the world for real golfers. Well the reality is providing a narrow target through narrow corridors makes the sport infinitely easier for the better lazy thinking golfer. While not providing that obvious line through width gives the golfer a sense of uneasiness because the path is less obvious. Augusta was designed with that in mind emulating the feedom found on the suld sod.

[ed_getka]

Niall,
   It is very interesting about Kingsbarns and there not being a favored position on some holes. Is the course so popular mainly because of the aesthetics/popularity of the course,  and once you get past that it loses some of it's luster?

Adam,
   The flip side of not having a defined route to the hole is that a squirrely driver of the ball off the tee (i.e. me) is allowed to take a freer swing than he would if the hole were a bit tighter off the tee. I don't think you need US Open width to lessen that freedom, but it should be addressed in some way IMO.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()