Why doesn't Sand Hills need...

[John Kavanaugh]

a par three course?

[Peter Pallotta]

I can't imagine that "time" is - or at least should be - much of a factor out in the great plains of Nebraska.
Doesn't a member who travels there from, say, New York or Los Angeles or Chicago look forward to leaving the insistent and inexorable ticking of big city clocks far behind, at least for a little while?
Doesn't he hope to be nourished and refreshed by the slower gentler rhythms of wind and an endless sky - with the sun rising in the east and setting in the west the only markers of a passing time?
For whatever the many charms of a Par 3 course might be, don't golfers also associate it with our rushed and hectic lives -- with the quick 9 after work, with the just-over-an-hour we have before picking up the kids, or before rushing off to the next meeting?
Isn't the Par 3 course a development/product of our increasingly urban environments and of the ever-faster pace of modern life?
Why bring such a development/product/reminder into a place like Sand Hills -- a course and club and a style of architecture that was meant to serve as the very antidote to such frantic and feverish living?
After 18 or 36 holes, and with a sun-dappled late-afternoon patio and cool drinks and good conversation and a long leisurely dinner there for the taking, does anyone really need to "squeeze in" a quick 9 on a Par 3 course?
Do members really travel out there to Sand Hills to be encouraged to "squeeze in" anything?
Maybe sometimes "enough" is more than enough, and certainly good enough, and even more than good enough. 

[Ben Sims]

Peter, are you messing with us?


I'm really pumped to see who says the magic word first.

[Alex Miller]

If I recall Sand Hills allows carts. You can play 36 there walking and do an extra 9 in an hour with a cart, so why build a par 3 course to fill the same amount of time.

[Tim Gavrich]

Every golf course is a par 3 course if you play it forward enough.

[Peter Pallotta]

Ben - For some reason (don't ask me why) I didn't want to see this thread drop to the bottom of the page....and my post was the only thing I could think of saying! 
I have to admit, though, that as I was typing it I started believing I might've stumbled onto something brilliant! 

[Sam Kestin]

To Tim's point--I would love to see more clubs build tees set at par-3 length throughout the course from angles totally unlike the angles used on the approaches for the normal 18 hole routing. This would enable golfers to spin around for a quick nine on the par 3 loop late in the evenings as well as provide the opportunity to experience the challenge of playing to a green complex from a completely different angle.


I think about this at Riviera every time I come up the hill on 18 and look back down at the third green. What a fun shot that would be from the top of the hill down to that green set in the valley.

[Mark Pritchett]

I'm sure someone will do a photo tour of where they could build one. 

[Tim Gavrich]

To Tim's point--I would love to see more clubs build tees set at par-3 length throughout the course from angles totally unlike the angles used on the approaches for the normal 18 hole routing. This would enable golfers to spin around for a quick nine on the par 3 loop late in the evenings as well as provide the opportunity to experience the challenge of playing to a green complex from a completely different angle.


I think about this at Riviera every time I come up the hill on 18 and look back down at the third green. What a fun shot that would be from the top of the hill down to that green set in the valley.

Sam--


Heck, why do there need to be tee markers set out in order for golfers to do this? So that they can submit a score for their handicaps from the par-3 routing? It seems like this would be important for an infinitesimal number of players doing the par-3 routing.


Re: the cross-country hole you're contemplating at Riviera, I'm tempted to say, "As long as you're not getting in anyone's way, why not try that shot?" But I realize it may be against rules there.


In general, I think when people contemplate the idea of "playing golf," they don't take the implications of "play" seriously enough. I think a lot of people "suffer golf" when they really ought to be "playing golf."

[Jerry Kluger]

One of the courses at my club has a separate set of tees that are called the Wee Tees - 18 holes and not one over 160 yards - and they are tee boxes not just markers in the fairways.  Good for the kids, good for practice, and good for a quick 18 when it is really cold.

[Terry Lavin]

Probably because Dick Youngscap long ago decided it would never have more than the 18 hole golf course.  As I recall the legend, Coore and Crenshaw had hypothetical layouts for at least five courses.  But that could be apocryphal...

[Shane Wright]

Sand Hills was a trailblazer.  It went before all others.  So in that regard, it was non-conforming.  And then once one is there, it continues as a non-conforming experience which is instrumental in why it is special, architectural design aside. 


I just can't see it going down the conforming path now.  And many who visit Sand Hills may never see it again and want to soak up ever second possible on the course.

[Jim Hoak]

Why does any course/club "need" a par 3 course?  Maybe at a public, daily-fee set-up like Bandon, for guys who want to play more golf and don't have the time or energy to go another full 18.  But a private club like Sand Hills can do what it wants--and is so great that it doesn't "need" an par 3 course to establish or maintain its greatness.

[Adam Lawrence]

I'm sure Terry is right as to why SH doesn't have a par three course or indeed anything except its original 18. The reason it doesn't need one is that its membership has been full for many years and therefore it doesn't need to go aggressively targeting new people

[Ted Sirbaugh]

When I was there a month ago, my caddie said that Coore had been there a couple of weeks prior to walk some of the land and look for potential green sites to build a par 3 course; however, I didn't hear anyone else mention this and it doesn't seem that they would need one

[Peter Pallotta]

It must be the gca equivalent of keeping up with the Jones' -- except definitely *not* the Robert Trent kind!
Hmmm - maybe we should invent a new phrase.
Keeping up with the Dyes?
Keeping up with the Ross'
I wonder...I wonder...What name could we use there? 

[Matthew Essig]

[/size]Every golf course is a par 3 course if you play it forward enough.

A course near me has junior tees quite a bit forward. Still trying to convince my father to go play the course as a par 3 course from the junior tees one afternoon with me...

[Kevin_Reilly]

Just posting to say that I might be the only guy here who has no interest in a par 3 course as an add-on to a regulation course.  My old club had one, and it never felt like "golf" playing it.  At SHGC I'd rather play the course than go around a Himalayas-style putting green or par 3 course.  The driving range there sets the tone...it's not fancy (understatement) but is fine for a warm up before you get to the first tee.  I'd never spend 5 additional minutes there.

[archie_struthers]

 




Is Sand Hills too busy?


Not my recollection

[Bob Montle]

Or for super seniors.
When my Dad turned 85 he quit using the regular tees except for short par 3's

He would drop a ball at the 200 yard marker, or at 150 yds or at 100 yds.
He would still keep score, and rotate lengths so he would use a different "tee" on each hole every day.

It made the game enjoyable to him again after he couldn't hit the ball much over 120 yards anymore.

As for me, I enjoy playing a local short par 3 course just to work on my wedges.

[Jimmy Muratt]

A par 3 course or "short" course can be a wonderful addition to many clubs/facilities.  At Farmington Country Club in Charlottesville, VA, Coore & and Crenshaw recently added a 10 hole "short" course (6 par threes, 3 par fours, 1 par five).  It's fantastic and is already showing it's tremendous value to the club in many ways:

-  wonderful place for juniors, beginners and seniors to learn the game and most importantly, enjoy the game
-  tremendous place to work on your short game
-  you can easily walk it in 1 hour and 15 minutes, ideal for after work when you don't have much time to play
-  it removes stress from the big course

Farmington is a busy, family oriented club so it works very well and is getting a lot of play.  At small, golf only clubs the short courses don't seem to get nearly as much use.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it can make them harder to justify the cost.  At a remote club with a small membership such as Sand Hills, that's a decision that's purely up to Mr. Youngscap.  For aging members or those that take children there and don't want to play 36+ holes, it may prove to be a nice addition.  For everyone that has seen the awe-inspiring land in every direction, it certainly would be something special.

[Eric Smith]

We once played a 9-hole match from approximately 150 yds out late one afternoon at SHGC. Great fun.

[Tom_Doak]

I'm sort of surprised that Sand Hills doesn't have a par-3 course, considering that Bill & Ben have built them on so many other projects -- everywhere from Friars Head to Colorado Golf Club to Bandon and Sand Valley.  Plus, Mr. Youngscap used to worry about having some big areas of sod handy just in case a major winterkill took a bunch of fairways on the main course.


But the sand hills are not a money-making operation, because the season is so, so short.  A hotel developer would tell you that you need to have 50% occupancy to justify building a hotel, and that's impossible in a place with a four-month golf season.  Sand Hills makes it because their members subsidize the operation, but nobody wants to double down.  Plus, why would you build a second 18 holes when the first course is so well received by all?  The second course is almost guaranteed to be inferior to the first ... and if it wasn't inferior, it would call into question why the first course was rated so highly.  [I believe this is the same calculation used by Muirfield in not pursuing a second course on their dunesland.]


Ballyneal is only different because it's a walking only facility, and there are a bunch of people on any given day who don't feel like walking 36 holes in the heat.  The Mulligan gives them something else to do.  It wasn't necessary, but I think it will be a cool addition without competing at all with the big course.  And it wasn't very expensive to build.