Spectacular Sand Hills! (Photo Tour - 18th Hole Now Posted)

[Mike Benham]

What's with the color of these photos?  I'm all for firm and fast, brownish, yellowish turf but these colors seem to have a strange tint, too much saturation or RGB correction ...

[Adam Clayman]

Huck, Do you know the course record from those back tees?

Mike, it is the photo. SH is kept greener than Ballyneal or any of the Bandon courses.

That's why Hucks statement (especially as a course rating guy) on the difficulty, seems odd, since BN's CR is 67. Even the best players prove short firm turf is a hazard

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck, Do you know the course record from those back tees?

No clue.  I sorta recall reading on here that Faldo shot some great score early on.

[Adam Clayman]

He shot 66 back in the day. Aced 13 too.

[Tom Huckaby]

Ada - gotcha - thanks, I remember that now.

And not to get into the tired old comparisons between these great courses again, but exactly what about my statements seemed odd?  That I thought Sand Hills from the back tees was tougher than Ballyneal at it's longest?

Yes I am a course rating guy, and yes I know the numbers at Ballyneal.

As far as I can guess, well... Sand Hills' numbers would be quite a bit higher.

Course records prove little, I think.

NOTE:  I am NOT AT ALL saying that Ballyneal is an easy course.  I just do believe that Sand Hills is pretty damn tough from those double-diamonds.  Short turf is a hazard indeed; just remember it exists at both places equally (at least in my experience).

Tom H.

[Matt Bosela]

What's with the color of these photos?  I'm all for firm and fast, brownish, yellowish turf but these colors seem to have a strange tint, too much saturation or RGB correction ...

Mike,

The majority of the photos were taken late in the day and the turf was just glowing at that point.  The only adjustment I've made is a contrast correction, otherwise, what you see is what you get.  The course was exceptionally green due to all the rain the area had but I can tell you it still played very firm and fast.

[Scott Szabo]

Adam, Huck,

The course record is 61, I believe.  There is/was a scorecard hanging in the golf shop.  If memory serves me correctly (and it's been a few years) his name was Brad Lardon.

I'm sure Gene can shed some light if I am not correct.

Regarding difficulty, as I've said before, I think Sand Hills is a much more difficult course than Ballyneal, but is easier to go low on than Ballyneal, if that makes any sense at all.  I have played Ballyneal much more than Sand Hills, but I've been under par a couple of times at SH from the tips, never at BN.  I think the heavily contouring of the greens at BN make it much more difficult to score on than SH. 

Scott

[Harris Nepon]

I saw the course record score card in the pro shop bust can't remember it right now. I think it was something around 62 or 63.


The long grass off the fariways is not difficult to hit out of, so it's not a as penal as it may look. It seemed more often than not you had a shot out of there. It's no where near as thick as fescue I've come across at other courses.

As Tom said, you could play multiple rounds with one ball. Easier to find a ball in the long grass than you would think.

[Tom Huckaby]

Scott - that all works for me.  It's all gonna depend on who we are talking about.  Neither course is easy, that's for sure. But then again neither course is crazy hard, from any tees.  Hell I managed some mid-70s rounds from the double diamonds at Sand Hills, so it can't be that hard. 

[Matt Bosela]

Adam, Huck,

The course record is 61, I believe.  There is/was a scorecard hanging in the golf shop.  If memory serves me correctly (and it's been a few years) his name was Brad Lardon.

I'm sure Gene can shed some light if I am not correct.

Regarding difficulty, as I've said before, I think Sand Hills is a much more difficult course than Ballyneal, but is easier to go low on than Ballyneal, if that makes any sense at all.  I have played Ballyneal much more than Sand Hills, but I've been under par a couple of times at SH from the tips, never at BN.  I think the heavily contouring of the greens at BN make it much more difficult to score on than SH. 

Scott

I completely agree with this and was trying to put it into words like you did - I think if you're on your game, you can go lower at Sand Hills than Ballyneal but it's also much easier to blow up at SH.  Much higher score dispersion at Sand Hills than Ballyneal.  I don't have many rounds to base my assumption on but over six rounds at Sand Hills, my scores were between 75 and 85 while at Ballyneal over the same amount of rounds, there was only a four shot difference between high and low and it was right in the middle of the SH range (between 78 and 82).

[Tom Huckaby]

I think it all turns on the tees one plays and the conditions one faces.  SOOO much changes at each course due to that.  Thus what generalizations can any of us make?

We can't even use course rating and slope, which would usually work decently enough, because Sand Hills doesn't have such....

My personal experience differs with those stated so far.  But hell, I have been to Sand Hills three times and Ballyneal twice.. my sample size is FAR too small to generalize.

So hell, let's get back to the tour.  I am still waiting for a ho-hum green.  Jeez even 4, which looks flat, has significant contour... and god help you if you have a right pin and your ball is left... roll, roll, roll down zee hill....

 

[Phil McDade]

Huck:

One more post and then I eagerly await the rest of the tour.

I once (foolishly) got into a debate with Pat Mucci here about the difficulty of Pine Valley (never played; judgements all from pics and TV), arguing similar thoughts: lots of forced carries, extraordinary penal surrounds off the fairways and greens, no margin of error, the usual. Pat replied: Although not a course for beginners, it's wider than you think; it's not that long (from the proper tees); greens are manageable with proper placement on approaches. But in essence, Pat's final argument was one I couldn't counter -- if it was so hard, the membership of PV wouldn't enjoy playing it. And they do, ergo, it can't be THAT hard. (I'm still not convinced, but my lack of playing PV essentially led me to concede the debate.)

In Ran's recent review of Old Macdonald, he wrote:

"As such, with the possible exception of Yeamans Hall where Doak and Urbina have worked for years, the author can’t think of a single course more conducive for a grandfather, father, wife and child to play than here. Forced carries are at a minimum while the amount of acreage presented as short grass is at a maximum for any course built since World War Two."

"The strength and flexibility of its golf holes insures that it will continue to garner glowing critical reviews while also putting smiles on the faces of many recreational golfers."

"Another cool thing about Old Mac is that it might be the hardest course at the resort for good players and the easiest course for bad players, which is a really neat trick to pull off. Like at Yale, good players can hit 15 greens and not break 80. Getting even short irons close to hole locations on large greens have vexed golfers for a century plus at St. Andrews. At the same time, there are lots of ways at Old MacDonald to break 90 or 100 as you are almost guaranteed not to lose a ball." (intro to thread announcing OM course profile posting on this site)

This, to me, is the stuff of genius, GCA division -- a course both difficult for the serious golfer (and with all due respect, you're a serious golfer if you're a rater...not that there's anything wrong with that ), yet truly enjoyable for the casual, recreational golfer. That's what I've always wondered about Sand Hills. PValley, Winged Foot (East), Oakmont -- all were built to be serious, hard tests for golfers. I've played courses like that, and I really didn't have a lot of fun. SHills looks more like the latter (the Pine Valley of the prairies) than something along the likes of Old Macdonald. But I'm open to hearing other sides of it.

[Tom Huckaby]

Phil:

I have no way to respond to any of that, other than this:  from the back tees Sand Hills is Shinnecock Hills.. from the middle tees it's NGLA.

I first said that years ago, and I think it still remains true.

So yes, my opinion is that Sand Hills clearly meets your definitions; that is, it is FAR closer to how you define Old Macdonald than it is to how you define Pine Valley and Oakmont.  Remenber what I wrote above - I watched a 12 year old make lots of pars... I watched a 70+ year old have great fun... each fine players, yes, but neither able to hit it more than 175 yards or so... but the point remains, it all turns on the tees one plays.  But you're never going to know any of this until you play it.  I hope you get that wonderful opportunity.

One final thing:  I have long trumpeted Sand Hills as the greatest course on this planet.  I have also said in here many times (back when I used to post a lot) that I have little use for stern tests of golf; I can see calling them great, but they are not my cup of tea.

Put that logic together... how could I of all people call Sand Hills #1 if it were not far closer, if not directly meeting, how you describe Old Macdonald?

[Tony Weiler]

Adam, Huck,

The course record is 61, I believe.  There is/was a scorecard hanging in the golf shop.  If memory serves me correctly (and it's been a few years) his name was Brad Lardon.

I'm sure Gene can shed some light if I am not correct.

Regarding difficulty, as I've said before, I think Sand Hills is a much more difficult course than Ballyneal, but is easier to go low on than Ballyneal, if that makes any sense at all.  I have played Ballyneal much more than Sand Hills, but I've been under par a couple of times at SH from the tips, never at BN.  I think the heavily contouring of the greens at BN make it much more difficult to score on than SH. 

Scott

I completely agree with this and was trying to put it into words like you did - I think if you're on your game, you can go lower at Sand Hills than Ballyneal but it's also much easier to blow up at SH.  Much higher score dispersion at Sand Hills than Ballyneal.  I don't have many rounds to base my assumption on but over six rounds at Sand Hills, my scores were between 75 and 85 while at Ballyneal over the same amount of rounds, there was only a four shot difference between high and low and it was right in the middle of the SH range (between 78 and 82).

These thoughts are very interesting.  I’ll get to see for myself at SH in August, and BN in Sept.  Wow, these pics (and the B lack and White from BN) really have me itching. 

My question is if I don’t play the tips (which I likely will NOT) does the chance to evaluate scoring on a comparison basis as stated above change?   

[Phil McDade]

Huck:

Thanks -- that helps clarify a lot, and I hadn't encountered your're back-tee/middle-tee/NGLA reference. I've long wondered about whether SHills is just one tough test of golf, or just a SOB from the back tees. It looks like the former, but sounds more like the latter, and I have to take your word for that without playing it.

Conceding arguments to both Mucci and Huckaby -- is that a GCA first?

[Tom Huckaby]

Huckaby and Mucci in any sentence other than one showing vehement disagreement would be a GCA first.



And you need not concede, though I appreciate the gesture.  I can see how it looks in these pictures, and others.  And heck, I have always also supported people going ahead and analyzing via pictures - no problem there.

It's just that in this case... I don't think they tell the proper story.

I have never had so much fun playing the game than my rounds at Sand Hillls.  I am a 4 handicap and not long off the tee.  The tips generally kicked my butt, but in a fun challenging way... especially since I knew I could move back to the middles, and have so many more action/birdie holes...

The same thing occurs at Ballyneal, btw.  That's why BOTH of these are so great.

[Scott Szabo]

Most of the discussion about hole #4 centers around avoiding the pit to the left of the green at all costs.  While it certainly is a worthy hazard, what many people fail to realize is how treacherous missing to the RIGHT of the green can be.  In my first visit, one in my group tried chipping a couple of times and had the ball roll back to his feet.  Then he grabbed a putter (the right choice in the first place!) and had the same thing happen.  Then he hit his next shot a bit harder and it went through the green and up into the native, from where he proceeded to chop it out and have it roll back to within a few feet of his original play.  He went straight to the fifth tee, ball in pocket, tail between legs, muttering to himself the whole way. 

While over a few beers later in the evening he reluctantly admitted that the 4th was his favorite hole of all  , as it is mine.  It's not one that many people gush over, but with all that it has to offer, it is my favorite of all at the Sand Hills.

[Jason Topp]

I would put the difficulty of Sand Hills as comparable to Pacific Dunes - maybe a bit more difficult tee to green but less difficult on the greens.  These pictures emphasize the difficult slopes and hazards but many of the slopes help you and the fairways are up to 90 yards wide.  For example, on the third, you simply have to hit the tee shot to the left and it feeds on the green.

You usually have some sort of shot from the scrub - often an easier shot than you would have from moderate rough on a parkland course. 

Forced carries to the fairways are not an issue.  I do not remember even thinking about them from the back tees and I am too short off the tee to play back tees at most modern courses.  I struggle with some of them at Sutton Bay into the wind but at Sand Hills they are no problem. 

[Gene Greco]

   Matt:

       I just visited Sand Hills last week and the course had just the right amount of "crispiness" throughout.

The greens were like an ice rink and there was plenty of roll on all our shots.

The pics appear to represent that fact: A fair amount of brown hue where Kyle (the super) is just giving the grass enough water to stay alive.

Was this your experience while you were there or did the heavy rains slow things down a bit?

           Gene

 

Gene,

Maybe you can comment.

Out of curiosity, how large is Kyle's maintenance staff at the club?  I am very ignorant about the maintenace practices of the prairie courses versus those of other more mainstream locations.  And, maybe it's just me and my opinion, but the course shows a remarkable maturity in these photos when I compare them to other shots I've seen of the golf course course.  You already touched on it above, but it even looks crisp and bit more tight than I thought it was from those photos.  

Huck and Spaulding are starting to wear on me a bit with their opinion of SH--in a good way.  Every time I see it, it looks better.

Ben:

There are 19 members of the maintenance staff.  They do an amazing job of pushing the limits during normal summer weather patterns and put in triple time during and after abnormal ones (such as what Matt experienced) in order to present the course at its best.

The course is browner during the latter part of July and August. In June, the area has just completed its spring rains so the course might appear more  lush at this time.

The greens are among the fastest and truest in the world and I have regularly watched better golfers crash and burn on them. So the comment about these greens being easier than such and such a place seems odd. I have only witnessed one golfer in 14 years master the greens from the get go. However, coincidentally enough, he also was the only golfer who played three consecutive days with out any wind. Nada.

And anyone who has played Sand Hills on several consecutive days knows that the wind will appear and is usually a constant and must be factored into reading a putt.     

 

[Matt Bosela]

Sorry for the little break - I'll post a couple more holes tomorrow and continue the tour.

[Matt Bosela]

5th Hole - 412 Yards Par 4

The 5th hole brings the first instance of a centerline hazard into the mix at Sand Hills.  From the back tees, the hole plays at a slight angle and the tee ball must be played over the back of the 4th green and over the native area to a very wide fairway made smaller by the presence of a bunker right in the middle of the target area.

The ideal tee shot has to flirt with that bunker in order to get a clear view of the green, which sits slightly elevated from the fairway in the middle and even more elevated should you miss on the left side, as the fairway slopes off dramatically to the left, propelling many draws or hooks into the left rough.

The approach shot is played uphill to a longish but narrow putting surface featuring a subtle spine that runs down the length of the green in the middle, with the green flanked on the right by a large bunker.  There is a lot of short grass around the green here as well, giving some neat options around the green.

Tee Shot from the Back Tee


Tee Shot from the Middle Tee


Approach from Middle of Fairway behind Centerline Bunker


Approach from Middle of Fairway Past Centerline Hazard


Partially Blind Approach from Behind Right Fairway Bunker


Approach from Right Fairway Bunker


Approach from Left Side of Fairway in Lower Area, leaving blind second over bunker


View from Left Side of Green Looking at Right Greenside Bunker


View from Back Left of Green Looking Back


View from Behind Green Looking Back down Fairway

[Anthony Gray]

  Looks like an emphasis on the short game. From those pictures if you miss the green it appears to leave some fun up and down attemps. True?

  Anthony

[Jerry Kluger]

I have felt that #'s 1 & 5 have a similar feel with respect to the approach shot and green - the green is uphill and sits between the dunes and is deep - naturally #1 us deeper than #5 but you are playing a longer shot into #5. (Unless you are going for #1 in two.)

[Michael Taylor]

What would be the 'weakest' hole at SH, and also the best hole on the property in your opinion Matt? Why?

[JC Jones]

I have only witnessed one golfer in 14 years master the greens from the get go. However, coincidentally enough, he also was the only golfer who played three consecutive days with out any wind. Nada.

Based on the prevailing wind discussion of 6 months ago, my money is on Pat Mucci being this mysterious master of the greens