[Donnie Luper]

I love Prairie Dunes. Number 2 may be one of the great short 3's in all of golf. I also love the fact that all par 3's go in different directions. #18 is often criticized but I think is fine. But if they want to change the hole and lengthen ii then there is plenty of room to the left of the tee box down the hill.

My claim to fame occured on hole #7. I was playing in the Trans Miss Mid Am years ago and was in match play. I hit my second shot on the par 5 on the green about 2 feet from the hole. I was one up at the time. Thought I had a great chance to go 2 up with that shot. But I LOST THE HOLE. The guy I was playing knocked it in the hole for a double eagle. So I made eagle and lost the hole. Does anyone know of another instance of this happening? I have never met anyone who had ever even heard of this happening to anyone else.

[Sean Leary]

I'm going to interrupt the lovefest here--it wouldn't be a real GCA thread without someone stirring the pot, right?

On one of my many attempts to understand why people pardon the narrowness at Desert Forest I mentioned that I didn't like the lack of recovery options once you strayed off the fairways there. One response mentioned Prairie Dunes as another course with a similar situation, at least from my recollection. I don't think its a reasonable comparison because the corridors at Prairie Dunes are FAR wider than those at Desert Forest, but at the same time I still can't totally love a course that forces a reload for essentially EVERY ball that finds the gunch. Many folks wouldn't like it at all if it were OB stakes and housing on each side, and while the visuals are far better, you have almost the same effect as OB at Prairie Dunes should you stray far enough.

I'll go on to say that I easily think its a top 100 course and because of the quality of the area between the gunch is the best course I've played that has this (lack of) recovery issue. I just can't ignore that entirely.

Not much to disagree with here. Though I would say that I would guess about half of the balls that go in the gunch get found in my experience, so I wouldn't say its exactly like OB, but it clearly is this course's biggest weakness. It is the very reason why I cannot place it in the very upper echelon of the best courses in the world. There are other weaknesses as well (similarly uphill par 3's, some similarity in greensites perched up in the dunes, a right to left tee bias) but it is really really good. And it has my favorite greens of anywhere I have played (and I have played and seen a good portion of the top 10-15 in the world) although I suspect that Crystal Downs' greens may be better.

[David Kelly]

I can certainly see the evolution of Sand Hills as a growth out of Prairie Dunes.  I believe that Coore and Crenshaw were there doing some work just before they designed Sand Hills. 

Is this fact?

Thanks,

Brad Isaacs

Coore is basically the in-house architect for the club and he has done work on the greens of 1, 2, & 14 and has added bunkers in a few places over the years.  Dave Axland usually does the work and is the person responsible for the 1, 7, 8 project that added the back bunkers to #7 and he has reconfigured the tee boxes on a few holes as well.

[Adam Clayman]

I'd love to hear about the dunes scape Dave built behind 7? From the one pic posted a while back, it looked like a stroke of genius. Hard to imagine a great place, and great for a long time, could have such a major change, but, there it is.

[Jim Tang]

Thanks all for the comments.  I've never seen PD but have been meaning to get out there.  Need to get that done soon.

Although PD is generally considered by most to be in the top 30 of U.S. courses, it doesn't seem to get much ink/publicity.  Why do you think that is?

Also, for those who have played the course, when is a good time to visit?

[Sean Leary]

I'd love to hear about the dunes scape Dave built behind 7? From the one pic posted a while back, it looked like a stroke of genius. Hard to imagine a great place, and great for a long time, could have such a major change, but, there it is.

Adam,

It looks like it has been there forever. It is incredible.

[David Kelly]

I'd love to hear about the dunes scape Dave built behind 7? From the one pic posted a while back, it looked like a stroke of genius. Hard to imagine a great place, and great for a long time, could have such a major change, but, there it is.

I saw construction photos of the project and the whole thing looked terrible.  It looked fake and unlike any other part of the course. Then when I got there and saw the completed work, it looked like it had been there forever and tied in perfectly. 

[Andy Troeger]

Sean,
Good to know regarding finding balls in the gunch. Do you think familiarity with the course helps with locating balls? We didn't find very many, but when you play it once you don't have much frame of reference to know exactly where to look.

Of those half, how many can be played and how many can be dropped as an unplayable lie without having to use the "return to tee" option anyway? Unless you're within two clubs of the edge, are you still pretty much out of luck?

[Sam Morrow]

Prairie Dunes really is a special place, I could spend days hitting shots around those greens. I know that most of the midwest golf love starts at PD and goes north to Sand Hills but starting at PD and going south is wonderful too. Oklahoma has some amazing stuff also, i think it shows the greatness of Maxwell.

[Sean Leary]

Andy,

You are correct. After a while you learn your distances and can find them pretty regularly. Don't get me wrong, a big miss to the middle of the gunch is usually gone. Also some holes are lighter than others and they do what they can to thin it as much as they can.

Normally if you can find it you can play it but its usually a pitch out.

[mike_beene]

is there a caddy program and do any groups use an additional fore caddie?Would that help?

[David Kelly]

is there a caddy program and do any groups use an additional fore caddie?Would that help?

There is a caddy program but not a strong one.  Forecaddies might help but I think the number of balls hit into the gunch is overblown.

[Sean Leary]

Agree with DK on the caddy program, disagree on the balls in the gunch. I do think that those that are not used to playing in the wind are apt to not swing normal and hit a few in there a round. David is a solid player and hits it straight. A John Kirk, Huckaby or Lou Duran type like him will not hit it in there much. 240 to 260 and straight is golden out there.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Andy I would think that is an honest observation of any course. However I am disturbed that the actions of the last year or two have become considered GCA like. I and many other spend less time on here because of hijacked posts or endless arguments with no point ever being made. I hope I am not doing the same now.

[Sean_A]

PD always seems like a very interesting and well loved course between the crap, but it has always been the crap talk that has slightly put me off ever trying to visit.  Its always hard to figure out individual tolerance for this sort of stuff and I am probably on the least tolerable end of the scale as I believe the recovery shot is a vital element to the game hence the reason for my admiration of such places like St Georges Hill keeping their undergrowth limited.  In other words, a fine mantra for golf is "find it and hit it".  From a completely honest perspective, how much does the crap limit this mantra?  Under normal conditions, how often could a bogey golfer expect to reload with purpose?

Ciao

[Andy Troeger]

Andy I would think that is an honest observation of any course. However I am disturbed that the actions of the last year or two have become considered GCA like. I am many other spend less time on here because of hijacked posts or endless arguments with no point ever being made. I hope I am not doing the same now.

Tiger,
I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean, although I think I do. The first line of my post about stirring the pot was intended to be tongue-in-cheek--I do think the gunch issues are Prairie Dunes' biggest weakness. Crystal Downs makes my top ten and Prairie Dunes not, and the biggest difference is recoverability (if that's a word). Based on Sean L.'s comments, its probably not as bad once you know the course. I just dislike re-load situations and PD does create them.

I spend less time here than in the past as well especially when it comes to reading. If I don't have anything I to say I sure try not to post!

Sean A.
Its an issue to a certain extent, but even as one that thinks that its a course well worth seeing if you get the chance. I probably went in the gunch about three times, but my drives tend to either be really good or really bad, so I'm likely to have a few problem holes at just about any course that requires driving ability, if not more!

[Sean Leary]

PD always seems like a very interesting and well loved course between the crap, but it has always been the crap talk that has slightly put me off ever trying to visit.  Its always hard to figure out individual tolerance for this sort of stuff and I am probably on the least tolerable end of the scale as I believe the recovery shot is a vital element to the game hence the reason for my admiration of such places like St Georges Hill keeping their undergrowth limited.  In other words, a fine mantra for golf is "find it and hit it".  From a completely honest perspective, how much does the crap limit this mantra?  Under normal conditions, how often could a bogey golfer expect to reload with purpose?

Ciao

Sean,

County Down and Portrush are cut from a similar cloth, to give you some perspective.

[Adam Clayman]

The reason why the gunch sholdn't be a deterent from visiting or from a rating perspective is how American golf has evolved. The corridors are wide enough to allow for slight mis-hits. But if you do get wild you are proportionally penalized. Holes like third, are just so good and it's the acute angle and fear of missing into the gunk that supplies the puckering. There are only a few areas that might need attention as it relates to the gunk. Late in the round 16&17 would be two holes that would benefit. Since they are late in the round and the relentless demands already placed on the golfer are likely spots where a bad swing by a less than really good golfer are likely. So by limiting the gunk effects there would help a lot of golfers. #11 on the right might be another since the hole jogs left and aiming left is only for the big and the bold. I'm not proposing eliminating the gunk, just reducing it's virtually certain "reload" inevitability in these key spots. Also, it shouldn't be too prohibitive to run a mower through there once maybe twice a year.   

[Sean Leary]

A bogey golfer that is wild will reload a bunch. Big fouls are hard to find. Tops, pop ups and sclaffs are fine. The wild 12 handicap that can hit it 260 will be reloading all day. But I think they will be doing it at a lot more other courses than people think as well. A wild player at Pacific Dunes can lose 6 to 10 balls pretty easily as well.

[mike_beene]

let me ask it this way to help those of us who have not seen the course get some perspective:Compared to a Muirfield or Gullane 1,which to me both have significant find the ball issues,is PD wider?Does it offer more or less playability when you find it?Is it harder to find the ball?Throw a comparison to Oakmont in,which to me plays close to Muirfield if you forget the drainage ditch hazards.To me every tee shot at Muirfield has a risk reward element in choosing to hit driver or not.Perhaps equipment has changed this because for many the driver is as straight as any club,and the two iron option is gone unless I dig through the garage.Lot of questions here,but on firm conditions off a tee why not dust a two iron off at PD that for me might fly 220 and run 20 more and then hit a lot of long clubs in?Sorry for the scattered questions but some answers might help those of us who haven't been there compare it to what more of us may know.

[Sean Leary]

let me ask it this way to help those of us who have not seen the course get some perspective:Compared to a Muirfield or Gullane 1,which to me both have significant find the ball issues,is PD wider?Does it offer more or less playability when you find it?Is it harder to find the ball?Throw a comparison to Oakmont in,which to me plays close to Muirfield if you forget the drainage ditch hazards.To me every tee shot at Muirfield has a risk reward element in choosing to hit driver or not.Perhaps equipment has changed this because for many the driver is as straight as any club,and the two iron option is gone unless I dig through the garage.Lot of questions here,but on firm conditions off a tee why not dust a two iron off at PD that for me might fly 220 and run 20 more and then hit a lot of long clubs in?Sorry for the scattered questions but some answers might help those of us who haven't been there compare it to what more of us may know.

Haven't played those 3. A 220 chaser will work very well on most of the holes with the normal wind. But if you can hit a 220 chaser with a 2 iron, you might not have issues anyway. I think the wind has a lot to do with the gunch issues well as it accentuates hooks and slices, especially at the standard 15-20 MPH wind...Someone who is good with aerials with google earthcan figure out how wide the corridors are. They are quite wide on most holes. I would guess 50-70 yards wide on and inexact guesstimate. 8 is tighter than that but it normally plays straight downwind as a very short par  5 and a 220 scooter off the tee still allows you to get home with the ball running.

[RJ_Daley]

I haven't had the pleasure of playing or seeing PD.  And, the only aspect of the discussion I can relate to is the long running comments on the playability of the rough.  I have followed Wild Horses years and progress of managing the 'wooga' with annual burning of front 9 in spring, back 9 in fall, etc.  Apparently, PD does a burn now and then, is that correct?  Of course with the burn, as I understand it, the conditions are nice very soon after new green plants come in rather fast.  But, it doesn't take long for the undergrowth of bluegrasses to really thicken to the point where areas become unplayable if you find it, and of course the auto reload.  Because of the sandy soil and when water spray doesn't drift to those areas at Wild Horse, it stays pretty playable, but the areas where irrigation spray dirfts, it gets too lush, quickly.

So, with that said, I have always wondered why some clever ag implement mechanic-designer collaborating with a prairie grass area golf superintendent doesn't try to invent or design a cultivation machine that can come in after a burn, and gouge out like a giant cross between a slice drum and core pulling drum, that could literally gouge up full scoops of both ground, turf-weed roots and scarify the ground in a manner that would keep regrowth very wispy.  The spoils of the ground-rhizomes and stolen material would be designed to fling back into a collecting bin, and taken to a nearby pasture to be sprigged on the ground to regenerate good pasture forage.  Maybe a light sprinkling of desirable wispy species of fescue or native seed could be spread in the scarified ground to outcompete the lush blue grasses...

I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but it just always seemed to me that some innovation along these lines would benefit many golf courses in this regard of keeping the rough-native areas ideally playable, while a fair penalty rather than a reload situation.

[Sean_A]

Sean

Thanks.  Comparing it to Portrush really does put some perspective on the situation.  To me this means PD is an extremely demanding driver's course if there is any significant wind about with the odd serious penalty for not being terribly far off target.  As J Kirk would say, the course should accomodate those shots.  That said, Portrush is still a great course that is a must see at least once/twice.  I have been told PD is quite open to visitors - almost GB&I style.  Is this true?

Ciao

[Sean Leary]

Sean

Thanks.  Comparing it to Portrush really does put some perspective on the situation.  To me this means PD is an extremely demanding driver's course if there is any significant wind about with the odd serious penalty for not being terribly far off target.  As J Kirk would say, the course should accomodate those shots.  That said, Portrush is still a great course that is a must see at least once/twice.  I have been told PD is quite open to visitors - almost GB&I style.  Is this true?

Ciao

The corridors are generally a bit wider than RP, but that is what it feels like yes. Shots that are30 yards offline are still in play. Shots that are 50 are often tomes not.

As far as visitors, yes, although it is rather pricey to play without a member.

[Sean Leary]

The reason why the gunch sholdn't be a deterent from visiting or from a rating perspective is how American golf has evolved. The corridors are wide enough to allow for slight mis-hits. But if you do get wild you are proportionally penalized. Holes like third, are just so good and it's the acute angle and fear of missing into the gunk that supplies the puckering. There are only a few areas that might need attention as it relates to the gunk. Late in the round 16&17 would be two holes that would benefit. Since they are late in the round and the relentless demands already placed on the golfer are likely spots where a bad swing by a less than really good golfer are likely. So by limiting the gunk effects there would help a lot of golfers. #11 on the right might be another since the hole jogs left and aiming left is only for the big and the bold. I'm not proposing eliminating the gunk, just reducing it's virtually certain "reload" inevitability in these key spots. Also, it shouldn't be too prohibitive to run a mower through there once maybe twice a year.   

I think they do what they can to maintain it within cost reason, whether it be by mowing or burning or using a rototiller to take out anything with a wood stem or base. When you look at the old pics, the gunsch looks mush sparser. I would guess water run off and fertilizer runoff would be the course for the present condition, but that is only a guess.

It grows so fast, especially this time of year. In the fall it is drier and a bit sparser IMO..

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()