[Howard Riefs]

A few weeks ago I played a round at The Bull at Pinehurst Farms, which is a 2003 Nicklaus design in Sheboygan Falls, Wisc., located about 10 minutes south of Kohler.  

The Bull features good variety of holes and requires precise shotmaking.  The design makes solid use of the site that features a ravine, wetlands, woods and the Onion River that snakes through various holes.  Holes #5,# 6 and #7 that abut the ravine really stand out.

While I’m not certain the course is worthy of its #86 ranking on Golf Digest’s “Top 100 Courses You Can Play,” it did exceed my expectations.
 
The hole I still can’t make sense of is #8, a par 5 with a double fairway.  The #3 handicap hole measures:

      Black:     568
      Blue:   556
      Green:    500
      White:    487
      Red:    435

Here’s how it’s described on the course website (http://www.golfthebull.com/Hole8.htm):

A very unique hole which can be played two different ways. Drive over the river to the landing area. Then make your choice... Go to the left fairway turning point, then over the creek, as a traditional three-shot par 5, or if your game allows, go for the green in two by playing up the right peninsula fairway and over the river to the green. Simply a great golf hole.

PRO TIP: This unique par 5 offers choices. With a long drive over the right bunkers to the peninsula fairway, you can get home in two, but beware the Onion River on three sides. Before playing your second shot, check to see which side of the green the flag is on, then play to that fairway.

A few images:


 







I was playing the green tees (6,424; 138 slope), which is plenty for me as I don’t hit a real long ball. On this hole, I hit a driver into the fairway about 250, even with the bunker; a soft 7 iron to the end of the right fairway; and a 52* wedge.  I two-putted for the par.

Why did Nicklaus incorporate the left fairway into the design of the hole?  At what point would one even approach the hole via the left fairway, which would require crossing two hazards and lengthens the hole?  

[Jeff Tang]

Howard, I have played The Bull one time and I vaguely remember this hole. I think I knocked it in the water on my second shot and made bogey.  Sounds like you played it much better.

Strategically it looks like a second shot up the left side would give you a better angle at the green whereas down the right you are facing a shot directly over the water.  Seems like Nicklaus intended the left side to be the safer, more conservative option and the right side offering a heroic carry when if pulled off could lead to an eagle opportunity.  From the right side though the green looks pretty shallow to be able to hold with a long shot.

[SL_Solow]

I am interested to know how the course is being operated.  I believe it was placed in foreclosure last winter for unpaid property taxes and defaults on its loan(s) from its primary lender.

[Phil McDade]

Not to sidetrack the intent of discussing the architectural merits of this hole

Shel:

You are correct; the Bull is facing some rather severe financial pressures:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/golf/116447053.html

They are open this year, and offering some discounts, but can't imagine they aren't hurting in some significant way. The golf season here in Wisconsin hasn't been great so far, with some hit-and-miss weather, and they will need a strong run in the summer and fall to help out with the finances.

I think the Bull really tried to capitalize on the success of the nearby Kohler courses, and assumed that what Kohler could do in drawing golfers to Sheboygan would spill over onto a "Nicklaus" signature course. I think it was a classic mis-judgement, and the kind of golfers the Bull tries to draw -- golfers willing to spend siginficantly for one great round, and esp. the corporate/organizational shot-gun start outings -- just aren't there anymore, or at least haven't been for a couple of years. They spent a lot of money on non-golf-related stuff at the Bull, which may be contributing to its financial problems. (Note also one of the complaints from "kenthree" in the "comments" section in the article linked above; a common lament of the Bull and a few other high-ends around here ((although not the Kohler-run courses....)) )

[Howard Riefs]

Howard, I have played The Bull one time and I vaguely remember this hole. I think I knocked it in the water on my second shot and made bogey.  Sounds like you played it much better.

Strategically it looks like a second shot up the left side would give you a better angle at the green whereas down the right you are facing a shot directly over the water.  Seems like Nicklaus intended the left side to be the safer, more conservative option and the right side offering a heroic carry when if pulled off could lead to an eagle opportunity.  From the right side though the green looks pretty shallow to be able to hold with a long shot.

Jeff, thanks for your perspective.  While the green is quite shallow, in playing it as a three-shotter from the right fairway, it shouldn't be that difficult to get the ball to hold with a wedge from inside 110 yards.

In either event, it's nice to occassionally incorporate strategy in how to play a hole.

[Jeff Tang]

Howard, I have played The Bull one time and I vaguely remember this hole. I think I knocked it in the water on my second shot and made bogey.  Sounds like you played it much better.

Strategically it looks like a second shot up the left side would give you a better angle at the green whereas down the right you are facing a shot directly over the water.  Seems like Nicklaus intended the left side to be the safer, more conservative option and the right side offering a heroic carry when if pulled off could lead to an eagle opportunity.  From the right side though the green looks pretty shallow to be able to hold with a long shot.

Jeff, thanks for your perspective.  While the green is quite shallow, in playing it as a three-shotter from the right fairway, it shouldn't be that difficult to get the ball to hold with a wedge from inside 110 yards.

In either event, it's nice to occassionally incorporate strategy in how to play a hole.

Howard, I agree, coming at it from the right with a wedge shouldn't be an issue.  I was more thinking about it as a two shotter from the right would be a difficult shot given the shallow green, and makes me wonder if that's even a strategically sound choice, ie, does the risk outweigh the reward from going for it in two?  Conversely your point about going to the left and needing to cross the hazard twice to do this makes the "safe" option seem somewhat risky as well.  I'm not sure what to think of the hole, probably would need to play it a couple more times to decide.

[Howard Riefs]

I am interested to know how the course is being operated.  I believe it was placed in foreclosure last winter for unpaid property taxes and defaults on its loan(s) from its primary lender.

I played early in the week in the late afternoon, benefitting from the $55 twilight rate that offered unlimited play after 4pm (http://www.golfthebull.com/rates.htm). The course was quite empty at that hour, and I zipped around in about 2.25 hours; it would have been faster but I got stuck behind a two-some on 14 and they wouldn't let me pass.  I planned to play another nine but at 6:30 saw that the first 3 holes were somewhat backed up, so I headed home.

The course was in very good shape, with no noticeable maintenance issues to my untrained eye.

[Kalen Braley]

Howard,

Based on what you posted, it looks like laying up to the left fairway is a much easier shot to execute as the fairway over there looks almost twice as wide as compared to the one on the right.

So perhaps the intent was:

GO left for an easier layup but with a longer approach in.
Or GO right for a tougher/tighter layup but get rewarded with a shorter approach over water.

Seems reasonable to me.

[Howard Riefs]

Howard,

Based on what you posted, it looks like laying up to the left fairway is a much easier shot to execute as the fairway over there looks almost twice as wide as compared to the one on the right.

So perhaps the intent was:

GO left for an easier layup but with a longer approach in.
Or GO right for a tougher/tighter layup but get rewarded with a shorter approach over water.

Seems reasonable to me.

Thanks, Kalen. Appreciate your perspective.  Would be interesting to play the left fairway when I visit the course again.

[Ronald Montesano]

A/ the carry over the second hazard from the left is minimal; the hazard is well short of the green;

B/ the approach from the left gives, it seems, access to the entire length of the green (certainly) and, depending on whether the green is elevated, a full view of the length of the green from there. If your miss is more depth than width, you want to come in from the left.

[Steve Kline]

Just looking at the pictures a lay up to the left could you be useful for hole locations closest to the river at the front or right (depending on which angle you are looking at the green) of the green. This way you have the length of the green to work and not have to hit a wedge to a front pin with water short or tucked behind the small bunker. The lay up area does appear wider to the left too.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()