[Paul_Turner]

I thought Hankley might disappoint this crew! 

I played it about 10 years back after reading Doak's negative review and hoped he was wrong.  But I came away agreeing with him.  It gets pretty high up in the dumb rankings but I think there must be 20-30 English courses as good or better that hardly ever make a top 100.

Since playing it, I had wondered in hindsight whether I'd missed something in its simple lay of the land greens.

[Sean_A]

I thought Hankley might disappoint this crew! 

I played it about 10 years back after reading Doak's negative review and hoped he was wrong.  But I came away agreeing with him.  It gets pretty high up in the dumb rankings but I think there must be 20-30 English courses as good or better that hardly ever make a top 100.

Since playing it, I had wondered in hindsight whether I'd missed something in its simple lay of the land greens.

Paul

Please IM that list of 20-30 non-top 100s.  I am always on the look out for a no hoper. 

Ciao

[Philip Gawith]

James, what I like most about your pictures is the sequence of tee shots off the first tee where the magnificent Peter stands like a statue in the background of three of them, with barely a muscle seeming to have moved! What a trooper!

[Mark Chaplin]

At last something we can agree on; lunch and 18 at Swinley tomorrow with three good men....splendicious.

[Scott Warren]

Mark P:

I just don't see the strategy on the drives.  Yes there are some pretty green sites but they hide (as Scott suggests) a set of pretty flat greens.  As Mark suggests the drive on 18 is a little more interesting but as the 18th it's a little too late.

At 5, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 17 you don't see benefit in a drive that challenges the drive hazard - be it sand or heather?

[Mark Pearce]

Mark P:

I just don't see the strategy on the drives.  Yes there are some pretty green sites but they hide (as Scott suggests) a set of pretty flat greens.  As Mark suggests the drive on 18 is a little more interesting but as the 18th it's a little too late.

At 5, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 17 you don't see benefit in a drive that challenges the drive hazard - be it sand or heather?

Quite simply?  No.

Even with a back left pin on 9 there was only minimal benefit in being any further right than middle of the fairway on 9.  I can't even work out which side of the fairway is supposed to be advantageous on 5.  Position on 15 is important but that's more about length than line (unless, like Ben, you're going to try to kill someone standing on the green).  I can see some advantage on the others but nowhere near as much as at a number of other heathland courses and certainly nothing to compare with the great links courses for strategy.

Chappers,

Very jealous.  That is a proper day in anyone's books.  When do you ever do any work?

[Scott Warren]

Fair enough. As my buddy Mr Whitaker likes to say, "that's why they make chocolate and vanilla"!

[Mark Chaplin]

Mark - Wednesday, Thursday and Friday this week then one of our best annual matches against the Old Cranleighans over the weekend. To be fair I did 5 days in September!

[Giles Payne]

Just my two pennies worth - Hankley is very pretty and sits on a great bit of land but I do not think that the majority of green complexes offfer the interest or complexities of either West Hill or Liphook. I was particularly impressed by the disguise of the Liphook greens - sometimes you thought you were putting uphill and you were actually putting downhill.

Off the purples, Hankley played long and you could see that there were landing areas that gave a good kick forward if you hit them - I am not sure that there was difficulty in the drives - you just gained advantage from an accurately struck ball into the correct part of the fairways.

The subtlety of the Hankley greens may have been hidden by the fact that they were slower because they had been verticut but I just did not see the requirement for you approach to be on any particular part of the green - you were just let with a longer put rather than a particular disadvantage or particularly difficult line.

West Hill suprised me - I had played there years ago but it is much better than I remembered. They seem to have cleared a lot of silver birch and opened it out which I think has lead to healthier heather (but it may just be down to old and inaccurate memories.

Anyway - it wasn't a great hardship to play any of them but I would margnally take Liphook over West Hill over Hankley - controversial I am sure.

[Mark Pearce]

Mark - Wednesday, Thursday and Friday this week then one of our best annual matches against the Old Cranleighans over the weekend. To be fair I did 5 days in September!

5 days work in September?  No wonder you need a rest......

[Mark Pearce]

First off, the green surrounds at Liphook were often not cut low enough, balls would get entangled, especially since the course wasn't playing fiery fast. Take the first hole, which some tried to attack with a running shot. If you hit it down the middle, then the slopes deflect the ball away into the right rough. If you hit it down the left side, then in the 3 or 4 efforts I have seen the ball got entangled and never ran all the way down onto the putting surface. So what is the successful running shot supposed to look like on this hole?

I don't know what a succesful running shot would look like.  I do know that in our foursomes match Conrad hit a low, running tee shot which landed short left and ran.  And ran again.  And then some more.  And ended up near the second tee behind a tree.  Plenty of evidence there of short enough grass and a firm enough surface!

[Mark Pearce]

Mark P:

I just don't see the strategy on the drives.  Yes there are some pretty green sites but they hide (as Scott suggests) a set of pretty flat greens.  As Mark suggests the drive on 18 is a little more interesting but as the 18th it's a little too late.

At 5, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 17 you don't see benefit in a drive that challenges the drive hazard - be it sand or heather?

I have thought about this a little more.  I think the problem is that where there is a benefit in challenging the hazard it is entirely obvious where you want to drive the ball.  On 17, for instance, standing on the tee for the first time, it's clear that the place to be is left.  There's no real thought required.  And you don't need to be hard left, just leftish, in the same way that rightish is good on 9.  I was really struck that my first reaction when Ran asked what I had made of the course was that it hadn't made me think much and the more I think about it the more that impression firms up.  Maybe I have missed something.  I certainly feel I should go back if good judges of a course like you and Mark disagree so strongly but I just don't see it and I'm encouraged that other good judges seem to agree.  Like you say, that's why opinions are what they are.

[Eric Smith]

Fair enough. As my buddy Mr Whitaker likes to say, "that's why they make chocolate and vanilla"!

I've heard that before!

James,

Thank you for the thread and the pics. It appears that you all had a fantastic few days of golf and fellowship. Not to mention the weather! My goodness, it looks beautiful!! I should hope that next year's iteration will see the same and that I will have the opportunity to join in the festivities when the BUDA heads to Silloth.

[Michael Whitaker]

I enjoyed Hankley very much, but it did feel a bit like an American course in the way one played it. As Mark said, there was not a lot of thought necessary on where to play tee shots. And, the greens were flat enough to offset approaches from bad angles.

Liphook, while maybe not as challenging to the better golfers, offers considerably more options for tacking your way around the course.

First and foremost at Hankley the object was to stay out of the heather. Once that was accomplished the play of a hole was fairly straightforward.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()