[Carl Rogers]

all things to all people?
Just got back from the George Cup... as usual Wade, Aaron & Staff were terrific.  Food very good also.
(I hope a few of you will post some pics)
Second question first,  It is probably unrealistic to expect one course to be all things to all golfers.

What do you care to measure?

1. Is Ballyhack a walking course? .... It is possible to walk it for an extreme few, but other wise no, it cannot be walked in my opinion.

2. Does Ballyhack lend itself to fast play? .... Except for a few holes with fairly wide playing corridors, there are:
-many severe water hazards and highly intimidating forces carries in the line of play
-many steep side hills, high and low adjacent to the line of play resulting in many lost balls etc (if not the possibility of sprained ankles)
-significant distance and vertical movement from cart path to greens on many holes
-many difficult steep bunkers in the line of play hole after hole
Ballyhack is not a fast play course, in my opinion

3. Are recovery shots possible at Ballyhack?  (see question above) 
-recovery shots are almost always profoundly problematic or non-existent, in my opinion.

4. Does Ballyhack have memorable holes, a variety of holes and strong visuals?
Unequivocally, yes!!! 

5. Does Ballyhack defend par?
Unequivocally, yes!!!  See Virginia State Open results and scorecard for stroke rating and slope.

6. Does Ballyhack have interesting green complexes with lots of movement, etc?
Unequivocally, yes!!!  This question may require more discussion.

7. Can the less skilled & beginner get around the course?
Profoundly problematic (even for a 14 or 15 handicapper)
See question 2 & 3.

8. Course conditioning? ...
Again excellent!

I hope this thread can be taken in the right way.

[Bill_McBride]

Not an impossible course to walk for the very fit.  My partner and I in the Dixie Cup a few years back, two slightly zaftig chaps, rode while our opponents, Craig Disher and Evan Fleisher, walked and carried.   They kicked our ass. 

[Wade Whitehead]

Please don't tell the Whitehead kids that Ballyhack is unwalkable.

I look forward to responses and will withhold mine for a while.

WW

[Jason Thurman]

Carl, I think you've hit the nail on all points. Ballyhack is a club that I look forward to playing again. The George Cup is an event I've thought hard about playing each of the last two years, and I hope to take another crack at Ballyhack someday whether in that event or at another time. I've also thought hard about joining a national club lately. Ballyhack was a course that I thought about at one time, but the lack of walkability is ultimately a dealbreaker for me.

Still, I've been wrestling with how subjective golf course architectural analysis really is lately, and Ballyhack is a great example. It's a course that I have some contradictory feelings about - a course that I wouldn't enjoy walking (I'm fit enough to do it, and smart enough not to), that wouldn't accommodate my off rounds, and that takes a lot of time and golf balls to play. At the same time, it's a beautiful, super-fun course in a setting that trumps things like pace of play. Who would look at their watch while playing Ballyhack?

I like it a lot. I don't love it because some of its drawbacks are things that are important to me. That knocks it down my personal list of favorite courses a bit, but does that also mean that its architecture isn't as good as the courses I prefer over it? I think the answer to that question is simply "Who cares?" We spend so much time on this site trying to figure out which course is "better" than another, when ultimately we're all just discussing a subjective topic. I've recently decided to spend more time celebrating my favorite courses rather than the "best" courses I've played, and doing so gives a refreshing liberty to ignore the things that others take issue with that I simply couldn't care less about. I suspect the guys that love Ballyhack don't really care that others will complain about its lack of walkability or tolerance for hackers, as it simply ticks the check boxes they care about. I think they have it right - I'm not sure why I should care that a course that I love might not be as lovable to someone else for whatever reason.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'll just reply a little at a time.  I've played 31 rounds there this year.  I'm a pretty fit 67 year old.  I generally walk the front nine but ride the back nine.  The front nine is not a bad walk.  It is hilly but I enjoy the walk. The back nine is a little more problematic. I will walk it from time to time but not as a general rule. 

[David_Elvins]

What do you care to measure?

What do you think the ideal number of times per year to play the course would be? 

Could you play it twice a week for a year and not want to give up golf? 

[Tommy Williamsen]

What do you care to measure?

What do you think the ideal number of times per year to play the course would be? 

Could you play it twice a week for a year and not want to give up golf? 
[/quote]

The more I play it the more I want to play it. If I don't get there every couple of weeks I get itchy for it.

[Andy Troeger]

Tommy,
How long did it take us to play our second round in the spring? We hit a few extra shots here and there, but as the first ones out I think we were able to play at a comfortable twosome pace. Maybe three hours?

I think Ballyhack is great fun and a great match-play course. I wouldn't necessarily want to play medal play golf there regularly, but I managed to somehow miss the 5th fairway which says something. I think it would be a great place to mix with something a bit softer. It is better than some wild courses that I would put in the "fun to play every ten years or so" category.

[Ronald Montesano]

Could you play it twice a week for a year and not want to give up golf? 

I cannot fathom this notion of voluntarily giving up golf.

I snuck onto Grover Cleveland (Buffalo, NY) golf course as a kid, played through middle and high school, played varsity in high school, but not at Wake Forest.

If told that the only course I could play the rest of my life was Thunder Hill Golf Club (whoops, it's closed), I'd play there.

[Tim Pitner]

Carl,

You framed the discussion well, I think.

My favorite sort of course is more walkable and less penal than Ballyhack.  While not as dogmatic as some, I'm generally pretty hard on courses that aren't easily walkable.  With that said, I'm mildly surprised how much I liked big and bold Ballyhack.  As I said elsewhere, I don't believe it has any weak holes and I have a lot of time for any course, easily walkable or not, that has holes the quality of 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 13, and 15 - 18.  

On the subject of difficulty, there's no doubt the course is well-defended--from tee to green and around the greens.  For a mid-handicapper such as myself, I found the course from the orange tees very playable; in fact, when I played it on the Friday before the competition, I thought the orange tees might be too short for me.  When we played on Saturday in the wind from the blue tees, I thought differently!  I can imagine moving from one set of tees to another fairly frequently according to weather conditions and how much challenge one wants on a given day.  And, as Andy said, it's a great match play course.  

[Joe_Tucholski]

1. Is Ballyhack a walking course?
Agree it's probably not a walking course for most over 50 or so.

2. Does Ballyhack lend itself to fast play?
There are many intimidating forced carries but I think they look scarier than they are.  I've only played 2 rounds and both were with my wife who is very much a beginner.  When playing the correct tees the carriers look scarier than they are.
I also think the fairways are pretty wide. I agree there is a good amount of sidehill off the fairways but the fairways are generous.
Can't really dispute some of the green to tee walks.
I wouldn't consider it a slow play.  Both rounds I played with 3 people were in just over 3 hours on an empty course.

3. Are recovery shots possible at Ballyhack?  (see question above) 
Agree recovery shots are tough if you miss the fairway on your tee shot.  Recover around the green is possible.

4. Does Ballyhack have memorable holes, a variety of holes and strong visuals?
Unequivocally, yes!!! 

5. Does Ballyhack defend par?
Unequivocally, yes!!!  See Virginia State Open results and scorecard for stroke rating and slope.

6. Does Ballyhack have interesting green complexes with lots of movement, etc?
Unequivocally, yes!!!  This question may require more discussion.

7. Can the less skilled & beginner get around the course?
My wife who is probably a 36 hcp got around the course and thought it was tons of fun.  Her favorite shot was the tee shot on 6.  Didn't think she had a chance to carry the junk but the downhill nature kept the ball in the air and allowed her to take a very safe route to the green.

8. Course conditioning? ...
Again excellent!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tommy,
How long did it take us to play our second round in the spring? We hit a few extra shots here and there, but as the first ones out I think we were able to play at a comfortable twosome pace. Maybe three hours?

I think Ballyhack is great fun and a great match-play course. I wouldn't necessarily want to play medal play golf there regularly, but I managed to somehow miss the 5th fairway which says something. I think it would be a great place to mix with something a bit softer. It is better than some wild courses that I would put in the "fun to play every ten years or so" category.

As I recall we got around in about three hours.  Most of the members play at a pretty good clip.  The only thing that holds people up is looking for golf balls, but that is true everywhere.

[Jason Thurman]

Of course it's possible to play Ballyhack quickly, and it's not surprising that most of the members are fairly fast players. The point, though, is that a fast round at Ballyhack takes a bit longer than a fast round elsewhere, and those fast-playing members at Ballyhack could play faster elsewhere.

Of course, one of the benefits of being an out-of-the-way private club is that pace of play issues are mitigated. If Ballyhack was open to the public and did 30,000 rounds per year, the design would likely be complicit in many 5 1/2 hour rounds. However, as a private club with fairly limited play, it's not too hard to get around in a reasonable amount of time. You will likely have a frustrating search or two for a ball though.

Again, it all ties back to the original post. Should a course try to be everything to everyone architecturally? I continue to think, more and more, that the answer is no. Ballyhack is not designed to help slow players get around more quickly in the way that Reeves Golf Course on the east side of Cincinnati down by the old airport is, because Ballyhack's clientele can be trusted to overcome the characteristics of the course that would generally lend to slow play in a way that Reeves' clientele can't. I don't really see any issue with that.

[Tom_Doak]

To the original question:  some sites offer the possibility of building a course that's everything to everybody, and some do not.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Thought I'd post some pictures.

Par three 17.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Par four 1st hole



200 yard par three third



Second shot on par four fourth



from the forward tee on the par four fifth



Tee shot on short drivable par four sixth



Looking back on the par five ninth

[Tom_Doak]

Question for Lester:  why leave the picket fence row of trees behind this green?  The distant backdrop is far superior.  Just a thought,

Chainsaw Tom

Par three 17.

[Jimmy Muratt]

Lester,

To piggy-back on Tom's question regarding the trees behind the 17th green, those few trees remind me of the few trees that were left for years behind the 6th green at Kinloch.  The backdrop there is the lake and I always thought they blocked the view and shielded some wind from the green.  Finally, most were removed a couple of years ago and I think the greensite is greatly improved.  Interested to hear your thoughts on this as well as the situations seem similar.

Jimmy

[Carl Rogers]

Tom has copied a pic of the 17th hole, the course's shortest par 3.
The cart path is out of frame, to the right, that swoops down and then sharply up and around and by the trees that Tom has referred.  To one of the points I have made, lot of walking and climbing on a short hole.

At one point in time, in one of Lester's earlier routing plans, the 17th green was a double green with the 11th green located just immediately on the other side of the hill slightly on the right half of the pic.

[Jonathan Mallard]

I'll chime in as well.

For the most part, the course could be considered walkable. Problematic sections are to the first tee, the transition from 8 to 9, 9 to 10, and holes 11 and 17 (more on the last two below).

Plenty of room - everywhere.
Plenty of movement in the greens to narrow the preferred corridor on each hole.
Bold memorable holes - every one of them.

Is it playable for all levels? As others have mentioned, I'm not sure here. I think that the higher handicappers and older players as they lose carry distance will have problems in some spots. 14 and 15 for sure. Doesn't make them bad holes, or a bad concept. Please see Pine Valley.

Can it be played fast? In carts, yes. Most time lost would be looking for balls. There are other spots that changes have been made to the course to address this issue. The bunkers on #5 were mentioned as a question on the quiz. Amazing the number of balls that were found when they were redone. Another change I saw was the change to the slope in front of the first green. It's been tweaked to keep balls that roll of the false front a lot closer to the green and to provide a lie that sits the ball up a little vs a tight lie.

In my two trips there, I've never really had any issues with leaving myself with a difficult recovery shot. Ok, except for my match with Kevin Lynch on hole 14. But, I deserved to be there after the quality of shot I hit. [I would have been better off taking a conceded half and not playing it!]

Re: walking on holes 11 and 17. As some of you may know, I work as an engineer. Specifically a bridge engineer. I was asked to discuss the concept of putting a walking bridge in on 11 (tee to fairway) and 17 (tee to green). I surmised that they [and Lester, PLEASE correct me here!] were fill slopes, and having Scott shoot the distances, they would not be small construction projects. With stipulating that a single simple (long) span (no piers) would be the preferred solution, there is still lots of engineering to be done. Then to construct them, you'd need two decent size cranes to come in and set some of the pieces. If you go with more and smaller spans (lots of piers), and much lower profile, I'm not sure that makes the cut as a solution. Much easier to construct with smaller piece, but essentially, you'd be walking down close to the water and back up, pretty much the same way you do now, but perhaps a more direct path. This also gets you much more into an environmental permitting discussion.

I'll be happy to try and clarify anything above if I need to.

Would I play it again if offered the opportunity? Absolutely. I've thoroughly enjoyed both of my visits to Ballyhack!

[JBovay]

Carl,

This is a great set of questions to ask about Ballyhack. I agree with you on most of these points.

I said it before, but I think the really special thing about Ballyhack is the way that Lester George was able to utilize the unique features of the land to build memorable, challenging, and strategic holes. Almost every hole presents the player with a shot where a lost ball is a serious risk, but really only the first tee shot is do-or-die if you're playing from the appropriate tees. So many of the holes involve diagonal carries across the hazards that I really do think the course is as playable as most others, while remaining visually intimidating at all times. (Someone (Wade?) tossed out Mike Strantz's name in connection with visual intimidation at my dinner table. I haven't played a Strantz course, so I can't say much else.)

In the same way, there's open space in front of 16 of the greens that would allow a run-up shot for a low-trajectory player and allow others a safe target line for the approach that avoids bunkers, long grass, and ravines. The exceptions are the short par 4 eighth and the Short 17th.

I am a big fan of walking and walkable golf courses, but I am able to overlook the difficulty of walking Ballyhack because it really is a unique and terrific golf experience. Jonathan, I appreciate your comments about the unfeasibility of building bridges in a couple of spots. I can see how, for someone who keeps the ball in the fairway, walking Ballyhack is, in fact, feasible. But as one of the guys I played with said, "It's a workout, even if you're riding a cart [for those of us who have to traverse the hillsides looking for balls]."

A few other highlights of the course I would like to mention, even though they don't address your questions:
 
The approach to the fifth, where one simply cannot underestimate the change in elevation and expect to make par. The 11th, with its wild, slanted fairway where a few flat spots do exist that (I suspect) members must learn to play to. The 17th green, with three distinct bowls that demand precision with a short iron.

Regarding the "short porch" on the 15th: how many players don't try to utilize it? From the blue tees, playing the tee shot straight downwind, I was able to hit 4-iron, 4-iron about 20 yards short of the front edge. (Should have been 4-iron, 5-wood.) I'm just not sure I see the point of the left-hand fairway.

Here are just a few photos of mine. I didn't take many that weekend, knowing the rest of you probably had it covered.

Looking back on the fourth:



Looking back on the fifth, with the second and ninth at either edge of the image:



The 15th, from the entrance to the fairways:

[Tommy Williamsen]

Is it playable for all levels? As others have mentioned, I'm not sure here. I think that the higher handicappers and older players as they lose carry distance will have problems in some spots. 14 and 15 for sure. Doesn't make them bad holes, or a bad concept. Please see Pine Valley.

 

My wife plays Ballyhack and loves it. She can't carry the ball more than 125 yards in the air. The carry on 14 is the most problematical.  She has no problem, however, carrying the tee shot.  She does need to lay up on the second shot and play the hole as a three shorter.  Fifteen, if you play it down the left side leaves a very doable third shot.  It is only when you hit the second shot over the ravine the player has a long carry.

[J Sadowsky]

As a high handicapper, Ballyhack can be brutal at times.  But a high handicapper still loves good green complexes, and Ballthack has that in spades.  Plus, there are a few holes that are no problem for high handicappers.  And, for high handicappers like me, who can (WIN SAUL SHOOTOUT LONG DRIVE CONTESTS)...errr, carry it 200 yards but lacks consistency or accuracy, it makes the good shots - when they come - just that much more rewarding.

I'll have to admit, for a high handicapper, I couldn't have Ballyhack be my home course.  31 rounds a year at BH (assuming that 31 rounds a year wouldn't improve my game) just seems painful.  But a few rounds a year, with its ups and downs, highs and lows, can be magical.

[Tommy Williamsen]

As a high handicapper, Ballyhack can be brutal at times.  But a high handicapper still loves good green complexes, and Ballthack has that in spades.  Plus, there are a few holes that are no problem for high handicappers.  And, for high handicappers like me, who can (WIN SAUL SHOOTOUT LONG DRIVE CONTESTS)...errr, carry it 200 yards but lacks consistency or accuracy, it makes the good shots - when they come - just that much more rewarding.

I'll have to admit, for a high handicapper, I couldn't have Ballyhack be my home course.  31 rounds a year at BH (assuming that 31 rounds a year wouldn't improve my game) just seems painful.  But a few rounds a year, with its ups and downs, highs and lows, can be magical.

I have a friend who is an 18 and loves the place.  But you're right, it couldn't be his home course.  He just knows that he will lose a few balls.  He has learned that he has to think about score differently than he does at his home course that has a course rating of 69.7 and slope of 120.  He did, however, join Musgrove Mill GC, a course that eats golf balls of the wayward.

[Ken Fry]

From the first tee you get a good idea what you're in for.  The view across the course sets up the anticipation and the view of the opening tee shot makes sure you're on the correct tees.  The grand scale of the place is immense.  I found for my game the carries and visuals looked harder than they played.  By no means the course plays easy, but I never felt concerned about carries off the tee or in to greens.

Is Ballyhack everything to everyone?  No.  It's a pretty extreme site that will attract a more adventurous player.  The average player off the street probably won't "get it."  My wife certainly didn't "get it" as I explain below.  She'd never played a course like that and it beat her up more than she'd ever experienced before.

On to Carl's questions:

1. Is Ballyhack a walking course?
As others have discussed, Ballyhack CAN be walked.  Any course can be walked.  Is it something to do often?  No way.

2. Does Ballyhack lend itself to fast play?
It depends on who's playing.  If a group keeps the ball in play, they'll do fine.  There's plenty of room off most tees and green areas I thought provide ample room for errant approach shots.  If someone gets way off line into the long grass, it can make for a long day.

3. Are recovery shots possible at Ballyhack?
As mentioned above, there's room to miss around the course, but get off line and recovery from the long grass is extremely difficult.  There's plenty of opportunity around the course to get creative by playing shots off mounds and running shots into parts of greens.

4. Does Ballyhack have memorable holes, a variety of holes and strong visuals?
Ballyhack is a BIG course.  The view from the first tee down the valley and over most of the front nine sets the day up well.  If that view doesn't hit you, the tee shot on #2 sure will.


5. Does Ballyhack defend par?
Not that it matters much but the course can play very tough.  I can see playing more match play than stroke play.  There's big number possibilities all around along with good scoring opportunities if shots are executed properly.  I love private courses that provide so much variety to never become repetitive to member play.

6. Does Ballyhack have interesting green complexes with lots of movement, etc?
Absolutely agree, although I've raised a question to Lester and Wade Whithead about one particular green:  #3.  From the back tees, the hole plays 240 into the wind then once you reach the green, you encounter what I thought was the toughest green complex on the course!  Wicked undulation, a valley separating the back bunkers from the putting surface while the green slopes severely away.  Hole #3 is an ego killer!

7. Can the less skilled & beginner get around the course?
The course is no doubt geared toward stronger players.  My wife is an excellent player and accompanied me on a round at Ballyhack.  She'd never played a course like that before and I think it was a bit jarring.  Like Tommy mentions about his wife, my wife struggled with approach shots because of the carry needed and spin to hold the greens.  She was rolling balls off and through greens all day.  If you get yourself in bad positions around the greens, you'll have a rough day.  I wouldn't want to be on the course with a high handicap player unless they had a lot of golf balls and were quick to drop and go when a shot got into the long grass.

8. Course conditioning? ...
It's been a few years since my round but conditions, especially tees and greens, were nice.  For folks familiar with the area, how tough is it to maintain good turf between the red clay base and extreme heat and humidity?  My folks live down the road at Smith Mountain Lake and the courses in their area tend to have pretty rough conditions.

Ken

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()