[Parker Page]

I was listening to The Fried Egg's podcast with Kyle Hegland the other day, and the conversation touched on a subject about which I've been wondering and would like to get the board's opinion.  I had the great pleasure of playing Sand Hills twice this summer, and no one needs me to say that the course is a masterpiece.  However, #13 stuck out as a question mark in my mind (we played the course from the back tees), and this question came back into my mind when Kyle mentioned during the podcast that he often suggests that players play the hole from the members' tees. 


So my question is: is #13 a great hole?  At 220 yards and uphill (into the wind both times we played it), the green complex seems a bit unbalanced in comparison to the kind of shot required to reach it.  The green is deep and tilted from back to front, but it's at an angle to the tee, so the benefit of the green depth is not entirely felt.  And because of the uphill, you can't run a ball onto the green.  It's also protected left and right by bunkers -- the one on the right being very deep, and the one on the left leaving a very difficult up-and-down to a green that slopes away.  Are there risk/reward elements that I'm missing?


It's certainly one of the grandest holes on the property and maybe the game.  It feels like it should be great, but I can't get past the above questions.  Maybe it should just always be played from the members' tees.  Maybe it's just a 3.5 par that should be played with a shot short of the green to the fairway below and hope for an up-and-down (as Ran suggests in his write up).


Is the 13th a great hole?

[Ted Sirbaugh]

I was a big fan of 13. It's certainly the hardest par-3 there, especially from the back tees, and maybe the hardest hole on the course relative to par, but the fairway in front of the green provides reasonable recovery options... both times I played I left it short right, and I was left with a tough but fair chance at getting up-and-down (failed both times). I just loved the look of the tee shot and also thought the green was very good


I believe I recall reading (maybe from the Little Red Book?) Doak say that he likes the 11th at Ballyneal better from the 2nd tee, instead of the furthest back tee. Maybe this is the case at Sand Hills too, and it's just a better hole from the members' tee? The holes are similar in that they play from one dune to another, though I think 13 at SH is a harder hole

[Tom_Doak]

It's kind of funny that you can't just say you think there's a hole at Sand Hills is not great, and feel like you have to hedge.


Also I don't remember the quote about #11 at Ballyneal.  I'm sure it is not in the Little Red Book, as I went over every piece for that multiple times.  It's possible that I said it at some point on GCA.  It's a hard hole for me from that back tee, seems like I never hit a good shot to it ... but not all the back tees were built for me to begin with.

[Jason Topp]

This year I watched a tee shot on 13 that landed near the 14th tee and funneled back to the green and realized that is the secret to 13.  If you hit it to the left side of the green over the bunker the ground works to funnel the ball onto the green.  If you hit it to the right side, which looks like the safer line from the tee, the ground repels the ball away from the green.   


I think it is a terrific hole.

[Brett Wiesley]

Ok, I'll bite.


I think the 13th hole at Sand Hills is not the best hole on the course, and may be a poor hole.  In fact the collection of par 3's may be slightly disappointing given the remainder of the holes on the course, mostly due to the fact that other than #17, they all play to a similar yardage.


#13 is a hole that I only saw par made by anyone once during my visit.  Most any ball that flew to the green bounded through and the back of the green actually slopes away and then down to a dirt cart path. 


I felt the hole may have a better fit if they made it longer...240-260ish, making it a driver for some.  Widen the green surrounds and allow a bowl like effect.  This would fit the description of the ball that hit near 14 tee and came down to the green a reality.  Somewhat like #5 at Dismal River from the back tee.

[Parker Page]

It's kind of funny that you can't just say you think there's a hole at Sand Hills is not great, and feel like you have to hedge.

Tom, it really wasn’t a hedge as much as a genuine question. I had heard it described as a great hole, and it certainly LOOKS like a great hole. There’s no doubt that it’s a hard hole. But I couldn’t figure out how it was a great hole because there’s not that element of risk/reward and options.


Do you think it’s a great hole? I had not noticed the kicker beyond the left bunker that Jason pointed out. Is Jason correct?

[Tom_Doak]

It's kind of funny that you can't just say you think there's a hole at Sand Hills is not great, and feel like you have to hedge.

Do you think it’s a great hole? I had not noticed the kicker beyond the left bunker that Jason pointed out. Is Jason correct?

I don't think it's one of the best holes on the course. 


Maybe great for a certain class of players, of which I'm not one.  To get to the backstop Jason describes, from the back tee, you'd have to fly it about 210 yards over the left-hand bunkers, plus the uphill, and maybe into the wind.  I don't know if the shot would hold downwind, because I've never seen a shot like that on that hole.

[Scott McWethy]

I think Sand Hills has the greatest collection of 18 holes of any course I have played, with the exception of the 13th hole.  From that back tee distance it is extremely difficult to hit a high enough ball, and long enough, where it will land and stay on the green.  Does an architect ever design hole knowing that a majority of the players will miss the green because of how difficult it is?  The holes is much better from the regular tee (roughly 185 yards) which still plays plenty long.  To each his own, but I don't think it's a good hole from that back tee.     

[Tom_Doak]

I think it's fair game to have one hole on a course where only the best players can hope to hit and hold the green, from the back tee.  I don't think that makes it a bad hole.  I just don't think that makes it a great hole, either.

[Peter Pallotta]

I don't remember ever reading an analysis on how this particular former tour pro (i.e. Ben C) might occasionally influence/trend a C&C design towards challenging the better player.
The only such insight I can recall is the suggestion that Ben's own style of play and wins at Augusta tend to foster wide/2nd shot golf courses with a premium on putting.
Is that true/accurate?
And even if it is, is it also true that occasionally the young star golfer he once was rises up from some deep recess of his mind and has him saying "I used to hit that shot - now it's your turn to try"?
 

[Mike Hendren]

It's been 15 years or so since I visited Sand Hills but my basic conclusion is along these lines:  the course is so great that none of its individual holes have to be.  That said, I'd go with the 1st and 2nd being "great."  Maybe the 16th as well.  The 13th not so much.

Bogey

[Brad Tufts]

I think it's fair game to have one hole on a course where only the best players can hope to hit and hold the green, from the back tee.  I don't think that makes it a bad hole.  I just don't think that makes it a great hole, either.

This is basically where I stand.  I like the back tee more than the second tee because the visual is pretty awesome, but it's extremely difficult from back there.  For me it's in between clubs too, too long for a hybrid, and seemingly too small a target for a fairway wood.  I doubt many people, good players included, are that comfy from 213 uphill, often into a prevailing wind!


The course has a bunch of half-par holes, and this one is a par 3.5...ok with me, just not in the top half of SH holes IMO.

[Rick Lane]

Have not played SH, but interesting conversation nonetheless.  A 213 yard uphill, into the wind hole, is, for most players, an opportunity to try to miss in the correct place to get up and down.   I think that makes an OK hole, just cant be 18 of them.  I think what moves the conversation is the concept of "par" versus the concept of "course rating", for which a hole like that would not be 3, but some higher number?   (IE course could be par 72, but rated 73.8 or something)  Such that even though you might feel you failed at "par" when you enter your score, versus course rating, you might get that half stroke back?   

[Brad Tufts]

Yeah, funny too because there is no course rating at Sand Hills.  My group guessed at one point at 73.5/135-140 from the tips.

#14 is definitely 4.5 half-par (par 5), and #15 is a 4.5 half-par (par four), so it all evens out.

I think the biggest criticism on #13 may be a general lack of places to miss.  It's easy and safe to miss short, but the ball rolls back 50y, and your pitch is 100% blind to a decent-sized green.  Left and right is sand (unless you find the slope pin-high left), and long slopes away towards hard ground and tall stuff.  Again, just a 3.5 half-par!

[Scott McWethy]

Yeah, funny too because there is no course rating at Sand Hills.  My group guessed at one point at 73.5/135-140 from the tips.

#14 is definitely 4.5 half-par (par 5), and #15 is a 4.5 half-par (par four), so it all evens out.

I think the biggest criticism on #13 may be a general lack of places to miss.  It's easy and safe to miss short, but the ball rolls back 50y, and your pitch is 100% blind to a decent-sized green.  Left and right is sand (unless you find the slope pin-high left), and long slopes away towards hard ground and tall stuff.  Again, just a 3.5 half-par!

Brad, that's definitely the problem, plus it plays into the wind a good portion of the time.  There is no good spot to miss, especially when you're trying to hit a shot over 200 yards up hill.  If you leave it short and not in one of the bunkers, it comes off the false front and leaves you a very difficult chip shot because it will roll down a good 15 to 20 yards below the green.  Left or right you're in the bunkers and they're not easy shots to get close, especially the left one since your well below the level of the green and it runs away from you.  Blasting it over the green is the best option, but you have to hope it doesn't go too far into the tall stuff.

It's just a hole for me (8 handicap) where I stand on that back tee and I say to myself that I don't stand a chance.  I'm just hoping to get the ball somewhere around the green that gives me a shot at getting up and down.  I don't mind playing a hard hole, but I think a player should be given some options when playing such a long hole.  With the 13th, it's a hit and hope for the best.

I know Nick Faldo aced it when out there, so I'm sure he has a much different perspective on the hole than I do, but then again I'm no 6 time major champion!!

[Parker Page]

Thanks for the strong engagement on my question. I think my conclusion is that the hole would be better played from the member tees, but the fact that the back tees exist keeps the hole from being great.


I also think 15 at Atlanta Athletic Club and 4 at Blackwolf Run fit this bill of holes that look great but aren’t because of a lack of risk/reward options.

[archie_struthers]

 


Haven't played Sand Hills in a log time but remember the 13th hole vividly.


It's a really difficult hole  , so playing the tips might be be beyond the ability level of most players. If you must make a number hit it short and chip and putt. Otherwise blast away and hope for a thrill if you can hit the green!

[Jimmy Muratt]

In my opinion, #13 is a great golf hole.  I enjoy half-par holes and #13 certainly fits that bill.  It demands a good golf shot or you will be scrambling to make par.   It still offers a chance of recovery from a poorly played tee shot. 

From some of the comments, it sounds as if many are playing the wrong set of tees.  Many players insist on playing the back tees and then complain when they don't have the ability to pull off the shot.  In reality, the issue isn't with the golf hole but the set of tees the golfer has chosen to play.

[Tom_Doak]

Thanks for the strong engagement on my question. I think my conclusion is that the hole would be better played from the member tees, but the fact that the back tees exist keeps the hole from being great.

That is a really poor conclusion!  Anyone who wants to can just bypass the back tee, so how is that tee, in and of itself, a detriment to the hole?


If the hole has a problem it's in the lack of alternative ways to play it.  Changing tees does not fix that at all; it just dumbs down the challenge a bit for guys who aren't good enough to play the back tee.

[Scott McWethy]

Thanks for the strong engagement on my question. I think my conclusion is that the hole would be better played from the member tees, but the fact that the back tees exist keeps the hole from being great.

That is a really poor conclusion!  Anyone who wants to can just bypass the back tee, so how is that tee, in and of itself, a detriment to the hole?


If the hole has a problem it's in the lack of alternative ways to play it.  Changing tees does not fix that at all; it just dumbs down the challenge a bit for guys who aren't good enough to play the back tee.

I don't agree with your statement fully.  Changing the tee does change the hole.  I'm not saying it changes it into a great hole from the regular tee, but it does give me a chance to get the ball on the green.  I can hit a hybrid from the regular tee and get enough height to hold that green some times.  I don't stand a chance from that back tee because I can't hit the ball high enough with a three wood or driver to hold that green.  That's just my game.

I do enjoy playing the back tees at Sand Hills and don't want to play 17 holes from the backs and then one hole from the regular.

Where I do agree with you Tom is the lack of options around the green where you can hit the ball and stand a decent chance of getting up and down.  No matter what tee you play from, there are not many spots around the green that aren't too penal for that second shot.  Over the back of green is about it.  It does also depend on where the pin position is.  Anything on left side of green makes the second shot much more difficult. 

[Tom_Doak]

Scott:  So the shot values of the back tees at Sand Hills should be tailored to YOUR game?

[John Kirk]

I looked up a picture online to remind myself of how the hole looks.  My recollection was that the hole looks like a long iron shot from the back tee, and it still looks that way to me.  I don't think I can actually get it there with a 3-iron like I might have 10 years ago, but I might still hit, knowing the most likely miss is 30-40 yards short on short grass, below the hole.  I might try to fade a wood up there, but it seems like the range of misses is worse, and the chances of double bogey or worse come into play.

It sure is a good looking uphill par 3, very enticing, even if it is one of the less spectacular holes on the course.  Part of my philosophy about golf is that it has to be hard somewhere, and it is difficult to make par here.   It's not my least favorite hole on the course, but I tend to like long, interesting approach shots more than the average bear.  I like the 3rd hole at Pasatiempo more than this hole, even though I make a par on PT #3 only about 25% of the time.

If I ever play there again, I think I'd bring along a 2- or 3-iron and try to bounce it onto the green once more. 

[Scott McWethy]

Scott:  So the shot values of the back tees at Sand Hills should be tailored to YOUR game?

Nope not at all, but if you don't have an opinion, then what's the point of the conversation.  By the way, we're talking about one hole here.  I tried to convey that for an 8 handicapper, the hole gives me fits (and it sounds like a lot of other people who have played it) from the back tee because I think with my skill level, it's extremely difficult without a lot of options.  You have to hit the ball in such a small target area to make it work, otherwise you're most likely well below the green or in one of the severely penal bunkers.  I mentioned before that I don't have a problem with a difficult hole, but give the player some options if they can't hit or hold the green from such a lengthy distance.

Tom, what do you think of this hole?  I've heard you disagree with posters on this hole when people say it's not a great hole and they express their reasons why, so what is your opinion.  As a golf course architect, what percentage of players would you be happy with that hit the green (and held the green) on their tee shot.  Would this be a hole that you would have designed this way?  If not, and you're comfortable saying, what do you think could improve the hole?

 

[Brandon Urban]

I am personally a fan of having a "do or die" hole on a golf course, especially a place like Sand Hills where just about every other hole offers you all kinds of options. I mean, the hole right after the thirteenth is one that every one feels bad about if they don't make birdie.
It's pretty cool to have the chance at a hero shot every once in a while. And when you pull it off, you'll never forget it. As opposed to just another par 3 with options for you to hit a bad shot and still make par.

[Ted Sirbaugh]

I am personally a fan of having a "do or die" hole on a golf course, especially a place like Sand Hills where just about every other hole offers you all kinds of options. I mean, the hole right after the thirteenth is one that every one feels bad about if they don't make birdie.
It's pretty cool to have the chance at a hero shot every once in a while. And when you pull it off, you'll never forget it. As opposed to just another par 3 with options for you to hit a bad shot and still make par.

I agree with you, I think we sometimes get too focused on every hole needing strategy and options that we can't appreciate a great hole requiring a tough shot. Like you said, Sand Hills has plenty of holes with endless options. I don't think #13 should be penalized for having fewer options... it fits into the routing well and provides the chance to hit a memorable shot. I would probably put it in the bottom half of holes at SH, but there are plenty of great ones in that half

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()