[John Mayhugh]

David
I'm another person who has never heard of the course before.  It's good of you to post the thread.

From the photos and your hole descriptions, I have a hard time understanding what makes the course "truly spectacular."  There are nearly 60 bunkers and water in play on maybe 1/2 the holes. Some of the green complexes look good, but it's hard to tell much about contours.  From looking at an aerial alongside the photo, there seem to be some interesting approach angles.  The first nine rather intricately routed, but then also has some strangeness to me.  Looks like after playing the par 3 third, the player has to walk (or drive) back 100+ yards to hit a tee shot on the fourth.  Those "Jesus" bridges look cool, but how does a walking player make it from the 6th green to 7th tee?  Just a longer walk?

Obviously, the success of the course needs to be judged based on what the owner wanted.  If the owner wasn't concerned about some of the routing compromises, then we shouldn't care.  However, when we compare this course to others, then things like that are fair game.

IMO, Fazio builds very competent courses.  And no one hides a cart path like he does.  They are generally aesthetically pleasing. Some of the bunkering at Santapazienza doesn't photograph very well - seems out of scale.  It may look ok on the ground, but I would have to take your word for it.  The brilliant white sand may or may not work for the location.

So what is it about Santapazienza that makes it spectacular?  The uniqueness seems to come from being ultra-private, the "halfway house" after 5 holes, and the "Jesus" bridges.  Each of these may make it memorable, but I don't see anything very  special about the design from the routing, photos, or descriptions. 

I have only played one "estate" type course - Wolf Point.  I loved WP, so I'm not against the idea of a course with very limited access.  I'm interested in what the course looks like, and this particular one in Brazil fails to excite. Give me a fortune to spend on my own course, and it would look a lot closer to Mildenhall (or High Pointe hop farm) than this.  Perhaps just an issue of tastes.

[Robert Kimball]

Just for fun, take a peek at this list and see which ones you can check off, or notch?




http://www.golfvacationinsider.com/cr/10-exclusive-golf-courses-you-will-never-play-13730

[David Davis]

Some of you might be interested in this Golf Channel segment about Santapazienza. I think you can see things in the right scale and it's better to see them that way than in my photos.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6eBCZ2QBJ0

[John Mayhugh]

The Golf Channel bit kind of reinforced my perception from the photo tour.  How much of a bump comes from the "Jesus bridges" and exclusivity? That was prominent in the GC profile too, though to be fair they aren't generally very architecture-focused.   

[David Davis]

The Golf Channel bit kind of reinforced my perception from the photo tour.  How much of a bump comes from the "Jesus bridges" and exclusivity? That was prominent in the GC profile too, though to be fair they aren't generally very architecture-focused.

John,


Thanks for your comments. Yes, perhaps I'm totally blown away by exclusivity. On the other hand once you've been alone on a course or only with your group and had the place to yourself, like you also experienced at Wolf Point do you really think that makes much of a difference after you've seen it many, many times? Don't tell me that was the best part of your Wolf Point experience? If so I think that's pretty sad as I love Wolf Point and the course and the people I was with made it an awesome experience not the fact that we had it to ourselves.


However, if you are comparing having the place to yourself to the 6.5 hour round of golf I had this summer at Pinehurst #2 in 100 degree weather. I'll admit it's hard to look past the 6.5 hours as a deterrent and just love the architecture. Though by now, more than 600 courses into my ongoing study I feel like I can formulate my opinion around these things tinsels and bells. That being said, the Jesus Bridges are very cool, though for me they have nothing to do with the actual golf course. There were also other things there non-golf related which I would classify as almost unbelievable in my view. Anyway, nothing to do with the golf.


In any case, nobody is trying to sell the course to you. I'm just posting the photos I have and the tour so people that hear about the place or are curious can take a look to see what it's all about. Trying to add something to this growing resource. Look at the positive side if you can tell from the photos it's not your thing then you can remove it from your wish list.

[John Mayhugh]

David,

I'm not sure if you read my earlier comments (reply #50 at the top of the page).  You had initially talked about the course being spectacular, and others had questioned this view.  You seemed a bit frustrated that there weren't more specifics from those with lesser opinions.  I added my own impressions and then asked you to clarify what made the course seem so good to you. You didn't reply directly, but you later posted the Golf Channel piece and I was simply commenting that this pretty much reinforced my initial perception. 

Certainly don't think you are trying to sell the course to me.  You seem to really like it, and I just don't see anything in pictures and routing that would make this as interesting as Fallen Oak (for example, which is pretty good). 

I think it is fair to say that my tastes in courses doesn't fully align with yours, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[David Davis]

John,


Here's some of the things I really like about the place:

• [size=78%]Excellent routing on a property that is very dynamic and pretty tough to run a course through. Not too different than something like Shanqin Bay. [/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Really interesting transition from the lower areas characterized by the lakes (7 holes involve water) up through the rainforest. [/size]
• [/size][size=78%]18 totally and completely unique holes that create a routing that you can walk off and remember every single hole.[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Really interesting, very large, green complexes and surrounds[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]lots of width in the playing alleys to allow for proper strategy to actually utilize the varying pin positions on the large greens.[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]A back 9 that kept growing in terms of spectacular holes that were great fun to play. [/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Deceptive in the photos but I'd say it's hard to understand the scale of everything until you are actually there. It's kind of like seeing photos of a course like Peachtree then going there realizing just how much movement and undulation the property has. There are also significant elevation changes.[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Obviously a lot of dirt was moved in creating parts of this course, I think Fazio always does this however on the back 9 there was a really interesting tie in with these huge very obscure rock formations, that and the way they tied everything seamlessly into the surrounding nature and rainforest was very cool.[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Perfect maintenance - definitely not something I'm use to or require but attention to detail was amazing and it's commendable. The super has done a wonderful job there.[/size]
• [/size][size=78%]Finally bunkering, many commented how they didn't like it. Nearly all new courses these days have the flavor of the month frilly natural bunkering, I suppose this has some Augusta or Peachtree to it, I didn't find it overdone as there was plenty of width to allow for these huge bunkers and I found them quite spectacular. Given my favorite courses are classic links and heathland I don't mind seeing something totally [/size]different[size=78%] for a change.[/size][size=78%]
• [/size][size=78%]Excellent set of par 3's (ex the waterfalls/streams which I don't love on the two front 9 par 3's) All varying lengths etc.[/size][size=78%]
• [/size][size=78%]Good mix of short long and medium 4's and 5's.[/size][size=78%]
• 15 through 18 are also a great finish with 4 of the most spectacular holes on the course.
• Another really cool aspect of this course is as I mentioned in the write up, a lot of thought was put into creating a totally different course for each ability level from the tees and different angles. Sure plenty of architects think about this and try to do it, the only difference was here to me it really seemed to work quite well.

[/size]There are many other things I liked as well but that's a pretty solid base to give you an idea.[size=78%]






 

[John Mayhugh]

David,
Thanks for the added comments. 

With respect to bunkering, I don't think the primary objection has to do with a lack of frilly edges.  Rather, the scale of some of the bunkers seems to overwhelm visually (not necessarily intimidate - just excessive).  You said that you suppose it has some Augusta or Peachtree to it.  Not that surprising, as "credit" for the bunker look at Augusta really goes to Fazio anyway.

You mention the finishing stretch of 15-18 as being especially strong.  Wondering if you could comment on the tee shot on 15?  Other than from the tips, it looks awful to me.  The ground slopes fairly steeply from left to right, with that massive bunker you like on the right side of the fairway.  With the slope, one needs to start the tee shot out the left, even aiming into the rough.  Well, there is a silly tree standing sentry at the left edge of the fairway.  From the far back tee, the angle isn't too bad. But as the tee distance shortens, the player has limited opportunity to aim left. So the tee shot seems to get harder the shorter your teeing distance.  Makes no sense to me.  From the front tee, about 170 to the tree and 190 to the bunker.  Middle tee 230 to the tee and 250 to the bunker.  Seemingly steep downhill.  I just don't see how you avoid the bunker without working the ball right to left or playing short of it.

Not trying to pick things apart in detail.  This was a standout issue when I first glanced at the aerial so since you like the hole I'm wondering if this tree seems ok to you.

[David Davis]

John,


Thanks for the question. Sorry for the slow response. I'm traveling at the moment.


It's a good question and very specific so thanks for asking. I'm curious why if you were standing on the tee you would be look all the way over there to left. Yes the hill slopes there where that tree is and I suppose you could play the hole by aiming there but I'm trying to figure out why you would look at it like that. To me the line is the bunker on the left hand side for example unless you want to take on the right side fairway bunker. However, that's probably a 300 yds carry. The tree is more a visual trick if you ask me, it makes it feel like the landing area is much more narrow than it actually is.


I'm not sure if that properly answers your question but that fairway must be like 80 yds wide. I doubt honestly you would stand on the tee and want to aim at that tree unless you were playing a huge fade.

[John Mayhugh]

I'm curious why if you were standing on the tee you would be look all the way over there to left. Yes the hill slopes there where that tree is and I suppose you could play the hole by aiming there but I'm trying to figure out why you would look at it like that. To me the line is the bunker on the left hand side for example unless you want to take on the right side fairway bunker. However, that's probably a 300 yds carry. The tree is more a visual trick if you ask me, it makes it feel like the landing area is much more narrow than it actually is.

I'm not sure if that properly answers your question but that fairway must be like 80 yds wide. I doubt honestly you would stand on the tee and want to aim at that tree unless you were playing a huge fade.

David,
From looking at the aerial, your line seems to vary greatly depending on which tee you play from.  Your comments and photo suggest you were playing from the far right tee.  The hole plays longest from that angle, but it's also the easiest angle which doesn't make sense to me.

Take a look at the photo I've crudely marked up.  I've no idea how many actual teeing areas there are, but there seem to be at least three.  I've identified them as A, B, & C.  Your photo from tee seems to have been taken from the A spot.  From there, it's about 300 yards from the tee to the front of the large bunker.  The angle allows you to play somewhat into the slope and yes, there's no need to go close to the tree.

But what happens when you move to tee B?  From there, it's only about 250 to the front to that bunker, and you're hitting onto a side slope from 50 feet above.  That suggests that the yardage will play shorter, and I would think that your ball will bounce to the right.  So you need to play more to the left, and the tree is about 230 from the tee.

The worst case appears to be from the more forward tee C.  From there, it's about 190 yards to the bunker.  You're hitting downhill and the slope would seem to bounce you directly at the bunker.  The tree is only 170 from that tee.  (note: all yardages come from Google Maps)

Not sure if you looked at the tee shot from the perspective of the other tees?  It seems to unnecessarily complicate the tee shot for lesser players.
santap 15 tee by john mayhugh, on Flickr

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()