Sand Valley 3 "will be just over 6,000 yards and par will be 67 or 68"

[John Kavanaugh]

As someone who is in their 50th anniversary year of golf I have played courses all my golfing life where par 72 for men are listed on the bottom of the card as par 75 for women. As is common in our modern world we have simply flipped the card.  I say...about time!!!

[David Davis]

Congrats Tom and team!


I knew there was a reason I hadn't broke down and visited already. Made that mistake at Bandon and Streamsong the first visit. I can wait until you guys finish before going to the only other place (besides The Netherlands) I know of where the residents are referred to as Cheese Heads. There will actually be enough interesting golf there to justify a dedicated "1 state" trip which is rare. So I'll just have to fly into Chicago to disrupt this theory.


Tom, sounds like your bucket list of designs is being fulfilled. Any thing else you are dying to do?

[Thomas Dai]

Nice news to hear of something different to the norm going ahead. Congratulations Tom and colleagues.
Short on the card doesn’t necessarily mean easy to play though.
Atb

[John Kavanaugh]

I have a question for golfers who are more familiar with how women enjoy the game than I ever will. Do you think women would rather play a 6000 yd course as a par 72 from the same tees as the male golfers or play par 68 from up tees? Does anyone not believe that somewhere on this card the course will be at least par 70?

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,


I know you've wanted to do some out-of-the box, quirky stuff for quite a while.  Will this be the opportunity?

[PCCraig]

Fantastic news. Can't wait to see the course come together. You had me at Swinley Forest...

Tom Doak, here's to hoping you build the 5th course at Kohler as well. Having two of your designs so close to home would be terrific.

What is the land for the third course at Sand Valley like? From the picture posted is appears to be a large field/prairie? Has is already been cleared of trees?

[Mike Nuzzo]

I have a question for golfers who are more familiar with how women enjoy the game than I ever will. Do you think women would rather play a 6000 yd course as a par 72 from the same tees as the male golfers or play par 68 from up tees? Does anyone not believe that somewhere on this card the course will be at least par 70?

Why can't a person play either, or all three?

[jeffwarne]

Just saw Tom's post - oh sweet Mary and Jesus, no Par 5s: thank you. I may never play it, but just knowing that it's there, without a Par 5, is gratifying enough!

I'm not sure what this comment means Peter.


With a "few" holes over 450 it would seem most of the golf world would embrace that as a par 5, with the better players having opportunities for occasional eagle putts and less need for the inevitable extra tees needed to make it playable as a par 4 for most golfers.
What makes those courses work in the UK is that they have one block of tees and the shorter hitters see it as a chance to reach a par 5 in three and it can be labeled a par 4 for the experts in a competition -WITHOUT building tees 100 yards apart

[Keith Phillips]

Love this.  As a Wentworth member years' back, I far preferred the 6,000 yard par 68 East course to either the West or the Edinburgh.  One short par 5, a great mix of par 4s and 5 par 3s.  Played in 3 hours and was a lot of fun.  I haven't been to Sand Valley yet but my guess is I'd do 36 a day with 18 at the shorter course each day!

[Peter Pallotta]

Jeff, fair & valid point for sure. My comment was mostly self-referential: I think great Par 5s are the hardest holes to design, and I find the (much more common) average Par 5 my least favourite holes to play. When Tom mentioned that his current routing has NO Par 5s, I was very happy: ie I think it will make for an even better golf course (and I know Tom wouldn't/won't stick to that idea if it doesn't). But also: when we talk lovingly here of half-par holes it is almost always in reference to short Par 5s; I think it good sometimes to experience the same 'Par 4.5' as a long Par 4 instead.
P

[Jeff Schley]

TD (some of the coolest initials to have btw) congrats to you and wonderful news for us!  Also curious about where exactly the location is as I was up there this summer.  Also curious about what the average green size will be, which probably won't be known for a while perhaps.  I assume walking only as well?

Really like how this resort is coming together as they were building more lodging when I was there and it will only expand from here I'm sure exponentially more.

[Kyle Harris]

Really like how this resort is coming together as they were building more lodging when I was there and it will only expand from here I'm sure exponentially more.

I doubt we'll see 9 courses under construction at one time.

[Jeff Schley]

Really like how this resort is coming together as they were building more lodging when I was there and it will only expand from here I'm sure exponentially more.

I doubt we'll see 9 courses under construction at one time.

I'm talking about lodging, not courses.

[Jim Nugent]

Great news for golf.  With no par 5s, average golfers will do better and have more fun. 

At the same time, scratch golfers and pro's won't have par 5s to beat up on.  So even though the course will be shorter, it will play longer for them. 

Bottom line: we should get a course many here have dreamed of: lower slope but higher course rating.  I am real pleased Tom is the one designing it.

This general principle -- more par 3s and less par 5s -- is how to solve the high tech/distance issue that plagues golf.  We can build courses well under 7000 yards, that challenge the top pros in major tournaments, and that average golfers can have a blast on. 

[Jeff Schley]

This general principle -- more par 3s and less par 5s -- is how to solve the high tech/distance issue that plagues golf.  We can build courses well under 7000 yards, that challenge the top pros in major tournaments, and that average golfers can have a blast on.

Very true, you can't build the courses long enough to tame today's length so like the idea of making everyone play a shorter track and see who can dial in their short game and putting.

[Sean_A]

Ahhh, I don't want to dampen the high spirits, but I will bet $100 that very few people will find this design concept an easy course to score on.  I know that Doak has seen all the prime sub par 70-sub 6200ish courses worth seeing and, among other things, he will want to retain the challenge these courses present. The far more pressing issue for me is will the walk be as satisfying as his major "role" model courses?  If that aspect is off in search of trying to create the "best possible holes" (or other reasons) there is a chance the overall product could suffer.

Ciao

[Drew Groeger]

Congratulations on this new project! When did you know this was the place for a shorter course?

I realize that its early and things could change, but based on the routing posted in the article, I love how 3 looks completely "found". The way the green tucks into the hills there seems special. 13 looks to maybe have a Himalayan feel? Or is there a slight dip in the center of the ridge crossing the fairway? I hope the way 14 and 15 cross remains intact!

Sorry to comment on the details so quickly, but a routing on topo from a top GCA is worth me taking notice, educate myself and get better.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ahhh, I don't want to dampen the high spirits, but I will bet $100 that very few people will find this design concept an easy course to score on.  I know that Doak has seen all the prime sub par 70-sub 6200ish courses worth seeing and, among other things, he will want to retain the challenge these courses present. The far more pressing issue for me is will the walk be as satisfying as his major "role" model courses?  If that aspect is off in search of trying to create the "best possible holes" (or other reasons) there is a chance the overall product could suffer.

Ciao

I think Sean is absolutely right but I also think that Tom isn’t the kind of designer to overlook this aspect.


If he produces a nicely compact, 6,100 yard Par-68, then I think it will be a great thing for golf.

[John Kavanaugh]

Can we stop the misogynistic mantra of no par 5's and accept that this course is breaking new ground in the growing demographic of couples travel? I'm reminded of the old 80's adage...Strong enough for a man but made for a woman. It's no secret that sells.

[Tom_Doak]

One other note: I could get fully onboard of this concept if there were only one set of tees that play at a true yardage as advertised. I have yet to play a resort course in my adult life that does not deceive the consumer about the length of the tees played. I take little liberty saying that every course is 5% shorter than advertised. I call it the motion of the ocean conundrum.

That is another idea that I hope someone will let me build one day, but I am guessing it won't go over here.  The client has always been very focused on shorter options for seniors and I am sure they won't stop caring about that on this course.


It is weird how multi-course resorts insist on wanting every course to appeal to every player instead of giving each player a course more tailored to their likes, but maybe this will change that a bit.


There are many other speculations on this thread but that's all they are, since few of the design details have been worked out or agreed upon yet.  A couple of the holes are so thick with trees that I still haven't walked on the green sites yet!  The one thing I did hear loud and clear is that the client would like to see a lot of open sand, so there will probably be more bunkers than I would otherwise have done.  (Or maybe, like Tara Iti, they just won't be called bunkers at all.)

[Brad Tufts]

This will be the only time the two properties are mentioned together, but...


...it seems like the Mission Hills Hainan Island project is the only resort to get to the number of courses where they felt they could start using more inventive ideas once they had 4 or 5 full-length courses in the ground...like two pins per hole, like a 6000y course, etc.  I don't know enough about the individual courses to know if these things were well-executed or not.


Maybe you add them all together....MH had 12-15 regulation courses (b/t the two locations) total before they tried some different things...the Keisers have 9 (Bandon/SV/Cabot/Dunes) before going in a different direction.  Although one might say the Keisers have already done so with the Preserve/Sandbox...


After being at SV just 10 days ago, anything they add will be a great addition!

[James Reader]

My current routing has five par-3's and NO par-5's, although there are a few 450+ yard holes we could turn into a par-5 if we want to, and either of two short holes could turn into a drivable par-4.





Wouldn’t it be interesting to not have any pars?  Isn’t one man’s par 3 another’s short par 4 anyway?  Or perhaps that would be a stretch too far!

[Tom Bacsanyi]

Congratulations Tom and team!


I've not yet visited the resort, but it seems to me the presentation of SV and MD is very raw in general, perhaps it'd be cool to have No. 3 be a bit more defined, something like a UK heathland look for the sake of variety.  But it already sounds like the owners want the super raw look continued.  No matter!  It'll be a great course either way and I love the sub 70 move.

[Tom_Doak]

This will be the only time the two properties are mentioned together, but...

...it seems like the Mission Hills Hainan Island project is the only resort to get to the number of courses where they felt they could start using more inventive ideas once they had 4 or 5 full-length courses in the ground...like two pins per hole, like a 6000y course, etc.  I don't know enough about the individual courses to know if these things were well-executed or not.

Mission Hills Hainan did start down that road, though it was primarily a function of having the same architect doing all of the courses, and having to figure out some way to distinguish one from another.  They even built a shorter, par-70 course - very much going out on a limb for Asian retail golfers - but a lot of the secondary courses were under-funded, and didn't get the same level of detail and execution in the rush to finish them all.


Indeed, there are plenty of shorter courses in the U.S. today, but nearly all of them are in markets where nobody cared much about "design" and no one tried to make them very good.  And so a lot of people just extrapolate from that and assume that it can't be done well.  If the new course at SV proves to be unpopular, it won't be because we didn't try hard enough 

[Jay Mickle]

Perhaps in the spirit of sociability and sustainability I could tee off with my playing partners on the 400+ yard par 4s and play the course as a par 72+. (Maybe I should just set par as my age). Playing from different tee boxes I often find that being last to hit I am left pulling up the rear as my partners are on there way down the fairway as I grab my bag and scurry after them.