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

[SL_Solow]

Barney, I usually enjoy your attempts to make people stretch but why don't you wait to see what gets built.  Since when do we pay by the yard?  Would you pay more to play the International in Bolton Mass (could be stretched to 8,000 yds) than Cypress point?  I am sure we can give other examples.  Short and interesting sure beats long and boring.  So let's see what happens.  I have a fair amount of confidence in Tom.

[Emile Bonfiglio]

Tom, is there any thought to the idea of leaving some land available if you needed to stretch a few holes out to make the par 72 number if it is not well received?

[Tom_Doak]

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).

I've gotta drill down on this comment a little bit, Jay.


First off, yes, I hope this will be a course you could play from the same tees as stronger golfers.


Second, you shouldn't expect to shoot 68.  I don't know your handicap, but unless you're scratch, you probably aren't looking to shoot 72 either.  So ... how does it matter what par is for you?  You should be trying to break 75, or 80, or 90, or whatever a good score would be for you personally, as I would see it.

[Kalen Braley]

Well the nice thing about a par 68 is you can have a crap day, shoot 21 over and still brag about breaking 90!


Genius!!

[Tom_Doak]

Tom, is there any thought to the idea of leaving some land available if you needed to stretch a few holes out to make the par 72 number if it is not well received?

No.  They have hundreds of acres more land, so I suppose that's always an option.  But I wouldn't have signed up for the gig if I thought they were going to give up on the concept easily.  Making a design "more conventional" is not an assignment I'd want.


Who was that old Musselburgh pro, who said the customer is always right?*




* I looked this up, and it is credited to Marshall Field, a Chicagoan, among others.  Also, in Japan the phrase is "The customer is a god."  American suck-up pales by comparison.

[jeffwarne]

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!

Plus one-and allows just enough tees for turf wear without littering the property with tees

[John Kavanaugh]

Barney, I usually enjoy your attempts to make people stretch but why don't you wait to see what gets built.  Since when do we pay by the yard?  Would you pay more to play the International in Bolton Mass (could be stretched to 8,000 yds) than Cypress point?  I am sure we can give other examples.  Short and interesting sure beats long and boring.  So let's see what happens.  I have a fair amount of confidence in Tom.

Damn, it hurts me when I disappoint you. If I have learned anything in the twilight of adulthood it's that when you feel the first prick of injustice you speak up before it's a scab. I'm not a hybrid golfer and feel the need to speak out against hybrid golf.

[BCrosby]

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.

Agreed and well said Jim.

[Ryan Farrow]

Sad then isn't it that the headline is yardage and par.

Actually, it is sad, now that you mention it.  There is so much urgency today to "sell" one's ideas, instead of just putting them out there so people can judge for themselves.  Hell, your brother in law will probably be making judgments about whether this is the best course at Sand Valley or the worst, before we have even broken ground 


Swinley Forest and Rye and those places do not "sell themselves" as par-68 courses in any way, shape or form.  Nor do they make any apologies for what they are, because that's a superficial analysis, and their members only care that they are full of good golf.  I'd guess more than a few guests come and play them and don't even notice what the par was, until they are adding up their score at the end.


It would be nice to take the same approach here.  Heck, I tried to convince Lew Thompson at Forest Dunes not to say anything about the course being reversible until opening day [or day two], but as you can see from Matt Ginella's story today, Lew is not so great at keeping things in confidence!

Hopefully after more of these are built it will not have to be part of the marketing. Congrats on getting the job, I'm  looking forward to seeing what you guys create. Brian Curley built a 6,000 yard par 70 course in Haikou, China with 6 par 3's and I never once thought it was any less of a course. I doubt many people will notice except for the scratch player looking for an easy score on a par 5.

[John Kavanaugh]

No one ever notices.

[Andrew Buck]

  And, as one of a daily double round, as previously noted, the shorter course should work well.  I imagine the best scenario is for that to be played second, and it might be a course where the afternoon tee times will be more sought after than the morning times (maybe first day as a warm up, who knows)

I don’t doubt that will be the case, but if it is I would question the success of the project.


In this scenario, any player will be as tired on the last 9 holes either way, and if I was offered a 36 hole day at Swinley Forest and the Berkshire I wouldn’t say I needed to play Swinley last because it’s the short course.

[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).

I've gotta drill down on this comment a little bit, Jay.


First off, yes, I hope this will be a course you could play from the same tees as stronger golfers.


Second, you shouldn't expect to shoot 68.  I don't know your handicap, but unless you're scratch, you probably aren't looking to shoot 72 either.  So ... how does it matter what par is for you?  You should be trying to break 75, or 80, or 90, or whatever a good score would be for you personally, as I would see it.

I play for fun, don't often keep score, prefer to play the ground where possible and play varying shots.  I do, however, greatly enjoy match play and look for a level field based on handicaps ie. par. I have really not given this new paradigm any deep thought but find the possibility interesting.

[jeffwarne]

a great thought on multiple fronts


especially as mentioned at a resort where walking 36 hole days.


While I'm not a fan of 27 hole complexes with interchangeable nines....I do think a 9 hole course/loop or 2 that return to the clubhouse and planned/tee timed for 9 holes plus a morning or afternoon 18 has a place at a resort for those not being up for 36 or a par 3 course


i.e.
Pac Dunes 18
Lil Pac Dunes 9


Old MacDonald 18
Young Dr. Young 9


Bandon Trails 18
Lil Pac Dunes 9


Bandon Dunes 18
Young Dr. Young 9


I generally try to plan several 27 hole days on many of my UK golf trips

[Ally Mcintosh]

  And, as one of a daily double round, as previously noted, the shorter course should work well.  I imagine the best scenario is for that to be played second, and it might be a course where the afternoon tee times will be more sought after than the morning times (maybe first day as a warm up, who knows)

I don’t doubt that will be the case, but if it is I would question the success of the project.


In this scenario, any player will be as tired on the last 9 holes either way, and if I was offered a 36 hole day at Swinley Forest and the Berkshire I wouldn’t say I needed to play Swinley last because it’s the short course.

I’m not so sure, Andrew: In your example, Berkshire has 6 threes and 6 fives that could be called fours - they feel similar, regardless of par.


To reiterate Sean and my point before, I actually think it will be a bigger success if people play it second, not as the short course but as the easier walk. Making the course a compact, easy walk will be a huge win. It needs to feel like it’s 5/7ths the walk of a big resort course, not 6/7ths like the length might suggest.

[Sean_A]

Ally

I agree, the walk will be critical in trying to recreate the charm of the best versions of this type of course.  We may even find out how much love for Swinley is down to its "setting" rather than its design 

Either way, the concept is sound and worth a go.  In a way, it would be grand if this course was on the flatest part of the property to really accentuate the walk. If the Keiser wants to get really out there...he could re-introduce bogey score (which is really just a fancy way of highlighting the half par holes).

Ciao

[Duncan Cheslett]

Great news.


Most of my golf has been played on 6000 yard or less courses with sub 70 pars. They are certainly no 'easier' than the 6500-7000 yard  courses I play on my travels.


Par 5s tend to be the easiest holes to score well on. Eliminate most of those and the course immediately loses a few hundred yards in length, a couple of shots to par, AND potentially becomes more difficult!


Jack up the number of tricky par 3s to five or six and the course also becomes a lot more fun to play.


I know that this is a resort course but the idea is even more applicable to members' club courses. Who the hell wants to play a 7000 yard course three times a week?


I wish Tom well with his revolutionary new concept.


Dr MacKenzie would approve...


 


 

[Kyle Harris]

Isn’t one man’s par 3 another’s short par 4 anyway?

Literally no.


One man's "expert" may be different, but alas, par remains the same.

[Tom_Doak]

In a way, it would be grand if this course was on the flatest part of the property to really accentuate the walk. If the Keiser wants to get really out there...he could re-introduce bogey score (which is really just a fancy way of highlighting the half par holes).

I still have the scorecard from my first round at Swinley in 1982, and it showed only the Bogey score, not par.  Bogey was 74; the left negative of the short holes was a 4, and holes like 5 and 15 were 5's.


It was the only club in the U.K. by then that still showed Bogey on the card, but I had some from my dad's visits there in the 1970's that show Bogey alongside Par for Hadley Wood, so I guess it didn't really fall out of use in club golf until about 50 years ago.


If we stick with the layout I've got now, the Bogey score from the back tees would probably be six or seven shots above par.

[Sean_A]

In a way, it would be grand if this course was on the flatest part of the property to really accentuate the walk. If the Keiser wants to get really out there...he could re-introduce bogey score (which is really just a fancy way of highlighting the half par holes).

I still have the scorecard from my first round at Swinley in 1982, and it showed only the Bogey score, not par.  Bogey was 74; the left negative of the short holes was a 4, and holes like 5 and 15 were 5's.

It was the only club in the U.K. by then that still showed Bogey on the card, but I had some from my dad's visits there in the 1970's that show Bogey alongside Par for Hadley Wood, so I guess it didn't really fall out of use in club golf until about 50 years ago.

If we stick with the layout I've got now, the Bogey score from the back tees would probably be six or seven shots above par.

There are still some clubs which have Bogey Score on the card..at least they did the last time I visited: Sacred 9, Sandwich, Elie and New Zealand (maybe even Prestwick) are some examples...all of which I would be happy to join  .

Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

Really?

[Daryl David]

Can’t speak to the others, but I have a card from Royal Worlington and Newmarket and it has the bogey ratings as well as par.

[Michael Whitaker]

Elie Scorecard

Elie even lists the Bogie score on their website:  http://www.golfhouseclub.co.uk/the-course/

Aldeburgh scorecard


Royal Worlington and Newmarket Scorecard

[BHoover]

Can someone please explain to me what the “bogey” score means?

[Michael Whitaker]

Can someone please explain to me what the “bogey” score means?

In my opinion it is the equivalent of American "Par."

Par on a UK course is (again IMO) the equivalent of the American "Course Rating," the score which a scratch golfer is expected to shoot. That's why American handicaps are calculated against "Course Rating," not Par.

EDIT:  Now that I think about it, I guess the Standard Scratch Score (SSS) would be the same as an American "Course Rating" score.

[Jason Topp]

Can someone please explain to me what the “bogey” score means?

Not real descriptive


https://www.golf-monthly.co.uk/features/the-game/what-are-bogey-competitions-in-golf-78821