News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« on: May 29, 2008, 10:43:12 AM »
Phil Benedict's thread highlighting Ian Andrews unique comment is to blame for this train.

Both Public, albeit one is situated in the heart of the most stressed out (likely all traffic related) city in America. The other in the most laid back land of sand.

For those who have played both. Comments, comparisons about the ARCHITECTURE, would be appreciated.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2008, 10:45:18 AM »
Wild Horse may be from the land of sand, but don't discount the thrill of glacial till.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2008, 10:46:48 AM »
Adam - is Tacoma really that stressed out?

I always thought those northwesterners were pretty relaxed....

Huh.

Can't comment on the two courses, haven't been to Chambers Bay.  But my Tacoma friends seem pretty darn relaxed to me....

TH

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2008, 10:58:09 AM »
Huck, It may be a few years old, but they were awarded the honor by some list, somewhere. Besides, golfers are rarely that stressed.

JK, Thanks for the alliteration.  Is it really GT? Tectonic might tax my brain, too too much.


« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 11:01:56 AM by Adam Clayman »
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2008, 11:00:41 AM »
Adam, off the top of my head:

Generally, Wild Horse is more seemless with the whole perhaps better than the sum of the parts.  The individuals holes are CB are more distinctive.  

WH is more demanding off the tee given the strategic placement of bunkering and the lost ball potential from the native grass.  With the exception of the 8th, 10th and 12th, CB offers extreme width off the tee.  

Green surrounds and putting surfaces from both a size and contour standpoint are both fluid and subtle and somewhat similar.  

As for approaches, CB is more demanding based on the 1st, 4th, 7th and 10th and unlike WH offers some ridiculously tucked hole locations, notably extreme right of the 13th and 17th and rear of the 16th.  

The bunkering at WH is strategic and at CB more penal and very difficult to extract from.

Aesthetically, both are spectacular, period.  

Wind enhances the challenge at both courses.  

Both play firm and fast.

Both showcase the great outdoors.

The par threes are more diverse at WH as 3 of the 4 one-shotters at CB play downhill and I hit the same club on all four holes.  

FWIW, I'd go 6-4 in favor of CB.

Mike
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 11:04:36 AM by Michael_Hendren »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Tom Huckaby

Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2008, 11:02:17 AM »
Huck, It may be a few years old, but they were awarded the honor by some list, somewhere. Besides, golfers are rarely that stressed.

JK, Thanks for the aliteration.

Gotcha... only my Tacoma friends aren't golfers.

But anyway...I too am curious how these compare.  The universe of people who've played both has to be very small, but odds are 95% of such participate here!

So fire away....

BTW, of course you know I LOVE Wild Horse.  CB looks to me like Wild Horse with a seaside view.  Oversimplification, for sure... but wrong?

TH

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2008, 11:05:15 AM »
Michael, Your first point and your last seemingly do not compute. Why would you favor the lesser sum? Water's influence?
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2008, 11:23:42 AM »
Adam,based on one play there is a "sameness" to the holes at WH and more variety at CB.  Replays, particularly of WH would likely change my opinion as its subtleties were revealed.  Visually, the boldness of CB is very appealing to me w/ or w/o the H20 and I enjoy seeing the golf course spread out before me.

It might indeed be a push on the architecture but I do favor CB to play.

Make sense?
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2008, 11:24:39 AM »
Michael, Your first point and your last seemingly do not compute. Why would you favor the lesser sum? Water's influence?

He made no assertion that the Wild Horse sum was more than the Chambers Bay sum. He simply asserted that the sum at Wild Horse is enhanced by the seemless nature of the combined holes.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2008, 11:31:13 AM »
Garland, that's what I intended.

Also, I would add that CB has more outstanding holes than WH - specifically nos. 1, 5, 6,  7, ,10, 11 and 14 (omitting the fun and quirky 12th).  Surprisingly, these hole are all par fours, which suggests that as a group the two shot holes at CB might be among the best collection designed and built in the modern era (did I really type that? - get out the flame retardant!).

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2008, 12:47:58 PM »
With the caveat that I only walked CB, though looked critically at the features... I would have to say there isn't all that much similarity to CB and WH in design.  The greens surrounds at CB tend to be wide out and short cut like 6 and 10 at WH.  CB in greens size and along with surrounds is just a bigger design.  The bunkering is more dramatic at CB and I'd characterize them more like BallyNeal in depth and placements than WH.  And, there are the vast waste areas at CB that WH doesn't have.  The elevation changes are also more closely akin to BallyNeal than WH it seems to me.  CB feels like a course in spacing and configuration that could and will hold big events.  It is a big lot course.  WH is obviously intimate in that regard. 

Degree of playing difficulty would clearly go to CB.  And of course for a venue destined to hold USGA events, how could it not be designed more complex or difficult.

Going forward, I think my interest will be in how CB fares in maintaining and holding the fescue turf surrounds of the greens and their firmness. Given the sand capped nature of CB as opposed to the pure sand base of WH, and what I believe is a totally different nutrient requirement given the dwarf blue FWs of WH and fescue dominant at CB, fert applications, I think will be more difficult to monitor at CB.  combined with the greater stress of more play at CB, and more fragile FW turf, CB looks to be the more intense management challenge.  I believe they will have to top dress more frequently at CB with imported sand, whereas, WH uses its own home sand so to speak.  I think it is critical that CB hold on to the intended surrounds playability vision, and should climate and turf evolution of the surrounds fescue species be crowded out and revert to a more poa and high cut and traditional surrounds rough somehow be reverted to, they will be severely compromised in original intent.  But, I don't think that will happen as a turf maintenance goal and philosophy issue seems to be the primary focus of the staff. 

The super David Wienecke seems to be very fired up to hold the line, and manage the intended design characteristics.  He does a great job which he regularly explains on the webpage for CB.   (I wish more golf course websites had such a fine superintendent's monthly column).  In that regard, Josh Mahar does a fine update column on the WH webpage, and thus the two courses are very similar with top notch superintendents, who communicate very well with the members and users of their facilities.

I just hope I get to play CB once in the next year or so... But if I had to parcel out 10 plays, I'd go 7WH-3CB only because I enjoy the comfort and playability factor with plenty of thrills in the intimate setting of WH more than the the harder demanding and strenuous challenge of CB.  If I were younger and a better player, that may go more favorable to CB and even out in number of plays.

No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2008, 02:00:38 PM »
  I have played each course once. Well not quite, as Chambers Bay didnlt have finished sand in the bunkers and I played off mats.They both have a minimal Doak rating of 7.5 because I drove more than 100 miles to play, from Portland and Scotts Bluff. I'd have to agree with Mike that Wildhorse is seamless, but that may be a function of the general topography and ease of construction via better soils.
  Compare WH's nuance versus CB's boldness? I just drink them in and enjoy.
  There would be no quesion using Golf Digest criteria. Chamber's Bay would win hands down because of resistance to scoring. Walk in the park I'd have to hand it to Wildhorse.
  Chambers Bay's greens are going to be more difficult to putt and to hit into the correct position. I didn't see as much of that at Wildhorse. Both are generous width fairways. CB is wider, but has more contour to contend with.
  Which is the "better" course. I would say Chambers Bay, but Wildhorse is the course I would rather play. But I'm stuck with Chambers because it is close. Next trip is July 5th. We may have openings.
 
 
   

Daryl David

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2008, 08:44:53 PM »
  I have played each course once. Well not quite, as Chambers Bay didnlt have finished sand in the bunkers and I played off mats.They both have a minimal Doak rating of 7.5 because I drove more than 100 miles to play, from Portland and Scotts Bluff. I'd have to agree with Mike that Wildhorse is seamless, but that may be a function of the general topography and ease of construction via better soils.
  Compare WH's nuance versus CB's boldness? I just drink them in and enjoy.
  There would be no quesion using Golf Digest criteria. Chamber's Bay would win hands down because of resistance to scoring. Walk in the park I'd have to hand it to Wildhorse.
  Chambers Bay's greens are going to be more difficult to putt and to hit into the correct position. I didn't see as much of that at Wildhorse. Both are generous width fairways. CB is wider, but has more contour to contend with.
  Which is the "better" course. I would say Chambers Bay, but Wildhorse is the course I would rather play. But I'm stuck with Chambers because it is close. Next trip is July 5th. We may have openings.
 
 
   

I wondered if anyone would say it that way.  That sums up my feelings.  I am pretty sure Chambers is a better golf course, but I would rather play Wildhorse. 

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2008, 09:16:58 PM »
i am playing wild horse tomorrow morning.  can't wait.

Jason Hines

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #14 on: May 29, 2008, 09:40:00 PM »
Chip,

Is it still there?  Spoke with my mother in Kearney tonight, sounds like multiple tornadoes and possible injuries.

Played WH this past Saturday, feels like I belong there every time I play.

Scott Szabo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse New
« Reply #15 on: May 29, 2008, 10:58:12 PM »
We're playing 36 at Wild Horse next Wednesday and I can't wait!
« Last Edit: May 30, 2008, 09:33:18 AM by Scott Szabo »
"So your man hit it into a fairway bunker, hit the wrong side of the green, and couldn't hit a hybrid off a sidehill lie to take advantage of his length? We apologize for testing him so thoroughly." - Tom Doak, 6/29/10

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chambers Bay V. Wild Horse
« Reply #16 on: May 29, 2008, 11:00:36 PM »
Thirty five dollars vs. $150....
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back