[TEPaul]

I've been to Sand Hills and Wild Horse but looking at the photos of those kinds of courses that have sprung up in some of those sites in Nebraska that look so amazing as a whole new deal in American golf architecture, I'm just wondering when golf course architecture analysts look at those courses a hundred years from now if they may consider them to be a true architectural breakthrough in a sort of renaissance way to what many feel was the INLAND GCA breakthrough in the English heathlands over a century ago.

[Jason Hines]

Tom,
Very interesting question, I don’t think I can answer that question for sure today because the area/genre is still in motion.  I could see in the next 20-30 years the region becoming more of a destination with the infrastructure to support the area as a destination for golf if the quality of GCA is there to support it.  This country and era already has several destinations where you can go play ho hum golf and to me, the pull of the sand hills is the GCA, not the mountains, warm winter weather, the ocean etc.  There are several people where the remoteness and getting away from it all does have some appeal.  However, I think the overall pull again is the GCA, which is why I think the answer to your question is potentially a strong yes.

Other reasons would be the playing conditions that the prairie has to offer along with the breakthroughs with technology, agronomy and irrigation.  As most people know, the Sand Hills is a region of weather extremes and it sounds like the industry is following along.  For example the weather in Valentine this instant is 16 degrees, light snow, 15 mph wind with below zero wind chill.  Not your ideal conditions for fescue greens.
 
Also, the Wild Horse model could be emulated over and over in the smaller sand hills communities by building new clubs that the whole community supports.
 
On another note, I am always amused to what marketing or promotion people make the comparisons and statements that the golf and facilities are just like Scotland or Ireland or some other location.  I think the courses of the region are beginning to stand on their own, which is another reason the answer to your breakthrough question is yes.  Just my novice opinion.

[Adam Clayman]

FWIW, You and you fellow east coasters would do yourselves a favor to make many journeys out here.

[Tommy Williamsen]

While there are differences between some of the courses in the sand hills of Nebraska and Colorado, I think it is fair to say that Sand Hills opened up new venues.  Desert Forest and Desert Highlands did the same for desert golf.  I think in a 100 years folks will say that courses were built in places that seemed inhospitable at the time.  As for it being a true architectural breakthrough, I think probably not.  Heathland courses allowed golf to be played inland on soil that drained well in winter and played similarly to links courses the rest of the year.  The sand hills of Nebraska are different from the sand hills of North Carolina but I don't think that we consider Pinehurst et al to be breakthroughs in architecture.

[Ron Farris]

For many years, well before the Sand Hills GC, people have commented on the beauty and linksland look of the Sandhills, and said "wow, that looks like a golf course.  If it were a course, who the hell would play it, it is in the middle of no where".  Well they built it and people did come.  I have had people tell me they love the Sand Hills look and would like to incorporate it into there course, but the membership wouldn't stand for the long grass.  So maybe in 100 years people will consider the Sand Hills to have its own style, but the style, or natrualness of the Sand Hill golf courses is not new or revolutionary.  The location is relatively new and and the willingness to take the financial risk of people continuing to come to such a remote place may be a bit revolutionary.
 100 years from now I will be dead.  The Sand Hills will be Alive and golf will be good. 

[TEPaul]

Ron:

I'm not thinking that the architectural "look" I see in many of those Nebraska Sand Hills courses is new and revolutionary----I'm think more along the lines of some "RENAISSANCE" to an architectural look or style or philosophy or arrangement that was once revolutionary and new for INLAND courses and which first happened in the English heathlands over a century ago.

In other words, the INLAND English heathland type really was something of an architectural breakthrough in the late 1890s and early 20th century. Is the Nebraska Sand Hills type and style a breakthrough for American architecture in some renaissance way that has vestiges to the architecture of the English heathland back then?

By the way, C&C's Hidden Creek in New Jersey was intended to be something of an architectural tribute to the early architecture of the English heathlands.

[Jerry Kluger]

TEP: The premise that the architecture of SH was some kind of breakthrough similar to a breakthrough of some 100 years ago really does not work for me.  The breakthrough of SH was to not fabricate features which added nothing to the playing characteristics or natural features of the property.  The genius of C&C was what they did not do in building the course - perhaps it was a Renaissance of what had been done since the opening of Crystal Downs in 1929 and Prairie Dunes in 1937 - or should I say, was not done. 

[Jud_T]

The real issue for me is the economic viability of the region....While it may be great natural ground for golf, you are talking about an area that is essentially in the middle of nowhere with a very short golf season...I guess if a bunch of great courses are built and maintained for next to nothing it could end up being a wonderful golf destination spot,  but who's going to foot the bill initially?

[Norbert P]

  
  It is in the designers appreciation of place, whether links, montane, heathland, forested, etc., that makes them special.
            


btw, nice post Jason.  No novice is ye.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

The economic viablilty of the area is indeed an issue..or...it could initiate a new kind of private club empire in which members join a series of clubs under one umberella.
As such the economic hardships of these hard to get to venues could be offset by having more members.

I was talking to a very inteligent member of the golfing industry this weekend, who suggested such a model.
Perhpas it involves as many as 10 clubs situated across the nation, where on eflat fee covers membership at all venues.
I know simi;ar arrangements already exist between clubs, but for these far away venues in the current climate this may work.
That being the case I think Tom's original question may gain some logic, as more inventive architects are given the opportunity to build in these venues previoulsy considered only for very private venues.
I understand this idea is not earth shattering or original but in this economic climate could gather some momentum.

Opinions?

[Adam Clayman]

Jud, Was this an educated comment, or, just your perceptions?

While it may be great natural ground for golf, you are talking about an area that is essentially in the middle of nowhere with a very short golf season..

Nowhere? That's relative.

So is a short golf season. I've played 50 rounds since October 1st and will have golfed every month this year. Not all sections of the region have the same micro-climates.

[Jud_T]

Michael,
While I agree with you in theory I'm not sure this model works in the states.  The whole point of private clubs, besdes exclusivity, is excellent conditioning, limited play and no tee times. Once that's not the case then many will opt for the better daily-fee clubs.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()