Bandon vs. Pacific Dunes

« **on:** December 21, 2004, 02:55:47 PM »

What is it that makes Pacific Dunes "better" than Bandon Dunes, in the eyes of not only the rankings, but also most of the people on GCA?

I have played them both quite a few times, and while I think I like Pacific better, I can't really explain why. I like the Par 3is at Bandon better, I like the short Par 4's at Pacific better. I like playing Bandon better if it is very windy. I didn't like 16 at Bandon until they cleared out more room left. The Par 5 finishing hole at Pacific is better than Bandon's.

If we did golf course match play comparing the two, what would the results be. I am curious what people with significantly more knowledge than I do think about the differences between the two courses.

« **Reply #1 on:** December 21, 2004, 03:19:29 PM »

Sean:

From the sound of your post, I doubt anyone here has significantly more knowledge than you about these two courses.

But rest assured this has been beaten to death many times here. The GCA dogma is that Pacific is clearly better. But don't let them sway you - it's closer than those here like to admit, and MANY outside of this group tend to prefer Bandon.

So stick to your guns and don't be swayed... Bandon is a damn fine golf course.

TH

ps - I did match play and PD won 1up. Others here had it 10 and 8. Others here also say one shouldn't even bother playing BD on a trip there, that all time should be devoted to PD. That's the madness you are up against.

« **Reply #2 on:** December 21, 2004, 03:50:15 PM »

Pacific has more bounce for the ball, better strategic options, smaller green targets, numbers 6,11,13. Nothing against Bandon Dunes, it is a great track but I like Pacific a bit more.

« **Reply #3 on:** December 21, 2004, 03:55:39 PM »

Quote from: Peter Pittock on December 21, 2004, 03:50:15 PM

Pacific has more bounce for the ball, better strategic options, smaller green targets, numbers 6,11,13. Nothing against Bandon Dunes, it is a great track but I like Pacific a bit more.

Peter:

"A bit more" I can certainly live with.

But here's the test we've used before: say you have a long trip planned and can get in 10 rounds, to be dispersed between PD and BD. How many do you give to each course? I've generally said 6 PD and 4BD... but others here go so far as to say it's 10 to 0. That to me is silly, as BD is a damn fine golf course. Yes, PD has 6, 11 and 13, but each of 4, 5 and what the hell 16 are fascinating holes at BD...

So ok, how do you disperse it?

And don't include BT or Sheep Ranch.

TH

« **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2004, 03:56:14 PM »

Much better greens, more holes with great strategic options, better use of land, no bad or average hole holes which Bandon has a few of, Bandon opens poorly as well, pacific is much better routing

« **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2004, 03:58:27 PM »

Bandon opens poorly?

I kinda like each of the first three holes, then 4 and 5 are spectacular....

Ok, what the hell, we've batted this around too many times already. That just caught my eye as strange...

TH

« **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:00:37 PM »

Tom, The first hole has a blind 2nd shot. Actually much of the tee shot is blindish as well. I think it is a good hole but not as an opener on a daily fee course with mostly first time players.

« **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:03:49 PM »

Quote from: Tiger_Bernhardt on December 21, 2004, 04:00:37 PM

Tom, The first hole has a blind 2nd shot. Actually much of the tee shot is blindish as well. I think it is a good hole but not as an opener on a daily fee course with mostly first time players.

Well JB, the approach to #1 PD is blind also, as is much of the tee shot...

I think you're right - blind openers are not a good thing in general. But these are both very cool golf holes, which trumps the principle.

TH

« **Reply #8 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:09:52 PM »

Tom 7:3 for me.
I like Bandon, but would rate it is ordinary when comparing it to the links courses of home..that is how I felt coming off 18..
Pacific, however I thought was about as good as links golf can be.
I really like the lack of quirkiness that Pacific has yet still can be viewed as such a fine example of links golf.
You get the feeling that the best player would win there and not get srewed by too many bad bounces..
Now I know someone is going to sat that is all part and parcel of links golf, and I see your point..but from a player's perspective that can sometimes be somewhat harsh..
I think that some of the tee shota at Royal St Georges two years ago showed this as being somewhat unfair, not that for one minute i want to play a links course that does not have "some" quirk to it

« **Reply #9 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:11:13 PM »

I also think the openeing tee shot at PD is one of the finest openers I have ever played

« **Reply #10 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:17:46 PM »

OK, I can certainly live with 7:3, not at all far off from my assessment.

As for the opening tee shot at PD, well... I've never played it from the way back tee. From there it must be something. From the closer tees, it's not that big of a deal...

TH

« **Reply #11 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:23:16 PM »

Tom,

It was not my intention to beat a dead horse on this topic, I just had never seen a thread really comparing the two, more just references to PD being better.

Michael,

The tee shot (and hole) from the back tee on 1 is phenomenal, but from the up tee where mostly everyone plays, I don't think that hole isn't really any better than one at Bandon. I like the elevated greens on 1,2 and 7 at Bandon, as it makes club selection quite challenging

« **Reply #12 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:25:58 PM »

Quote from: Sean_Leary on December 21, 2004, 04:23:16 PM

Tom,

It was not my intention to beat a dead horse on this topic, I just had never seen a thread really comparing the two, more just references to PD being better.

No hassles, sorry about that Sean. The comparison has been discussed here before, but what the hell, what HASN'T been discussed here before?

So not your fault... I was just trying to prep you for the over-riding sentiment here, as expressed before. Maybe things have lightened up.

TH

« **Reply #13 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:39:57 PM »

Huck:

One can make a very strong case the first six holes at Bandon are superior to the first six you play at Pac Dunes.

In real terms -- the style and "presentation" is a big part of what makes people opt for one versus the other. It also helps some since Pac is about 500 yards shorter.

Somone has to tell me how Bandon is soooooooo weak architecturally? I easily concede, however, that the 18th at Bandon is a major league letdown when compared to the 18th at Pac.

« **Reply #14 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:40:29 PM »

Tom,

No worries. I promise my next starting of a post will not be "Why does everyone think Fazio sucks so much"...

« **Reply #15 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:42:36 PM »

Quote from: Matt_Ward on December 21, 2004, 04:39:57 PM

Huck:

One can make a very strong case the first six holes at Bandon are superior to the first six you play at Pac Dunes.

In real terms -- the style and "presentation" is a big part of what makes people opt for one versus the other. It also helps some since Pac is about 500 yards shorter.

Somone has to tell me how Bandon is soooooooo weak architecturally? I easily concede, however, that the 18th at Bandon is a major league letdown when compared to the 18th at Pac.

Matt, you are preaching to this choirboy - I concur 100%. I've never understood why PD is seen as so much better than BD.

Adding BT to the mix will be interesting... odds are the cognoscenti then make the mix 9 BT, 1 PD, 0 BD...

« **Reply #16 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:43:12 PM »

Quote from: Sean_Leary on December 21, 2004, 04:40:29 PM

Tom,

No worries. I promise my next starting of a post will not be "Why does everyone think Fazio sucks so much"...

Now that WOULD be good.

« **Reply #17 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:45:52 PM »

I prefer PD to BD, at a 7:3 ratio I would say. As I have stated before I think the one drawback to PD is the lack of crosswind shots compared to BD. And since the wind is a big factor at the Bandon courses I think that is significant.
I disagree with Tiger regarding average holes at PD. I think #14 par 3 is average, since it is only a wedge in. I would probably think differently if it was a mid-iron shot or more. I do like the green and surrounds.
When I go up in June it will be BT/BT, PD/PD, BT/BD. When I made reservations the lady was worried that I wasn't going to schedule any BD rounds. I can't imagine ever going there and not playing at least a round on BD.

« **Reply #18 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:50:33 PM »

I'd go 6-4 Pacific, maybe 7-3.
The best holes on both courses are outstanding, the difference to me is that Bandon has a few that are a little "less than", while Pacific didn't seem to have any holes that left me wanting.

Besides the holes at PD that get a lot of press, I think that #16 is flat out brilliant.

-Ted

« **Reply #19 on:** December 21, 2004, 04:51:38 PM »

Quote from: ed_getka on December 21, 2004, 04:45:52 PM

When I go up in June it will be BT/BT, PD/PD, BT/BD. When I made reservations the lady was worried that I wasn't going to schedule any BD rounds. I can't imagine ever going there and not playing at least a round on BD.

Anita Levrets?
And I had to change my trip up there, due to a family conflict that opening weekend. So I go the next week (June 9-12), and my rounds go BD, PD/BT, BD/PD, BT. Two of each... for now anyway... arrival earlier or staying later remains a possibility.

TH

« **Reply #20 on:** December 21, 2004, 05:01:23 PM »

Matt,
What are earth are you drinking out there in NJ?

The six hole thing is nuts just on the basis of #6 at Bandon which absolutely SUCKS (unless you are rating the view of the beach). Easily the worst par 3 on the property I have seen so far. I would give the first hole to PD, 2 to PD, 3 is a wash (although PD green and surrounds is superior) , 4 to BD, 5 to BD (but not by much because I think #5 on PD is a great par 3), #6 PD is one of my favorite short par 4's anywhere, and STOMPS #6 BD.

I would love to hear you spin the first 6 at BD being better.

Tom,
Too bad about the reschedule, I was looking forward to at least crossing paths up there.

« **Reply #21 on:** December 21, 2004, 05:01:43 PM »

I'd be 7-3, perhaps 6-4 for PD simply due to the incredible detailing around and within each green, but I think Bandon is quite good as well. I don't rank Bandon quite as high as some others, (I don't think it's modern Top 10, for instance), but it's a VERY good golf course.

I can't wait to hear the first reports from BT and how it measure up against what's there. Who am i kidding..., I can't wait to get back to see for myself.

« **Reply #22 on:** December 21, 2004, 05:08:30 PM »

Quote from: ed_getka on December 21, 2004, 05:01:23 PM

Matt,
What are earth are you drinking out there in NJ? The six hole thing is nuts just on the basis of #6 at Bandon which absolutely SUCKS (unless you are rating the view of the beach). Easily the worst par 3 on the property I have seen so far. I would give the first hole to PD, 2 to PD, 3 is a wash (although PD green and surrounds is superior) , 4 to BD, 5 to BD (but not by much because I think #5 on PD is a great par 3), #6 PD is one of my favorite short par 4's anywhere, and STOMPS #6 BD.
I would love to hear you spin the first 6 at BD being better.

Tom,
Too bad about the reschedule, I was looking forward to at least crossing paths up there.

Ed - well maybe it's for the best. Methinks you would have wanted no part of my architecturally apathetic, hard-drinking college buddies.

As for the comparisons of the first 6 holes, well... you have it 3-2 with one tie, in favor of PD. Seems to me that's pretty close.

I'd put it like this:

1 - tie (I like the opener at BD)
2 - PD
3 - tie
4 - BD
5 - BD
6 - PD

Now 6 PD is CLEARLY better than 6 BD, because I am with you, I put 6PD as one of the world's great short par fours.

But at least you can see the argument for the first six holes being better overall at PD, no? All one has to do is switch one hole in either of our assessments.

TH

« **Reply #23 on:** December 21, 2004, 05:15:28 PM »

Tom,
You are right, in no way is it a blowout. Until you get to 6 that is. I would say the only other place that PD significantly outpaces BD is on #2. I think someone could make a case for #1, 3, and 5 going either way.

« **Reply #24 on:** December 21, 2004, 05:18:20 PM »

Quote from: ed_getka on December 21, 2004, 05:15:28 PM

Tom,
You are right, in no way is it a blowout. Until you get to 6 that is. I would say the only other place that PD significantly outpaces BD is on #2. I think someone could make a case for #1, 3, and 5 going either way.

That's my take as well. Thus I can agree with Matt that one can make an argument that the first 6 at BD are superior. Not saying it's necessarily RIGHT, but I could see the argument.

Make it first 5 holes and one really has an argument.

News:

Sean Leary

THuckaby2

peter_p

THuckaby2

Tiger_Bernhardt

THuckaby2

Tiger_Bernhardt

THuckaby2

Michael Wharton-Palmer

Michael Wharton-Palmer

THuckaby2

Sean Leary

THuckaby2

Matt_Ward

Sean Leary

THuckaby2

THuckaby2

ed_getka

Ted Kramer

THuckaby2

ed_getka

Mike_Cirba

THuckaby2

ed_getka

THuckaby2