It is easier...Is that it..

John:

It has way more variety of golf holes.

Kiawah is a great course, but not every hole has a character of its own ... mostly because there is only 10-12 feet of elevation change on the whole property.  Still, that makes a lot of the holes feel similar.

Without playing either course I know for sure I would rather look down at the ocean from 50 and 100 foot cliffs then be almost level with it..

Yes, John, that's it for some people.  But get back to variety.

I'm not sure I can agree with the variety argument when Kiawah is far more elastic.  I would think Kiawah would be better suited for hosting the National Blind Golfer Championship and then the US Open on consectutive days then Pacific..

I think the far more appealing/influential definition of variety from one hole to the next within a given setup, not the elasticity of the target-skill level of a chosen setup from one day to the next.

I've not played nor seen Kiawah anywhere other than TV or photos, so I can't comment on comparisons between the two...but I believe your definition of variety, though certainly plausible, is not the same most others would state.

I had the pleasure of North Carolina golf in May of this year, including the Ocean Course.
I found the low country beauty stunning, especially including Kiawah, and the site of the Ocean Course possibly unparalled.....open, raw, wild.  Great Stuff!

My experience of the Ocean Course was mixed.  We took a cart, and if I had to do it over would have walked, for riding and experiencing the layout that way was disappointing....the paths are almost completely below the level of the fairways; from that vantage point you have to climb up steep slopes just to see each hole, and riding left me missing the chance to walk down the middle of the holes and thereby really get a good look at the strategy, the construction, the layout of each hole as it unfolds in the playing of it. While I was glad to get the chance to play there, at the end I felt cheated out of a real opportunity to experience Pete Dye's greatness.  It was a real guess where our shots went, so to grab several clubs, run up onto the fairways, search out shots, worry about the pace of play, etc., all took away from the majesty and excellence that is there.

The turf around the greens was grainy bermuda and precluded any runup shots.  The greens were bumpy and slow, without any doubt the worst greens of the 16 rounds that week (mostly in Myrtle Beach area but including Turtle Point and the Nicklaus course at Kiawah).  We were told when we were ready to play that the paspalum greens on the course were "good, much better than the practice green" but that certainly wasn't the case.  I was left wondering how the PGA Seniors, scheduled for next year in the same month we played, would fare with a stimp of 6 or 7 and truly bumpy surfaces.

Pac Dunes on the other hand?  Just completely awesome in all it's linksy and great ways....how does one compare them?
Tight turf, ground game, natural features, great variety, etc, etc.  Pure fun.

Tom

John:

It has way more variety of golf holes.

Kiawah is a great course, but not every hole has a character of its own ... mostly because there is only 10-12 feet of elevation change on the whole property.  Still, that makes a lot of the holes feel similar.

Tom, With all due respect I disagree about holes feeling the same at Kiawah. Not once have I felt bored on Kiawah Ocean nor have I looked back and felt a need for more variety... elevation challenges not withstanding.

I do not doubt that Pacific is MORE varied (have not had the pleasure as yet) but also do not believe it wholly accurate to label Kiawah Ocean as overall lacking in variety.

Tom- I think you mean clubhouse not hotel.  I was out there on Tuesday and they are a long way from finished.  I played with a resident and he said it will probably get finished the week prior to the event.  

As for Kiawah vs. Pacific Dunes.  It is not even a fair contest.  I would say there are only two holes on Kiawah that could keep up with Pacific.  #14 and #15.  Its a good course but shouldn't ever be mentioned in the same breath as Pacific.

Nice Geoffrey...I couldn't agree more, but then again I have never played the Honors Course...even though I can't imagine liking it more than Kiawah just cause I'm use to that type of scenery.

I see Kiawah Mike lurking...what took so long.

Bill, Bill,Bill.  I didn't MAKE you choose at all; you made a statement that one was better than the other and I just called you on it.

Heck yeah, all of these courses are great.  But if we just left it at that, we'd have pretty short and boring conversations.

 

Both are fantastic in their own ways.  I liked Pacific better because is was completely natural.  You could see there was not a lot of ground moved to build the course.  Fits me eye!

For me personally, BD trumps Kiawah because it just looks so much better--so much more natural. I've never liked the manufactured and highly shaped look of most all Pete Dye's courses but any architect, including Tom Doak, has got to pull out all his best stuff to make BD or any other of his courses play as strategically challenging through and through as many of Pete's courses do, particularly for good players. Pete may have some of the most razor thin margins for error in the entire history of golf course architecture and sometimes I think he throws in a bit of over-kill in a penal sense and I'd be happy to give you a couple of examples of that at Mystic Rock where we just held the Pa State Open.

They call it the Ocean course at Kiawah but I don't remember the ocean ever coming into play.  I know they changed some of the holes to get closer, but when I played it back in 1998, the holes were set pretty far back.  Still a great course, but not in the same league as Pacific Dunes, in my opinion.