[David Wigler]

Anthony,

Again not meant as a criticism of C&C (Their bunker work at Cuscowilla is pure genius) nor of the decision (DeVries would have been my choice among the ones I know Keiser interviewed) but have you seen Old Memorial?  I think it is pretty darn special.  That type of course would fit at Bandon and I think Smyers would really make it special.

[CHrisB]

The announcement will be made after the British Open...and Crenshaw is here (at Bandon Dunes) now...hmmm....

[DMoriarty]

They are waiting until the end of the Open because they really want to bring some star power to the project and will announce the winner of the Open as the architect of the third course.  That way, if they attach a big name to the course, maybe they will finally be able to sell some hotel rooms and fill their tee sheet.  

Gee I really hope it is Tiger.  Since courses are being made to fit his game, we might as well go to the horse's mouth.  

[Jonathan Cummings]

You know, I almost wish Josh and Mike would stop at the two and a half courses they currently have.  Do what they wish with the little Sheep Ranch - keep it as their private preserve, and maintain the two marquee courses for the public golfers.  

The more courses they build the more popular this place will become and the more excuse the casual golfer will be able to make to go to Bandon.  I just don't want to see the place overdeveloped.  Thoughts of a 3 acre practice putting green with 500 people milling around and a Pinehurst-type 91st hole pub is anathema to me.

JC

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Jonathan,
Understanding your meaning, I tend to be a little more out of the box on the subject. The entire Bandon Dunes complex deserves another golf course, maybe even two more, simply because it can hopefully serve as a model for future resorts of its nature.

What is wrong with the casual golfer being able to go see how golf really should be played in terms of walking, design, as well as the incredible personality the resort and its employees have? You have to credit Mike and his quest to build a links that offered golf as it was meant to be played, as well as the humble people that work there and enliven the experience with their spirit.

Shouldn't this be a great way for the "casual" golfer to learn? I hope so, because of all of the SoCal's that go up there, that I would consider "casual" are part of the pieces that are making Bandon such a success. They love the place, and the place loves them back, and in turn, they will return again and again.

And we also cannot forget how all of it has boulstered the sagging economy of an Oregon lumber town. Hopefully that alone is reason to see that sometimes it is best for all to realize what the big picture is in Oregon: to realize "our" contempt for the "casual" and how they perceive the Game. Hopefully the Bandon model can only infuse them with the knowledge needed to make the Game further prosper.

Cheers

[Jonathan Cummings]

Tommy - all you say is true.  My thoughts are more musings and selfish in nature - I want to preserve the same feelings I have gotten on my previous 4 visits.  I fear that won't be possible the more Bandon is built.

J

[TEPaul]

David Wigler:

I see you've said you feel that Coore & Crenshaw would be unwilling to take the project for the next course at Bandon (probably for the reason of being unwilling to have whatever they might do there compared to the likes of Pacific Dunes). I don't think you should be so quick to make that assumption. I dont believe Coore & Crenshaw feel that way at all.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Jon,
I feel quite the opposite.

I think that what they have done there is such a positive in educating the unknowing masses, it gives us even more reason to return. Newer courses means that it will relieve the burdon on the other courses that are being taxed in daily play. I don't see them getting any relief or rest.

As you know, the Sheep Ranch is Phil Freidman's course, and I don't think it will ever be "completed" because it goes against the mold of what it is meant to be. I don't see it as part of Bandon Dunes either, simply because it is Phil's Toy. However, the logging town area of the property thats South of the Woodlands, that I can see will someday be a golf course. It has it written all over it.

[Joel_Stewart]

I dont believe Coore & Crenshaw feel that way at all.

I know someone that spoke with Bill Coore two weeks ago and he said they would love to do the project so I'm confused.

I did here (probably a rumor on this web site) the third course is going to have cart paths so its possible C&C would not want to be involved in that aspect?

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I made this post weeks back on the CC situation. They would like the job, but are not happy with the site which they would have to work with. Therefore, the negotiation is not over desire to do the job, butwhat property they would have to work with. ie they have no desire to have the number 3 course there. I heard in Scotland, at a club his father in law is a member of  that our own Todd E. is being given a shot at this project as well.

[Forrest Richardson]

Anthony,

I've been listening in to this discussion and it is fascinating gossip. Your comment, "...Smyers' Bunker lines are too hard and less natural looking....to 'Americanized.'" has me wondering whether you realize that Bandon is, in fact, in America?

I find it very entertaining that many golfers — especially architectural purists — from America visit the UK and, when the happen upon a course which borrows American traits, they feel it is a sell out and unworthly of much at all.

Now, reverse this...consider the British or Scotish golfer visiting America...

I am very sensitive to the fact that Bandon is a seaside/linksland course, so it is understandable that this magic place began with a hommage to a linksland venue. But, I'd be cautious about continuing that approach — there is plenty good about the American influence in golf architecture which can be embraced at Bandon...and I hope it comes out in this third course.

[Holyhead_ferry_1]

Lynn
I agree with your comments Steve is a good architect, as are the others in contention, (I wish I'd had a chance) It is important to American's to develope an American links, a style in the modes of the National and Shinnecock.

It matters not who the final choice is there are two courses already in situ and the third I hope will complement the previous.
The biggest point here is that the Architect does not try to out do the previous courses or try to stamp his authority at Bandon but let the land dictate greatness, if that is obsreved then the accolades and success will follow.

As on so many projects with more than one course it becomes a battle to out do the previous architect and subsequently the whole point of the exercise is missed.

From my visit and the nature of the terrain there, the golf course should fit the land nicely and there is great room for something special with a little imagination and thought.
Regards
Ian

[David Wigler]

Tom,

I have never spoken with either C or C, so I am expressing a pure guess with no background knowledge.  I simply cannot believe that having a reputation that exceeds Doak and Kidd, they would agree to build a course on a VASTLY inferior piece of land, that has no chance to be better regarded than Doak or Kidd's and yet will be compared to Doak and Kidd's.  I could clearly be wrong.  If they have the guts to take the project, good for them and good for golf (Although I still would have kept with the theme of lesser known architects and given DeVries the shot).

[Paul Richards]

David:

I tend to agree with your assessment.  My understanding is that the third course will be through the woods, with no ocean-front property at all.  Why would they want to be a "third wheel" at this property?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

David,

First, I want to address something with you......

You are on for a really good bottle of vino and dinner when you say, "I said it before and I will say it again - No F'n way that C&C take this project!!

While the other property might not be as glamorous as the other two, what makes you thnk that it is vastly inferior?  Have you actually seen that property up close to make that determination?  The reason why I ask is that I have, and personally I don't find it as bad as your making it out to be. I mean, do you actually think Mike Keiser would be taking a risk to build a course that is so VASTLY inferior to the courses at Bandon? I mean, they haven't even turned the first shovel, and it seems as if your signing the death certificate pretty quick, especially when you say, "they would agree to build a course on a VASTLY inferior piece of land, that has no chance to be better regarded than Doak or Kidd's"

Also, Where is everybody getting the idea that Mike Keiser is only utilizing unknown architects for Bandon Dunes? Has he ever said he was doing this? I don't remember anytime at all Mike Keiser saying he was sticking to any kind of formula. If so, it surely wasn't a Bandon where he was taking a very high risk to build a golf course(s) in a state he lives some +/- 2000 miles from. Tell me what kind of formula is that?

Maybe it would be better for Mike Kaiser to just teleport Cascata to that piece of property, after all, it is "bulletproof" correct? I will say this about that though, what is Catherine Zeta Jones doing with that old man when she could be with me?

[Holyhead_ferry_1]

Tommy Tommy
I could tell you some things about Cahtrine Zeta Jones Boyo(Welsh like her see), I'll take the bet the C&C golf factory take the Bandon job Silva and Smyers are good but as you said C&C are out of thier mind but will do the job. Ego is a funny thing.
We will soon find out reading the messages earlier someone said Crenshaw was at the Lodge so the cat will soon be out. And bye the way thanks for the vote of confidence earlier.
Regards
Ian

[ForkaB]

Tommy

Good points.  I will add that I personally think that the land on which Friar's Head was built was significantly less attractive (for a golf course) than the land on which both Bandon courses were built.  C&C (and B) seemed to do a reasonably good job there.........

[TEPaul]

In my opinion, it's real hard to try to predict what Coore & Crenshaw will or won't take on as a project. If you analyze their recent inventory of courses they've sort of been all over the place, picking up probably one of the world's most potential sites (Sand Hills) and some of the most difficult too (Talking Stick) and the small pre-routed Easthampton. Kapalua too as dramatic and pretty as it is must have been a real difficult exercise in routing.

Probably the added problem with them and their potential projects is the fact that they've dedicatedly limited their production to only two courses (three at most) at the same time. Some might think that's easier, and in a way it is once the projects get set in motion but with that few if one or both fall out or get delayed, as many of their projects have, they can get some unwanted downtime despite the overall demand or apparent demand for their services.

I think they can be a bit site-sensitive (potential) but if one were to try to figure out how or why it would be almost impossible. I think they're real interested in stretching themselves to try to do different things too--in different enviroments, different locations, looks and styles.

It certainly does NOT seem to me that they're out to hit a homerun each time out, just to do projects that really interest them architecturally whatever that may be at the time.

I know they'd like to do a project in Philadephia someday if something interesting comes up and it fits into their two at a time schedule without being impractical. Scheduling is tough though with pemitting and such as one can see from the history of Friar's Head (if Friar's had gotten out of the box on time they may've never done Easthampton). They could have done Philadelphia Cricket Club's second course, and I'm sure they would have but it didn't work with their schedule at that time and they passed on that one for that reason.

Basically I doubt they're very interested in doing a course that has a massive housing component going in. I believe they considered doing a course in Scotland that had incredible land for golf but the fact that it was about next door to the the Arctic Circle probably made them pass.

Opportunities that are interesting for whatever reason seem to inspire them although it's hard to figure out what that may be. In a general sense I think the thing that interests Coore most is "difference" in architecture! All I know is if I ever had a great site they'd be the first ones I'd call--every time!

[Jonathan Cummings]

C&C are generally known to work on only a single project at a time.  I don't know their schedule but this might have also impact(ed) their decision.

JC

[David Wigler]

David,

...While the other property might not be as glamorous as the other two, what makes you thnk that it is vastly inferior?  Have you actually seen that property up close to make that determination?  The reason why I ask is that I have, and personally I don't find it as bad as your making it out to be. I mean, do you actually think Mike Keiser would be taking a risk to build a course that is so VASTLY inferior to the courses at Bandon? I mean, they haven't even turned the first shovel, and it seems as if your signing the death certificate pretty quick, especially when you say, "they would agree to build a course on a VASTLY inferior piece of land, that has no chance to be better regarded than Doak or Kidd's"...

Maybe it would be better for Mike Kaiser to just teleport Cascata to that piece of property, after all, it is "bulletproof" correct? I will say this about that though, what is Catherine Zeta Jones doing with that old man when she could be with me?

Tommy,

I know our bet is on.  

To me, it is a case of "It is what it is."  I am not saying the course will be bad.  There are brilliant parkland courses in the US.  Heck, if C&C can build the equivalent of Castle Pines, Valhalla or Cog Hill #4, they will be universally praised.  That written, those three parkland courses would all be viewed as the weakest link at Bandon.  The problem they face is twofold.  1. Parkland land is VASTLY inferior to the phenomenal seaside links property given to Kidd and Doak.  2. Kidd and Doak did great jobs (There was no Art Hills wasting the piece of great property like at Bay Harbor).  Given that and C&C's reputation as superior to Kidd and Doak, why would they take a project that even if they nailed and was put in the top 100, it would be viewed as the weak course at Bandon?

I hope I am wrong!

[TEPaul]

DavidW and TommyN;

This is simply idle speculation on my part but what the Hell. I've never met Mike Keiser but obviously he's a man with a good deal of interesting foresight with an innovative side.

Perhaps, with his third course he should go for something quite different at Bandon. And that just might be something very different than Bandon Dunes and Pacific Dunes.

It seems to me that the idea with the first two courses was to create something that could accomodate recreational golf quite well and also somewhat the better player too. I don't know Bandon Dunes as well as Pacific Dunes but I do recall Tom Doak seemed a bit concerned in the beginning how Pac Dunes would stand up to the better or very good player.

Perhaps, the third course should be designed as an out and out championship style golf course to soley fill that bill. Maybe along the lines of what the Black is to the other Bethpage courses.

I have no idea what the demand is at a place like Bandon for three courses of the same basic application--eg the recreational golfer but I'd assume that might be a bit much for the demand in an area as remote as the Bandon Dunes resort.

But an out and out championship course may fill a supply and demand bill out there very nicely particularly if the course could come off well as a championship tournament venue in the future. If that worked it might be a better justification to increase the accomodations at the Bandon resort too. I understand that Keiser does own a good deal of excess land out there too.

And if that were to be done and the mission for the third course it could give whomever does it a certain amount of latitude architecturally. It could give somebody like Coore & Crenshaw the opportunity to do something very different in architecture for the future.

My recommendation for them would be to really use width and center features to create highly strategic golf--maybe even along the lines of TOC--something that seems to have been so little done in the history of architecture despite the fact that the belief is that TOC is the prototype for golf architecture. Smyers, on the other hand, has some very interesting ideas on architecture to counter the excessive distances of today and the future. He spoke a good deal on that subject at the original Archipalooza at Bandon Dunes.

I didn't pay much attention to the land I assume will be used for the third course but I'm assuming it's off the the left, or east of #14 and #15 at Pacific Dunes. I would certainly not call that land a potential site for a "parkland" style golf course. It should probably be something open along the lines of the other two and what seems to be the nature of the land and the environment out there and the unfettered wind out there is potentially one of architecture's biggest assets.

Something out and out championship would seem to be the way to go on the third course and with C&C they might be able to come up with something in the championship style that would be very interesting--perhaps even unique.

Championship style architecture sometimes looks like a low popularity application but history shows us otherwise. There's the popularity and fame of Bethpage Black, of course, and there's also the popularity and fame of Pinehurst #2.

Mike Keiser should read in Ross's "Golf Has Never Failed Me" the sections on Pinehurst #2 when first built by Ross as a championship course. The applicable sections are on p 73 (bunkering) and beginning of p 177 (Pinehurst).

Ross mentions that when #2 was proposed as a much more difficult championhip style design everyone said that no one would use it and that #1 would continue to be overcrowded. In fact it turned out to be the other way around!

Again, my recommendation for the third course for both Mike Keiser and particularly the architects who do the third course would be don't even try to compete with the first two courses that're there. On the third one go for an entirely different application and the out and out "championship" vein would seem to be just the way to go!

[Matthew Schulte]

It was my understanding that the land to be used was to the south of 18 on Bandon and inland in the trees and dunes.

I like the idea of a demanding treelined course the problem is what can be done visually to get the attention of Joe 6 pack.  I'm sure Redanman will say I am too hung up on the look of bunkering, however, I would love to see something like the bunkering scheme at Metropolitan Club in Melbourne.  Bunkers cut right out of the green with no fringe or rough between the bunker and the green.  Big, elevated, fast greens with big contours that can feed balls off the greens and into these "sandbelt" style bunkers or onto tightly mowed chipping areas.  Is that style of bunkering simply too costly to maintain for resort play?  Certainly this specific type of bunkering would be new and different for Coore & Crenshaw.  They seem to have some of the best bunkering artists in the business and could probably pull that off.  This would indeed be very different from the original two.

Now we can get an authentic taste of the UK and Australia all on one site.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

David, You keep on mentioning inland, and while there are some holes inland, I still fail to see how its going to impede the success of the third course. Maybe it may have something to do with the fact I have seen the abilities of Bill Coore to TRANSITION from dunes to open Heath-like meadow, back to dunes, back to meadow, back to dunes (!) at a certain undisclosed course in Bating Hollow.

But The Woodlands doesn't have to be like anything else you've have ever seen to describe it, simply because Bill Coore is the best for creating something of its own indivudual character that may or may not have ever been visited in the schools of golf architecture. As Tom Paul has properly shown, he has grasped every school you can think of from the horrid but spectacular Plantation; the flat and featureless Talking Stick North and South; The never before used Sandhills of Nebraska, to two very different sites in the Mecca of American Golf on Long Island.

Imagine going from woodland to sandy ocean dunes , and back again, or ocean dunes to woodlands to ocean dunes again; or even just a few holes in the woods, and all ocean dunes!?!  I just don't think it is fair to speculate what Bill Coore is doing, especially if you don't know what he is doing. And.......If it wasn't going to be good enough, I just don't think he would take the project, which might be getting back to the point of where you are at, but the fact remains, your going to be buying me dinner!

Also, I want to disagree with Redanman COMPLETELY on the character of the bunkers and what they should or shouldn't look like. The point is that they should resemble their natural surroundings or embrace the quirky ideas of Nature that make then totally unfomulaic. Even the National Golf Links of America does this, despite what many may think.

Just think of that image of RCD we placed here a few months ago. Which bunker would you want to be gobbled-up and swallowed by knowing you made a error in your shot?



Hallelujah!

[bakerg]

M_Shulte,

I don't think the ground in Bandon (or anywhere in America) is suited for the Bunkers you find in Australia.  I believe it has to do with the type of grass that grows there that allows the bunkers' edges to be that sharp.  I am with you though.  I would love to see those bunkers used in Bandon, but I don't believe that it would work.

As for the whole debate about who the 3rd architect is going to be might be moot given the fact that there is much more land at Bandon for several more architects to have their crack at this place.

I am just wondering how long before another developer decides to build in one of the surrounding towns to scoop up some of the overflow from Bandon.  Similar to The Bull near Whistling Straits.  I have this feeling that the state of Oregon will allow the continuation of golf course development in their state given how huge Bandon Dunes has been for the local economy of Bandon and Coos Bay.  

[David Wigler]

Tommy,

This is truly a win/win.  If I am wrong on my gut, the penalty is that I get to play a C&C the next time I go to Bandon and get a night of dinner and vino with yourself.

What is my downside?

PS - Have you played any of DeVries work yet?  Would you have given him the shot?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()