[Tony_Chapman]

That's wonderful. In this day of $325 to play #2 and $350 at Pebble and the God-awful amounts to play the "sister courses" this is the most refreshing thing I have seen in quite some time. Too bad I am an idiot, at best, and just realized it.

[Andy Hodson]

This thread may be the best illustration of how great Pac Dunes is...it makes Bandon Dunes seem  a little "pedestrian" by comparison.

But Bandon is not "pedestrian" at all. Its a damn fine golf course, and at least for me...about 4 shots harder than Pac.
That counts for something, I guess.

And this will tell you how good #4 at BD is...it is better than #4 at PD.

And am I missing something...#6 BD is not a good hole?

All that said, BD just misses being in PD's class due to, Imo, some so so holes (for arguments sake...#9, #13, and maybe #18...though I like 18 as sort of like the final slow down runway back into the house after the roller coaster ride just experienced). But the par 3s on the back side are all world.

It just may be that Pacific touches the soul a little more than Bandon. And I'd take Pacific if I just had to post a low score.

You know, on second thought, maybe the weakness at BD is the par 5s. The strength then would be the par 3s.

But, Bernhardt, the real question is...Tufted Puffin lounge or The Bunker?

[blasbe1]

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?

Without having the benefit of time to read this entire thread:

First play:  Pacific was just more memorable;

Second play:  Pacific is better routed, more exciting to play, I didn't know what my next shot would be on Pacific while on  Bandon I kind of ploded along.

Third play:  There was little difference.

Fourth play:  WE NEED A THIRD COURSE FOR PERSPECTIVE, BUT  
IF HISTORY'S WORTH A DAMB . . . it's all good.   DONT WORRY ABOUT WHICH IS BETTER . . . I doubt any of us are qualified to say, just go and go often, and remember that we've got a slight disadvantage in these things and REMEMBER:

THAT MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

 
 

[Paul_Turner]

Like most I prefer PD, but I think some here are too tough on BD.  

Rich G pointed out that the turf is better on PD.  And I agree, but I have no explanation why.

When I was last there,  David Kidd spoke at a Golf Week meeting and he was asked a question something like:  "what would you have done differently..."  and he replied "gone second".

I took that to mean two things:  firstly, he was really impressed with what Tom Doak and company had built in PD and he had learned a lot from their work.  And secondly, he had the tougher site.

[Robert Thompson]

Not to wade in too late on this one, but if Bandon has a real weakness, it is the finishing kick of 17 and 18, which doesn't really measure up to Pacific. However, I like 16 at Bandon, while I think 16 at Pacific is the one miss on the entire course.
Nonetheless, I didn't see the separation between the two as extreme as some have suggested. I also think that the routing for Pacific isn't as perfect as some have suggested -- there are some awkward walks between a couple of holes (11 and 12, if I recall) and I think nine is just average, especially to the lower green. But it is still one of the great accomplishments in modern golf architecture -- but then again, I think Bandon is in some ways as well.

Robert

[ian]

16 at Pac Dunes is one of my favourites and the 16th at Bandon Dunes is my least favourite on the property. I like Bandon a lot till 15 and don't care for any of the last three.

Pacific may not be perfect, but it still better than almost anything built in the last 40 years. The course remembers that "fun" is still an essential element in golf design.

I.A.

P.S. Robert must have taken the "clear" from his suppliers at BALCO again.

[JohnV]

Ian, that is interesting because I did my match play and Bandon was 1 up through 15 and lost the last 3 to lose 2-down.  Great minds think alike I guess.  I'm not terribly anti-16 at Bandon as I think there are a lot of different ways to play it from just crossing the chasm and having a blind second to trying to drive the green, but I love 16 at Pacific.

[Robert Thompson]

Mr. Andrew really has no idea what he is talking about. The 16th at Pacific is rather dull, especially given what it follows and leads towards. Of course his one-dimensional way of thinking means he can't appreciate the 16th at Bandon -- which has numerous options from tee to green. His issues with the hole might be due to the fact that as a left-handed golfer, he is simply worried about snapping it into the ocean.
I think the best way to play the hole is to simply bomb it slightly left of center, carrying it beyond the chasm.

The 17th at Bandon is the really odd one for me -- a 4-iron off the tee to avoid trouble and a massive green. The 18th is fine, but not outstanding -- so I understand why people think Pacific's finishing is stronger.

Robert

[Adam_Messix]

Robert--

I can understand your opinion about 16 at Pacific Dunes but have to totally disagree.  Having played it with both wind directions, I have to say that the hole is an exciting, interesting, and downright difficult short par four.  With the wind against, it's the kind of hole where a tee shot down the left close to the bunkers (and thereby leaving a more straight on angle to the green) is worth at least a half a shot.  Then you have to talk about the penalties for missing the green, particularly to the right down in the valley.  The last time there, my group that included all 5 or lower handicaps played the little stinker in 3-6-7-8.  Now downwind, the drive is critical as most drives are going to finish in the aforementioned greenside valley, leaving an even more difficult shot because you don't have the wind as a sort of backboard.  

If I were to make a constructive comment on 16 at Pacific, I think because of the number of balls that finish to the right of the green, there are going to be (and were) a lot of divots in a small area.  It also must be considered that players take 2, 3, or even 4 shots to reach the green from down there.  But this is a minor downer about an excellent hole.

I also liked 16 at Bandon, particularly from the abandoned far back tee.  My guess is that under certain wind conditions, that hole location behind the left bunker is inaccessable.  

Both courses at Bandon are super and Bandon Trails will make a great addition to the facility.  I can't wait to get back there.  If given 10 rounds (excluding the Sheep Ranch), I would probably go 4 rounds Pacific, 3 rounds at Bandon Trails, and 3 rounds at Bandon Dunes.  But if forced to juggle the rounds around, I would not be disappointed.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Adam;

What would those numbers be if the Sheep Ranch were included?

I'll tell you mine, if you tell me your's.  

[Robert Thompson]

So the 16th at Pacific has lots of fans.
I don't think it is a bad hole, but really doesn't present a lot of options. Your best bet is a three iron or three wood to the dip in the fairway and then a short iron to the green. The fairway surely has some interesting contours and the green is in an interesting location. But a great hole? I don't see it.
I actually only think marginally more of the 17th at Pacific -- though the 18th is all-world.

Robert

[THuckaby2]

Robert:

Ever play 16 PD in a summer wind, from the middle tees, which makes the green reachable?

It really is a GREAT hole like that.

Absent that it is a bit strange.  I still like it, but have a hard time calling it great.

Wind determines everything at PD and BD... #16 BD is stupid in summer wind, damn cool in no wind or winter wind....

TH

[Ted Kramer]

So the 16th at Pacific has lots of fans.
I don't think it is a bad hole, but really doesn't present a lot of options. Your best bet is a three iron or three wood to the dip in the fairway and then a short iron to the green. The fairway surely has some interesting contours and the green is in an interesting location. But a great hole? I don't see it.
I actually only think marginally more of the 17th at Pacific -- though the 18th is all-world.

Robert

I like #16 at PD better than #17.
And I agree, #18 is all-world.

-Ted

[Sean Leary]

Adam,

Wasn't the abandoned back tee a completely blind tee shot, where if it was into the wind, you had to lay up short of thye chasm?

Does anyone rember the hole before they cleared out all of the room left that there is now?  

How good of a spot would these two be for a US Am? Unreal.

[JohnV]

Sean,

We should get a good idea in 2007 when the US Mid-Amateur is played there.  I'm still wondering which course we are going to use for match play.  It will be an even tougher choice once the Trails opens.

[THuckaby2]

Sean,

We should get a good idea in 2007 when the US Mid-Amateur is played there.  I'm still wondering which course we are going to use for match play.  It will be an even tougher choice once the Trails opens.

That is a GREAT question... I guess the assumption has been that it would be PD for the match play... but add BT into the mix and whoa... one necessarily gets left out... This will be very interesting indeed.

TH

[Robert Thompson]

Interestingly, I played with a kid on a full golf scholarship to some Division 1 schiool in SC on our last day at Bandon, playing Bandon. He hit it prostigious distances and had a lot of game, though not the attitude to really excel. I was playing to scratch at the time and managed to beat him.
Anyway, the point was that Bandon was clearly four to five strokes tougher than Pacific. The kid shot in the sixites (as did I) in calm conditions at Pacific, but neither of us managed to break par at Bandon in calm condiitions the following day.
I would assume Bandon a very interesting test, even for some of the world's top amateur players.


R

[peter_p]

At a recent college tournament the winner shot 71-71 at Bandon Dunes (7040 yds), and the back tee on 16 was in use.
Players lost balls eveywhere, left, right, short and long.

[George Pazin]

Anyway, the point was that Bandon was clearly four to five strokes tougher than Pacific.

I've never really understood this sort of comment. The bottom line is still to shoot the lowest score possible. Whether it's par, 10 over or 10 under doesn't matter at all. One could just as easily say that there is more pressure to score low on PD. Seems like you're a little too fixated on par as a number.

[THuckaby2]

GP - I don't think Robert was too fixated on par at all... it's just a convenient reference.  Would it have been as useful to say "we shot in the 60s at PD, but couldn't get below 73 at BD"?  Sure, but that's a lot more words... In any case that's what I got out of his post... and that's why I understand his take that BD is 4-5 shots tougher.

And it should be...it is MUCH longer.

Of course "tougher" absolutely does not equal "better."

[Robert Thompson]

George: I couldn't have cared less if Bandon was a par 74, it still plays several shots tougher than Pacific. It isn't a comment on the quality of the golf course, just the difficulty.
I'm a bigger fan of Pacific, but I don't see the courses as far apart in quality as some. If it is a test of all the shots in the bag, and distance to boot, then Bandon would be the course.
If you are looking at aesthetics and a course formed around the classics, than Pacific would be best.
Of course, you should play them both and get a truly great golf experience....

Robert

[George Pazin]

Huck -

The problem is that I think too many do equate tougher with better. And I do think that too many are fixated with par. (I have no idea if either of these apply to RT, it just sounded that way to me.)

Would you describe a true par 70 course as 2 shots tougher than a true par 72? Is Rye 5 shots tougher than NGLA? Does that sort of comparison even have any meaning?

My point is that the only time score really matters is in competition and in competition, low score wins, whether it's par, 10 over or 10 under - or low score on the hole if it's match play. I saw the 12th at Oakmont won more than a few times with pars and bogeys during the Amateur. Eagles are not rare on the 13th and 15th during the Masters (at least prior to Hootiezation ). Does that make the 12th at Oakmont 1-2 shots tougher? What does that comparison mean? All three - the 12th at Oakmont, the 13th at ANGC & the 15th at ANGC are outstanding holes, IMHO.

Toughness has probably damaged more courses in the US than any other concept - except maybe fairness!

[THuckaby2]

George:  we were talking about the place in the context of it hosting USGA championships.

So simmer down.

 

[Tim_Weiman]

My take on Bandon vs Pacific comes down to something simple.

I always suggest to folks who have not yet been there to play Bandon first. If they do so, they are likely to really enjoy the course.

Playing Pacific first isn't a good idea. The likely result is to make Bandon seem less enjoyable.

[THuckaby2]

redanman:

I can buy all that.  Maybe not agree to the degree of separation between the courses and I could care less what architects' courses it should be compared to, but buy the logic anyway.

So if you have 10 rounds to divide between the two courses, how many do you play on each?

TH

ps - you of all people might be interested in the specifics of my injury.. fracture in the hook of hamate.  Doctor thinks it will reattach, but we await results of CT scan next week.  Surgery is possible.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()