News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2006, 11:48:39 AM »
Mike:

Put you on the spot -- do you have any preferences for the courses you listed ?

What course(s) in Ireland would you compare Ballyneal to ?

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2006, 12:05:30 PM »
Just need to add one more item on my thoughts of
Ballyneal -- kudos to owner Rupert O'Neal for the vision he has brought forward because he truly understands the core ingredients of what golf can and should be about.

Ballyneal clearly provides that kind of special connection that far too few courses I play provide.

Mike Policano

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2006, 12:14:04 PM »
BN felt like a longer version of the Island Club without the blind shots and like the back nine of Tralee, without the water in each case.

As you know, there is something for everyone in those four great courses.  SH and WH were in super condition, which one would expect for more mature courses.  DR and BN are new borns with eye-popping potential.

Preference -  hmmmm - strictly personal from a lefty - BN by a nose.




Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2006, 12:23:56 PM »
I too was extremely impressed by Ballyneal, but I have to differ with anyone who claims that it "feels" like Ireland.  There's no ocean, it's located in high desert--while it may play like an Irish course, it definitely doesn't "feel" like Ireland as far as the intangibles go.  Sorry if I'm quibbling, but I wouldn't want people expecting an "Irish experience" because Ballyneal doesn't offer that.  

Matt W,

I'm curious--to what extent, if any, is Ballyneal's length a factor in why you say it's more challenging than Pacific Dunes?  I don't know what Ballyneal is on the card from the back tees, but it has to be much longer than PD.  

BTW, count me among the people who think you underestimated #14.  It's a fine hole.  Excellent write-up overall, though.

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #29 on: August 28, 2006, 12:46:04 PM »
Tim:

Don't agree with you / re: 14th hole. Look at that hole and stack it up against the likes of three other -400 yard par-4 holes you play at Ballyneal -- the 1st, 7th, 9th and 12th holes. The 14th is simply OK and offers little of the complexity / options for the better player. No doubt it may intrique the high handicap type but I have shared my thoughts on the holes in question and see the 3rd and 14th holes as a bit of a downer when compared to others of similar length / par designation.

Pac Dunes is a great layout to play but I have to say a good bit of what is there rests more with the "look" than the "strategic elements" which are more prevalent & complex at Ballyneal. Tom Doak is now including more and more of the tactical dimensions in shot values and I can see that with my round at Ballyneal and on my walk of the Sebonack property.

Pac Dunes is also shorter and dependent upon the wind which often blows - and blows hard at times -- with the Pac Ocean alongside. Frankly, I believe too many raters provide brownie points because the ocean is there. Give Ballyneal an ocean next to it and the place would be even higher on the assessment level for many.

Tim -- if the wind drops to the 5-10 mph range Pac Dunes is a far easier course to negotiate. What I said was that I see more of an evolution of the Doak design philosophy at Ballyneal and that Pac Dunes doesn't beat out the Holyoke design from the concept of its core site, the sophistication of its routing and the sheer intensity of the shot values faced.

To be clear -- I am not suggesting that Pac Dunes is less of a golf couse -- only that Ballyneal is more.

FYI -- Ballyneal is listed from the tips at 7,147 yards.

If memory serves, I believe Pac Dunes is just around 6,700 yards from the tips - although that yardage # might be higher when you add the "hidden" tees in the mix.

Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #30 on: August 28, 2006, 01:18:12 PM »
Matt,

Sometimes I struggle to decode your terminology--"tactical dimensions in shot values," "concept of its core site," "sheer intensity of the shot values faced"--does this mean that you prefer the more undulating site at Ballyneal and enjoy that Ballyneal is probably more demanding than Pacific Dunes?  I don't doubt that your terms mean something to you--I just wonder whether they have much independent meaning.  

In comparing Ballyneal to Pacific Dunes, I would say that the biggest difference was that, at Pacific, it is mostly the greens and their surrounds that dictate strategy off the tee and in the fairway, but, at Ballyneal, because of the prevalence of uneven lies, you have to take greater care with the positioning of your ball.  The greens at Ballyneal are also more undulating than at Pacific, but I thought the greater difference was in the pitch of the fairways.  

Re: #14, it's a birdie hole, which doesn't mean that it's a lesser hole.  The player, including the "better" one, has options--how much club to hit, how far right to go.  Personally, I prefer it to #9, but would definitely give the nod to #7 and #12 over it.  

mike_malone

  • Total Karma: 3
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #31 on: August 28, 2006, 01:26:50 PM »
 I looked up the word "brilliance" in Webster's. It used the words "distinctive" and "striking". Aren't many of these recent designs beginning to look a little similar ? Do they play similarly as well ?
AKA Mayday

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #32 on: August 28, 2006, 01:30:23 PM »
Tim:

Allow me to decode my lexicon -- what I mean is that Doak is now being able to effect the nature of what better players are capable in doing. His designs have become more sophisticated in dealing with the wherewithal better players can deliver when playing.

Too much of the focus here on GCA is spent on specific "looks" and I don't doubt the considerable talent that Doak and his team have in that area. However, what makes the Sebonack marriage so unique and fruitful is that you see a collaboration of the game's greatest thinker (and still the best player for now) in concert with one of the very best natural creators for the way golf courses should appear.

My higher estimation of Ballyneal stems from several items. Take one for now -- you don't need wind to make Ballyneal play a certain way. The design elements are present. If you have wind then adjustments, sometimes significant ones, will need to be made.

Tim -- re-read you second paragraph of your last post -- all of those items you mentioned stem from an evolutoin of the architect himself to include such dimensions into the experience. I see that as a real plus because it means Doak as a designer now sees the critical nature in tying all the parts together. Keep in mind what "looks" good for many is nothing more than a talking point for the better player -- it has little impact on how they play the hole / course. At Ballyneal I could clearly see the rise of the strategic / tactical qualities I mentioned.

We will agree to disagree on #14 -- although I appreciate your agreement with me on it versus the likes of #1 and #12.

Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #33 on: August 28, 2006, 01:52:13 PM »
Matt,

Your thesis is interesting--that Doak is giving greater consideration to the better player in designing courses.  I wonder, though, whether, at Ballyneal, some of what you are ascribing to Doak and Co. was actually just the product of the site.  In other words, maybe it wasn't designed to be more difficult; maybe it came out that way because of the severity of the dunes/chop hills.  Obviously, I can't answer this, but someone on this site could . . . . At Pacific, I'm guessing that Doak had to exercise some restraint because of the winds.  Even you would have to agree that the 6700+ yards at Pacific give the better player all he can handle when the afternoon, 3-4 club winds pick up.  


wsmorrison

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #34 on: August 28, 2006, 01:54:11 PM »
"Allow me to decode my lexicon -- what I mean is that Doak is now being able to effect the nature of what better players are capable in doing. His designs have become more sophisticated in dealing with the wherewithal better players can deliver when playing."

You are using the wrong code book, Matt.  What the heck does all this mean?

"My higher estimation of Ballyneal stems from several items. Take one for now -- you don't need wind to make Ballyneal play a certain way. The design elements are present. If you have wind then adjustments, sometimes significant ones, will need to be made.

Tim -- re-read you second paragraph of your last post -- all of those items you mentioned stem from an evolutoin of the architect himself to include such dimensions into the experience. I see that as a real plus because it means Doak as a designer now sees the critical nature in tying all the parts together. Keep in mind what "looks" good for many is nothing more than a talking point for the better player -- it has little impact on how they play the hole / course. At Ballyneal I could clearly see the rise of the strategic / tactical qualities I mentioned. "

Huh?  There are a lot of words (and some that aren't words) but in the sequence you put them they seem to have little meaning.  How many monkeys do you have over there typing your stuff?  I think you need a couple of million more and maybe Mike Malone's Webster's Dictionary as well.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2006, 08:38:12 PM by Wayne Morrison »

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #35 on: August 28, 2006, 04:35:09 PM »
Wayne:

Simply send $4.95 to my home address and I can provide you with the complete Ward lexicon golf dictionary -- no money back if less than satisfied. ;D

Tim:

Yes, in a word. I see Doak now being very conscious in tying all the ends together. For the pursists who fell in love with Pac Dunes I can surely understand their fascination with the place and I can see how Doak spent his initial time with harboring more time an dattention on these types of players. However, I think the closeness of the ocean and the playability of the design to their particular level of play is what makes it so grand for many purists.

It's always interesting when the better players are quizzed and they will generally say they like both Pac Dunes and Pebble Beach but the latter is the better test of golf.

For the stronger better player the design options at Pac Dunes are present on a number of holes but not as complete or thorough as I found at Ballyneal.

I see the evolution of Doak design to fully tie together the complete package. At Ballyneal, I believe he had a better site -- I also see a much more enriched routing that never allows the course to lower itself no matter the wind direction or velocity.

Tim -- I would not couch the Doak movement as "giving greater consideration" but more towards an understanding in his final design on how better players approach playing the game with today's clubs. I think that Doak gained some invaluable info from working with Jack at Sebonack because of the manner by which he approaches his more recent efforts.

Let me attack the "site" aspect of your post. The site alone at Ballyneal wasn't going to create the kind of holes that are there. This idea that holes are just there is closer to Disneyland thinking than reality. One has to see what is possible and how to tie the whole package together. No doubt the Ballyneal site is a very special place. But it took the hand of a craftsman like Doak and his team to bring that to the maximum.

The Doak team routed the course with the understanding in acheiving some sort of balance no matter if you face the more prevailing SW wind or you get the opposite direction during the off-months or during that particular odd day.

Look at how the long par-4's play out. The 2nd, 17th and 18th play in roughly the same direction -- the 6th and 10th go the opposite way and the long 13th is sort of a cross situation. I like the way that was done because it keeps the course playing at a high level.

Tim -- I never downplayed the potential wind gusts at Pac Dunes but if a course hangs its entire hat on wind velocity then its true design is really being bolstered by an unpredictable factor. That's no different than when rough is used as a design crutch.

The aspect of Ballyneal is that even with NO wind the totality of the design is well crafted. Clearly, the wind can blow quite hard at Holyoke as well and when that happens the player needs to make serious adjustments because unlike Pac Dunes the Ballyneal layout is much longer and frankly, IMHO, more tenacious on the requirements off the tee.

Let me also point out that the routing for Pac Dunes follows a general direction -- the holes go either north or south. At Ballyneal, the property takes you to all corners and you will have situations where crosswinds become a major item to deal with when playing.

Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #36 on: August 28, 2006, 05:13:01 PM »
Matt,

Let me comment on two things.  First, I didn't mean to imply that the course at Ballyneal was sitting there for Doak and Co. to find--not at all.  What I meant was that the topography at Ballyneal is obviously more undulating and, because of the uneven lies and greater movement in the land, I think it's a factor in why Ballyneal may be more difficult than Pacific Dunes.

Second, I'll take issue with your comment that relying on the wind at Pacific Dunes means that the "design is really being bolstered by an unpredictable factor."  In fact, in my experience, the winds at Bandon are quite predictable--1-2 clubs in the morning and 3-4 clubs in the afternoon (no matter the direction).  

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #37 on: August 28, 2006, 05:31:33 PM »
Tim:

C'mon partner you have more qualifications than the folks who put out cancer drugs. What is the tap dance about Ballyneal "maybe" being more difficult than Pac Dunes? There's no doubt in my mind it is. Maybe the 3-4 club wind is influencing your thoughts on this one. Do you think there is calm air in Holyoke or that it follows a set formula ?

Keep in mind it's not just the difficult meter at Ballyneal -- it's about being ahead of Pac Dunes from a site aspect, routing and shot values sides. You have not addressed any of these items or put forward a compelling counterpoint.  

Tim -- are you saying that Pac Dunes is the better overall course ?

Please don't play dodge ball because I see the Colorado layout ahead of the Oregon gem for the reasons I have cited. I know many people don't like having to handle straight-up comparisons but it's time to cut to the chase.

If you want some wiggle room -- if you had ten rounds between the two how would you divide your time? Mine is quite simple -- I'd be at Ballyneal no less than six times.

Tim -- wind is an unpredictable item in any design. Just when you think it will blow hard it softens or comes from a different direction -- if at all. I think it behooves people to assess the design that is there and see if it holds water without wind being too much of an influencer on your final comments.

Sean Leary

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #38 on: August 28, 2006, 05:42:15 PM »
 I found Pacific to be more difficult than Ballyneal in a normal 1-2 club wind. Dead still I would feel probably otherwise, but I felt that it is easier to get in a lot of trouble at Pacific.

I think a very good, long player can go pretty low at Ballyneal regardless of wind..


Adam Clayman

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #39 on: August 28, 2006, 05:43:19 PM »
For the record;
 There was no emotional aspects to me pointing out where I thought Matt made factual errors. His opinion of the 14th is exactly that, his opinion. I have no problem with that. But as you pointed out, and I tried to point out, the hole has a quality about it, which is greater than what's apparent upon limited play. As you pointed out. But then again, I'm a sucker for those center line bunkers.

I'm glad Matt saw the genius.

 
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 11
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #40 on: August 28, 2006, 05:43:31 PM »
Matt:

First of all, I'm floored by your overall review of Ballyneal.  You haven't divided up your mythical 25 rounds in the Sand Hills region yet, but I take it that Ballyneal will get its share, and I'm pleased.  Between your review and Ran's, I am excited to go back and play it again in their grand opening and in the Renaissance Cup next month.

You are right that over the past five years we have become somewhat more focused on longer drivers of the golf ball than we were previously.  But, it didn't all happen at Sebonack.  Surely I learned a bunch from watching and listening to Jack, although some of the things we like to do to make it harder for good players visually are things which he dislikes ... such as obscuring landing areas as you spoke about on another thread, or building greens which "hang off the edge of space" like #11 and #12 at Sebonack.

As I said, though, not all of the differences between Pacific Dunes and Ballyneal are the result of Sebonack.  For starters, Pacific Dunes is a resort course and the sister to a course which was built at 7300 yards from the back -- so we didn't feel the need to repeat that effort.  We aimed for Cypress Point there, not Pebble Beach.  (And those landing areas at Pacific Dunes are not as flat as you remember -- we deliberately left a bunch of awkward stances for long hitters, especially on the par fives.)

Over the past five years, we have certainly noticed the general changes in the game toward added length off the tee and have been more concerned with finding ways to counteract it, not only with added distance but with more demands on positioning and shotmaking.  Julian Robertson and Michael Campbell both talked us through that at Cape Kidnappers; Michael Clayton provided more perspective about it on our two Australian projects.

I'm glad all of it has been productive from your perspective.  But you'll need to get through Australia and New Zealand before you can really tell how much credit to give to Jack.

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #41 on: August 28, 2006, 05:54:46 PM »
Tom:

Thanks for the added info -- it's my ultimate golf goal to head to the land Down Under and see your work there. Clearly, the success of Kidnappers, Barnbougle Dunes and St. Andrews will be high on my overall golf course radar list.

I can certainly appreciaste your counterpoint w Pac versus Bandon Dunes. I think you can understand my counterpoint on how better players view Pac versus Pebble.

Yes, I really enjoyed Ballyneal. For the first time in a long time it was a course that exceeded the expectations of what I expected. That's rare indeed given how sometimes the hype often is really nothing more than just blowing smoke.

I'd be curious Tom -- what aspects in the Nicklaus collaboration do you see as being part of your overall evolution as a designer. No doubt you will include them or exclude them on a site specific basis.

One last item -- it's finally good to play a Doak course that elevates a true tenacity in not allowing a good "looking" hole to simply be outmatched by sheer power alone. Ballyneal has that element and it will clearly add to its star power as more people play it for themselves. The layout does fill out the balance sheet for all levels IMHO.

I salute you in being adaptable in your design works -- and in taking the inputs of the people you mentioned.


Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #42 on: August 28, 2006, 06:02:11 PM »
Matt,

In calm conditions, I have no problem saying that Ballyneal at 7100 yards is more difficult than Pacific Dunes at 6700.  I also think that the rough at Ballyneal is more penal than at Pacific Dunes.  So, yes, I'm inclined to think that Ballyneal is the more difficult layout, but I've played Pacific maybe 8 times and I've only played Ballyneal 1 1/2 times so I don't know that I'm qualified to give a definitive opinion here.  

I haven't countered everything you've said because I don't disagree with it all.  I do, however, prefer Pacific Dunes to Ballyneal.  The ocean is a factor--I'll admit it--but mostly I prefer the variety of holes at PD (the seaside holes along with the terrific, inland holes), the vegetation (pine trees and gorse), and the links-like turf.  Given ten rounds, I might split them evenly because I like to mix it up, but, if pressed, I'd give a 6-4 or even as much as a 7-3 edge to PD.  

Like I said, I thought Ballyneal was terrific.  The only hole I didn't especially like was #9, and maybe I'd warm to that over time.  I believe that an argument can be made that Doak and Co.'s work at Ballyneal is even more impressive than at PD.  But, if the question is where would I rather play (and that's how I look at questions regarding which course is better), it would be PD.  

Tom_Doak

  • Total Karma: 11
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #43 on: August 28, 2006, 06:05:28 PM »
Matt:

I have not said so before, but it did get annoying after a while to hear Mr. Nicklaus repeatedly credit me for "the look" of Sebonack and to credit himself for the playability, as if I had little to say about how it played.  Having done the routing and been there every time Jack was, I'd like to think I had a little to do with the shot values.  Of course, if he had seen any of the other 21 courses we've done, he might realize we understand something about it, though I am sure he would believe that Sebonack is better in that respect than any of our solo work.  

For that reason, I'm glad to hear that you like the shot values of Ballyneal so much.  I might have been trying extra hard there just to prove that I knew something about it ;) and I might keep doing so for a while longer.






Daryl David

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #44 on: August 28, 2006, 06:35:03 PM »
Tom,

I for one, am damn glad you tried so hard!  ;D

It seems that a lot of folks have mentioned that Ballyneal exceeded their expectations.  I think that says volumes about how special the course is.  Especially given the inevitable comparisons with Sand Hills.  For me personally it was a surprise as I had just come from playing Sand Hills for the first time and was in that state of eurphoria that must follow every round there.  To then have so much fun at Ballyneal, made my golfing year!


Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #45 on: August 28, 2006, 07:37:42 PM »
Sean:

You say the difficulty areas are more prevalent at Pac Dunes and NOT Ballyneal. Really ?

You must hit the ball off the tee like ole Calvin Peete did then if that's the case. The sloping nature of the fairways and turning points in the fairway there make for some interesting possibilties. I guess when you are that dead straight you need not have to deal with it.

I agree a long low handicap player can go low at Ballyneal provided the turf is not at optimum firm conditions. Then it becomes a much different matter.

Tim:

Be intersted in your handicap if you care to share and for a listing of your ten most favortie modern designs -- post 1960. It will help me understand your last post even more so.

Thanks ...

Tom D:

No doubt it's a bit simplistic to say that only Jack and his team did the tactical and you and your team did the "look" of Sebonack. I think when you merge things together the spillover has to be present and each group will likely have a bit of both throughout.

Nonetheless, I see Ballyneal surpassing what you have done from the layouts of yours I have played. With wind the sheer demands of the course will only intensify and frankly I only played the course when the greens were not at full speed -- ditto the firmness of the fairways. Would love to see Ballyneal play at the speed of Hoylake -- if only one time. ;)

Tim Bert

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #46 on: August 28, 2006, 10:31:44 PM »
Based on limited play, this 14 handicapper would rate Pacific Dunes as more difficult that Ballyneal.

From the green tees at Pacific Dunes, I've played 6 full rounds and never broken 90.  I've done this on some pretty good ball striking days. but I can't seem to escape the blow-ups there.  I've shot 54-39, and I've also played one round there where I was less than 5 over on 15 of the holes and still didn't break 90.  I've played PacDunes in a variety of wind conditions (calm to 30+.)

At Ballyneal, I shot 87 my first time around.  This was from a mix of the back and near-back tees (I think we determined that we played it around 6600.)  The wind was very tame that morning.  I didn't make any birdies, but I didn't really have any big blow-ups that destroyed the round either.

Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #47 on: August 28, 2006, 11:41:40 PM »
Matt,

I'm not sure how this helps you, but I'm a 9 handicap--reasonably long, but not super long off the tee.  I won't give you ten courses, but my favorite modern designs include all three courses at Bandon, Ballyneal and The Ocean Course.  

The day I played Ballyneal, it was quite calm--only a 1-2 club wind at its peak.  So, I didn't see Ballyneal at its toughest.  Still, I would rate it as more difficult than Pacific Dunes, mostly because you face more uneven lies in the fairways and the rough is more penal--it's usually a chip out, whereas you can get lucky at Pacific with a wispier lie.  

Matt_Ward

Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #48 on: August 29, 2006, 07:00:27 PM »
Tim:

You simply glossed over one of my points previously made. The complexity of the overall routing is first rate and quite complex at Ballyneal. At Pac you have the south / north and north / south variation. Not to say that the hole are bad in such a configuration but in my book I give a few more points to those courses that twist and turn from a greater range of positions / starting & end points.

Tim Pitner

  • Total Karma: 0
Re:The Brilliance of Ballyneal
« Reply #49 on: August 29, 2006, 07:15:23 PM »
Matt,

Maybe this damns me as a critic, but I don't pay too much attention to the routing of the holes as far as where they point on a compass.  The bigger considerations for me are flow, walkability and wind--it's good to have some cross-wind, in addition to downwind and upwind holes.  It's the relationship with the wind direction that matters.  Come to think of it, when I've played Pacific Dunes (June-Sept), the holes are mostly into or with the wind--not that many cross-wind holes.  Perhaps a weakness.  But, I also understand that the prevailing winds in the winter are different.