[John Kavanaugh]

Using Erin Hills as a base at $150...should architectural considerations be in place because it is a public course.  Do the people who travel and pay high fees such as this expect or deserve anything less than would be found on a private course.  

[RJ_Daley]

JK, perhaps the deciding point is the green fee amount.  An ultra expensive public, like the CCFADs at Kohler or Pinehurst or EH (although the owner at EH expresses that he did not want it perceived as an ultra expensive) are ultra expensive for two reasons I can think of.  One is that they cost a lot more to acquire a primo piece of land to build upon, thus requiring more green fee, and two, they are designed with more unique and complicated architecture, thus more maintenance expenses.  So, they must charge more to be profitable.  Let's face it, the formula of roughly $10 more green fee for every million spent above 2 million, with a base no matter what price of about $25-30 for any course below 2 million is still valid, I think.  I don't see how they could have built EH for much less than 12-15 million with CH and maintenance and bungalows, etc.  

But, your asking 'should the be designed differently'.  No.  The archie should design what the land permits, common golf sense suggests, and the owner envisions.  If they want bells and whistles, then build them, and they will be required to charge green fees within reality of the expenses.  I think that is why EH is $150, as has been explained by the owner himself in articles.  No need to apologize for recovering his money investment.  

But, if an ultra expensive public is built/designed like a low maintenance public, with no complexity, straight forward, on the cheap, and then charges more due to some prestige archie name or some other hoity toity notion, well the market will find that out and stay away accordingly after being taken to the cleaners once.

[John Kirk]

Well...you might make an argument that a private course has the luxury of incorporating more deception or quirk, such as blind tee shots or unseen hazarding, into the design.  The high end public course will have a significant percentage of players who play the course once.  There will be a strong desire to play the course well if they only get one shot at it, so it's tough to put any quirky stuff that's hard to figure out the first time around.

Stone Eagle is tough the first time around.  You've got to hit your tee shot on #4 well right of where it looks like you should, and you can't see the cross hazard on #14 off the tee, which needs to be considered.

[John Goodman]

John, a subject close to this came up when I was at Bandon last month.  My caddie was critical of the 14th at Bandon Trails (and later of the 15th green and the 16th), saying in substance, "these holes would be OK at a members' course, but they're just too hard for a resort course.  People don't want to come out here and lose a bunch of balls or have to pick up."  I think he was saying that largely because my foursome was hacking up those holes pretty bad  (four of the eight golfers in our group took a "statutory" 10 on 14, and only one made better than a 6; our handicaps ranged from 6 to 20, with most in the 10-12 range).  I can't explain why everyone played that hole so poorly.  Maybe we were talked into it.  

The caddie wasn't I don't think talking about architectural interest or merit.  But when you're talking about just plain difficulty, then I think the caddie has a point.  Despite the fact that Trails is a great course, I enjoyed it a good deal less than BD and PD.  I acknowledge that this is mostly based on the fact that I shot horrible scores at Trails both times I played it.  In my mind, though, trying to make par (or even keep from blowing up) to a front pin on 5 (where in five minutes I saw two decent golfers putt off the green into the front bunker) or 14 is probably beyond my ability as a golfer and I'd just as soon pass on it, unless my game improves.    

[John Goodman]

Um . . . what are snake and egg greens?

I agree that it might matter some on stroke vs. match.  We were playing both.  There were some overall and individual trip bets that required you to keep a score (the max you could record being a ten - which was not recorded by anyone on PD or BD, but by I think six people in one round on PT, including by the 20 hcp on two or three holes).  But within each foursome there were matches being played also, and also matches being played on the cards among foursomes.

You can definitely tell that a great putter and short game player designed PT.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

I have a problem with publicly owned high end courses.  What municipality should be supplying a playground for the wealthy in competition with private enterrise?  

While I understand that the courts have blessed these operations, I wonder whether the public interest is truly served.  Local government should be in business to supply services otherwise unavailable to the general public for reasons of economics or conflicts.  

With that statement, If a course is going to charge high end fees it had best be one step up architecturally from the standard fare.

[John Kavanaugh]

One reason I don't hold Pacific Dunes in such lofty heights as most is that I feel that it was comprimised for public play.  Is the site really that good that it is purposely less interesting that it could be and still the best any living man ever built.  I just can't buy that but haven't been around enought to dispute it..

I also find that people who hate to lose balls when paying at a public course don't mind so much when paying as a guest at a private...It is befuddling..

[John_Cullum]

A very good friend of mine has started a website called playmygolfcourse.com. (It's a private club access website and you can use it anonymously if you 'd like.) Anyway, he printed up a lot of Pro V1'swith the logo, and he explained that part of his marketing plan is letting people find his lost golf balls. He is a very interesting character.

[George Pazin]

I have a problem with publicly owned high end courses.  What municipality should be supplying a playground for the wealthy in competition with private enterrise?  

While I understand that the courts have blessed these operations, I wonder whether the public interest is truly served.  Local government should be in business to supply services otherwise unavailable to the general public for reasons of economics or conflicts.

I think JakaB simply meant public, not private, not necessarily publicly owned.

(I agree with your point, though many on here have disagreed in the past.)

[Steve Lang]

 

Contrarian SE TX Experi.. I used to find a much higher quality and numbers of balls abandoned at The Woodlands TPC than I do now at the Woodlands CC East Course.. (renamed, same course)

Given the ultra-expensive venues are more likely to be played once by travelling folks or on someone else's business or comp expense account.. I'd think they should throw everything in the book at the players one way or the other, but provide enough tees for the range of high-rolling golfers.  I can't count the number of times starters have told us that you've got to pick the right tees to both score well and play at the expected pace..  we always move back one set from their recommendation under the "if I'm payin' I'm playin, everyone else be damned rule"

[cary lichtenstein]

It would be interesting to have Tom Doak compare Pacific Dunes and Ballyneal, public v. private and what he did differently to accomodate the public side, especially since both are walking only courses.

[Jordan Wall]

John,

Is $150 ultra expensive or just expensive?

Ultra expensive would run more like $225+, wouldn't it?

[Tim Pitner]

John, a subject close to this came up when I was at Bandon last month.  My caddie was critical of the 14th at Bandon Trails (and later of the 15th green and the 16th), saying in substance, "these holes would be OK at a members' course, but they're just too hard for a resort course.  People don't want to come out here and lose a bunch of balls or have to pick up."      

I hate the idea that a resort course, or any publicly accessible course, has to be dumbed down to suit certain players.  IMO, Bandon Trails #14 is playable for all levels of players.  But, you might have to play the hole knowing that you'll need to chip and putt for par.  You can't aim at the pin, or the green for that matter, if you miss your drive right.  I don't think there's anything inordinately difficult about #15 or #16 either.  Into the wind, the uphill par 5 #16 is a bear for anyone.  

As someone who plays the vast majority of his golf on public/resort courses, I beg architects, please don't throttle back because the course will be public.  Owners may think that's what customers want, and maybe you do too, but that's not universally true.  I think the success of the Bandon resort is a testament to that.  

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

Is $150 ultra expensive or just expensive?

Ultra expensive would run more like $225+, wouldn't it?

Jordan,

I am talking about after tax non-expense account dollars.  This weekend I spent $50 for 18 holes including cart at a very nice Liddy course.  We then played foursomes for the second 18 for $20 including cart.  I had four Gatorades at $1.75 each then a Sprite and club sandwich at the turn for $9 including tip.  This totals $86 and is what I call an expensive day considering I flinch when my 11 yr old wants another jersey at close to the same price.  $150 just for the golf is indeed ultra expensive...It is even over my budget per ticket price to the National League Championship Series I plan on attending this Saturday.(scalping of course)  Do you have any idea what it means to my son to attend that game and what it would say about me as a father if I payed that to golf and balked at taking my son.  Get a clue my friend.

[cary lichtenstein]

$150 is expensive, just not in the same category as $185 + caddy fee, which can run upwards of $250, or the group of courses at $300 and above, e.g., Trump in California which is a joke expensive.

[John Kavanaugh]

Cary,

A two carat diamond is ultra expensive no matter what the size of that rock Bette is sporting.  Between a guy with more money and amost as much free time as God and a kid who goes on eight day golf trips to Hawaii with his parents I'm dying here.  Erin Hills is an inland course in a poor state with a short season and charges $150.00...It is ultra expensive.  How many seamstresses could you hire back in the day for how long for that kind of money...It's criminal to poo poo $150 after tax earnings.

[Anthony Butler]

John,

Is $150 ultra expensive or just expensive?

Ultra expensive would run more like $225+, wouldn't it?

Jordan,

I am talking about after tax non-expense account dollars.  This weekend I spent $50 for 18 holes including cart at a very nice Liddy course.  We then played foursomes for the second 18 for $20 including cart.  I had four Gatorades at $1.75 each then a Sprite and club sandwich at the turn for $9 including tip.  This totals $86 and is what I call an expensive day considering I flinch when my 11 yr old wants another jersey at close to the same price.  $150 just for the golf is indeed ultra expensive...It is even over my budget per ticket price to the National League Championship Series I plan on attending this Saturday.(scalping of course)  Do you have any idea what it means to my son to attend that game and what it would say about me as a father if I payed that to golf and balked at taking my son.  Get a clue my friend.

WTF!!! Was I the only person who had a total disconnect there.  

John, I do know that you just gave a sixteen year old a hard time what seems like no good reason... Sure hope your young'un doesn't trip and spill his $6 Coke at Busch Stadium.

Go Mets!

[cary lichtenstein]

John:

As soon as Bette gets home, I'll tell her you suggested she downsize her ring...if your phone rings, I suggest you don't answer it

Cary

[George Pazin]

I'll side with John (for once) and say that I think $150 is ultra expensive. Not as ultra expensive as $225 or $300 (I was a math major, so I know those are more ), but as far as golf goes, that's ultra expensive.

I generally won't play anything over $100 unless I know it's pretty damn great.

As for the thread question, I was always under the impression that the only significant difference for most architects is blindness, with the prevailing thought being on a private course it's more acceptable due to the repeat play thing. Blindness, and maybe making the course a little easier scoring-wise to keep things moving. Ironically enough, I usually like both of those things.

[John Goodman]

John, a subject close to this came up when I was at Bandon last month.  My caddie was critical of the 14th at Bandon Trails (and later of the 15th green and the 16th), saying in substance, "these holes would be OK at a members' course, but they're just too hard for a resort course.  People don't want to come out here and lose a bunch of balls or have to pick up."      

I hate the idea that a resort course, or any publicly accessible course, has to be dumbed down to suit certain players.  IMO, Bandon Trails #14 is playable for all levels of players.  But, you might have to play the hole knowing that you'll need to chip and putt for par.  You can't aim at the pin, or the green for that matter, if you miss your drive right.  I don't think there's anything inordinately difficult about #15 or #16 either.  Into the wind, the uphill par 5 #16 is a bear for anyone.  

As someone who plays the vast majority of his golf on public/resort courses, I beg architects, please don't throttle back because the course will be public.  Owners may think that's what customers want, and maybe you do too, but that's not universally true.  I think the success of the Bandon resort is a testament to that.  

I don't disagree with the sentiment, Tim.  Maybe I just need to play BT 14 a few more times.  After playing it twice, I concluded that if you miss your drive right, it is best to play the rest of the hole with your putter.  In fact I tend to think that if the pin is up front, it's best to play every shot after the drive with your putter, no matter where your drive ended up (if not in the woods or the bunkers).  I found that any recovery from the left side of the green has to be just about perfect to stay on the green, no matter where the pin is, and the penalty for going over is pretty severe.  I am fine with 14; but I am glad that there are not a bunch more holes like it on the course.  It showed me what a hack I am, that's for sure.

[PThomas]

John, a subject close to this came up when I was at Bandon last month.  My caddie was critical of the 14th at Bandon Trails (and later of the 15th green and the 16th), saying in substance, "these holes would be OK at a members' course, but they're just too hard for a resort course.  People don't want to come out here and lose a bunch of balls or have to pick up."      

I hate the idea that a resort course, or any publicly accessible course, has to be dumbed down to suit certain players.  IMO, Bandon Trails #14 is playable for all levels of players.  But, you might have to play the hole knowing that you'll need to chip and putt for par.  You can't aim at the pin, or the green for that matter, if you miss your drive right.  I don't think there's anything inordinately difficult about #15 or #16 either.  Into the wind, the uphill par 5 #16 is a bear for anyone.  

As someone who plays the vast majority of his golf on public/resort courses, I beg architects, please don't throttle back because the course will be public.  Owners may think that's what customers want, and maybe you do too, but that's not universally true.  I think the success of the Bandon resort is a testament to that.  

I don't disagree with the sentiment, Tim.  Maybe I just need to play BT 14 a few more times.  After playing it twice, I concluded that if you miss your drive right, it is best to play the rest of the hole with your putter.  In fact I tend to think that if the pin is up front, it's best to play every shot after the drive with your putter, no matter where your drive ended up (if not in the woods or the bunkers).  I found that any recovery from the left side of the green has to be just about perfect to stay on the green, no matter where the pin is, and the penalty for going over is pretty severe.  I am fine with 14; but I am glad that there are not a bunch more holes like it on the course.  It showed me what a hack I am, that's for sure.

John G:  I think putter is the play there...I had a perfect drive there, was about 30 yards short of the green..pin was in the middle if I remember correctly..I putted up to about 20 feet, took 2 more putts and got my par

[cary lichtenstein]

I thought 14 at Bandon Trails was easy, 2 pars and a birdie in 3 rounds.

However, the others we played were unable to hold the green.

[Jordan Wall]

John,

Is $150 ultra expensive or just expensive?

Ultra expensive would run more like $225+, wouldn't it?

Jordan,

I am talking about after tax non-expense account dollars.  This weekend I spent $50 for 18 holes including cart at a very nice Liddy course.  We then played foursomes for the second 18 for $20 including cart.  I had four Gatorades at $1.75 each then a Sprite and club sandwich at the turn for $9 including tip.  This totals $86 and is what I call an expensive day considering I flinch when my 11 yr old wants another jersey at close to the same price.  $150 just for the golf is indeed ultra expensive...It is even over my budget per ticket price to the National League Championship Series I plan on attending this Saturday.(scalping of course)  Do you have any idea what it means to my son to attend that game and what it would say about me as a father if I payed that to golf and balked at taking my son.  Get a clue my friend.

John,

When my dad plays a course that is $150, I say good for him.
It would be selfish to think he should spend the money on me.
I always like to go to Seahakws games but if my Dad spent $150 on a round of golf, and we never went to the game, I would be happy he did something he enjoys.  I would think your son would probably feel the exact same way, but I don't know your son so that would be hard to say.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think the intended marlet of any course impacts the architecture, includng high end public versus Private. I have concerns with number 1 at Bandon Dunes, as a resort course, which is being corrected. I think the blind second shot at Pacific Dune sis not so on top of things at a resort course either. I love both as golf holes.

[John Kavanaugh]

Jordan,

So you are sticking with your position that $150 for a round of golf is not ultra expensive.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()