[Evan_Green]

Would be interested in hearing comments on this course in the West Sacramento area...

If this has been previously discussed please forgive me as the search feature yielded mostly results from the often discussed course of the same name in Nebraska.

[Stan Dodd]

I was a member ther for a couple of years.  
I loved the movement in the greens, they are always fun to putt.
The routing is awkward, the 2 holes on the other side of street make for a walk where ever they come.
The environmental restrictions made for some funky holes, like the 18th, just not a very fun hole.  With the amount of wind in Davis and some of the evironmental areas it makes for some not very fun golf.  
The short , used to be 3rd, in one tournament with 40 players, the wind dead into us, only two players  carried the enviromental area.  
The short fours are fun, unless the wind makes them silly.

[Michael Dugger]

The first golf course I helped build while interning with LUI.

It's hampered by the size of the site.  Some very tight areas.  Indeed some major flow problems as Stan alluded to.  I re-routed that course about a million times in my head.

Jeff would be the first to tell you management has re-organized the holes a handful of times, and not a one of the arrangements really are any better than the last.

There are some nice short par 4's.  I thought the par 3's a little ordinary.  Lots of water.  Kinda narrow in places, it would not contain my game, that is for sure.

It offers a nice round in the $40-55 price range.

[Garland Bayley]

Hope this helps.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=26316

[Tim Leahy]

Nothing special for NorCal, about 16 others just like it within a fifty mile radius. Agree 18 is just a bad hole, 17 is nice over water drive where you can cutoff some, lots of houses, rolling but no real changes in elevation, wet lands, minimal trees, boring par 3's, plays real slow on weekends. The pro/mgr was on Big Break Trump edition, first or second one eliminated.

[Gib_Papazian]

Jeff,

The major drawback at Wildhorse is obviously the hinky cul-de-sac of ground where the first two holes are routed, but aside from that, I feel like it is vastly unappreciated - in some measure due to the first two holes, but also that it is somewhat attached to your basic Central Valley generic tract housing development.

One thing that impressed me - beyond the contouring of the putting surfaces - was the strategic geometries of the holes. We played from the regular blue tees - given the *true* length our group can carry the ball - and found there to be some sort of choice to be made off most of the tees, be it a carry over a hazard or simply an advantageous spot for which the next would be easier depending on the wind and movement of the pin.

I hated the fifth hole as I recall, because the fairway sloped towards the water on the left, but some idiot thought it was a good idea to put a ribbon of cement on the high side of the fairway just where I wanted to aim my tee shot.

We got a kick out of #'s 10 and 11 - definitely the most entertaining run on the golf course. One of them had a big carry bunker off the tee that obscured the fairway - but I do not see it on the Wildhorse website. If it has been removed, the architect ought to be pissed beyond measure.

The 17th works well - with a sort of "Cape" tee shot with the bunkers waiting patiently for Armenian Pollos to hang a curve ball out to the right.

I've no objection to #18 a bit. From the correct tees for me, it is 430 and there is plenty of opportunity to get a couple of insurance birdies in the bag before coming to the last.

With a 240 drive, you have 190 to the green (160 over water) and if anybody wants to whine about that, after all those shortish holes that precede it, they need to get fitted for some XL Pampers and have a milky tit stuffed in their mouths.
 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Gib,

Last time I was there that carry bunker was there, so it may be a web omission.  I would comment further on the course, but as noted, the hole numbers have changed so many times that I'm not sure just what hole anyone is talking about.

The new owners called me out just to have a look see, which was nice and as far as I could tell, they hadn't changed much and the bunkers etc. looked pretty much as designed.

It wasn't a great site, as noted, and I don't think 18 is great with the forced carry over the ditch, but there are some other decent holes, if you can put on the housing blinders.

[Kyle Henderson]

I started playing golf during my last year as an undergrad at U.C. Davis. Wildhorse was $18 to walk for student... a great bargain. The course was tough for a beginner due to the wind and forced carries. However, as my game developed, the course took on increasingly complex and strategic dimensions. Every hole is distinctive, if not first rate.  Also, the greens were very quick and hard in the first years after it opened, which gave most players fits.

I always loved the contouring of hole #13 (at least that was its # the last time I played it... it's the par 5 on the western border of the course). The hole itself is very straight and lies on what was a flat orchard, but the fairway contouring and bunker placement give the hole a lot of character and roll. Very imaginatrive and fun to play.

The tee shot on 17 is a joyous risk/reward opportunity.

My biggest gripe with the new management is that they abadoned the dirty sand for white grains in the greenside bunkers.

[Jeff_Stettner]

Put me in the camp that thinks Wildhorse is a pretty good value in Norcal on a rather indifferent site. Gib touched on some of the little details that make the place unique. I remember one par 5 with a high side and low side on the fairway. The high side was flat and made going for the green a real option, the low side a series of bumps and rolls that often provide awkward lies. It was a great example of how to add interest at a minimal cost.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()