The Short hole at Old Macdonald:

[Brad Klein]

Steve Kline,

you are quite right that the vast majority of people who play that course won't know who Macdonald is and won't have played the originals -- or for that matter, various Macdonald incarnations of those holes. But I would go further.

We're proceeding on the assumption that most won't know or care who Doak is either. What we assume is that the golf course has to work on its own; it has to be fun, exciting, bold, interesting, a little maddening, and unlike anything they have ever seen before. But it also has to work. Our intent, and we've been discussing this throughout, is that the success of the course should be, after they step off the 18th green, they might ask themselves, "Gee, that was something else. I wonder who this guy Macdonald was?" If that's the effect, and it's certainly what's intended, the course might have a chance.

All this architecture stuff, talk of templates, originals, authenticity - it's all an abstract academic excercise unless the golf course works on its own terms and fits the site.

[George Pazin]

Brad, Brian, Ian, et al: please stop putting words in my mouth I did not write!

My point was the lack of critical comment in the *thread* -- I would have expected a green that size to have generated more critical discussion than Kyle's point about how long it would take to mow.

As to your own conclusions (as well as your manners) regarding what my post "proves," have any of you seen "The Ox-Bow Incident"?

Maybe you could watch it while I'm away searching for the world's greatest egg salad recipe....

Mark

Mark, what you're experiencing is the limitations of the web and this site - in person, you can make such a comment and your tone, body language and other subtle nuances will allow people to understand what you meant. Quite frequently when we make comments on here that seem innocent or even clever, they end up being interpreted in an entirely different manner.

Your explanation clears things up and I think Ian accurately addressed why there hasn't been more discussion of the nature you seek.

I can't believe Matt Ward has requested the yardage, slope and course rating from the tippy tips....

 

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Considering that plagiarism is the highest form of flattery and that in all of art there are very few original thmes, Old Mac follows in a great tradition of honoring and flattering those who have 'performed before.' 

Think if you will the the truly original in your lifetime.  Was Kurt Cobain original?  The Beatles?  Ken Kesey?  Miles Davis?  Tom Doak?  The painters Lichtenstein or Warhol?  I think not not.  They have simply built on the themes introduced before.

Why would the creation of this artistic gameboard in Bandon be any different?  Every golf course I have ever played includes some sort of template hole.  A cape, a redan, and rarely a form of biarritz.

One more question as we debate this idea of building a tribute to an icon of American Golf, who was the last truly original Golf architect?   

[Steve Kline]

Steve Kline,

you are quite right that the vast majority of people who play that course won't know who Macdonald is and won't have played the originals -- or for that matter, various Macdonald incarnations of those holes. But I would go further.

We're proceeding on the assumption that most won't know or care who Doak is either. What we assume is that the golf course has to work on its own; it has to be fun, exciting, bold, interesting, a little maddening, and unlike anything they have ever seen before. But it also has to work. Our intent, and we've been discussing this throughout, is that the success of the course should be, after they step off the 18th green, they might ask themselves, "Gee, that was something else. I wonder who this guy Macdonald was?" If that's the effect, and it's certainly what's intended, the course might have a chance.

All this architecture stuff, talk of templates, originals, authenticity - it's all an abstract academic excercise unless the golf course works on its own terms and fits the site.

Brad - I agree with you 100%. If the course can serve to make a few people wonder about the great holes then I think you guys would have accomplised something.

And - please work on the spelling of your name. 

[Kirk Gill]

Aren't there limitations imposed on the GCA's creativity on most course design jobs? Either because of ownership, or environmental restrictions, etc.? Various kinds of artists and craftsmen work within self-imposed limitations all the time, like filming in black and white or playing "unplugged" or using watercolors. I understand the notion of wanting to see a "new, original Doak," but I disagree with Don's assertion that he won't be getting that just because this design team is choosing to work within a particular design framework. There may have been limitations on some of Mr. Doak's previous work which we're not aware of as players. It's also too easy to find an existing course wanting in comparison to the one that was never built.

That said, I have to agree that you don't have to agree that it is the best use of the site. I just wonder how one would go about making that determination.

[Dan Herrmann]

Wow.  Wow.  Wow.
This green complex is so beautiful.  Wonderful.

Between Old McDonald and Cabot Links, the 2010-ish period is going to be out of this world for new high-end architectural designs.  Too bad they're almost 4000 miles apart

George - thanks for starting this thread.  I couldn't stop smiling!

[Jim Nugent]

Steve Kline,

you are quite right that the vast majority of people who play that course won't know who Macdonald is and won't have played the originals -- or for that matter, various Macdonald incarnations of those holes. But I would go further.

We're proceeding on the assumption that most won't know or care who Doak is either. What we assume is that the golf course has to work on its own; it has to be fun, exciting, bold, interesting, a little maddening, and unlike anything they have ever seen before. But it also has to work. Our intent, and we've been discussing this throughout, is that the success of the course should be, after they step off the 18th green, they might ask themselves, "Gee, that was something else. I wonder who this guy Macdonald was?" If that's the effect, and it's certainly what's intended, the course might have a chance.

All this architecture stuff, talk of templates, originals, authenticity - it's all an abstract academic excercise unless the golf course works on its own terms and fits the site.

I'm not sure that in this case the vast majority won't know who MacDonald is.  At least not by the time they play.

The reason is the name.  When they hear it, they will probably first think of the children's song.  After a laugh, they will realize that isn't likely.  They will want to know what the name does come from.  Then they will learn the course gives its rendition of some of the great masterpieces, as painted by the guy who designed PD, and on a spectacular site.  

This is one reason I doubt Old Mac needs to market to us on GCA.com.  I know I'm real glad we're getting these sneak previews of the holes, two years before the course opens.  

  

[Norbert P]

Quote from National Links Course Porofile, by Ran  M . . .

"6th hole, 135 yards, Short; One of Ben Crenshaw's favorite short holes, the green is eccentric and a thorough original with nothing like it anywhere in the world thanks to a small mountain in the center which makes it effectively play as three small ones. A player on the opposite side of the green from the hole should happily  take three putts. The front left corner of the green is quite good at gathering a ball and feeding it into the front bunker."

I really don't want to get into the comparing game; especially a better/best debate, but what are the compelling concepts of the original hole that make it so interesting for those ideas to go into a new hole?  I have never played at National, and I had to find info on the original"Short Hole" to know what it was and what it looks like.

"Short Hole" 6th @ National Golf Links of America

[Dan Herrmann]

Look at how cool the photo looks in B&W - you can almost imagine Mr. MacDonald on that green!

[Garland Bayley]

...
I really don't want to get into the comparing game; especially a better/best debate, but what are the compelling concepts of the original hole that make it so interesting for those ideas to go into a new hole?  I have never played at National, and I had to find info on the original"Short Hole" to know what it was and what it looks like.

"Short Hole" 6th @ National Golf Links of America

Am I mistaken in thinking this is the "original" "short" hole?

[Bill_McBride]

Quote from National Links Course Porofile, by Ran  M . . .

"6th hole, 135 yards, Short; One of Ben Crenshaw's favorite short holes, the green is eccentric and a thorough original with nothing like it anywhere in the world thanks to a small mountain in the center which makes it effectively play as three small ones. A player on the opposite side of the green from the hole should happily  take three putts. The front left corner of the green is quite good at gathering a ball and feeding it into the front bunker."

I really don't want to get into the comparing game; especially a better/best debate, but what are the compelling concepts of the original hole that make it so interesting for those ideas to go into a new hole?  I have never played at National, and I had to find info on the original"Short Hole" to know what it was and what it looks like.

"Short Hole" 6th @ National Golf Links of America

Slagster, the Short Hole is designed to test the player's ability to hit a short iron.  The green is typically very large for a short hole, and has different areas separated by tiers or severe contours so you can't just hit the green, two putt and walk off with a par.

Take a look at the NGLA #6 Short - there is a pretty good tier just right of center, from which it's virtually impossible to two putt to a lower right side hole location.  And check the player in the front left - there is a deep bowl there, same problem.

The difficulty isn't hitting the green, it's making birdie or par after hitting the green.

[Brad Klein]

Short Hole is based on 5th at Brancaster / Royal West Norfolk, England, not the 8th at St. Andrews.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Kline & Brad Klein,

I think you underestimate those golfers willing to make the trek to Bandon, Oregon.

I think most are or will be aware of the designers for each course, and I think most will have a "sense" of the courses they're about to play.

One rarely commits to a cross country venture, in time, travel and money, without knowing what's in store for them.

In addition, with two (2) year's lead time, as the course grows toward maturity and opening day, more and more will be written/published about Old MacDonald, thereby informing the golfer with respect to what's in store for them.

Brad Klein,

You're right, the ultimate test will be in the play of the golf course, and not in it's tie to history or its designer/s.

If it's fun, challenging and deemed a sporty course, it's popularity will rise and with it .... interest in its genesis.

Having a property swept by wind has to be a major plus, as someone connected to Old MacDonald stated, "WIND is the finest asset in golf."

Paul Cowley,

You're on.

I'm disappointed that the course won't be open in 2009, but, I'm hoping that Mike Sweeney and others will put together a nice GCA.com trip, ala Mountain Lake, in the summer of 2010.

I think Mike Kaiser's vision was/is brilliant.

Four diverse golf courses with nice accomodations, good food and service.

The addition of more golf courses helps to justify the trip in terms of time, travel and money for those seeking wonderful golf experiences.  The luxury of staying in one spot, but having access to four diverse golf courses can't be discounted.

And, if they ever get that casino modernized, nightime entertainment could be a plus.

If OM is representative of CBM's design principles, I can see it being the most popular of all four courses.

Time will tell.

[Tim Pitner]

Will Bandon break the $300/round barrier by 2010?  And will Sheep Ranch still exist? 

[Norbert P]

"Is there any disappointing aspect to The National Links? Yes, that subsequent architects evidently failed to appreciate many of its design
merits." Ran Morrissett

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/ngla1.html

I just went through the course profile of National.  The idea of having as grand a golf course as this in my back yard is truly energizing. I suggest a revisit.  

For those who suggest an other architect than one that has already been glorified by the blessing of designing at Bandon, I agree, and I think Urbina is the perfect choice.  

If ever there is a #5, I'd like to see a local designer get his name in the hat.

   Billy Mac, thanks for describing the goal of the "Short Hole".  I understand much more gooder now.  


"Short Hole is based on 5th at Brancaster / Royal West Norfolk, England . . ."   Brad Klein
Ran mentions in his profile that it is an original Macdonald creation.

It also states that the "Cape Hole" is Macdonald's creation but isn't Machrihanish's Battery effectively a cape? Perhaps Old Tom told Mac aboot it.
  

[Norbert P]

I've heard a disturbing rumour though. Do they not have Guinness in the pub any more?

 That is disturbing. Somebody say it aint so.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Will Bandon break the $300/round barrier by 2010? 

Doesn't that depend upon supply and demand and what the market will bear ?

Does Bandon still offer a discount on second rounds ?[/color]

[Tony_Muldoon]

Short Hole is based on 5th at Brancaster / Royal West Norfolk, England, not the 8th at St. Andrews.

Good Doctor, thou has taught me so much...but ...surely you mean the 4th?


Green is very aproximately 30yards wide by 21 deep





I posted more pics on Brancaster, a year ago and there was some discussion then.

[Tom Huckaby]

Will Bandon break the $300/round barrier by 2010? 

Doesn't that depend upon supply and demand and what the market will bear ?

Does Bandon still offer a discount on second rounds ?[/color]

The supply of great golf courses is small, and the demand for them is large.  Thus there is no reason to think that the rates at Bandon will do anything but continue to rise.  Here are the current rates:

http://www.bandondunesgolf.com/green_fees.cfm

Make of them what you will.  For some it's too expensive already, for others, no amount of money will keep them from playing these great courses.  One thing is certain though:  the rates have risen steadily over the years, pretty well directly corresponding with the acclaim the courses have received.

And of course this is fair.  But it does make those of us who played it in the early years -when it really was golf as it should be, in terms of the clientele being die-hard golfers willing to make the long trek and bear the iffy weather, as opposed to now, where far too many are obnoxious caddie-berating, service loudly demanding belt-notchers - very wistful for days gone by.

I'm sure I'll bite the bullet and play again when OM opens.  But l will be wistful, for sure.

In any case yes Pat, they do have decent replay rates as you'll see... but who knows, will those become a casualty of success also?

TH

ps - that short hole looks crazily cool to me.  But I wouldn't want to give a stroke to a higher handicapper on it!

[Eric Olsen]

[Does Bandon still offer a discount on second rounds ?[/b][/color]

Staying at the resort for my upcoming trip over Easter, the first round costs $120, and the second round costs $60, and any golf after 36 holes is, and I believe will always be, free.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Eric:

We'll see if all of that stays constant.  My guess is indeed that the replay rates and late free golf do become casualties of success after OM opens and receive the acclaim it undoubtedly will.

And those rates you paid are decent for sure.  But did you see what the summer rates are now?

It truly is becoming a little bit of California up there.
 

[John Kavanaugh]

Winter rates should remain low as the place was empty on my recent February trip.  No matter how high Golfweek rates Bandon IV it will remain a filler course like Trails because of the lack of ocean front holes.  My only concern is that they will go to a Pinehurst rate structure with Pacific going at a premium.

[Garland Bayley]

Short Hole is based on 5th at Brancaster / Royal West Norfolk, England, not the 8th at St. Andrews.

National's 6th may be based on the 4th? 5th? at Brancaster / Royal West Norfold,  but since St. Andrews is a very old course and it has a hole named short, is it not the original "short" hole?

Had Slagbert asserted the 6th at National was the inspiration for the 5th at Old MacDonald, that would have been a different assertion. The assertion perhaps that you have corrected by telling us what was the inspiration.

I was playing Dan Kelly with Slagbert's statement, and in true Dan Kelly form did not put in the smiley.


 

[Tom Huckaby]

Winter rates should remain low as the place was empty on my recent February trip.  No matter how high Golfweek rates Bandon IV it will remain a filler course like Trails because of the lack of ocean front holes.  My only concern is that they will go to a Pinehurst rate structure with Pacific going at a premium.

The place was anything but empty when we went in Feb 2007... one of us saw an exception to the rule - not sure which one.  In any case, my bet does remain on prices rising for all of the courses.  But it is also very possible the Pinehurst structure as you suggest does happen also.

TH

[Bryan Izatt]

Will Bandon break the $300/round barrier by 2010? 

Doesn't that depend upon supply and demand and what the market will bear ?

Does Bandon still offer a discount on second rounds ?[/color]

I'm sure I'll bite the bullet and play again when OM opens.  But l will be wistful, for sure.

TH

Tom,

Amen.


Patrick,

If there is to be a GCA trip organised, then maybe Dec or Mar would be a more palatable time, both from a $ and clientele point of view.