No Ballyneal? Seriously?

[Matt_Ward]

Matthew Schulte  Posted on: Today at 12:44:07 am   

Matt Ward:

I also find its' absence laughable as I see it as worthy of being well inside the top 100, although I am admittedly biased.  As Jim said it will eventually find its' rightful place. 

Out of curiosity if you had to assign it a number where do you think Ballyneal belongs within the top 100?   

Matthew:

To answer your question I have to say that my time at Ballyneal came very early on before the greens settled in terms of overall conditioning. But, I could easily see the qualities present.

A return visit would give me the added benefit in seeing how things have progressed.

I am very comfortable saying that Ballyneal would easily make my personal top 100 -- a second visit would give me the wherewithal to see if it could crack my personal top 50 in the States.

I have to say this -- I am more partial to the newer courses that have opened in the last 25 years because when they are really done well have as much, if not even more to offer, than so many of the so-called classic courses which I have found in plenty of instances are feasted because of their age rather than how well their overall designs have held up in the years since they first came onto the scene.

Ballyneal is difficult to get to -- but it's not utterly remote. When you step on the 1st tee and gaze upon its rolling terrain you can feel the blood rush to your hands as you can't await the opening tee shot. Ballyneal combines the experience dimension (e.g. land, routing and shots) that real golfers yearn for.

Matthew, just realize that there are other courses that were also left off that should be on such a listing. Tom has his fan club here -- there are other designs which also offer a great deal in comparable terms.

[Jim Franklin]

I really am not surprised by the omission.  Remember where the course finished in DIGEST's Best New list?  (I think it was 6th or 8th that year.)

I have never agreed with the GOLF DIGEST "definition" of a great course and I am always looking for ways to prove it wrong.  Building Ballyneal was apparently another way to prove it wrong.

P.S. to Jim Franklin:  Did the grades you submitted for Ballyneal really add up to it being a top 20 course? 

I just went back and reviewed my rating of Ballyneal and it did place in the top 20. Maybe I don't know what I am looking at, but I thought it was terrific and extremely fun to play which was most important to me.

[Tom_Doak]

Ah, but "fun to play" is a criterion for the Doak scale, NOT for GOLF DIGEST.

[Jim Franklin]

I guess I have a little Doak in my GD ratings then.

[Steve Salmen]

I just saw the video Will posted.  I did not notice one bunker rake.  Do they have them at Ballyneal?  Just wondering.  Thanks.

[Kyle Henderson]

I just saw the video Will posted.  I did not notice one bunker rake.  Do they have them at Ballyneal?  Just wondering.  Thanks.

No rakes when I was there. That sand in the softest I've ever played in. It feels like butter. It also supports the local plantlife at a perfect density at which your ball can often be found and played to the fairway with a skillful stroke.

[Greg Chambers]

no rakes, no tee markers, no benches, no trash cans, no water cooler stands, no ball washers, no divot repair bins, no beverage cart, no cart paths, no carts, no top 100 ranking...golf digest got that one right for sure   

[Kyle Henderson]

no rakes, no tee markers, no benches, no trash cans, no water cooler stands, no ball washers, no divot repair bins, no beverage cart, no cart paths, no carts, no top 100 ranking...golf digest got that one right for sure   

I enjoyed watching the caddies wandering off in what seemed to be a rather aimless, leasurely trajectories only to suddently see a garbage can lid pop up underfoot  for them to offload their refuse. Nothing is allowed tranish Ballyneals treasured grounds.

This pairing of natural,  uncluttered surroundings with supreme peace and quiet are becoming rarer and more precious, something to be [WHACK OF SQUARE CALLAWAY DRIVER AGAINST URETHANE-COATED PROJECTILE!!!]... by all.

[Scott Henderson]

I enjoy the GD list each year, but it is obviously something that has to be taken as a basic guideline, rather than a divine revelation.  Having played Ballyneal and not finding it on this year's list just strengthens this view of the list.

I, like Kyle, often wondered where the caddies were going when they were dropping off the trash.  The buried trash cans with pop up lids reminded me of the rake storage around the bunkers at Pacific Grove - I love both uses of this "technology."  The undergrounding in both cases eliminates a lot of "eye clutter."

[Andy Troeger]

I have to believe the "resistance to scoring" category hurts Ballyneal on the GD criteria too. If the wind is blowing the course is plenty challenging, but for a really good player on a relatively calm day I think the width of the corridors and lack of length considering the firm conditions make the course pretty scoreable for low handicaps.

[Scott Szabo]

Andy,

I have played there numerous times as a low handicapper (with many low handicappers) and find the course to be difficult to score on due to the severity of the greens.  Most have found it difficult to get the ball close to the pin due to the firm conditions, leaving many opportunities for challenging putts, many times resulting in three putts.  We have all talked about how much fun Ballyneal is, but how difficult it is to put up a good number.

If Ballyneal is considered relatively easy, then I'd hate to see what difficult is....

[Andy Troeger]

Scott,
You've played it more than I have so perhaps that's correct. On a calm day I don't think low handicappers would have that much trouble getting the ball close enough to the hole that the greens wouldn't have as much effect on them as on the rest of us.

Its more difficult than Shoreacres IMO, but otherwise would have been one of the easiest to score on of the top courses I've played. Those types of recovery shots play to my strengths though and accuracy is not, so it might play easier for my game than for some others.

[Andy Troeger]

PS: I don't consider all that a criticism--some of these courses to me get way too hard. I'd rather err on the side of playability and FUN any day!

[Kalen Braley]

PS: I don't consider all that a criticism--some of these courses to me get way too hard. I'd rather err on the side of playability and FUN any day!

Andy,

Cmon...your supposed to tell him how you shot even par on the front 9 with 4 clubs?    

[Kyle Henderson]

The wide fairways and large greens will make it fairly easy for talented players to post consistent numbers with few blow ups, but the crazy greens demand approaches tight to the pin to avoid three putts. This difficulty is compounded by fairway undulations that can play havoc with the trajectory of approach shots. I never faced a stiff wind at Ballyneal, but I'm sure a fairway of 50 yards in width never seemed smaller.

[Adam Clayman]

Andy, You are very alone in that opinion.

I sense there's a backlash against the recent outing of just how suckered American golfer's have been when it comes to quality. Tom did an amazing job creating a medium for which to sport. It's one of the most unique courses I know, or have heard of.

P.S. There are some rakes at Ballyneal. They are those furrowed wooden ones, with the bend in the split. I heard the Amish make them, as they have no metal fasteners.

[Jim Colton]

Between my buddies and I (all 2-5 handicappers), we have 20+ rounds at Ballyneal and have yet to break 80.  I wish it was easy as Andy thinks it is.  Maybe the 4-club route is the way to go, because it'll probably keep you out of the yucca.

[Scott Szabo]

Andy,

I do believe I understand what you are saying.  I've played a few rounds where I've not been on with my long game but have been able to get it around and still shoot a 75 or 76.  For the record, my lowest round at Ballyneal is 71.  For me, it's a course where a mid-70s round is the norm, but it's very difficult to get it under par, largely due to the greens themselves.  You can be 20 feet from the hole and struggle to get down in two putts.

[Andy Troeger]

Scott,
I can see that--I'm not talking about shooting under par, but its far easier to shoot a decent round there than some of the other courses where I'm pretty pleased to be in the 85 range.

My handicap last year was in the 8-9 range, admittedly the highest I've ever been, and I shot 77 despite being four over on the par fives, plus the extra nine that Kalen mentioned. I didn't feel like I played some unbelievable round by any means--playing on a calm day certainly helped.

Adam,
It appears even on this board I'm not totally alone, and I know others that have said something similar to me. Its a wonderful golf course with a reasonable amount of challenge--it doesn't overdo it as some other courses (including many in the top 100) seem to do.

[Scott Szabo]

Scott,
I can see that--I'm not talking about shooting under par, but its far easier to shoot a decent round there than some of the other courses where I'm pretty pleased to be in the 85 range.

I can agree with that.  The potential for big numbers just doesn't occur that often as balls can usually be found and played from off the fairway.  That's one reason a round at Ballyneal is so enjoyable.

[Adam Clayman]

Well there's a huge difference in resistance to scoring and not allowing high scores. Isn't there?

You're the panelist, so you have to decide what that term means, but as it reads to me, it implies a resistance to going low hole after hole. Because you went out and played well with four clubs you think it's easier. FWIW, Great courses allow those who play well to go low (if par is low?)

The more one thinks about this whole RTS category the more it seems queer. Perhaps more individualized thinking is in order? The way Jim Franklin interprets it.

Andy, By any chance were you alone on the afternoon par round using only 4 clubs? I'm not implying it didn't happen, rather pointing out when golfing alone pars do seem to come easier. Less distraction, go when ready, peace.

   

[Andy Troeger]

Adam,
I don't really see what you're getting at with the resistance to scoring definition--if any of the categories is pretty straight forward it would seem to be that one. Interestingly enough I tend to play well at Black Mesa too, but that one I always feel like every shot is critical to scoring well--I didn't feel that way at Ballyneal especially off the tee. It would be interesting to know what Ballyneal would be rated in terms of slope/course rating if it had one.

I played a match with Kalen with the four club nine, and it lasted 8 holes before I outlasted him. Putts were holed, etc. FWIW, my impressions were based at least as much on the original round as they were by the additional nine.

Ballyneal would do extremely well IMO in the "playability" category if Golf Digest still used it.

[RJ_Daley]

I'd rather review Will Smith's very nicely done website, Punchbowlgolf.com, than jump in on another rater justification or debate. 

Thanks Will, the video and narative says about all I'd need to know about BallyNeal if I were trying to decide if it is a top place to play.  The numbers game in the rankings and ratings is getting old, and less rather than more informative about identifying what courses are of high quality and worth seeking out. 

[ed_getka]

I still think the best way to find courses to see is by recommendations from guys on this site. Ultimately course preference is a very subjective thing, but as I have found other GCA'ers with similar tastes it has been very useful to me in finding courses to play whenever I travel.
   I am looking forward to seeing Ballyneal this summer with great anticipation.