Wade Hampton (with Pictures)

[Ed Oden]

Matt, I fully understand that people care about the rankings.  And I can tell that rankings (whether the magazines or personal lists) are very important to you.  That is perfectly fine with me if it is what you enjoy.  Its just not my cup of tea.  But I will confess that I think those who are obsessed with the rankings are missing something since analysis invariable devolves into a comparison of lists rather than the merits (positive or negative) of a course.  

So far, the negative comments about Wade have primarly concerned the look of the place, particularly some who feel the course is overbunkered.  But I don't believe I have seen anyone find fault with the details I presented (or Jim Lewis added) about the course, how it plays, its strategy or architectural pluses/minuses.  I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who takes a contrary view in the specific rather than the generic.  I don't mean that as a challenge.  Rather, I think I can learn more from that type of commentary.

For what its worth, I've played 30+ Fazio courses.  Shadow Creek, Victoria National and Dallas National are not among them.  There is one (perhaps two) Fazio design that I prefer to Wade.  But they are close enough that I couldn't argue with anyone who felt differently.  I never said I loved Wade.  I believe what I said was that I think the course is very good.  I'll leave it to others to decide whether its ranking is justified.

Ed

[Adam_Messix]

Matt--

How many times have you played Wade Hampton?  I ask only because when you say the course lacks strategic merit, I simply don't agree with you. 

Ed--

I've played Victoria National, Dallas National, The Quarry, The Preserve, Shadow Creek, Galloway, WW, BD, SR, McArthur, etc., etc., etc., and I have Wade Hampton ahead of all of them.  What's amazing is that the hole that required the most Earth moving was #1 and that the 18th hole pretty much fit in the terrain as Fazio originally found it.  I think the greens at Wade Hampton are really subtle, particuarly 7, 16, and 18 and are easy to miss as high quality on first look.

[Matt_Ward]

Adam:

Given the list of the courses you mentioned -- we see things differently regarding Wade Hampton. On the Fazio side I would have the likes of Victoria National, Dallas National and Galloway ahead of it. Ditto for Glenwild in Park City, UT which few ever talk about. I have not played The Alotian but from those who have played it they think very much of the place too. One can also place the likes of Karsten Creek in that elite grouping as well for me.

I've played WH twice -- if there's a particular cut-off needed in order to understand the course please let me know. Try to keep what I said in mind -- I didn't say the course has no strategic elements -- but not in my mind to merit such a high placement among the very elite of courses in the USA. That's my opinion -- pure and simple. You see it differently -- so be it.

Ed:

Let's take it from the top shall we ... the issue is not whether WH is a fine layout -- I never said it wasn't. It's really a matter of overall context and how the course stacks up agsinst other TF layouts of note and other top tier courses in which the NC layout has been placed. Frankly, you can disavow ratings and the like as hooeee -- I simply mention them only in the context to see how courses fare when placed against one another.

Ed, I too said the course was "very good" -- I simply went further to say that much of the hype stems from the hands-on (almost too much hands-on) elements TF incorporated there. You see it differently -- so be it. I think the overall land is what makes the place -- the bombardment of bunkers simply added too much chocolate syrup for my tastes and overpowered the ice cream bonanza of the layout.

Ed, the issue of strategic qualities you and Jim mentioned are quite clear and my issue is not about the qualities of the course which it has but just how good it is when held against other TF layouts and other modern courses which have opened in the last 25 years. WH benefits from a tony clientele and no doubt the gorgeous property helps the place big time.

Last point -- you mentioned the word "obsessed with the rankings" -- I simply use them as a reference point because they illuminate tastes on which people believe quality golf can be found. WH is a very good layout -- but there are plenty of very good layouts in the USA -- for a course to be amoing the top 25-50 layouts in the USA the bar for me and for what I have played is a good bit higher. If the course works then that's all that matters for you.

[Adam_Messix]

Matt--

Glenwild is one of the few Fazio course that I have not been to, I have played the Alotian and really liked it and have it my Fazio top 5, but not ahead of Wade Hampton. 

The reason why I asked you how many times is because I had similar thoughts to you regarding several holes at Wade Hampton after my first couple of plays, however, over the years (and between 50-60 rounds), I have grown to appreciate those holes more and more and think they have real strategic merit.  The course is really subtle and I do think that people get caught up in the scenery and miss a lot of the strategic values that the course has.  A good example is the 8th hole and how much a drive that hugs the bunkers on the left is handsomely rewarded versus a drive down the center of the fairway or on the right side.  Ditto #9.  #12 looks like such an inviting target off the tee, but the effective landing area is the left hand side of the fairway given the angled nature of the green.  Even now, I'm still not sure what the correct layup yardage is on 18 and it may be the narrowest and most dangerous part of the fairway. This is just a few examples, I could cite more. 

As far as a number of times playing a course to see it all....I'm not sure there is a definitive answer.  I've told many people that I need to see Sand Hills again because I played it in an unusual wind with 15-18 playing downwind.  There are other courses where I didn't "get it" like others have and want to see it again to give it another look.  I was curious as to the number of times that you played Wade Hampton because there are a lot of subtle vagaries to the place that you may not see in a round or two, it took me a few plays to see it all. 

I think someone may have mentioned it earlier, but the rating do sometimes leave a player predisposed to what they are going to get when they play.  I try to have an open mind when visiting a course, particularly for the first time.  Sometimes I'm thrilled and pleasantly surprised, occasionally I'm disappointed.

[Ed Oden]

Matt, if you agree that Wade Hampton is "very good", then at the end of the day I am not sure that we view the course all that differently.  Its just that your posts always seem to come back to the context of rankings and whether one course is better than another.  I don't disavow the rankings.  I just don't care whether Wade Hampton (#17) is a better Fazio than Victoria National (#24), Shadow Creek (#41) or Dallas National (#59).  That is splitting hairs to a degree I just don't buy into.  Moreover, outside of the fact that you think Wade is overrated (an opinion I likely concur with) I see almost no substantive criticism in your comments.  The only thing I can really find is this:

It does look good for its setting but it's overkill with the bunkers. More of what made TF appealing to his legion of fans on the Digest ratings side of things. Plenty of eye-candy to the max -- but too often it's the inclusion of such items that takes away from all the natural elements of the land itself. Why not allow the land itself determine more of the strategic elements ?

Heck, I've offered more specific criticism of the course than that.  I have no problems with substantive criticism.  But I am inclined to disregard generic criticism, especially the dreaded "eye-candy" tag.  In my opinion, that term is too often used to drive home a negative impression when specifics are in short supply. 

Ed

[Matt_Ward]

Adam:

I can only hope you get the opportunity to visit the Park City area and play Glenwild. Ditto if you should ever head to OK and play Karsten Creek.

Adam, again -- I need to stop you before going on with the strategic argument. I never said WH doesn't have strategic holes or qualities -- I originally opined that I don't see such elements as being especially noteworthy for a course that consistently rates among the elite of elite courses here in the USA.

Personally, as I opined previously, I see more of the recent TF designs being much better from a consistency standpoint and in terms of hole / shot differentiation. You see WH being a better overall layout than a few of the other TF courses I mentioned. We shall agree to disagree on that side of things.

Adam, I don't doubt that playing a course more times than 1-2 can certainly reveal other elements that just were not present with such earlier plays. No doubt the wind pattern is one key item -- as you mentioned your time at Sand Hills and where the wind blew when playing the closing stretch there. I am well aware that future plays may open up windows that were prematurlely closed.

At the same time -- future plays may also move the meter the other direction too simply because the hype the course has received from the various high placements it has garnered.

Adam, the predisposition a player(s) has prior to going to WH is something a top 25 course should be able to handle without any issue if it's really that bulletproof. Sand Hills can make that claim -- Pacific Dunes can equally make that cliam. Wade Hampton, which I like a lot, but not at the highest of high levels from the ones I have played in the States. Adam, in your reply, you didn't address the overkill of the bunker inclusion. It appears to me TF simply added on these elements to spruce up the overall picture -- TF did that plenty of times in his earliest efforts after moving on as a one-man design operation. Let me stress that not all bunkers at WH are window dressing but sometimes the adage of less is more could have really helped WH in my mind. If you think it's grand stuff -- so be it.

Ed:

Let me start again -- OK -- in the event you missed something.

Wade Hampton is listed as being a top 25 course in ALL of the USA -- according to the likes of Digest and a few of the other mags have it quite high - generally in the top 50.

That alone says plenty and any course -- and I emphasize the word ANY course that is at that high has to be nearly bulletproof for me in so many ways. Ed, if you don't care about rating / rankings, call it what one will, that's fine with me and no doubt with yourself.

However ...

When people look at a golf course it's not unusual for discussion to ensure in which people begin to ask just where does the course fit with all other courses -- whether they be in the Tar Heel State or the USA as a whole.

Ed, I don't split hairs -- if you have not played the courses I used as a reference point then you're in no position to know whether my comments are dead on or off. Context is an essential element in looking at a course -- any course. Doak did no less than that with his Confidential Guide book which in sum does place numerical guide points on overall course quality.

I've played WW twice -- I've also played 70+ TF courses throughout the USA. I think my portfolio of TF courses is deep enough for me to form my own opinion -- no less than you have formed yours from your total listing of TF courses played.

I also said -- in the event you missed it -- that so much of WH is really early TF eye-candy par excellance. You say there is no "substantive criticisms" and that the use of such a term is nothing more than "generic criticism"-- what do you need Ed -- a volume comparable to War & Peace? TF overloaded on the bunker inclusions on a number of holes there. How bout giving the land a bit of a breather and allow the topography to shine without all the clutter from forced-in bunkers. The collection of par-3 holes is good -- but not outstanding. I agree with Doak's comments that the two-shotters from the 13th to the 16th are well done and provide a stern test for all levels of play.

Ed, go play Glenwild in UT if you ever have the opportunity. Ditto the likes of Karsten Creek in OK, to name another.

I never said WH is not a very good golf course -- but "very good" is not good enough for a very lofty position among the elite of elite courses. You said youself that WH is likely overrated -- so are you just simply arguiing for the sake of arguing?

Ed, I never said one would not benefit from playing WH -- but if I were headed to NC and had only a day to play golf I can tell you this -- there would be other choices on my list to play before heading over to Cashiers.

One final element you either ignored or are quick to dismiss -- having a high profile and connected clientele no doubt has helped WH. I liked the course for what TF did there but if were to review what TF has done more recently -- since WH opened if memory serves in 1987 -- then a number of his more recent efforts are more strategic and even more noteworthy for their overall hole differentiation.

Just my opinion ...

[Ed Oden]

Matt, I see no need to argue.  You prove my point with each successive post.  I appreciate that.  And thanks for pointing out how many Fazio courses you have played.  Not sure I have ever heard you mention that before. 

Ed

[JMEvensky]

Anyone in the Tree House qualify for the Senior Am?

[Michael Herrmann]

Not specifically, but a member from my club (Ed Steiber) was the medalist in the local Cincinnati qualifier and is heading down next week.  I had the pleasure of playing Ed in our season long match play championship last week and we talked a little bit about this upcoming tourney.

[Adam_Messix]

If the long range weather forecast holds, Wade Hampton will be as firm and fast the USGA will desire it for the Senior Am.  This is despite having 117 inches of rain this year to date, fortunately, the last few weeks have been really dry and it should present itself very well for the championship. 

[Joe Sponcia]

Ed,

Thanks so much for taking the time to document the course.  Out of curiosity, what are your camera specs?  I hope to play WH one day, especially after seeing your excellent camera work.  It certainly appears to have a little Strantz in it, and I agree, maybe a little Augusta, the way the trees are framed at the base and mostly in the background (outside of that out of place 17th tree on the left).

[Ed Oden]

It is always a shock to see one of my old photo threads pop back up since I don't do them anymore.  This one makes me cringe a bit, so it has taken me a few days to get the courage up to respond.

Brian, I don't see many similarities between Sage and Wade other than the inevitable commonality of certain Fazio aesthetics.  Wade is the better course by a fair amount in my opinion.  I don't mean that as a slight against Sage.  But, from a comparative standpoint, Sage has the worst holes and Wade has the best holes.  Wade seems to me to be a more strategic and cohesive design.  

Joe, photography enthusiasts will no doubt be disappointed, but I just used a Panasonic DMC-TZ5 point and shoot for those pics.

Best wishes,

Ed

[Joe Sponcia]

Ed,

Why cringe?  I think you did a great job and were fair with your comments.

I would have to walk to the car...but I think I have the same camera and it DOES take great pictures!