[Rob Rigg]

I loved the 8th at Sand Hills - this hole is awesome.

We had a back pin so there were not a ton of shots to play in there - I messed around with a couple. The first time I tried to run my shot up the left side - not successfully the first ball but I ran it on the second time just not too close. I drove the green from the Square tees the second round which was a blast!

The front pin on either side is fantastic - bringing a ton of shot options into play and as you can see from the photos the cant of the green allows you to play around the horseshoe.

I believe the fronting bunker is the only "man made" one on the course?

Matt - I was generalizing and I should have been more literal - There are a couple of fun greens at SH depending on pin position - 3 and 8 for sure, maybe 2 and a couple others Bob mentioned - at BN there are about 14 of them. I could spend at least an hour on the 7th Green at BN and 45 minutes on the 8th, then 30 minutes on the 9th and 10th, etc. etc. That is no more a knock on SH than 99.9% of the other courses in the country where you just can't do that (O yeah, this is an SH thread - pls continue! )

Sean - Absolutely correct - unless you can really nip a lob wedge around the greens, then bringing anything in from the air is tough off of fescue. A hockey background is helpful in executing those shots, fortunately. A lot of people do not like bump and run and refuse to give up use of their lob wedge no matter what the turf tells them. It's a different game.

[Mike Benham]

At BN, the routing tends to change direction much more frequently while SH can play with/against the wind for a fairly long stretch.

Rob -

Are you a member at Ballyneal?

Are you a member at any other private club?

[Rob Rigg]

Mike -

No.

Yes.

[Mike_Trenham]

A few comments on walkability.

The reason this course is not more walkable is the pathways from the tees to the fairways and greens to tees are very narrow because so many of the golfers play 36+ per day and opt for carts.  You can not walk a few accross like you can at BN.  This may as much as anything be a reflection of the availability of caddies in a town so small, a membership that maybe getting older after 15 years of operation and so many members hailing from areas without caddies.  The walkways from the greens to tees at BN are generous and also play as chipping areas often.

Yes the front nine has some elevation changes but hardly anything more challenging than at Pacific Dunes or Bandon Dunes or Lahinch.  A few of the more difficult walks at the top of my mind that are most worth it are Colorado Golf Club, Carne, Pacific Trails, Pine Valley, Kirtland.
 

[Steve Strasheim]

Thanks for the great thread and pictures.

I must say I find it troubling that some people have to try and portray Sand Hills Golf Club as overrated. I have followed this course pretty closely since before it was built and I've only known a couple of guys that took that position. In my opinion, their negative assessments of SH had less to do with the golf and more to do with other, related issues.

[Gene Greco]

OK, I was going to start a new thread about this, but I will just do it on this one.

An error in judgement.

You should have started another thread.

Threads like this one are more of a celebration, a way for the golfer to extend and share his euphoric state after, as Maslow stated,  one of life's peak experiences.

Thankfully, I didn't note anyone  passing water on his previous thread of  black and whites.

[Tom Huckaby]

Rob:

It's all good man as you do seem to appreciate Sand Hills #8, a truly great golf hole.  So let's take this in a continued friendly spirit.

I guess the only thing I continue to find hard to understand about your take is this:

There are also more options to do so at BN based on my experience at both courses. The number of elevated approaches at SH make anything but an aerial attack quite challenging on more holes than I would prefer. This does not diminish the quality of SH at all - it is a stern but fair test of shotmaking. It just became repetitive.

You say this, yet you agree with Sean that the nature of fescue at Ballyneal allows for one and only one type of shot... do you not find that contradictory?  Or is Ballyneal repetitive also?  Or is it that only repetitive aerial shots bother you?

I continue to disagree also about the overabundance of aerial attack shots "required" at Sand Hills... I find one hole only where it's required (17) and even on that, a viable play for the brave is a bounce off the right hill.  There are plenty of raised greens at Ballyneal also... man I just don't get this critique, never have.

Raised greens at Sand Hills:

1 - but one can, and I have, run it up the  hill, from long and short.
4 - ditto
7 -ditto - in fact I don't' have the skill to nip a wedge onto that plateua
11 - same as 1 and 4
13 - same
17 - described above.

None of these require the aerial attack.

[David Mihm]

@Gene I do not think I am 'urinating' on anything & @Steve, My impression of the goal of this forum is 'to promote frank commentary on golf course architecture' as the GCA homepage says.  I think that's what this thread is all about.  Prompted by Rich I have tried to lay out my viewpoint on why I do not think Sand Hills is a Top 10 golf course as it is rated by most publications.  That does not mean I think it is a bad golf course.  And my experience at the club was terrific -- the staff and its unique setting make it a true destination.

I was also explicit in saying that when it opened, it may very well have been a Top 10 course if only for the revolution in architecture it was at the very heart of initiating.

Plenty of people whose opinions I greatly respect (including Rich, Dan, and Jon) rate Sand Hills as one of their all-time favorites.  We obviously differ on this course but in my opinion the discussion is part of the fun that the playing fields for golf allow for, which other sports do not.  

@Mike_T, I think SH's walk is considerably more challenging than Lahinch, though agree that Carne's back nine requires some serious energy.  From a walking standpoint, there is the inspirational breather at Carne offered by the 13th and 14th holes which always gives me a second wind, though!

[Tom Huckaby]

No respect for my opinions, David?

 

As for Sand Hills' walk, I'd put it about the same as Cruden Bay.  Some hillls but nothing that can't be managed.  But I also consider the allowance for carts to be a plus.

TH

[Richard Choi]

Gene, I don't think anyone is urinating on anything.

If the site was not about having different opinions on variety of courses, this wouldn't be much of a site. Nobody is trashing Sand Hills. I am pretty sure everyone who posted here today enjoy the course immensely and I am positive they would welcome additional opportunities to play the course to see if their first instinct was correct.

I should have created a separate thread, but I think this was one of the most interesting discussion we've had lately. I don't think anyone is a loser for that.

[Gene Greco]

David:

     Could your opinion in any way possibly be wrong?

Or could it be self serving?

Or maybe for the 'good of the cause' along with the rest of the 'army' which has enlisted on this website?



Is Shinnecock Hills a faux links?

Is it any less of a golf course based on your definition?

A few raised and built up greens there, too.



What's Pine Valley?

Is that not your ideal type of golf course either?

Sucks trying to bump it up on 2,3,5,7,8,10,11,13,17 and 18.



Ever rain in your part of the country?

Well, it rains in the Sand Hills, too.

I just returned and there wasn't a ball mark to be found, fairways were screaming.



Your list of prefered golf courses centers more on those outside the USA which is fine.

However, your centric view doesn't mean those courses deemed great  by the large majority of well travelled, intelligent and/or  passionate golfers are not... simply because you have declared such.



And I will reiterate: this could all have courteously been done on a seperate thread while referring back to the pictures.



 

[Richard Choi]

Gene, if people were really offended, a mod can just move all the posts from today to another thread. I don't think anyone would mind.

Personally, I like some interesting comments to go with the pictures.

[Rob Rigg]

Rob:

It's all good man as you do seem to appreciate Sand Hills #8, a truly great golf hole.  So let's take this in a continued friendly spirit.

I guess the only thing I continue to find hard to understand about your take is this:

There are also more options to do so at BN based on my experience at both courses. The number of elevated approaches at SH make anything but an aerial attack quite challenging on more holes than I would prefer. This does not diminish the quality of SH at all - it is a stern but fair test of shotmaking. It just became repetitive.

You say this, yet you agree with Sean that the nature of fescue at Ballyneal allows for one and only one type of shot... do you not find that contradictory?  Or is Ballyneal repetitive also?  Or is it that only repetitive aerial shots bother you?

Tom - You conveniently misread what I wrote - lobbing a shot in off a tight lie is challenging for most golfers - a putt, bump and run or pitch is available off tight lies while a lob or pitch is often the only recourse off soft lies. So fescue has three clear options versus two clear options on most American playing surfaces which are usually bent or bermuda with fairways that tend to play much softer than greens. Fescue provides more options, but the lob shot is the preferred one for most people who play golf in this country due to normal playing conditions. All options are available at Sand Hills but the preferred seemed to be the aerial on the approach and bump and runs around the greens needed to be executed with more skill than on most links courses due to faster green speeds and fall offs.

I continue to disagree also about the overabundance of aerial attack shots "required" at Sand Hills... I find one hole only where it's required (17) and even on that, a viable play for the brave is a bounce off the right hill.  There are plenty of raised greens at Ballyneal also... man I just don't get this critique, never have.

Tom- It would be very entertaining to see you run an approach shot up from the back tee on the 13th or 17th, especially with heavy wind - or even the 1st if you are going for the green in two or hitting your third from the bottom of the hill. A running shot up to a back pin on the 2nd would also be very impressive as would a running shot from 200 yards up onto the 4th green. From around the greens, at SH, the bump and run is absolutely an option, as I clearly mentioned, but it is more exacting than on most links courses that I have played. An aerial approach and the ability to bump and run around greens are two different aspects of playing a course - obviously.  

Raised greens at Sand Hills:

1 - but one can, and I have, run it up the  hill, from long and short.
4 - ditto
7 -ditto - in fact I don't' have the skill to nip a wedge onto that plateua
11 - same as 1 and 4
13 - same
17 - described above.

None of these require the aerial attack.

Gene - Indeed - this topic should have been brought up on another thread. Way to go Rich - jeez. When I played SH the fairways were fast and the greens were pure despite recent heavy precipitation. The course is immaculate and drained exceptionally. I didn't recall anyone stating it was slow and soggy on this thread or that the course was in anything but perfect condition any time it was played.

Steve - Sand Hills is the number one modern golf course per all the magazines - surely it is a great course to discuss, compare and contrast to others for it is the benchmark by which all other modern courses are judged. Golf courses are works of art - surely opinions will differ?

Mike B - My home course gets trashed all the time despite its ranking - let me know if you want to tee it there - I would be interested in hearing your honest opinion.

Apologies Matt - Enough of the banter - let the celebration continue - Sand Hills is a great course and it is a wonderful golfing experience.

[Steve Strasheim]

Steve - Sand Hills is the number one modern golf course per all the magazines - surely it is a great course to discuss, compare and contrast to others for it is the benchmark by which all other modern courses are judged. Golf courses are works of art - surely opinions will differ?

Of course opinions will differ, but I question the motives of such minority opinion. Could it be:

1. A cast of bait on an Internet forum,
2. A play for attention,
3. Sour grapes,
4. A desire to promote another course.

Of course it is possible that some people really believe Sand Hills is overrated. But, my personal experience with people that feel Sand Hills is overrated is that they had some of number 3 above.

Although I enjoy Heitz Cellars MV Cabernet immensely. It's not the best wine I have ever tasted. That doesn't mean I would come on an Internet forum and equate it to table wine from E&J Gallo.

[Phil McDade]

OK, I was going to start a new thread about this, but I will just do it on this one.

An error in judgement.

You should have started another thread.

Threads like this one are more of a celebration, a way for the golfer to extend and share his euphoric state after, as Maslow stated,  one of life's peak experiences.

Thankfully, I didn't note anyone urinating on his previous thread of  black and whites.

Gene:

Respectfully, these photo threads -- maybe the single greatest asset of this site (there are now literally hundreds of GCA photo threads archived here, of courses both with the stature of SHills and those of merit that don't make many "top" lists) -- are precisely the place for the kind of vigorous debate I believe Ran and others envisioned for this site. Greatness, in all manner of things, including golf courses, stands up to such vigorous and probing debate.

[Scott Szabo]

Gents,

Please help me understand all the comments relating to Sand Hills being a difficult walk.  I just don't get that at all.

Also, most everyone on this site would agree that the more options one has on a particular shot, the better.  In my couple of plays, Sand Hills allows for both the aerial game on a few holes, as well as the ground game.  Isn't that a good thing?
  

[Tom Huckaby]

Rob Rigg:

We're close enough.  I believe we each have great love for both courses.

What we disagree on is I see no repetitiveness at either course, and particularly not at Sand Hills.  I do not see the "required" or even "preferred" aerial shots that you do... I have indeed ran shots up to each of 1, 2, 4 and 13 .. in downwind situations.  I have seen many others do it too, as downwind, that's the smartest play given landing on the green means bounding over... Now 17, of course that's a stretch, but reports are that members play it that way at times... for me, heck I also like the variety of one hole where it's do or die must play a fly, especially since it's 150 max.  17 is one fantastic golf hole and if one downgrades it because one can't run it in.. I'd say one is too attached to the ground game.   

I also don't see a huge difference between the fescue at Ballyneal and the bent at Sand Hills... each has been very firm and very fast at each place, each time I have been there.  In the end grass is grass and how it plays is how it plays.

I also PREFER  the more exacting nature at Sand Hills over  the "it's gonna end up OK pretty much no matter what" nature of so many shots at Ballyneal.  As I say, the intensity is ratcheted up at Sand Hills, and to me that remains a good thing.

So, to each his own.  Walking is paramount for you, and Ballyneal being walking only, well it's always going to have a strong place in your heart, no?  Me, I prefer options over being told what to do, especially for 2nd and 3rd rounds on hot days.

So, we each have our inherent built in preferences.  I can live with that.

[Jerry Kluger]

The thing about SH is much of your initial enjoyment can be determined by who you are lucky enough to have as your host.  I understand all the hullabaloo about the bunker on number 4 but it's when you get to 7 and 8 that your host can really show you what the fun is all about.  Try a putt from the back to the front of the green on #7 or try getting to a left hole location on number 8 from the right side of the fairway and as well as the opposite positions - you could put down a dozen balls and just have a great time trying to figure out your options.  That's part of what SH woke the world up to - fun and challenges in golf and BN followed this philosophy as well.

[Gene Greco]

OK, I was going to start a new thread about this, but I will just do it on this one.

An error in judgement.

You should have started another thread.

Threads like this one are more of a celebration, a way for the golfer to extend and share his euphoric state after, as Maslow stated,  one of life's peak experiences.

Thankfully, I didn't note anyone urinating on his previous thread of  black and whites.

Gene:

Respectfully, these photo threads -- maybe the single greatest asset of this site (there are now literally hundreds of GCA photo threads archived here, of courses both with the stature of SHills and those of merit that don't make many "top" lists) -- are precisely the place for the kind of vigorous debate I believe Ran and others envisioned for this site. Greatness, in all manner of things, including golf courses, stands up to such vigorous and probing debate.

Phil:

   Then why did Ran NOT post his response to this thread here, but rather on the substitute xyz thread?




      

[Tony Weiler]

What I've always loved about GCA.com, even before I was a member, was/is the picture threads and the great discussion that follows.  I get to play both SH and BN in the next two months and pictures that encompass debate such as this will make both that much more enjoyable from a playability and architecture standpoint.  So, right or wrong, to me at least, it has great value. But it is hard to imagine, given it's rankings, it being a Doak 5.  Maybe David is from Alaska?    

[JC Jones]

What I've always loved in the pictures of the 8th hole is the bunker right at the front of the green.  It appears small in comparison to the green but I bet it plays with the golfer's mind.

How big is the bunker relative to the rest of the green? 

My favorite C&C hole (mainly because I've only seen one of their courses) is the 10th at Sugarloaf with a small little bunker in the middle of the fairway.  It doesn't take up much room but it certainly plays with the golfer's mind on the tee.  I see this bunker on 8 having a similar effect.

[Eric Smith]

 

My favorite C&C hole (mainly because I've only seen one of their courses) is the 10th at Sugarloaf with a small little bunker in the middle of the fairway.  It doesn't take up much room but it certainly plays with the golfer's mind on the tee. 

JC,

That type of bunker or center-line bunkers, are more 'aiming' bunkers for me, even the nest of them on the opener at Kingsley.  I aim at them and the ball travels left or right of target on demand!

[Tom Huckaby]

What I've always loved in the pictures of the 8th hole is the bunker right at the front of the green.  It appears small in comparison to the green but I bet it plays with the golfer's mind.

Oh my yes it plays with one's mind, starting at the tee.. it's like the Road Hole in that effect.  You know you do not want to be in that bunker pretty much no matter what... so you plan accordingly.

What's really fun is there's a bold way and a timid way... perhaps even more so than the Road Hole itself.  By that I mean, the next time you see someone try to pitch over the Road bunker will be the first time.  On #8 SH, greater golfers than I have nipped a wedge tight to a pin not far beyond it... I have seen it done.  Now I sure as hell can't do that myself - I take the timid way around, and settle for a 10 foot curling putt if I do it right.  But fortune favors the brave.. if you want to get it inside 10 feet, nip it you must.

This hole also is a prime example of “Shinnecock from tips, NGLA from middles” that I like to spout about – at least for me.  From the tips, I have to bear down on the tee shot, to make the carry and protect against going into the right rough… then the 2nd is a 7iron or something, darn tough to that smallish green.  From the middles, oh man it’s SOOOO tempting to fire one up the left side, pray for the rightish bounce, get one on the green… I have done it… but the penalty for failure is steep, in left rough or in the bunker… it’s just too fun NOT to try… gosh I love that shot.  Wonderful golf hole.  BTW, it has a killer green also… so we are now 0/8 in terms of lack of ho-hum greens, if Kenny is still following this.

[Eric Smith]

Would someone be willing to label the holes on the aerial? Thanks!

[Phil McDade]

OK, I was going to start a new thread about this, but I will just do it on this one.

An error in judgement.

You should have started another thread.

Threads like this one are more of a celebration, a way for the golfer to extend and share his euphoric state after, as Maslow stated,  one of life's peak experiences.

Thankfully, I didn't note anyone urinating on his previous thread of  black and whites.

Gene:

Respectfully, these photo threads -- maybe the single greatest asset of this site (there are now literally hundreds of GCA photo threads archived here, of courses both with the stature of SHills and those of merit that don't make many "top" lists) -- are precisely the place for the kind of vigorous debate I believe Ran and others envisioned for this site. Greatness, in all manner of things, including golf courses, stands up to such vigorous and probing debate.

Phil:

   Then why did Ran NOT post his response to this thread here, but rather on the substitute xyz thread?




      

Gene:

I'm not sure of Ran's motivations about when and where he posts; you'd have to ask him.

I do know this: I've learned something about Sand Hills on this thread, in part because of the polite and thoughtful replies by posters to my questions. It's the reason I, and I'm guessing many others, keep coming back to this site -- to learn something. Photo threads that are a mere "celebration" of a course, without discussion of its merits, are merely sycophantic Greek choruses.

I'd also note, in researching another noteworthy course well-known and admired here, that I came across the following comments today on a golf site devoted to discussing the merits of courses and their architecture:

"The National (Golf Links) is perhaps golfdom's most over-rated course. The first two holes are atrocities, and the rest of the course is beautiful and scenic, but hardly top 100 material."

"Tom Fazio's Quarry course at Black Diamond Ranch in FL is a better track than National..."

I don't spend much time on that website. I find the commentary on GCA much more informative.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()