Sand Hills vs XY and Z

[Mike Sweeney]

I thought I should have pull this away from the other thread so as not to distract from the SH picture thread.

Hey Rich,

First of all, I am more than willing to stand up as the one who said Sand Hills was a Doak 5 the first evening of The Yucca. At the time, a) I couldn't recite the Doak Scale verbatim and b) it was mostly to wind you up!  

But upon closer examination of The Doak Scale per this article: http://www.linksmagazine.com/best_of_golf/features/the_doak_scale.aspx I truly do rate it around a 6 or 6.5 as Spaulding mentioned more rationally later on in the thread.  (Btw, I heard Blue Moon added an extra shift over the weekend due to record demand for its product on Saturday afternoon). 

If we are considering 'the region' to include Ballyneal, I think BN stands head-and-shoulders above SH.

I don't mind being called a moron -- everyone on here has his or her own opinions.  I think Rich offered a terrific summary of my overall feelings about the place with a couple of exceptions:

-The course is too soft with too severe false fronts and repellent, rather than inviting, contours to allow a ground game
-It looks like a links course, but it is just a facade.
-Raised tee, drive to a lower fairway, hit approach to a raised green with a false front. Rinse and repeat.
-It is over-rated because it was the first to start the modern renaissance, but it has been surpassed by many since.

The conditioning at Sand Hills was outstanding...the course played plenty fast...I just found the contours far too difficult to encourage me to hit run-up shots when the aerial game worked just as well, or better, thanks to the elevated Bent greens. 

I consider myself extremely fortunate to have played Sand Hills but find its consistent position in the Top 10 in the country/world (especially ahead of Ballyneal?) to be curious.  There are a handful of world-class holes (4, 8, 11, 16) but in general I found the course repetitive--an opinion that was readily confirmed by the variety @ Ballyneal.  I found the course to be an extremely difficult walk, especially in the typical 90+ degree heat, and was downright shocked to see the number of carts in use. 

While I would not say that Tetherow has any world-class holes like those I mentioned above, on balance I found the experience there to be comparable, and Tetherow is much closer to my house.

Courses w/similar topography and playing conditions that I've played where the architecture is either more interesting or more fun to play --

Royal Aberdeen
Ballybunion
Lahinch
Cruden Bay
Carne
Ballyneal
Pacific Dunes
Cypress Point (not a true links course, but some architectural similarities as I discussed with Spaulding)

I would also like to point out that my favorite course on the Bandon property (though I have not yet played OM) is Trails, so this criticism is in no way intended to impugn C&C -- just to say that the hype around Sand Hills seems excessive in my own personal assessment.

And I completely agree with JC Jones that 99% of Florida courses are 0's.

Thankfully I have not played Ballyneal so I can stay away from that rugby match  , but I am shocked that David said in reference to Carne "the architecture is either more interesting or more fun to play."

Here is one of my past quotes about Carne to show that I am a BIG fan of the course.

On the back 9 there are a few spots where I wondered why Eddie did not incorprate the ocean more than he did at Carne.

Driving from Enniscrone to Carne gives one the feeling of driving back to NYC/Boston. It is remote for those that love remote golf.

The greens and greensites are not world class, but I really believe it is a place that needs to be seen and played at least once. I played it just the one time in 40+ MPH winds. It really was because the girl in the pro shop said "you are going to play in this wind?!

This is the real Ireland out at Carne.

In the Ran scale, Carne came out as a "missed opportunity" so it has no review at GCA. I always thought Ran missed that one, but is it possible that Carne is a better or more fun golf course than Sand Hills?

And David, agreeing with JC on anything is not exactly helping your argument!

[Ran Morrissett]

The middle of the front nine at Carne is horrible with the parallel holes that are separated by poorly created artificial mounds. Yuck, yuck, yuck. Why in the world route the holes through that portion of the property when you had other wild tumbling land at your disposal?  

Poor routing + poor construction + poor strategy (insufficient width to create interesting playing angles) + poor quality of holes on the front = missed opportunity.

I will say the eighteenth hole is one of the best, least known links holes anywhere - I just wish there was more of that. Maybe if Coore had routed the course, there would have been  

Cheers,

[JC Jones]

I have no dog in this as I am not a member of either Ballyneal nor Sand Hills and I have likewise not played the same.

Nonetheless, I find the most fascinating and educating threads on this site are generally the ones where people get into a good discussion about the architectural merits of various courses.  Just like the Shinnecock v Pine Valley or Shinny v NGLA or any of the great v great threads of the past, I find a Ballyneal v Sand Hills discussion to be equally as interesting.  I doubt anyone is using it as an opportunity to bash or worse, "urinate" on either or both of these courses.  We should feel lucky that we have 2 modern courses like this worthy of such discussion.

[Jim Franklin]

Has Mr Huckaby seen this thread? Sand Hills a Doak 6? Hmmmmm...interesting.

I loved SH and I loved Ballyneal. The ground game is more prevalent at Ballyneal, but is not non-existent at SH. There are a lot of raised greens at SH now that I think about it, but that certainly did not take away from my enjoyment. Having played there 20+ times, I had a blast each and every time so that qualifies it as a 9.9 Doak to me. I would give it a 10, but Rock Creek gets that number.

[Tom Huckaby]

Has Mr Huckaby seen this thread? Sand Hills a Doak 6? Hmmmmm...interesting.

I loved SH and I loved Ballyneal. The ground game is more prevalent at Ballyneal, but is not non-existent at SH. There are a lot of raised greens at SH now that I think about it, but that certainly did not take away from my enjoyment. Having played there 20+ times, I had a blast each and every time so that qualifies it as a 9.9 Doak to me. I would give it a 10, but Rock Creek gets that number.

Jim  - this is cut from the current Sand Hills picture thread - all discussion there.  I do not have the strength to counter it again in a separate thread.. although that would have been most appropriate.

[Jim Franklin]

Thanks. I finally got around to reading some of the other thread. Good luck. SH is in my Top 6 so you know where I stand.

[Richard Choi]

It is my bad. I should have just started a new thread. Mimh's analysis deserved one...

[Mike McGuire]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

[Tom Huckaby]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

8 is not driveable from the tips, at least not by many.
But each are great golf holes.. what the heck does it matter if back to back, from the middle tees, they are each driveable?  Good lord, if anything, that adds to the uniqueness of the course....

Oh well.  As I said in the other thread, I disagree with every contention David makes.  So no need to rehash again here.  But I am curious about the above....

[Tim Bert]

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

I find this to be an odd criticism. I doubt there are many, if any, wind conditions that would render these both drivable on the same day for all but the most elite golfers. Back to back short par 4s can be a wonderful thing. The two at Cypress Point and Sand Hills come immediately to mind.

[Tom Huckaby]

Well said, Tim.  As you can see that struck me as very odd as well.

The rest has been beaten to death in the picture thread.

[Scott Szabo]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

Is this any different than back to back LONG par fours?  Or a short-4 and a short-5?  Ballyneal closes with two brutes for par fours, as does Winged Foot.  Does this make them lesser because of this?

[Jim Franklin]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

7&8 are two of my favorite holes there. Quite frankly, I am glad C&C had the courage to put back to back short fours on the course. CPC, as Tim stated, has back to back short 4s as well. What was Mackenzie thinking ?

[Dan Moore]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

I love that they had the balls to put the short par 4's back to back.  Both were great and 8 is pretty much all world in my book.  Made for an interesting stretch of holes and dramatic contrast to the tough start and middle part of the back that is also quite tough with the short par 5 mixed in.  The overall flow was one of the intriguing aspects of the course.  

[Jon Spaulding]

7&8? Totally different golf holes, playing in opposite directions, totally different shot requirements......

I prefer S&H to any other letters in the alphabet, Mike.

Somewhere in nerd space, there's an algorithm incorporating beard length, playing ability, and sanity. I must admit that Mihm is a "stress test" for this postulate, he is a damn good player. I only know one rocket scientist, perhaps he can put something together.

[David Mihm]

Hey guys,

Just found this thread via Gene's last comment on the other one.

First of all as a relative newbie to this whole 'forum' concept (I am more used to blogs where comments are organized around posts rather than threads) I apologize to the community if my comments should have remained off of a photos-only thread.

Secondly, I feel like I mentioned already but perhaps I did not that 8 is a fabulous hole, one of ~4 world-class holes at Sand Hills that would surely be enjoyable to play again and again and again for members.

I thought 7 was one of the better holes as well...the similarities to 9 @ Cypress were hard if not impossible to ignore.  The look Mackenzie achieved at Cypress and the more demanding tee shot place that slightly higher in my own personal book but I do not by any stretch disagree that 7 is an outstanding hole.  The fact that 7 and 8 are back-to-back does not bother me at all...the point about back-to-back long holes being just fine is a good one.

[David Mihm]

Regarding Carne, it's been 4 years since I played there most recently but I remember loving the 5th, 6th, and 8th holes there and was not struck by any artificiality. The back nine is a unique stretch in the world and feels as unmanufactured to me as any stretch at Ballybunion.

As a side note, I must admit I've never really understood the architectural community's aversion to parallel holes, provided the holes are different enough from one another.  There are plenty of great courses that play predominantly in two directions (Dornoch and Aberdeen come to mind).

Having said that, Ran, I certainly see your point about parallel holes being strange on a course with so much more great linksland at Hackett's disposal.

[George Pazin]

David, you don't need to apologize for anything, you didn't introduce the comments. For that matter, Richard doesn't either, he was simply trying to foment discussion. We can quibble about where it should have been - I'd agree it would have been better on it's own, primarily because it is too likely to be missed on a photo tour - but no one needs to apologize to anyone, it's just not that big of a deal.

Much of the best discussion on this site comes from heated arguments about the best of the best. I'd rather see two passionate golfers post on here than have it devolve into a backslapping-fest.

[Richard Choi]

I will second George, David doesn't need to apologize for anything.

When is the last time we heard from someone who got to play a very exclusive golf club and post anything other than a glowing review? Not very often.

When I go to Amazon.com and read comments about the product that I want to purchase, it is not the glowing reviews that I find most useful, the negative reviews are far more useful - even those that I don't necessarily agree with. I really did not want David to post on his own because of stuff like this and I figured I could serve as a buffer.

I just don't understand the attitude of people who believe any opinion different than theirs should never see the light of day.

[Mike McGuire]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

Is this any different than back to back LONG par fours?  Or a short-4 and a short-5?  Ballyneal closes with two brutes for par fours, as does Winged Foot.  Does this make them lesser because of this?

Quite different.  I said driveable not short. Every course should have several long par fours and by odds will have them in sequence. Not every course will have a drivable par four much less 2 and back to back.

(We did play the up tees the first day, 8 was reachable by all. Second day the tips and 8 was out of reach)

[Jason Topp]

David:

I appreciate your views even if I disagree.  I really like having my thinking on a course challenged in a well thought out manner. 

[Jim Franklin]

I would not go as low as 6-6.5 but agree with Mr Mimh's analysis.

All those holes to choose from you end up with back to back driveable par fours??

The Sand Hills experience is fantastic though and cant wait to return.

Is this any different than back to back LONG par fours?  Or a short-4 and a short-5?  Ballyneal closes with two brutes for par fours, as does Winged Foot.  Does this make them lesser because of this?

Quite different.  I said driveable not short. Every course should have several long par fours and by odds will have them in sequence. Not every course will have a drivable par four much less 2 and back to back.

(We did play the up tees the first day, 8 was reachable by all. Second day the tips and 8 was out of reach)

Just curious, but how many reached #8 and what were the scores? Also, how many reached #7 and what were the scores?

[Rob Rigg]

Jim,

I reached #8 for birdie from the middle tees - just missed the eagle - a great hole - but had an 9 iron or something from the tips on the same day.

I tried to reach #7 but with the wind it was a very challenging shot. Ended up laying up the second time and getting up and down for birdie.

Both of those holes are excellent short par 4s and they play very differently.

In terms of SH being over-rated - let's remember it is #1 Modern so if anyone thinks it is #2 (say behind Ballyneal for example) then by default that person is saying it is over-rated. Let's not be too sensitive here - SH is aboslutely not a Doak 5 but maybe it is an 8 for some instead of a 10? That should be okay as opinions differ based on personal style and preference.

I would imagine that an appreciation for SH would grow over repeated visits as it must play drastically different based on the wind direction. Playing into the wind on the final four holes, especially when they are not pushovers, is rarely a "fun" way to end a round.

Personally, I thought the approach shots at BN were more varied and interesting for the type of game that I like to play. And as mentioned (I don't disagree with you on this Tom), the walkability of BN is something that I absolutely loved - it definitely enhanced the overall experience for me. For people who like to ride in a cart from time to time that would be a major inconvenience.

I wish that I had played the courses back to back (we visited Prairie Club inbetween).

[Bob_Huntley]

I may not have read the critique of Sand Hills correctly but to say the running shot is not on there, is nonsense. I played 18 holes with Neil Regan and he used a puterr on every second shot to the green; and I must say, very effectively.


Bob

[Mike Sweeney]

I may not have read the critique of Sand Hills correctly but to say the running shot is not on there, is nonsense. I played 18 holes with Neil Regan and he used a puterr on every second shot to the green; and I must say, very effectively.


Bob

Bob,

I was on the phone with Tom Paul today and you and that trip to Sand Hills came up. Hope all is well.

[Tags:]

Tags: