Ballyneal Criticism

[Bart Bradley]

Bart, When was the last time you played Wild Horse? Or for that matter BN?

I see no problem with the turf, but I'm open to your justifications for your critique?

Adam:

I was at Ballyneal and Wild Horse 6 weeks ago.  The turf was equally firm at both places.  The greens at WH were substantially better in terms of smooth roll.  Perhaps early June is a too early in the season to judge the greens, but WH was far ahead of BN at that time of year.

Adam, the "first cut" of rough at Ballyneal was also a significant problem....While I admit that the fairways are plenty wide and that a well struck shot should not end up in the first cut, this area was so clumpy that it was often impossible to hit the back of the ball.  I had to take 3 unplayable lies in 6 rounds from the "first cut".  There were many times that I would have preferred to have been in the native than in  the first cut.  Now, this may have improved since June as well.

These are minor criticisms of an otherwise outstanding place, course, and club.  Please realize that I LOVE Ballyneal and all that it is.  But it might be even better if the grassing program were/had been different.

Bart

Bart,

I'd like to see these lies in the first cut that you had to take an unplayable out of.  I know it's patchy, but I've yet to encounter anything that I couldn't get a club on and try to hack out of.  I kinda like the randomness of the rough and native.  It seems like an appropriate penalty for missing a 70-yard fairway.

Jim:

Again, I prefaced my comments by saying that I knew that being in the first cut meant I had hit a poor shot.  I agree I shouldn't be rewarded for being in that area....However, the lies that I and my playing partners got in the first cut were quite often terrible.  Why have a first cut at all?  I generally had been better luck extricating from the native.  In my opinion, this portion of the playing surface could have been better.

Please understand that overall, this is a minor criticism but after all, this is a thread called "Ballyneal Criticism".

Bart

[Adam Clayman]

David, The irony in you agreeing it's a 3rd shot course is interesting. How did that work for you on #8?

I have no idea what it means to be a 3rd shot course, or that it would even be a weakness. Unless we are talking Par 3 courses.

Michael, excellent post. I have no idea who the one man is, from the other. Pure genius. One item jumped off the page. The notion that the bunkers have no strartegery    to them, couldn't be further from the reality. Almost every bunker, save for a few and the recent additions, are of the highest strategic value because the more you flirt with them, the more reward you achieve when avoided.

Bart, Appreciate the comments.
 The clumpiness is important on a couple of levels. Firstly, Fescue is a clump grass, so that's it's nature. The clumpy appearance, aesthetically, is key to the transition into the native. The best analogy is an impressionists use of pixels to blend it's images. A stark line of demarcation would look hideous in the way Wolf Creek in Mesquite Nv. does.  And lastly but most importantly, is the playable aspect. Allowing a naturally random rub o' green outcome, from an indifferent or poorly gauged shot. Considering the width of the fairways, don't you think there should be some aspect that challenges the player who misses the fairway? I do, and I feel it's a better test than chopping out of long blue grass that Wild Horse has. Yes, it could be better, more manicured, but to want that at Ballyneal is not in keeping with the break away from traditional, standard practices and expectations.

[Jim Colton]

Jim:

Again, I prefaced my comments by saying that I knew that being in the first cut meant I had hit a poor shot.  I agree I shouldn't be rewarded for being in that area....However, the lies that I and my playing partners got in the first cut were quite often terrible.  Why have a first cut at all?  I generally had been better luck extricating from the native.  In my opinion, this portion of the playing surface could have been better.

Please understand that overall, this is a minor criticism but after all, this is a thread called "Ballyneal Criticism".

Bart

Bart,
 
  No worries about the criticism.  I invited it with this thread and I'm not going to attack you or take it personally because you didn't like one or more (or even all) aspects of the course.  I spend a lot of time in rough and native out here, fortunately and unfortunately, so much that I've gotten pretty good at getting out of it.  I have the self-appointed title of Subject Matter Expert on the Playing Conditions of Yucca.  Like I said, I enjoy the randomness of it.  Sometimes you get a crap lie and have to take a drop or can only advance it a few yards.  Sometimes you can get some club on it and hit a heroic shot.  And sometimes you can fool yourself into trying to bite off more than you can chew and actually end up in worse shape than when you started.

p.s. I'm in Holyoke right now and the course is even more firm and fast than it was during the Yucca a few days ago.  The wind picked up to 20+ mph yesterday afternoon and it made the course a real stern test when combined with the turf conditions.

[Tim Pitner]

Jim:

I am a HUGE Ballyneal fan...but I believe it has the wrong grass for the environment.  If Ballyneal had the same playing surface as Wild Horse (which plays remarkably FIRM and FAST and the greens are silky smooth), Balllyneal would be better.

This one puzzles me--maybe it's simply down to when you catch the course.  The only time I've played Wild Horse--in July a few years ago--the fairways were definitely not firm and fast.  Ballyneal's fairways, however, have always allowed plenty of roll when I've played them.  And my experience is that Ballyneal's greens are very true (much like the Bandon courses) and not as slow as some would suggest (other than when the course first opened and the greens were rolling at 5-6). 

[Bart Bradley]

Adam:

I can see and appreciate your argument regarding the clumping.

But, I still can't get my head around the idea that it is a good thing that the first cut is MORE penal than being out in the native.  The fairways are wide, but there is a lot of roll and sometimes a lot of wind. At places, such as on number 9 or number 16,  the fairway does narrow down significantly.  So, a shot does not have to be terrible to end up in the first cut.  There should be some penalty, as you say, for being in the first cut but I think the grass choice makes it too much penalty or the environment does not allow the grass to grow in to the extent that the clumping is less severe.  I just returned from Scotland where many of the courses had fescue...none had the clumping issues in the rough like Ballyneal (I suspect because the environment is more suitable to growing fescue).  

Scott Szabo, a few posts back, said he experienced the same issue.

Again, Adam, I want to emphasize that I think Ballyneal is GREAT just as it is...It is inspiring.  I like the general non-conformity, tee-less, yardageless theme...But, I think it is possible that the greens could roll smoother, and the course could be even better with different grassing choices.

Bart

[Bart Bradley]

Jim:

I am a HUGE Ballyneal fan...but I believe it has the wrong grass for the environment.  If Ballyneal had the same playing surface as Wild Horse (which plays remarkably FIRM and FAST and the greens are silky smooth), Balllyneal would be better.

This one puzzles me--maybe it's simply down to when you catch the course.  The only time I've played Wild Horse--in July a few years ago--the fairways were definitely not firm and fast.  Ballyneal's fairways, however, have always allowed plenty of roll when I've played them.  And my experience is that Ballyneal's greens are very true (much like the Bandon courses) and not as slow as some would suggest (other than when the course first opened and the greens were rolling at 5-6). 

Tim:

Fair enough.  I have only been to Ballyneal twice.  Once in early June 2010 and the other in October 2008.  I loved it both times, but both times the greens were not smooth.

Perhaps, I just visited when the greens were not at their peak...but when the main playing season is short (May-Nov.?), I would think there might be a grass more suited to the environment to allow for smooth putting during that time. 

It could be that I just had bad luck and I hope and pray that I get to return to Ballyneal many more times and discover that the greens roll smooth most of the time.

Bart

[Adam Clayman]

Bart, Please don't feel that I don't understand how you feel, I do. I'm not arguing, just discussing and hopefully illuminating.  I do not agree that it's more penal than the native. It's just a different type of penalty. I've had every conceivable lie out there, both clumped and native, and only when lodged at the root of a yucca, have I not invented a shot to play. The best medicine is usually to just get back to short grass, although the heroic recovery is possible with the right circumstance. Again, Not arguing, discussing.

[Steve Kline]

Here are a few of my thoughts after a couple of days to reflect.

THE GOOD
- a great walk in the park and tremendously fun course. Immediately went back to the first tee and played until dark.
- great greensites with lots of variety for approaches, chipping and putting. One round I hit almost all sand wedges for chipping and the next I played all bump and runs to try something different.
- felt like there as good rhythm to the course

THE NOT AS GOOD
- course seemed fairly easy. With a good drive I think there was one hole where I hit more than wedge.  We played from pretty far back too. Some of this could be because there was no wind and the pin placements were not too tough.
- most holes seemed to dog leg left. I can only remember two that did not - 10 and 17.

I thought the greens were very true and putted better and faster than they looked. I had no problem with the glumly rough. I got a really bad lie or two but the fairways are huge.

Overall this is a course I would love to play every day. What more could I want?

[Jim Colton]

Steve,

  I'm guessing you make most courses seem easy!

  Just like the Open Championship, the course is definitely there for the taking when the wind is down.  Somehow I even managed to shoot 73 over the weekend.  Yesterday afternoon, the course was easily 5 strokes tougher, with an average wind.

[Kenny Baer]

Jim:

I am a HUGE Ballyneal fan...but I believe it has the wrong grass for the environment.  If Ballyneal had the same playing surface as Wild Horse (which plays remarkably FIRM and FAST and the greens are silky smooth), Balllyneal would be better.

Design-wise, I don't get any of the criticisms.  It is an all-world routing with all-world holes.

Bart

+1; being honest if BN was in the same condition as SH or WH it would possibly be the best course in the world. 

[Adam Clayman]

Steve, #'s 2, 3, 4 , 5 , 6 ,8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 17, don't dogleg left. Now of course it's not fair I included the par 3's.  
 
Pus, #1 from the member tee is also straight. #6 jogs left as does 18, but they are far from doglegs. The only real doglegs are 14 and 16.

IMO, that's a testament to the quality of the ground, it's undulations, and, the freedom associated with the width.

It's a unique original work of art. There's no place like it in the world. Somehow, someone could make that a criticism. Couldn't they?  

[Tom_Doak]

With your 'third-shot' comment, you identified something that I couldn't put my finger on while I was there, that, in my opinion, was the course's only true weakness.  I did find myself with a number of short approaches, and with no real way to attack certain pins, even from the correct sides of the fairway.  

David:

I would appreciate if you could give two or three specific examples of this, so I can tell how much the wind is a factor in it.

I think it's okay to have a couple of holes per round where it's almost impossible to get within ten feet.  Those are the ones which separate the men from the boys, and which show who has patience and who doesn't.  You would see a lot of them at St. Andrews this weekend, if it hadn't just rained.

But, I have to say I am always puzzled by the juxtaposition of good players' two complaints -- that (a) the course is generally a bit too easy and forgiving, but (b) the greens are too difficult, and there are some holes where there's no way to get close.  To me, those two criticisms tend to cancel each other out.

[Matt Bosela]

My only major criticism of Ballyneal is that after heavy rains and cold temperatures, we didn't get the real firm and fast conditions that the club is known for, with many balls sticking on the top of slopes and in the fringe where it would usually feed back to where you expected it to go.  Of course, that's purely bad luck and you even with those conditions, you could still visualize what would happen if it were a touch drier.

On the smaller side, I commented to a friend that there seemed to be an overabundance of right to left holes and I was also a bit confused a couple of times playing 13 and 14, as both tee shots are eerily similar.

13th Tee


14th Tee


Both are right to left, with blowouts guarding the inside of the dogleg and with centerline bunkers dictating strategy off the tee.

Of course, the green sites are completely different and the 14th green may be one of the better greensites on the golf course.

Minor quibbles to be sure - Ballyneal was one of the great golf experiences of my lifetime and I hope to get the opportunity to visit again in the future when it's playing the way it did for the guys at the Yucca.

[RJ_Daley]

I don't pretend to know the proper turf answers.  I only know enough to say that many of these comments comparing turf at BN, SH, and WH, soon PC, which lead to various criticisms, need a top quality superintendent who makes his living out in that area to explain a few things...

Trouble is... the darn superintendent profession has so many touchy/sensitive areas that frank commentary can sometimes lead to an uncomfortable professional situation for those fellows.  But, I can think of 3-4 guys who 'could' set a few things straight about some people's critiques.  The professional turf guy's explanations may not deminish some folk's criticism, but at least the critics might learn more about why certain aspects of the field of play are as they were found on those particular times where criticism is rendered.

[Scott Szabo]

Here are a few of my thoughts after a couple of days to reflect.

THE GOOD
- a great walk in the park and tremendously fun course. Immediately went back to the first tee and played until dark.
- great greensites with lots of variety for approaches, chipping and putting. One round I hit almost all sand wedges for chipping and the next I played all bump and runs to try something different.
- felt like there as good rhythm to the course

THE NOT AS GOOD
- course seemed fairly easy. With a good drive I think there was one hole where I hit more than wedge.  We played from pretty far back too. Some of this could be because there was no wind and the pin placements were not too tough.
- most holes seemed to dog leg left. I can only remember two that did not - 10 and 17.

I thought the greens were very true and putted better and faster than they looked. I had no problem with the glumly rough. I got a really bad lie or two but the fairways are huge.

Overall this is a course I would love to play every day. What more could I want?

If Ballyneal seemed to easy for you, you must be one hell of a player.  Did you play the long par fours all the way back?  If so, you must be a monster off the tee as well.  I can't imagine having a wedge into 2, 6, 10, 13, 17 or 18.  Most of those are mid to long irons for the masses, if not more.

[Michael Barnett]

First off, I am newbie to posting but a long-time viewer of the website.  I too had the privilege of playing in The Yucca this past weekend and found the routing and shot values at Ballyneal to be nothing short of spectacular.  That of course says nothing of our host who was as gracious as one can be.  All in all a truly memorable weekend and thanks again to all involved.  In viewing Jim’s initial post it did get me to thinking what if any weaknesses the course had; suffice it to say I found few if any.

Regarding the 1st cut, I too took the “rub of the green” view, figuring that if I had managed to miss the 70 yard wide fairway (which I did too frequently) it was reasonable to assume a penalty could/should be extracted.  I also tend to agree with Tom’s comment regarding the patience required around getting close to some of the pins on an approach, whether it was a 2nd or 3rd shot (to me the front/middle pin on 16, back/right on 6&14, front on 18, just to name a few).  On many of those one simply had to accept making a ~15 footer for birdie/par, and the desire to attack further brings larger #’s into play.   

The one criticism which Jim raised which I debated quite a bit was:

-   The undulations in the greens promote 'goofy golf' and circus shots, thus rewarding indifferent and poor shots and not properly rewarding well-struck golf shots.

On the positive side, I watched myself and my playing partners experience quite a bit of joy in getting balls quite close to hole on third shots+ that would have been exceedingly difficult had the undulations not been present.  And in my opinion, that is applicable for players of all levels which I think adds to the “fun factor” of the course.  On the other hand, I can think of many instances in which the internal contours of the green stymied/significantly limited many birdie opportunities after very well struck golf shots, especially as the greens began to pick up speed on Sunday.  Perhaps I noticed that more given the limited wind we faced over those 3 days, which necessarily led to more opportunities to attack pin locations (which might otherwise be played more conservatively) from the fairway.

After a truly memorable 3 days that was the only of Jim’s potential criticisms that I can somewhat appreciate, and can understand the view for having slightly less undulation in some of the complexes.  That being said it’s a minor quibble coming from someone who eagerly anticipated getting right back out there to play again as I began walking up 17 and 18.  That to me is the mark of a truly extraordinary course. 

[Peter Pallotta]

"But, I have to say I am always puzzled by the juxtaposition of good players' two complaints -- that (a) the course is generally a bit too easy and forgiving, but (b) the greens are too difficult, and there are some holes where there's no way to get close.  To me, those two criticisms tend to cancel each other out."

Tom - I'm always surprised, though I guess I shouldn't be, by how deep and of long-standing is the division good players make  between the ball-striking and the putting/chipping aspects of the game, and between the tee-to-green game and all the rest.  In a fundamental way, good players a) have always believed that the very definition of a good player is their tee-to-green game, and b) are loathe to think that a grandmother can conceivably manage one aspect of the game -- i.e. putting and chipping -- just as well or better than they can, and thus potentially score just as well.  Good players don't tend to see this reality as part of the magic and spirit of golf; they tend to see it as an arbitrary and unfair levellling of the playing field.  I know this must be the case, because even though I am a poor player, I can sometimes feel that sentiment creeping in to my own thinking on my rare good ball-striking days. But one of the many neat things about golf is that the final score doesn't lie; so the next time a good player tells you that the course is too forgiving, ask him what he shot.  (Just be prepared for a very long and convoluted answer full of "ifs" and "buts"...though your steady gaze throughout their pallid self-justifications will eventually speak volumes....)

Peter  

[Harris Nepon]

I'm honestly trying really hard to come up with a criticism of Ballyneal so I can participate in this great discussion, but I can't.

When I played it, the greens were a little fuzzy (due to horrible weather) but rolled true. The course didn't play firm and fast, again because the weather was horrible. So I have to give it a pass for the negatives I experienced. It was clear that with better weather and the ability to do some maintenance work, the course would be phenomenal.

Ballyneal was so much fun to play. The concept of no tee blocks was brilliant. The simplicity. The views. The accommodations. The service. The comfortable, laid back attitude of the whole place.

I guess if I forced a complaint, it would be the length of the course. Even stretched out to the tips on every hole it wasn’t that long. But not sure that’s actually a bad thing.

I feel bad trying to criticize such a great course.  Maybe I’ll stay on the sidelines of this one.

[John Mayhugh]

If there are no carts, cart paths, teeing blocks, hole markers, or any other above ground objects, (save for a cooler or iced water) what makes you think something as commonplace as a 150 yard marker would be acceptable?

Does the make-up of the course, or it's membership, lead you to believe they would want such a thing?

Use the bunkers or other features to figure yardages.

You have to have a need for caddies to have a successful program. Range finders and Sky caddies, as far as I know, are not not allowed. You may even be able to ask for one of the hand held devices the caddies carry to assist them in figuring yardage to help you. Either that, or pay attention your first time around when you do have a caddie. Ask them the distance as you walk past key features and remember them.

I really don't understand this.  If one is required to rely on a caddie for yardage, shouldn't the caddie know the course?  I think sending out unskilled caddies and having them use rangefinders negates a lot of the purity goal.  I have a hard time reconciling the idea of no tee markers while using electronic range finders.  I've been fortunate enough to play several rounds at Ballyneal, and this is my biggest criticism.  

I'm FINE with the idea of paying a kid to carry my bag and support the concept behind doing it.  I just don't understand all the yardage secrecy when a great many of the caddies are not especially knowledgeable.

The golf course is outstanding.

[Steve Kline]

Steve,

  I'm guessing you make most courses seem easy!

  Just like the Open Championship, the course is definitely there for the taking when the wind is down.  Somehow I even managed to shoot 73 over the weekend.  Yesterday afternoon, the course was easily 5 strokes tougher, with an average wind.

I wish I was there yesterday to play in the wind. Wind always changes everything.

[George Pazin]

But, I have to say I am always puzzled by the juxtaposition of good players' two complaints -- that (a) the course is generally a bit too easy and forgiving, but (b) the greens are too difficult, and there are some holes where there's no way to get close.  To me, those two criticisms tend to cancel each other out.

This is not at all directed at those commenting on this thread, I don't know them well enough to say, but my experience with most golfers, particularly better golfers, is that if they have a wedge or short iron in their hands, and don't get it close, then the greens must be tricked up or goofy.


John Mayhugh, perhaps the caddies are just learning?

[Link Walsh]

Never been to Ballyneal (or Sand Hills).  The only time I've even set foot in either of these states is a short layover in the Denver airport.  

But I wanted to comment on the criticism of the greens being too contoured and how you can't get to certain pins.

Tom said something in another thread about how he admired St. Andrews as the ultimate thinking man's course.  I'm paraphrasing, but he noted how one has to play the holes backwards in their mind to score well.  Depending on where the pin is and what the wind is doing (plus the hundreds of bunkers), it can affect a player's strategy immensely for each shot they play until they hole out.  Everything I've read and seen about Ballyneal sounds exactly like this description of St. Andrews.  

Also, some have argued that the fairways are too wide and hence, too easy to hit.  Because of the nature of the greens and how much your strategy is affected by pin position, shouldn't the fairways be wide in order to give players options about how to attack the hole?  Isn't that the very same criticism that many use when discussing how Augusta National has lost its way by implementing the second cut and planting all those trees?  How can it be bad for what Augusta did, but bad for Ballyneal to NOT do the same thing and narrow their fairways?

Ballyneal really sounds like the ultimate members course, one where you learn something new about the course each time you're out there and, more importantly, one that will never get boring.  Rather, your strategy for each hole varies depending on weather, pin position, and in this unique case where you choose to tee off.  

[Steve Kline]

Steve, #'s 2, 3, 4 , 5 , 6 ,8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 17, don't dogleg left. Now of course it's not fair I included the par 3's.  
 
Pus, #1 from the member tee is also straight. #6 jogs left as does 18, but they are far from doglegs. The only real doglegs are 14 and 16.

IMO, that's a testament to the quality of the ground, it's undulations, and, the freedom associated with the width.

It's a unique original work of art. There's no place like it in the world. Somehow, someone could make that a criticism. Couldn't they?  

I think the course is fantastic first of all and my not so goods are nitpicking. We played it from all the way back. Maybe dogleg is too strong of a word but it felt like a lot of holes moved left or cavorts a draw off the tee.

[Ben Sims]

Let me say first that on the Corky scale, Ballyneal is a 10.  Other courses that have garnered that ranking?  Crystal Downs, Oakmont, Pac Dunes, Wolf Point.  

Other than the 15th green not being blind enough, my biggest criticism of the course (only two days and 63 holes) was this:

I feel that both nines close with a whimper.  Not that a holes like 7 and 8 or 12 and 13 need to be the closers.  But a happy medium should be reached, and personally, I felt that 9 and 18 were the weakest hole on their respective nines.  In comparison, to me it would be like Yale finishing on a hole like #11.

[Steve Kline]

Scott - I shot 71 and missed two straight uphill birdie putts from 6-8 feet. Jim could give you a better idea of where we played from but it was all the way back except for 10 I think. On 2 I hit less than full wedge. I can't recall the sixth hole at the moment. Ten I hit a bad drive and 8 iron (again we didn't play that hole all the way back). The first time on I popped up my drive but the second time I think I had less than a full wedge. 17 I hit a 60 degree the first time and 56 the second. 18 I hit a 9 iron and a 3/4 wedge. Pin placements make a difference too.