Old Macdonald is Bandon's Best ...

[Tim Bert]

John M - thanks for clarifying. You are correct that I wasn't factoring public vs private, access, etc. I am factoring only enjoyment / preference.  If you trul meant it in the sense that you were taking 10-0 simply because you could go play 10 more at Old Macdonald the following week if you really wanted to then I get it. The 7-3 follow-up is a helpful point of reference.

[Tim Pitner]

Matt,

I agree that Pacific Dunes #12 and #15 are transitional holes, but calling them "filler" does a disservice to them, IMO.  I like #12 more and more, but it is somewhat bland.  #15, however, is quite an interesting hole (principally, the Foxy-inspired green)--one that I enjoy more than #16 - #18. 

It doesn't surprise me that people here love Old Macdonald; however, it does surprise me how quickly some people are downgrading (relatively) Pacific Dunes.  Mayhugh has OM as 8-2 over the other courses at the resort (I was assuming the 2 went to PD but perhaps not)!--that's insanity.  Maybe OM is just that good (I can't tell you until August 2011 when my trip will mirror that of Michael Underwood).  Or, maybe people are forgetting just how good Pacific Dunes is. 

P.S. Michael, do you mind if I put my charges on the Underwood tab? 

[Bill Brightly]

Matt just LOVES to debate precise rankings of equal or near-equal courses...

I'll say this: the Bandon Resort is certainly an example of the sum being greater than the total of its parts. In otherwords, the playing  experience of each course is enhanced by a golfer's ability to enjoy the other courses over a short time frame. Bandon Trails is fantastic on its own, but the golfer also gets to see what a skilled architect can do on a site that does not have the Pacific Ocean to work with, other than views.

[Matt_Ward]

Bill:

The Trails is weak during the middle of the round there -- although I do believe the opening hole on that layout is the finest of the four courses. I also believe that as time goes by the original 18 will be seen as much less a contribution than what has been done with the others. Just my opinions -- you're right -- I just LIOVE to debaste precise rankings. Thanks for noticiing.

Tim:

We agree to disagree -- compare the 12th and 15th to the other par-5 holes at the course. Big difference in my mind.

Old Macdonal doesn't have that flaw.

Tim -- the 12th IS bland. It's just there to eat up ground and yardage to get you to the sensational par-4 13th. Old Macdonald doesn't give away anything along the lines of filler in my mind.

I have not lowered my appreciation of Pacific Dunes but I do think Old Macdonald gives you more looks and more diversity than Pacific Dunes. The increased yardage also plays a role when linked to the pesky winds that can blow threough the property. I actuall originally thought that Old Macdonald would have eaiser holes on the front side because of the lesser yardage figures than the back -- but the outward nine is no less in quality than the closing half.

[John Mayhugh]

It doesn't surprise me that people here love Old Macdonald; however, it does surprise me how quickly some people are downgrading (relatively) Pacific Dunes.  Mayhugh has OM as 8-2 over the other courses at the resort (I was assuming the 2 went to PD but perhaps not)!--that's insanity.  Maybe OM is just that good (I can't tell you until August 2011 when my trip will mirror that of Michael Underwood).  Or, maybe people are forgetting just how good Pacific Dunes is.   

Or maybe people have preferences that do not match your own.

I don't expect other people to like OM to the same extent that I do. I'm only expressing my own opinion & I don't think of this as downgrading the other courses. I love big & bold & fun and OM stands out in that way.  And, for what little it's worth, I would play 8 OM, 1 PD, 1 BD.

[Adam Clayman]

So Matt you have no problem with how tight the lines of play are and their potential in hurting someone on an adjacent hole or teeing ground?  Who cares which is best? Its only opinion. 

[Garland Bayley]

Wow!  10-0? 

I've played NGLA once, so I have a repeat play bias at work.  But, Johnny "New Courses Are Better" sees it 5-5 at a minimum.

It's probably not logical, but I just loved NGLA that much.  I'm also Johnny "Old Courses Are Better" so you should keep that in mind.  Also, if I had unlimited access to NGLA, I might mix it up a bit more.  But if I had a chance for ten rounds there, I would play every one of them.

Of ten rounds at Bandon, I would probably play 8 at Old Macdonald.

OK, let's make it a better analogy. If you had 10 rounds to choose from Shinny, Sebonack, and NGLA, how many at NGLA?
8?

[Jerry Kluger]

Looking at Golfweek's ratings NGLA comes in at 4th place on the classical list with a 9.11 rating.  In the modern listing Sand Hills is #1 at 9.34 and Pacific Dunes is second at 9.23.  So along comes Old Mac and people say it is way better than PD which means it probably rates higher than SH.  But then they say that if they are playing 10 rounds between NGLA and OM they go as high as 10-0 in favor of NGLA.  I am getting a sense of snobbery here with the long history, magnificent clubhouse and very limited access being an undue influence on some people's opinion.  And aren't we going a bit nuts about OM without respecting the genius of PD and the greatness of BD and BT.   BTW: Golf Digest rates SH and PD ahead of NGLA.

[Dan Grossman]

I have not lowered my appreciation of Pacific Dunes but I do think Old Macdonald gives you more looks and more diversity than Pacific Dunes. The increased yardage also plays a role when linked to the pesky winds that can blow threough the property. I actuall originally thought that Old Macdonald would have eaiser holes on the front side because of the lesser yardage figures than the back -- but the outward nine is no less in quality than the closing half.

I was just looking at the OM scorecard and noticed the relative yardage imbalance between the two nines.  (I haven't played it yet, not until January).  I am curious how folks think this imbalance will affect the course during the winter wind?  It seems like the longest holes (#9, #10, #12, #17 and #18) will play into the wind.  You only get helped out by the wind on the road hole.  During the summer prevailing winds, you only have #6 and #11 to contend with into the wind.

FWIW, I also am not one who falls into the camp of thinking that #3, #15 at PD are less than worthly.  Having only played these holes with the winter wind, #3 becomes more challenging because you feel like you have to go for the green in two.  Assuming you hit a good drive, you are likely to be standing over your first fairway wood / long iron shot of the round with some poor outcomes for a bad shot.  #15 also becomes a bit more difficult into the wind as the layup can be challenging as you try to avoid the bunkers.  I haven't played it since they have removed some of the gorse on that hole, so that might change my opinion of it, however.  #12 is probably my least favorite of the P5s on the course.

[Matt_Ward]

Adam:

I see the course being sufficiently wide enough to avoid what you think can / does happen.

Just my opinion.

[Jud_T]

Jerry,

As discussed elsewhere, there are different criteria for the Classic and Modern lists and therefore you are comparing apples to oranges...

[Tim Pitner]

It doesn't surprise me that people here love Old Macdonald; however, it does surprise me how quickly some people are downgrading (relatively) Pacific Dunes.  Mayhugh has OM as 8-2 over the other courses at the resort (I was assuming the 2 went to PD but perhaps not)!--that's insanity.  Maybe OM is just that good (I can't tell you until August 2011 when my trip will mirror that of Michael Underwood).  Or, maybe people are forgetting just how good Pacific Dunes is.   

Or maybe people have preferences that do not match your own.

I don't expect other people to like OM to the same extent that I do. I'm only expressing my own opinion & I don't think of this as downgrading the other courses. I love big & bold & fun and OM stands out in that way.  And, for what little it's worth, I would play 8 OM, 1 PD, 1 BD.

John,

Fair enough.  8-2 does seem rather lopsided though.  Maybe that's a weakness of the 10 round distribution rating system, especially when applied to 4 courses.  Is OM 8 times greater than PD?  Do you rate PD and BD equally?  You have no room for BT in 10 rounds? 

[Mac Plumart]

Apples come in a variety of colors, but usually red.  The inside are white and when you bite into them generally you get a crunch or a snap.  They also come in a variety of flavors...some are sour/tart, while others are more sugary and sweet.  

Oranges are always orange and have to be peeled before eaten.  Peeling them is kind of messy and, at least to me, a hassle.  They have a sweet/citrus taste, but a little to acidic for me.  They kind of give me an upset stomach, especially drinking organge juice.  Which can be with pulp or stained and, therefore, without pulp.

So in the end when comparing apples and oranges, I will go with apples.  More variety with less mess.

[John Mayhugh]

Looking at Golfweek's ratings NGLA comes in at 4th place on the classical list with a 9.11 rating.  In the modern listing Sand Hills is #1 at 9.34 and Pacific Dunes is second at 9.23.  So along comes Old Mac and people say it is way better than PD which means it probably rates higher than SH.  But then they say that if they are playing 10 rounds between NGLA and OM they go as high as 10-0 in favor of NGLA.  I am getting a sense of snobbery here with the long history, magnificent clubhouse and very limited access being an undue influence on some people's opinion.  And aren't we going a bit nuts about OM without respecting the genius of PD and the greatness of BD and BT.   BTW: Golf Digest rates SH and PD ahead of NGLA.

I'm not sure how many people have said that OM is "way better" than PD.  Who is saying that?  I've said that I prefer OM to PD, but that's not quite the same thing.

Not sure how to take your "sense of snobbery" comment.  If I prefer NGLA to Old Macdonald, but prefer Old Macdonald to Maidstone - am I still being a snob?


Garland,
Answering your question is difficult as I have not played Shinnecock or Sebonack.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Garland,
Answering your question is difficult as I have not played Shinnecock or Sebonack.

That's shocking news almost deserving of its own thread! 

[Jerry Kluger]

Jud: the point is not only the numeric values but the position of the courses in the rankings.  NGLA's rating is still #4 classical in GW and much lower in GD and combine that with PD being #2 in GW modern means that OM which some feel is better than PD has to be close to SH if not ahead of it.  Are they saying that SH versus NGLA they would also go 10-0 - perhaps, but I think not.  NGLA has a lot going for it beyond the golf course and in my mind that is having a big influence on opinions.  Let's not go head over heels with respect to OM versus PD as well as OM versus NGLA. I will be very interested in seeing how OM comes out in the ratings in a few years when there have been a large number of raters playing the course and not just gca junkies like us.  Let me ask this question:  If Pebble Beach was not on the water where would it rank?  

[Jerry Kluger]

John: You don't have to say that OM is way better than PD to get it up to the rating of SH which is #1.  So if we now place it at the top of the modern list - or tied - then how does it compare to SH - are you saying it's better - and if someone then gives NGLA a 10-0 versus OM that to me is indefensible on architectural grounds unless you also feel that way in a comparison of NGLA versus SH.  Personally, NGLA was the most fun I have ever had on a classical course but I cannot say how it compares to SH or PD or OM or Ballyneal.

[Jud_T]

Jerry,

I don't disagree with you.  I hold PD in very high regard and it's a pretty high bar to say OM is better.  Very interested in Matt's opinion and hole-by-hole review as he tends to be a little less gaga over either the templates or the GCA's favored here.  Clearly the course has a ton of buzz and to say it's 1 or 2 on the Modern list at this early date may be a bit presumptuous.  All I know is I can't wait to check it out for myself next summer...

[Jerry Kluger]

Jud: Enjoy your trip.  Let me also suggest that if your were taking a 2 day trip to Bandon and you were going to play 4 rounds I think it would be a huge mistake not to play all 4 courses if you had not played them before. 

[Jud_T]

Jerry,

Agreed...As we're playing 7 rounds, all four easily make the grade....(OM3, PD2, BT1, BD1).....

[John Mayhugh]

John: You don't have to say that OM is way better than PD to get it up to the rating of SH which is #1.  So if we now place it at the top of the modern list - or tied - then how does it compare to SH - are you saying it's better - and if someone then gives NGLA a 10-0 versus OM that to me is indefensible on architectural grounds unless you also feel that way in a comparison of NGLA versus SH.  Personally, NGLA was the most fun I have ever had on a classical course but I cannot say how it compares to SH or PD or OM or Ballyneal.

I have not played Sand Hills, so I cannot compare that course to either NGLA or OM.  

I was not trying to make a defensible argument on architectural grounds. I was talking about which course I prefer playing.  


Tim,
The distribution of rounds isn't a multiple (i.e. choosing to play 4x the rounds on one course doesn't mean the preferred course is 4x better).  It's a statement about what kind of course I enjoy.  I could go on a three-day trip to Bandon and play only Old Macdonald and be happy with that. Just because there are other courses there, that doesn't mean I would need to play them all.  OM should provide enough variety for my enjoyment.  


Garland,
I'm just full of surprises.


Jud,
I assure you I'm not "gaga over the templates."  There is so much misunderstanding about what Old Macdonald is. 

[Jud_T]

John,

I was not implicating you, but rather was making a broader statement about the board, myself included, and how I felt for the most part that Matt was likely to be a bit more impartial.  If anything, I admit that as both a Doak and a template fan I'm predisposed to going gaga over OM myself....

[Jonathan Cummings]

NGLA is the most bold, fascinating, outrageous, inspiring golf course architecture in America and maybe the world.  I personally hold it that highly.  I love many other courses and have been fortunate to have seen quite a few.  I stick by my 10-0.  JC

[Tim Bert]

NGLA is the most bold, fascinating, outrageous, inspiring golf course architecture in America and maybe the world.  I personally hold it that highly.  I love many other courses and have been fortunate to have seen quite a few.  I stick by my 10-0.  JC

Care to opine on a course that wouldn't be 10-0 and let us know how many of the 10 plays it would get just for perspective?

CPC fits the bill you describe above for me (I haven't played NGLA but I certainly appreciate what you are saying because I've heard enough from Mayhugh re: NGLA vs. CPC)  but there are still very few courses even on my third or maybe even fourth tier down where I wouldn't at least take 1 round out of ten because 9 seems like more than enough of anything to pass up on the opportunity to play 2 courses instead of 1.  10 out of 10 seems extreme.

To each his own, I'm just interested to hear if NGLA is simply so inspiring to you that you'd take it 10-0 against anything.

[Tim Bert]

Hard for me to say with certainty -- but Old Macdonald just seems to have the best combionation of holes in my mind. When I look at Pac Dunes I see the two of the three par-5 holes on the back -- the 12th and 15th as filler holes -- holes that get you to another hole of distinction -- with the 12th it's the lead in to the 13th -- with the 15th it's to the final trio. I don't see either the 12th or 15th as especially noteworthy.

Matt - I'm not going to dispute your assessment that Old Macdonald is the best at the resort.  I disagree with you but I think it is within the realm of reason that a good number of people will prefer Old Macdonald.  It's a great golf course.

I do think that #12 and #15 at Pacific Dunes perhaps take on more of a ho-hum, filler hole type of role for the bigger hitter, lower handicapper.  They fill some space and probably don't provide really unique challenges when you are a solid ball striker and can pound it past the trouble.  I'm here to tell you that for the weaker player, the holes are alive and well in terms of interest and challenge.