Riviera vs Sand Hills. What courses are next?

[John Kavanaugh]

2. The greens

3. The green sites

I know this is shaky ground but I am beginning to believe that the similarities between the two courses are not a coincidence.  I find the flow of the greens and green sites to be the two finest examples I have ever played with the slight edge going to Riviera because of overall memorability of the experience.  Again let me emphasize that I played each set in optimal conditions and kikuyu fits my game having been reared on zoysia fairways.

It is my plan to proceed with a discussion on a hole by hole match play comparison.  I would also enjoy input from others utilizing the chess nomenclature popularized by Tom Doak in the CG. (!!! ? and such)

#1. Stange isn't it how both courses start with short par 5's to greens sloping back to front.  To me they play the exact same distance given all things equal with elevation and roll out.  While both greens appear to be simple at first glance I prefer the first at Riviera because of the mystery of the hidden slope.  Any fool can see that the first at Sand Hills is crazy quick if you go past the pin while the effect at Riviera is both extreme and surprising.

I rate the two green complexes as follows:

Riviera !?

Sand Hills !

Riviera up 1.

My apologies as duty calls.  We will pick this up later or continue on your own.  Hint:  I will be rating the fourth greens as follows: !!! vs !?!.  Any guesses which I prefer?

[Matt Bosela]

I've played both courses so I'm very interested to watch this play out.

Are you saying Riviera's green site for #1 is better than the corresponding hole at Sand Hills as well?  If so, can you explain why?

[Mark Pearce]

An interesting exercise, this.  However, I'm puzzled by your interpretation of chess nomenclature.  !? means likely a good move but perhaps unclear, ! means a good move.  Hence ! is probably better than !?  Also, in chess, the best you get is !!  Anyway, I look forward to the rest of this series and reasons 4-18

[Scott Szabo]

The green site at Sand Hills is hard to beat - I think it's one of the best on the course.

It's a tough second shot if going for the green in two as if you miss it sideways at all it spells trouble.

I think I'd give the nod to Sand Hills if we're speaking to hole #1.  

[John Kavanaugh]

An interesting exercise, this.  However, I'm puzzled by your interpretation of chess nomenclature.  !? means likely a good move but perhaps unclear, ! means a good move.  Hence ! is probably better than !?  Also, in chess, the best you get is !!  Anyway, I look forward to the rest of this series and reasons 4-18

This is a combination chess and Doak scale. A Choak scale where ?'s are positive marks given for fun.  We will make the rules up as we go. 

I have 7 hours of road time today so will only be able to make quick responses during pit stops. Thanks.

[Adam Clayman]

The cart path detracts from the opening hole in L.A.  Whereas the intro to the SH course is majestic. I give it a draw, because as you say John, the green in Mullen is just blatantly scary.

[Jeff_Brauer]

JK,

With both ranking as some of the best courses in the world, not sure anyone needs any justification for one over the other, and certainly no need to explain it in detail.

I love the majesty of Sand Hills, but still recall a three hour conversation with Lanny Wadkins, explaining in detail those nuances (greens and shots called for) at Riv that made him think it was about the best course in the world, and certainly from a players perspective, far better than Cypress, despite the latter's greater majesty.

And put another way, Lanny's love of Riv comes from its ability to separate a shotmaker (which he was) by calling for different shots rather than just "choices" brought on by wide fw.  This is me speaking, but I sure got the idea that he was in the no penalty, not a great course side.  So, I am guessing, even after allowing for the wind at SH, he might not find SH as good as Riv either.

Its just one opinion, second hand at that, but its the reason I can see many good players preferring Riv to SH.  It will be interesting if those kinds of opinions surface here on a hole by hole basis.

[Tom_Doak]

An interesting exercise, this.  However, I'm puzzled by your interpretation of chess nomenclature.  !? means likely a good move but perhaps unclear, ! means a good move.  Hence ! is probably better than !?  Also, in chess, the best you get is !!  Anyway, I look forward to the rest of this series and reasons 4-18

This is a combination chess and Doak scale. A Choak scale where ?'s are positive marks given for fun.  We will make the rules up as we go. 

John:

You are welcome to make up the rules as you go, but my ? marks in The Confidential Guide were done with chess notation in mind, designating a quirky hole which some would think was great, and some would think was too weird.  I can see a ? for the first green at Riviera, so I think we are on the same page ... but at the same time, my ? would mean that some people would prefer the first green at Sand Hills for that very reason.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jeff,
Think this guy would be in the same camp as Wadkins? 

[Bill_McBride]

An interesting exercise, this.  However, I'm puzzled by your interpretation of chess nomenclature.  !? means likely a good move but perhaps unclear, ! means a good move.  Hence ! is probably better than !?  Also, in chess, the best you get is !!  Anyway, I look forward to the rest of this series and reasons 4-18

This is a combination chess and Doak scale. A Choak scale where ?'s are positive marks given for fun.  We will make the rules up as we go. 

John:

You are welcome to make up the rules as you go, but my ? marks in The Confidential Guide were done with chess notation in mind, designating a quirky hole which some would think was great, and some would think was too weird.  I can see a ? for the first green at Riviera, so I think we are on the same page ... but at the same time, my ? would mean that some people would prefer the first green at Sand Hills for that very reason.

Actually, a "?" in chess criticism usually denotes a dubious move, where "?!" indicates an unusual move that has double-edged consequences. 

[Tom_Doak]

Bill:  Thats the way I used them, too, although yours is a much better explanation.  Not very many holes in the Gourmet's Choice received a straight ? , but a few did receive the !? or even !?!

[Sean_A]

Bill:  Thats the way I used them, too, although yours is a much better explanation.  Not very many holes in the Gourmet's Choice received a straight ? , but a few did receive the !? or even !?!

Not to rip this subject too far from its roots, but I have long wondered how North Berwick's 16th didn't merit some sort of notation.  Why (and how) would you not at least offer a "?"?

Ciao

[John Kirk]

I think I prefer #1 at Riviera.  I find the 1st at Sand Hills very demanding.  A tough tee shot with bunkers right in my landing areas.  The second shot is deceptive, and you have to trust a 200 yard shot further left than is comfortable.  The third shot is way uphill, maybe a club and a half to a fairly narrow green, with significant penalties for going long or wide.

To me the 1st at Riviera is more a par 4 1/2.  You can see everything.  It's not as pretty, but it is pretty, and it's a whole lot easier, physically and emotionally.  Sand Hills demands full concentration right away.

The 1st green at Sand Hills is one of many tilted disks with subtle contouring.  The 1st at Riviera wraps around the front bunker like a boomerang, and has greater flexibility on pin placements.

Funny, since the Sand Hills opener is often cited as one of the great openers in golf, but I prefer Riviera here.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill:  Thats the way I used them, too, although yours is a much better explanation.  Not very many holes in the Gourmet's Choice received a straight ? , but a few did receive the !? or even !?!

Thinking over your holes that I have played, I would probably award the highly coveted "!?!" to #16 Pacific Dunes!   

[John Kavanaugh]

In light of the Lanny Wadkins comments it is interesting that neither Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods ever won a professional event at Riviera.

[John Kavanaugh]

Moving on to number two I am going to have to admit that each time I finally made it to the second green at Riviera I was too exhausted to form much of an opinion.  I  do recall it being a very interesting green but after either doing battle with the trees on the right or driving range fence on the left, or both, I'm not sure I really cared any longer.  One other par 4 in my life have made this impact on me being the 12th at Torrey Pines South.  Each is in line with a par 5 which may play easier for those of superior talent which has made for rare television enjoyment.

All of that is moot in this match play exercise given my perceived greatness of the second green at Sand Hills. (I will use the term green when referring the the entire green complex)  The green would not be revealed for what it is without the excellent choice in tees provided to the golfer.  The front tee offers a drivable par 4 giving a putter approach where the back tee adjacent to one green requires a mid to long iron.  

Given my current busy schedule I do not have the time to explain the infinite possibilities provided by the second green at Sand Hills.  I will say that the top shelf provides ample room for a shot that I did not have the gumption to pull off.  I could blame that we were playing blind without a caddie but hit the same damn weak attempt the second time around.  It is an eternal quandary presented in a setting worth spending years trying to solve.

Matchplay at the seconds

Riviera .

Sand Hills (I did not intend to create a face but will leave it for laughs) Rating = 3?'s

Sand Hills wins.  Match even.

[John Kirk]

The second hole at Riviera is enormously difficult, as you have said.  Plays very long, significantly uphill, with a very sloped green.  A traightforward backbreaker.  Was #2 at Riviera ever considered a par 5?

The second hole at Sand Hills is easier, since it's shorter.  I have mixed feelings about this hole.  I find the blindness of the tee shot very disorienting.  The landing area is not that wide, perhaps averaging 50 yards, and I often end up in the native grasses left of the golf course.  In my experience, a full 20-30% of the tee shots end up there.  If I played there regularly, I would improve, after determining a good aiming point and having greater confidence about what to do.

I agree that the second green is outstanding.  I remember two brilliant short game plays in my time there.  One time, Ted Moore got up and down from just off the back left to a front left pin by playing way out towards the back right of the green.  A 15 second play, if you will.  The other time, I got up and down to the back right shelf from in front of the green by pitching it up onto the short grass area long and right, and letting it trickle past the pin.  I had to make an 8 footer to do it, but I was so fully engaged, I just had to make it, and I did.

Wow, what a tough call to say which is better.  Riviera's second is mundane by comparison, whereas Sand Hills is nothing if not exciting.  I hate lost balls in the native; I love the approach shot and the green.  I'll also say Sand Hills wins by a nose.

Sand Hills #2 wins, all square.

(JK:  I hope this OK for me to play along, since I know both courses quite well.  I'm really enjoying this.)

[John Kavanaugh]

(JK:  I hope this OK for me to play along, since I know both courses quite well.  I'm really enjoying this.)

John,

Your participation is vital to the success of this thread.  Thanks.  Given that we have 16 green sites and 15 reasons left to discuss I hope we play again before its conclusion.

[Jay Cox]

Was #2 at Riviera ever considered a par 5?

I always had thought the answer was yes, and that Riviera  was cited as a rare example of a rare course built with two par 5s to start.  But based on old LA Open results, it looks like the total par has been 71 since at least 1929.  Does anyone know the answer to John's question?

[Bob_Huntley]

The second hole at Riviera is enormously difficult, as you have said.  Plays very long, significantly uphill, with a very sloped green.  A traightforward backbreaker.  Was #2 at Riviera ever considered a par 5?

John,

The Members tee in 1975 was a par five; I remember it well.

Bob

[Jim Nugent]

In light of the Lanny Wadkins comments it is interesting that neither Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods ever won a professional event at Riviera.

It's also interesting that more than once the winner there has hit less than 50% of the fairways. 

[Pete Lavallee]

In light of the Lanny Wadkins comments it is interesting that neither Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods ever won a professional event at Riviera.

It's also interesting that more than once the winner there has hit less than 50% of the fairways. 

Lanny didn't overpower the course; he outmaneuvered it! With only 2 par 5's, everybody easily reaches #1, the course doesn't let Jack or Tiger gain strokes on the field with sheer power.

[Jim Nugent]

Pete, Riviera has 3 par 5s.  1, 11 and 17.  Your point about power is real interesting to me, especially since winners don't have to hit many fairways there.  Maybe it's not so important to hit the fairways, but it is important to miss them in the right places? 

A few years ago, one of the golf magazines did an analysis of Tiger's play at Riviera.  The author found he didn't win there because he putted terribly. 

[Brett_Morrissy]

I have played both recently(July) also -although only time for 18 at Riv-, JK a fascinating thread, I find them at first glance poles apart, and the kyke plays such an influence, a turf I have no desire to play. Separating the breath taking beauty of Sand Hills from the golf shots required is challenging and for me puts in the coastal ground vs inland argument category, always hard to dismiss the surrounds.
The opening tee shots on 1, I give to SH, but the approach shot into 1, I give to Riv -a shot requiring great commitment to your chosen path and shot, but the green site I give to SH - 1up to SH
Cart paths are a distraction, nothing worse then asking your shot mid flight to either hit or miss the concrete path!
Although 2 at Riv is an excellent and tough hole, I find the SH hole particularly off the back left tee driving over first green, to be an incredibly thrilling tee shot, added to the magnificently contoured and set green site gets SH away to a great start at 2 up.

[John Kavanaugh]

Brett,

I can't argue with anyone who would share your opinion.  One thing I have not touched on yet, spoiler alert, is my love of kikuyu rough.  I would like to see the numbers on how the pros who miss the fairway on #1 and 2 play the holes.  I don't see hitting either green in two from the rough.

I will never quite understand the hate for kikuyu as a fairway grass either, but then again, I did grow up on zoysia and optimal conditions await me everywhere I travel.