Gamble Sands too easy?

[Garland Bayley]

114 from the intermediate tees
118 from the regular tees
121 from the back tees
128 from the medal tees

...

This site has long suggested that the a measure of the best courses could be high course rating, with low slope rating.
Does Gamble Sands win this criteria?

[glenn.hackbarth@gmail.com]

I don't know if Gamble Sands wins, but do I think the course rating and slope accurately depict the course:  If you play one of the two back sets of tees, it offers plenty of challenge...especially in some wind.  Yet less skilled players can work their away around pretty well.  First rate course in my opinion.

[Garland Bayley]

"To easy". I would humbly suggest that no course should be considered "to easy" by handicap players until they can shoot under par every time they play it.
atb

Actually, it seems to me that you make a specious argument. Handicap players don't shoot par for any reason attributable to the course. If you can't hit it in the direction of the hole consistently, you are going to have a handicap, and it has nothing to do with how easy or hard the course is.

[Sean_A]

The concept of a course being hard or easy is always related to the golfer because they are subjective terms....regardless of however someone wants to apply math to suggest objectivity.  I never pay attention to handicap players when they talk about a course being easy.  Their (which is me) spectrum of course difficulty doesn't include easy...it starts somewhere around if I am playing very well...

Ciao 

[Jim Nugent]

114 from the intermediate tees
118 from the regular tees
121 from the back tees
128 from the medal tees

...

This site has long suggested that the a measure of the best courses could be high course rating, with low slope rating.
Does Gamble Sands win this criteria?

From the tips slope = 128 and course rating = 74.2.  If I did the arithmetic right, that means bogey golfer is expected to shoot around 98. 

That does not sound easy to me, either as a score by itself or compared to what the scratch player might shoot.  Actually it sounds harder for bogey compared to scratch. 

[Dan Gallaway]

Last time I played there, a couple of guys in my group complained about the slow greens.  I laughed because they didn't break 90, yet somehow think they need to make the greens tougher for themselves.  Same guys that don't take penalty strokes for lost balls, because "on the tour, they would have someone here with a little marker flag to let me know where my ball should be."

[Garland Bayley]

114 from the intermediate tees
118 from the regular tees
121 from the back tees
128 from the medal tees

...

This site has long suggested that the a measure of the best courses could be high course rating, with low slope rating.
Does Gamble Sands win this criteria?

From the tips slope = 128 and course rating = 74.2.  If I did the arithmetic right, that means bogey golfer is expected to shoot around 98. 

That does not sound easy to me, either as a score by itself or compared to what the scratch player might shoot.  Actually it sounds harder for bogey compared to scratch.

Most of that 128 would come from length. The bogey golfer would be having every hole over 370 yards considered a par 5. Note, that is not a bogey golfer that shoots 90 on a par 72, but is a bogey golfer as the USGA defines them.

118 from the "regular" tees seems pretty low in my experience. 128 seems pretty low when you get many courses around 135 when they get over 7000 yards.

Although my handicap matches the USGA bogey golfer definition, the USGA explicitly eliminates me from the definition, because I can regularly reach 430 or 440 in two. So I believe I would be one of those that benefit from Gamble Sands perceived "easiness".

[Garland Bayley]

The concept of a course being hard or easy is always related to the golfer because they are subjective terms....regardless of however someone wants to apply math to suggest objectivity.  I never pay attention to handicap players when they talk about a course being easy.  Their (which is me) spectrum of course difficulty doesn't include easy...it starts somewhere around if I am playing very well...

Ciao

It's getting pretty deep around here. 

[Jim Nugent]

Garland, what have you shot there? 

[Garland Bayley]

Garland, what have you shot there?

I haven't played there, but being directionally challenged, I score better when given width to work with.
For example, people say Chambers Bay is hard, but I have had good success there.

[Kalen Braley]

Garland,


Sounds like a perfect place to do another grudge match, especially given how far south my game has gone in the last two years...

[Garland Bayley]

Aren't you considering Silvies Kalen?

[Kalen Braley]

I am, but its looking a lot more iffy.  I took on a new role as Team Manager for Utahs Women Lacrosse team, which my daugher plays for and its put an extra demand on my time/travel.  But i'm still at least 50/50 for it!!

[Michael Essig]

Last year at the Washington State Mid-Am, we played GS from the tips on most of the holes (so 7050ish yards) with greens rolling at 11+. At those green speeds, the greens play very different than at their regular 8 (I have played them at 8 a half dozen times). And those contours have negligible impact on strategy at 8, but at 11 they feed the ball away from the hole; long distances from holes on those huge greens.  Therefore, you are thinking about the pin position on the tee box, because you know that you can't get at certain pins from certain places in the fairway; at least the places I knew I was going to be.  Because of the firm and fast greens, the only way to get to some hole locations is to bounce the ball onto the green; much like links courses in Scotland.  But when they put the pins at the edges of the contours that do exist, it is very hard to get near the pin no matter what you do.  That places a premium on lag putting from 40-60 feet which we faced a lot under the fast green speeds and because of the longer clubs required to hit 470 yard par fours and 225 yard par threes; let's be honest, you don't have a lot of spin on the club you are hitting from 200+ yards unless you are a tour pro, so the ball is going to be rolling on the fairway or on the green, and at 11 those contours became very evident.



Tom Doak is correct, a lot of the short game is less imaginative at GS, because you are typically faced with either of two shots: in a bunker, or from a tight lie to a green that is on the same level as your ball; no mounds, hillocks or raised greens like Scottish/Irish links courses which requires a different type of shot not found at GS. You can leave your 60 degree at home; not much need for it around the greens.


Honestly, having played the course when it was set-up to test better players, I preferred the greens at the faster speeds.  The 7000+ distance was too long for this 54 year old, 5 handicap, but I did like the faster greens; which is not something I typically say; typically I prefer something on the 8-9 range for most courses, but I thought the faster greens at GS enhanced the course because it made the greens more interesting and enhanced the strategy of the course by making you worry about the pin on the tee box. 

[William_G]

Last year at the Washington State Mid-Am, we played GS from the tips on most of the holes (so 7050ish yards) with greens rolling at 11+. At those green speeds, the greens play very different than at their regular 8 (I have played them at 8 a half dozen times). And those contours have negligible impact on strategy at 8, but at 11 they feed the ball away from the hole; long distances from holes on those huge greens.  Therefore, you are thinking about the pin position on the tee box, because you know that you can't get at certain pins from certain places in the fairway; at least the places I knew I was going to be.  Because of the firm and fast greens, the only way to get to some hole locations is to bounce the ball onto the green; much like links courses in Scotland.  But when they put the pins at the edges of the contours that do exist, it is very hard to get near the pin no matter what you do.  That places a premium on lag putting from 40-60 feet which we faced a lot under the fast green speeds and because of the longer clubs required to hit 470 yard par fours and 225 yard par threes; let's be honest, you don't have a lot of spin on the club you are hitting from 200+ yards unless you are a tour pro, so the ball is going to be rolling on the fairway or on the green, and at 11 those contours became very evident.



Tom Doak is correct, a lot of the short game is less imaginative at GS, because you are typically faced with either of two shots: in a bunker, or from a tight lie to a green that is on the same level as your ball; no mounds, hillocks or raised greens like Scottish/Irish links courses which requires a different type of shot not found at GS. You can leave your 60 degree at home; not much need for it around the greens.


Honestly, having played the course when it was set-up to test better players, I preferred the greens at the faster speeds.  The 7000+ distance was too long for this 54 year old, 5 handicap, but I did like the faster greens; which is not something I typically say; typically I prefer something on the 8-9 range for most courses, but I thought the faster greens at GS enhanced the course because it made the greens more interesting and enhanced the strategy of the course by making you worry about the pin on the tee box.

very well thought out about the greens speeds "daily" vs "championship"

[David Davis]

Just a quick bump here again as I finally made the trip out to Gamble Sands about a week ago now.


I'd say it's definitely not too easy but yes many people could have or eventually have their best rounds there as there are quite a number of scoring opportunties. I played a few times and from different tees. A mix of back and the next tees forward and also one round entirely from one tee forward. The scoring opportunities alloted me with two rare eagles, one a par 5 and one on a par 4. The par 5 7th hole is really a long par 4 but I'm told wind sometimes blows against which would greatly change this. I had relatively little wind, at least compared to home. However everytime I played that hole I made birdie or better without ever having to hit more than an iron into the green. Given I'm not that long it really only had to do with the firmness of the course which is in no way a complaint. I love that aspect of it.


Indeed as already mentioned the greens are very large and rather gentle in their undulations however, it's still a resort course in an obscure location and at the end of the day what will make it survive? Ball breaking difficulty or the fun factor of making your first birdie or two or shooting your best score etc. From the tips I'd doubt a bogey golfer would play anywhere near their hcp as there are too many long carries. However, move them up where they belong and they might just have the time of their lives. Gamble Sands could be the antithesis to the Castle Course with it's tricked up greens and difficulty levels.


The greens weren't particularly fast maybe 9 but that was plenty fast for the circumstances. Now if only they could blow all the forest fire smoke away which was crazy at times leaving a blackhole sun on the first day.


One thing is certain for me, Gamble Sands will receive a lot of repeat play from the local areas and I guess that's exactly what they need to survive and thrive there. The accommodation is excellent and the putting green course they put in I believe recently was super fun to play with a beer in the evening. On top of that there may be another course on the way.


Washington's competition for Bandon...me thinks. Great things are happening in Brewster, WA.

[Tom_Doak]

Just a quick bump here again as I finally made the trip out to Gamble Sands about a week ago now.


I'd say it's definitely not too easy but yes many people could have or eventually have their best rounds there as there are quite a number of scoring opportunties. I played a few times and from different tees. A mix of back and the next tees forward and also one round entirely from one tee forward. The scoring opportunities alloted me with two rare eagles, one a par 5 and one on a par 4. The par 5 7th hole is really a long par 4 but I'm told wind sometimes blows against which would greatly change this. I had relatively little wind, at least compared to home. However everytime I played that hole I made birdie or better without ever having to hit more than an iron into the green. Given I'm not that long it really only had to do with the firmness of the course which is in no way a complaint. I love that aspect of it.


Indeed as already mentioned the greens are very large and rather gentle in their undulations however, it's still a resort course in an obscure location and at the end of the day what will make it survive? Ball breaking difficulty or the fun factor of making your first birdie or two or shooting your best score etc. From the tips I'd doubt a bogey golfer would play anywhere near their hcp as there are too many long carries. However, move them up where they belong and they might just have the time of their lives. Gamble Sands could be the antithesis to the Castle Course with it's tricked up greens and difficulty levels.


The greens weren't particularly fast maybe 9 but that was plenty fast for the circumstances. Now if only they could blow all the forest fire smoke away which was crazy at times leaving a blackhole sun on the first day.


One thing is certain for me, Gamble Sands will receive a lot of repeat play from the local areas and I guess that's exactly what they need to survive and thrive there. The accommodation is excellent and the putting green course they put in I believe recently was super fun to play with a beer in the evening. On top of that there may be another course on the way.


Washington's competition for Bandon...me thinks. Great things are happening in Brewster, WA.

How well did you score compared to normal?


And how busy was it while you were there?

[David Davis]

Tom,


The lodging was actually full, I was there on a Monday night and as I mentioned there is a significant amount of smoke from the forest fires. In fact, in the area close by, Wenatchee they had declared an alert for people to stay inside.


I played early and late all the times I played so it was quite busy but there was also some kind of tournament on the Tuesday and a big group for that.


I walked a couple rounds and took a golfboard for the first time ever to try it the last round. I enjoyed trying the golfboard but wouldn't do it again as I couldn't find my rythm with my golf while using it but did manage to find out how far you could push the board to the point of two pretty bad crashes. I found out you can take them pretty deep to the ground like windsurfing but it's very tricky to keep ahold of the throttle lever in the middle while doing so and when my hand slipped off the throttle it was game over as then the brake hits hard given there is no other brake but that.


However, I digress as you didn't ask that.


I played one round about 10 shots under what I would normally play on a good day at Noordwijkse from the back tees. I would say the course is at least 10 shots easier to be fair. That's a lot but in a stroke play that would be realistic for certain at my level as the fairways are wide enough there that you can always error on the safe side and still have plenty of room. At home if I do that I will lose a ball on every hole.


The big difference between my rounds however was my putting there. I'm use to slow greens and putted great the first and best round. All rounds were in the 70's and out of 3 rounds at home I would only score 1x in the high 70's if that.


I think this has to do with firmness and roll which I love, width but also design as everything is designed and shaped to kind of assist wayward shots unless you end up in the many hazards. However, the hazards seem to be situated in a way that they really danger you if you try to cut off too much and take a risky line to gain a perceived advantage that I'm not really sure is there.


I do think that with a few plays I could match my lowest rounds ever and beat them with 3 drivable par 4's and an easily reachable par 5. That's already 4 more scoring opportunites than I would have at home.


That's also more than I can remember playing on any of the 600 plus courses I've seen. However, it was fun, feel good golf and I'd return just for that I suppose.

[Tom_Doak]

It must be popular if they are getting that many golfers out there midweek.  I did the driving from Spokane and on to Seattle when I played with Ran and another friend of ours, and it was NOT an easy drive down the hill late at night.  Still, it's a beautiful spot.


Your perception on driving strategy was the same as mine.  There are holes like the 5th where playing away from the hazard gives you a turbo boost and a better line into the green than expected, but there's just no reason not to aim another twenty yards to the safe side on most holes.  I felt like that was the case when we were building Cape Kidnappers, too, but those fairways are only 40-60 yards wide, so playing extra safe from the drop-off means you're going to drive it into the rough on the far side.



P.S.  I'll take your word for it on the golfboard, instead of trying it myself.

[jeffwarne]

I walked a couple rounds and took a golfboard for the first time ever to try it the last round. I enjoyed trying the golfboard but wouldn't do it again as I couldn't find my rythm with my golf while using it but did manage to find out how far you could push the board to the point of two pretty bad crashes. I found out you can take them pretty deep to the ground like windsurfing but it's very tricky to keep ahold of the throttle lever in the middle while doing so and when my hand slipped off the throttle it was game over ...

I'm enjoying the visual of that.


You posted those GS scores right?

[Daryl David]

I noticed that GS started advertising some discounted tee times for the first time since they opened. Some limits on when you can play, but around 30% less than normal. There has always been quite a bit of local grumbling over their rates vs Wine Valley, although they are different models. WV concentrates on locals with very reasonable annual deals and packages. GS is slanted more towards a Bandon type model going after destination groups with no discounts for local residents.

[William_G]

Daryl

FYI Bandon has many discounts for locals, and discounts Nov- April as many folks from Washington drive down that time of year.

Cheers

[Kalen Braley]

I've yet to see Gamble Sands, but with as excellent as Wine Valley is, (I rate it 7-8 on DS) I suspect I'd prefer to go there instead.


To boot, while Wine Valley benefits from close proximity to the tri-cities area and its 200k population, Gamble Sands is equally as far from all the major populations areas in Washington State. (about 2 hours)

[Dan Gallaway]

Is your Wine Valley review coming later today?  Haven’t played it since 2012, but felt there were plenty of holes that had me anxious to return (at least more anxious than my 6 year hiatus would imply!).