[John Kavanaugh]

Due to the unfortunate burden of being considered by my regional peers as one of the finest minds in golf I am often asked what is the greatest course I have ever played. I premise every answer with the fact that I have played St. Andrews so the question in itself was asked and answered regardless of my opinion. So, I was surprised today to read on the alphabet thread of a couple people who do not even find TOC to be the best S course they have played. And that leads us to this:


Please list one pro or con on why either course is superior to the other. Please, just one pro and/or con per post or feel free to argue why a previous opinion was nocuous.


I'll start...


The lodging options are better at St. Andrews. There are few towns in the world where I would rather spend the night.

[JESII]

I would be absolutely stunned if it’s not.

[John Kavanaugh]

I would be absolutely stunned if it’s not.

What is one thing that you find superior at Sand Hills?

[Alex Miller]

Hi John,


Your post and first point seem disconnected - how does lodging play a role in determining the best course? Better experience I can understand, but that's not what you're asking... is it?




I do think the interaction with TOC has with the town is very cool, and a positive because it really is more than just a golf club.

[Jeff_Brauer]

JK,


In general, after 500 years of experience, you would expect our best modern courses to be a better design.


Also, SH has a much better site.


Lodging?  Town? Who cares?  This is an architecture web site.

[John Kavanaugh]

Alex,


When someone asks me what is the best course I have ever played they are in fact asking where I believe is the best course to play that I have seen. To separate St. Andrews from the town would be like taking away the evening stars from Sand Hills. They both play a huge role in what I love about each course.

[JESII]

I would be absolutely stunned if it’s not.

What is one thing that you find superior at Sand Hills?

Haven’t been to either but I’d imagine the steak is better in Nebraska...

[John Kavanaugh]

JK,


In general, after 500 years of experience, you would expect our best modern courses to be a better design.


Also, SH has a much better site.


Lodging?  Town? Who cares?  This is an architecture web site.

Jeff,


As an architect perhaps you can tell me. Is the design of an "audience tee" or finish for that matter ever a consideration in the architecture of a course? In defense of Sand Hills I'll agree that a cow tells no lies, but would think St. Andrews is all that much better because of the audience it provides for both start and finish.

[mark chalfant]

I have not played The Old Course.  Ive played Sand Hills a few times over the past 20 years.


 It is my impression that the set of par threes at Sand Hills may be more interesting than the group of short holes at Saint Andrews.

[Frank M]

At a certain point the debate of "which is better" is absolutely pointless, and this is that point.

[John Kavanaugh]

Who cares?
At a certain point the debate of "which is better" is absolutely pointless, and this is that point. That's how I would have responded to your peers.

Frank,


The last time I was asked this question it was at the dinner table celebrating my Dads 88th birthday. I was sitting next to my Dad and the question was asked by a man kind enough to show up on a Tuesday evening. This was not the time or place to create yet another regret for my Father to wrestle with in these few remaining years we all hope he enjoys.

[JESII]

Ha

[Kalen Braley]

I agree with John that the "experience" of the course cannot be separated from its location, history, and context in general.


Reminds me of one of the first threads I ever recall reading on GCA, where it was pointed out that you can't take away all the ocean views from Pebble Beach....with corresponding pictures showing the ocean scribbled out for effect. 

[jeffwarne]

I would be absolutely stunned if it’s not.

What is one thing that you find superior at Sand Hills?

Haven’t been to either but I’d imagine the steak is better in Nebraska...

Given the name of the County just over the bridge, and the quality of the meal I had tonight,many would quibble with that.

[John Kavanaugh]

 It is my impression that the set of par threes at Sand Hills may be more interesting than the group of short holes at Saint Andrews.

That just may be one of the best inside architecture jokes of all time.

[Mike_Young]

There is no right answer....or wrong for that matter...

[Tommy Williamsen]

If I had a choice between playing SH or TOC, I'd choose TOC every time, not because it is better but because it is in Scotland. I agree with John the lodging is better. If I had to choose which course to play, I'd throw my hands up. They are so different. Both require some local knowledge, both require using the wind, both have great long par fours and short par fours, both have excellent par fives, both have fearsome bunkers, both have very puttable greens; yet only one has the history of championships that stretches back 140 years.

[E P Purmort]

Here's my thoughts:


First, the premise of this thread is poorly articulated.


The land and routing at SH is superior to TOC.


The 17th and 18th at TOC are a superior closing stretch to SH.


The walkability of TOC is superior to SH.


The Wind is world class at both.


The bunkering is world class at both.


The strategic merits and variety are world class at both.

[Frank M]

Frank,

The last time I was asked this question it was at the dinner table celebrating my Dads 88th birthday. I was sitting next to my Dad and the question was asked by a man kind enough to show up on a Tuesday evening. This was not the time or place to create yet another regret for my Father to wrestle with in these few remaining years we all hope he enjoys.

I wish your father decades more of health, happiness and great/beautiful years!

That said, the easy answer is "They're both great. Don't turn down an opportunity to play either...they're equally as good." I'm not sure how that response would ever cause a regrettable situation.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff,

As an architect perhaps you can tell me. Is the design of an "audience tee" or finish for that matter ever a consideration in the architecture of a course? In defense of Sand Hills I'll agree that a cow tells no lies, but would think St. Andrews is all that much better because of the audience it provides for both start and finish.

If I had a dime for every client who wondered if they could see the finish of a PGA Tournament that was never, ever, going to come to their course....from the clubhouse.    So, yeah, its an architectural thing, but would be sacrificed in a minute if the final hole was better somewhere else, a la Harbor Town 18.


As to the start, TBH, I usually recommend the clubhouse be situated to look down 1 or 10 since all the bunkers and what not are designed to be seen that way.  Most bunkering disappears from the backward view, and getting the sight lines right is harder than most would imagine.  The TPC course greens were generally designed with views from around the back and sides a primary constraint.  For that matter, most waterfalls and other scenery would be placed to look good from where the TV cameras would sit.


In the modern day, the "sophistication" of design certainly removes any charm that occurs at St. Andrews when their designs for lack of a better term "didn't know any better" or at least their minds weren't cluttered up with hundreds of years (or decades in the case of TPC design) design "experience.  Or maybe we just fill in the charm in our minds, blocking out sooty buildings and what not. 


So, yeah, in that way, TOC is better.  Or, they are 1A and 1B, with maybe several 1-another letters in the mix that are about equal.  Of course, this site wouldn't exist if we didn't split hairs. 


I cant even decide what is better by which I want to return to.  It's a tie. Personally, I am more likely to get back to Sand Hills due to proximity, but would love to go to St. Andrews, if only I could convince my son named after the place it was worth the trip.  Have told the story, but one day picking him up from Sunday school, the teacher pulls me aside and tells me they were studying how all good Catholics are named after saints, but that my son had the crazy idea he was named after a golf course.  


Also played Sand Hills right after opening, nearly getting bit by a rattler, in a Doakapalooza, and with Andrew right after his first AJGC tourney in KC, so good memories there, too.

[Mark Chaplin]

Sand Hills is a very difficult walk and it’s impossible to walk from the clubhouse to the golf course, unless you’ve a spare 20 minutes each way.  For this reason alone St Andrews wins hands down.


You can play golf all year around at St Andrews.


TOC is simply the most intriguing golfing challenge on the planet.

[Sean_A]

Jeff,

As an architect perhaps you can tell me. Is the design of an "audience tee" or finish for that matter ever a consideration in the architecture of a course? In defense of Sand Hills I'll agree that a cow tells no lies, but would think St. Andrews is all that much better because of the audience it provides for both start and finish.

If I had a dime for every client who wondered if they could see the finish of a PGA Tournament that was never, ever, going to come to their course....from the clubhouse.    So, yeah, its an architectural thing, but would be sacrificed in a minute if the final hole was better somewhere else, a la Harbor Town 18.

Who cares about the pros? However, I think it is very short sighted not to do everything in your power to start and finish in by the house.  When was the last time you heard someone say starting and finishing by the house sucked and that there is a better hole 500  yards away?  Besides, an archie can't design a fine hole on less than ideal land?  One of the worst walks in golf is the long walk from the 18th to the house.  Do you want to encourage walking or not?  Rant over 

A few people have said the land at Sand Hills is better than TOC.  Please explain why.

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Very plausible


SH is clearly a better golfing experience than TOC:  more diversity of the holes on the course; far fewer (if any) blind tee shots; more separation of the better players (TOC is by far the easiest of the most well known 18 hole courses on which to break 80); far less likelihood of playing a 5 hour round; far better land for golf.


That being said, SH is in the Capital of Nowhere, and whomever chose to separate the course from the unappealing "Clubhouse" is/was an idiot.


jpp

[Jon Wiggett]

Very plausible


SH is clearly a better golfing experience than TOC:  more diversity of the holes on the course; far fewer (if any) blind tee shots; more separation of the better players (TOC is by far the easiest of the most well known 18 hole courses on which to break 80); far less likelihood of playing a 5 hour round; far better land for golf.


That being said, SH is in the Capital of Nowhere, and whomever chose to separate the course from the unappealing "Clubhouse" is/was an idiot.


jpp

O'dear Rihc, seems you have finally transitioned to a full blown PGA Tour pro  Blind shots bad, hard is better....

[Niall C]

Rich

If the clubhouse is unappealing then perhaps moving the course away from it was actually a benefit for the course 

Also regarding your notion about separating the wheat from the chaff, does not kind of run contrary to the ideal espoused by the ODG such as MacKenzie that the course shouldn’t beat up the rabbits but still be a challenge for the Tigers. Clearly TOC was the role model for these ideas.

I’ve never played SH but if it had been around then and the ODG had based their ideals on it, what would they be ?

Niall

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()