Jump to content


 

Photo

Sandhurst Golf Club


  • Please log in to reply
135 replies to this topic

#16 _Andrew_

_Andrew_

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2337 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 04:38 PM

Matthew,

A picture of The Pit is actually on my desktop.


Maybe the fence at The Pit at North Berwick was purpose built for the golf hole as well. It just took 200 years to get the plans through council. laugh.gif



#17 BillReynolds

BillReynolds

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 06:31 PM

Matt,thanks for the review.

Very good noting the difference with the 10th since your original visit.It's the fairway that has been moved not the tees.Indeed one too many errant power fades etc found their way into the estate.Compounding the issue was the communal pathway for the residents that ran in front of the houses.So the fairway was widened to the right.The large river gum that was on the edge of the fairway now sits in the fairway similar to the tree on the 9th at the Dunes.An extra fairway bunker put in on the left and extensive planting of trees on the left tries to discourage players from taking the shortest line to the hole.Some minor work was also done to the green to accomodate for the new approach angle.

I agree the routing is unbalanced and that 2 par 3s run west-east and the other 2 run north-south.What a like about 8 and 15 is that Thomson has made tees so that as well as different wind conditions you have different angles as well.

A couple of holes play completely differently from the Championship tees.The first is 40 metres longer and palys more as a slight dogleg because on the direct line you take on the left hand bunker and the heavy rough.18 has a longer water carry.I'm not sure if noticed the back tee on 9, it would have been 15 metres over your left shoulder when your standing on the main tee, again making you think about what line to play.

Condition wise the course has improved in its first 12 months.Last winter it was a bog and this year following extensive drainage works it is holding up well. The condition of the greens and bunkers has been the most pleasing aspect.



#18 cunninga

cunninga

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1078 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 08:26 PM

Excellent review Matt.

I joined Sandhurst for the reasons you mentioned 'a good members course’ and more importantly the 'move away from his traditional pot style bunker'. If the course had deep pot bunkers everywhere I would not have joined, and I guess that's why I enjoy the Legends course over the Open course by a mile. Additionally I can't wait till the second 18 is built.

There are one or two bland holes (Every course has them), but they vary substantially with the different weather conditions (And boy do we get them). Example, one day I can hit driver, PW to 7 (370+m par 4), another day it could be driver, 5 iron.

Bill, in regards to the drainage, I actually thought last winter the course played quite well, considering the heavy rains we got. I remember certain other courses were under water, and it took weeks to get play going again. You are right in regards to the back tees, the additional length does make some holes play differently.

In regards to 10, it was unfortunate that complaints were made and that the hole had to be redesigned (It is a better hole now though). My argument was that if you buy near a golf course, you have to acknowledge that you will get a ball now and then on your land. I think it is wrong to buy land adjacent a course, and then complain. But I guess we all live in the land of the lawyers now...

My best holes, the 14th (driveable from front tees), and the 9th (Not an easy drive or easy second). 3rd "Wall" would be better with a bunker on the front right, but the course is only a year old, so I guess over time there will be some tweaking here and there.

Once again, great review.

P.S. I find the greens one of the best around, not huge in break, but you do get the truest roll. And they can run much faster if required. Plus the clubhouse and staff are fantastic.



#19 John J Jones

John J Jones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2765 posts

Posted 14 July 2005 - 12:57 AM

I can't help wondering why TWP/TP seem to always want to build at least one "funky" hole lately. At the Moonah Links Legends it's 16 where they have tried to be "different". Sandhurst it sounds like 3. What's wrong with just building 18 good solid golf holes? Why the hell do something as silly as putting a wall around 2 sides of the green?

JJ



#20 Faldos_Lovechild

Faldos_Lovechild

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1563 posts

Posted 14 July 2005 - 01:50 AM

QUOTE: John J Jones @ Jul 13 2005, 12:57 PM

I can't help wondering why TWP/TP seem to always want to build at least one "funky" hole lately.  At the Moonah Links Legends it's 16 where they have tried to be "different".  Sandhurts it sounds like 3.  What's wrong with just building 18 good solid golf holes?  Why the hell do something as silly as putting a wall around 2 sides of the green?

JJ

Is the third hole at Sandhurst promoted as their "signature hole"? Could it be that some developers are looking for something different to allow them to use a signature hole for gimmicky marketing purposes? What looks good in a brochure or magazine does not necessarily fit with the rest of the course.



#21 cunninga

cunninga

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1078 posts

Posted 15 July 2005 - 12:13 AM

QUOTE: faldos lovechild @ Jul 13 2005, 04:50 PM

Is the third hole at Sandhurst promoted as their "signature hole"? Could it be that some developers are looking for something different to allow them to use a signature hole for gimmicky marketing purposes? What looks good in a brochure or magazine does not necessarily fit with the rest of the course.

Promotion wise, the 3rd is the signature hole, but I myself (And other members) see 14 (Short par 4) as the signature hole.
smile.gif



#22 speckymagee

speckymagee

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 508 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 06:04 AM

Matthew,

Thanks for that quite insightful review. It was well put together and most interesting. Am having a game there this week so am more looking forward to it than i was after reading this.
Yoy guys who post these long and articulate reviews do us all a favour - whether we agree or not. Thanks.



#23 MatthewM

MatthewM

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1857 posts

Posted 22 July 2005 - 04:45 AM

Thanks Specky.

Hope you found the review to be one of the ones with which you agree.

How did you find the course?

MM



#24 butchy

butchy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1507 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 09:29 PM

had the 'honour blink.gif ' of playing sandhurst yesterday, and well, yeah mellow.gif .
it was okay.
lets just say, next time, i will drive the extra half hour to the national of moonah links, or the dunes, or go to the heritage.
maybe, it is because it needs to settle a bit more, but i just didnt like it. too much of the same thing over and over.
medium par 4s, and reachable par 5s, with okay drives. water is never in play.
didnt rate the greens whatsoever.
although i didnt play that well, i was sick of the course after 10 holes. it just didnt have anything about it.
the 3rd hole, the wall hole. yeah nice hole, but with the wall in the position it is, it just helps bounce bad shots back to the green. i reckon it looks stupid personally.
anyway, i will go back in a couple of years time to reassess, but until then, i will stick to peninsula and heritage.



#25 suwii

suwii

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 211 posts

Posted 04 August 2005 - 03:49 AM

hey my dad has invested in this~!!
i haven't played on the course yet though tongue.gif



#26 growler

growler

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts

Posted 04 August 2005 - 06:50 AM

QUOTE: faldos lovechild @ Jul 13 2005, 03:50 PM

Is the third hole at Sandhurst promoted as their "signature hole"? Could it be that some developers are looking for something different to allow them to use a signature hole for gimmicky marketing purposes? What looks good in a brochure or magazine does not necessarily fit with the rest of the course.

A very ordinary golf course to say the least. Tried to drive in one day after heavy rain to look around and noticed a lot of water over the driveway and the grassed area on the right along the driveway was totally under water. Seemed a lack of drainage to me.

Nearly always windy and where is the challenge?

Patterson River is a cheaper option which upon maturity has the potential to be a more inspiring course.

Plenty of other good course down there without worring about share value also, Southern, Spring Valley, Woodlands, Keysborough, Cranbourne.



#27 cunninga

cunninga

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1078 posts

Posted 04 August 2005 - 07:09 PM

QUOTE: growler @ Aug 3 2005, 09:50 PM

A very ordinary golf course to say the least.  Tried to drive in one day after heavy rain to look around and noticed a lot of water over the driveway and  the grassed area on the right along the driveway was totally under water.  Seemed a lack of drainage to me.

Nearly always windy and where is the challenge?

Patterson River is a cheaper option which upon maturity has the potential to be a more inspiring course.

Plenty of other good course down there without worring about share value also, Southern, Spring Valley, Woodlands, Keysborough, Cranbourne.

Growler,

The course is just on a year old, so what do you expect. (Funny how you mention PR a more inspiring course UPON MATURITY). The wet areas you mention are being looked at, and drainage throughout the course is being improved. Do you remember when courses such as GA were under water earlier this year, well play was easily still possible at Sandhurst.
Additionally Sandhurst will be a 36hole complex in 18 months, how many other clubs have that bonus?

"Nearly always windy and where is the challenge?" - That is the challenge, to play in windy conditions, it is afterall a links type course. Not all golf was meant to be played in still perfect conditions, you sound like a fairweather golfer.

The members do not worry about Share value, they worry about golf. The main bonus to share value is that when you decide to move or pull up stumps, you get something back in return. If you are happy to hand over $2 to $10k and not see it again, so be it.

BUT the main thing is that we enjoy golf because it is played on different courses with different variety in different conditions.

smile.gif



#28 MatthewM

MatthewM

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1857 posts

Posted 04 August 2005 - 08:35 PM

Growler, did you actually play the golf course, or merely try to drive in?

MM



#29 growler

growler

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts

Posted 09 August 2005 - 09:00 AM

Matthew M

courses surrounded by houses offer no inspiration at all. I just cannot believe that this is called a links course as is nothing liks St Andrews Scotland, Carnoustie, Royal Lytham, etc.

The hype that all these courses are being marketed tries to suggest that they are better than the established sandbelt - in my opinion that just ain't so. Housing developments with open space is closer to the mark.

Strange how on a windy day there are not too many on the course and yes I'm proud to be a fairweather golfers. There are many better things to do than be on a golf course when the weather is inclement.

Furthermore, not all shares are resold for more than they were purchased and many seem to ignore capital gains taxes, sales commission etc.

I'll look forward to seeing the new Norman courses just down the road from Sandhurst in a few years. The more competition the merrier, just hope there are enough buyers for all of the shares.

Why is the drainage going in so early after construction - something not seen????




#30 ttitheridge

ttitheridge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5492 posts

Posted 09 August 2005 - 04:30 PM

growler,

You use "St Andrews, Carnoustie and Lytham" etc as some ideals (not a bad call). But you also say that it lacks challenge unless it is windy and you don't like playing in the wind.

Well sorry to be the one to tell you this, but many of the top links or traditional courses in the world including

ALL

those mentioned above are not only far windier than Sandhurst, but also like Sandhurst, rely on that wind very heavily to maintain much of their challenge. Some of those can be almost benign for the taking if it were to be perfectly calm.

Any course would be lesser designed for any membership if in a windy location and yet tough to play on a calm day.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users