‘Like riding a rollercoaster’: Why this new Nebraska course has our raters buzzing

Seven years after opening Sweetens Cove, their nine-hole triumphant underdog in Tennessee, design companions Rob Collins and Tad King have minimize the ribbon on their first 18-hole venture. Landmand Golf Membership, in northeastern Nebraska, began welcoming public play final weekend. Given its pedigree, Landmand will inevitably draw comparisons to Sweetens — nevertheless it additionally deserves scrutiny by itself.

A handful of GOLF Journal panelists have been within the Cornhusker State final week for a sneak peek at one of many nation’s most hotly anticipated programs, and we requested them for his or her early evaluations of the design.

Advertisement

Let’s begin with a recreation of evaluate and distinction. In what methods is Landmand just like Sweetens Cove? In what methods is it completely different, apart from the truth that it has twice as many holes?

Steve Lapper, panelist since 2009; has performed 84 of the High 100: The best reply is scale. Each programs present loads of width off the tee. The distinction is that whereas Landmand’s terrain is very large and dramatic, Sweetens Cove is intimate and restrained. Each programs permit for restoration creativity across the greens, but Sweetens is much much less extreme and Landmand extra expansive and steep.

Paul Rudovsky, panelist since 2015; has performed all the High 100: Each are nice enjoyable, however they get to that time through completely completely different routes. Landmand is huge and daring. Sweetens is cute and quirky, within the constructive sense.

Adam Messix, panelist since 2015; has performed all the High 100): Sweetens and Landmand each have daring and fascinating greens and will enchantment to shotmakers. They each match their properties properly and have their share of quirk. Sweetens is way more intimate than Landmand, which has a scale as grand as absolutely anything that I’ve seen.  

Landmand has been described as “wild” and “daring,” an emblem of “architectural maximalism.” These traits include an air of journey. Additionally they carry a component of danger. In your opinion, how properly does the wildness of the design work? Does it ever go too far?

Lapper: The adage “fortune favors the courageous” involves thoughts. This enormous, rollicking web site required daring considering, and the King-Collins staff obliged. There are a few spots on the course which can be excessive or might have gone too far, but these are comparatively few, particularly in comparison with the variety of thrilling and glorious holes that work properly, even when pushing the traditional envelope. The influences of Mike Strantz’s iconoclastic Tobacco Street come to thoughts.

Rudovsky: The design works beautifully. I noticed it whereas it was nonetheless being formed final summer time and it occurred to me that simply as there’s a superb line between good individuals and loopy individuals, there may be additionally a superb line between spectacular golf programs and “over-the-top” programs. The King-Collins staff stayed on the right aspect of that line.

Thomas Brown, panelist since 2015; has performed 95 of the High 100: The property is 580 acres, which is big. Few programs constructed within the fashionable period have given the golf architect such an open subject to run with. The talk: Detractors might have a look at the inexperienced contours as extreme whereas admirers of the daring King-Collins fashion will take pleasure in discovering methods to flight their approaches into sections of the inexperienced that yield flatter putts. The par-5 holes play uphill for the strategy, which may get repetitive. Few eagle putt possibilities from the again tees will likely be seen with no serving to breeze. A number of rounds are required to study all the completely different gap places.

Pete Phipps, panelist since 2021; has performed 65 of the High 100: So long as anybody who ventures to the far northeast nook of Nebraska is aware of what they’re entering into, they’ll have enjoyable taking part in a novel and memorable course. For those who go in with an open thoughts and searching for a change of tempo from standard routings and terrain, you’ll respect the outside-the-box strategy King Collins takes with their design (see: early Pete Dye, Mike Strantz). Each trade does higher when sure ideas or personalities push sure envelopes, and if that’s the area of interest market King-Collins feels is their greatest match, then extra energy to them. Once more, so long as you learn the brochure, you’ll have enjoyable using the rollercoaster!

Messix: The dramatic nature of the property and the fixed presence of wind required a grand design. A lot of the course ties in rather well with the encircling property, which is a credit score to King and Collins. The property was not as straightforward to work with because it now seems. The course invitations inventive shotmaking with the quantity of motion all through and will probably be the uncommon windy course that may enchantment to each the sturdy taking part in shotmaker and the weaker participant who often bounces it round. Landmand requires some native data as there are locations to keep away from in addition to refined methods to maneuver the ball near the outlet.  

What’s your favourite gap, and why?

Lapper: The par-4 third. The incorporation of a number of rough-lined barrancas, diagonally and vertically splitting the golf green (just like the bottle bunker formations discovered on the eighth at Nationwide Golf Hyperlinks and the fifth at Baltusrol Decrease) are aesthetically putting, visually intimidating and demand a strategic determination off the tee. The second (strategy) shot is steeply uphill to one of the fascinating inexperienced complexes. It’s a terrific gap that may stand out on any course.

Rudovsky: The par-4 fifteenth. It takes an oft-used idea (the Cape gap) and incorporates it into Landmand’s boldness and measurement. The result’s excellent. 

Brown: I discovered the uphill third, taking part in as a 475-yard par-4, to be a very good problem. The snaking terrace-line of tough Steve mentions divides the left fairway from the suitable fairway in a refined method. It provides simply sufficient definition to a large open uphill canyon tee shot. The way of shaping the slope is a sexy characteristic which I can not recall getting used elsewhere.

Phipps: The par-3 14th deserves credit score for really pulling off a “true redan.” For a time period that has was cliche podcast slang, King-Collins didn’t simply make a redan for advertising functions, they did it so you might watch your ball roll from one aspect of the huge inexperienced to the opposite for 20-plus seconds, constructing anticipation and pleasure inside your group.

Messix: While you first have a look at the tiny par-3 eighth, you wonder if it’s part of the course. With a scorecard and pencil in your hand, it turns into a terror because the inexperienced is extremely shallow. You step up on the tee with a little bit of breeze in your face, it begs you to flight the ball. Downwind it requires an ideal strike to get the mandatory spin to carry the inexperienced. Brief holes that require precision are uncommon in fashionable design, and the eighth pulls that off impeccably.  

Any holes that want work?

Lapper: The par-5 fifteenth has a semi-fatal flaw. The tee shot should clear an uphill slope at over 250 yards so that you can get a view of what awaits: a fairway impinged on the suitable by native tough, with two massive, pinching bunkers making a slender neck. This leaves two unappealing choices: both a lay-up to 180-200 yards (too lengthy for the common participant), or a mammoth uphill strike overlaying 240-260 yards to a large inexperienced with a big false entrance. Both strategy stifles any wise risk-reward for many mere mortals. To my thoughts, this could possibly be mounted simply by changing the native tough to fairway on the suitable.

Brown: I discovered the drivable 310-yard seventeenth gap restricted within the always-go-for-it class, the place I dream from. Maybe I ought to transfer up from the again tees, as a result of working the ball up onto the inexperienced isn’t particularly reasonable. You’ve obtained to fly it on. The bunkers are huge at Landmand, and the bunker in entrance of the seventeenth inexperienced is a magnet.

Phipps: The thirteenth gap has the very best of intentions to observe within the footsteps of the super-cool seventh gap at Cal Membership, however sadly — attributable to being pushed in a lesser nook of land — doesn’t totally pull it off. It’s a pointy dogleg proper with nothing blocking a giant hitter from driving the inexperienced, however doesn’t play as properly for the remainder of us. For the common participant, there isn’t any danger/reward aspect to the tee shot, leaving an extended than most popular uphill strategy on a gap the place your opponent is likely to be placing for eagle. The distinction with No. 7 at Cal Membership is that even common hitters have the possibility to catch a slope and have their drives get nearer and nearer to the inexperienced.

Messix: Each gap at Landmand matches in properly in its setting and has loads of strategic benefit. I used to be upset with the 4th and seventh greens, the place there have been potential uber-cool gap places which can be unavailable as a result of the inexperienced in these areas is just too extreme to be pinnable.  

Inexperienced charges at Landmand are $150. You might reserve tee instances right here.