I've played the Campus Course a few times recently, and wanted to voice my thoughts. I'll start by saying that I'm very happy to have a much-improved centerpiece to the city. It was badly needed and from most angles, looks great.

The bunkers and nicely rolling topography make it plenty fun. The downhill par 5 1st is just awesome, and I also really like the par 4 11th, 12th, and the brutal but fair 18th.

I won't talk about the conditioning at this point, as it is probably not fair to judge yet. But I have three legitimate gripes.

1) Why oh why did they think it was a good idea to build NINE straight par-fours?

2) The par threes are very weak and monotonous. the 2nd, 14th, and 16th are all in the 180-200 yard range. The 4th is a little better at ~160 yards. It seems pretty obvious that every good course should have par-3's of varying length, but that idea is somehow lost.

3) The course, since it is surrounded by loud, busy streets on all sides, was never going to be a real charmer. But the gas-powered golf carts, concrete retaining walls, and rather ugly water hazards definitely don't help things.

I'm sure the course has been discussed a ton, but I hadn't heard these particular criticisms yet.

need to get out there...

I agree with a lot of your thoughts. On the other hand, I'm pretty easy to please...the bottom line is I think it's one of the most fun courses I've played.

Playing wise, to me about half the holes are average. On the front side, I like #1 and #6, but #8 is really the only hole that jumps out to me, which I like a lot. On the back, the stretch of #10, 11, 12 and 13 is fantastic. Then 15, 16, and 17 is another fun stretch.

My favorite hole at the old course was #12, now I can't decide between 11, 12, and 17. If you can't have fun playing those holes, you just can't have fun.

As for course condition, jury is still out but I have a feeling that with a little maturity it will be great.

I've haven't played anywhere near as many courses as some of the people on this board, but I've played more than a few all the way from Bryan Muni to Whispering Pines. And this one rates right up there when it comes to fun. My opinion might be different if I was as well traveled as a some of the others here.

I think the course is great, has character, good conditions, and is a wonderful setting. Playing golf in Aggiland with Kyle Field as an aiming point on some of the holes. I love it!

The course summed up all in all, after looking at pros and cons: fun.

I agree that in the middle of the round I find myself wondering when we're going to get to the next par 3 or par 5. It would have been better if they could have avoided that long stretch of par 4s in the middle, but there is certainly a good amount of variety in those par 4s. Several that should be easy pars and a few that are closer to being a par 4.5.

I also agree on the par 3s being very similar. All four of them are middle irons into a big, bunkered green. I think the greens are challenging enough to make that an adequate defense, but there isn't any real diversity. It would be nice if they were set up a little differently.

I don't totally agree on the course's "lack of charm." One of the things I really like about the course is that I feel like I'm playing golf in the Brazos Valley. I feel like lots of courses don't do a good job of using the topography and vegetation that is available to them. They added just enough elevation changes to keep it from being a boring, flat course but didn't pretend that the course was located in the Hill Country. CS is right on the line between the Blackland Prairie and the Post Oak Savannah and the course absolutely feels like it. I wish that they'd try to really get some good native areas developed along the borders of the course and in between a few holes. It would be especially awesome if they could encourage wildflowers to grow in some native areas this time of year.

The most true statement on this thread though is that the course is FUN. I can't wait to go play it again because it's just an absolute blast to play.

Fair criticism from the OP, but I think most who have played it will definitely agree on the fun aspect of it and that it is a huge improvement over what was there before.

Good points bagger.

I love courses that reflect the land and area in which they subside. There is a lot more to it than just following the topography.

For example the whispy 4-6" grasses on the campus course now in some of the roughs. Very unique and makes me remember the town and region where I am playing when I hit my ball in there.

Good thread with some interesting observations. I think Jeff Blume did a great job with the golf course routing and design. Any site is going to have limitations. The reality is that the course is somewhat squeezed into the space it occupies, so I'm sure his options were somewhat limited. But all in all, I agree that it's a fun course and the designer used a lot of imagination to come up with all the new holes and the routing.

Many courses end up with all the par 3s playing about the same distance. That's unfortunate, but one of the ways you can work around it is to adopt an approach where you play different tees on the par 3s to give you the variety you need. You might play one of them from the forward tee to give you a short shot, and another par 3 from all the way back to give you a longer shot. I think the course was built with the expectation that there would be some significant wind out of the south/southwest, and that wind would impact how the holes play. Unfortunately, 3 of the par 3s play mostly into the southwest wind, with #2 being a crosswind when it's out of the SW.

My only significant change I'd make is to the 18th. That hole as a par 4 finishing hole is simply too difficult for the average golfer, especially when the wind is out of the southwest. A long uphill par 4 is ok, but it belongs somewhere else other than the last hole. I'd look at playing the hole from the back tee as a par 5. In public course golf, it's always good business for the course operator to give the average player a chance to finish on a positive note with pars and birdies, and that hole as a par 4 is just too hard. It would be a much better finishing hole as a par 5 with a little more length.

But all in all, it's a very nice golf course and one I enjoy playing.

I agree that it is definitely fun and challenging to play(especially in the wind). I think that the rough could be cut down a little lower(so you can at least find your ball) and I think it has TOO many sand traps. The pace of play was was horrendous at first but has improved drastically the last couple of times I played(which may be because there were not many people playing). We were totally shocked the first time we played to see that they had gasoline carts also.
Will continue to play there every chance I get.

Played the tips today. Windy. Very young, new course. Should grow to be a good one. Beat me up a little bit. I had to hit driver-driver on 18 and couldn't quite reach it (491, i believe, uphill into a stiff wind?). It's the first time I can remember not being able to reach a 4 when I smoked a drive in the center of the fairway.

Greens were firm and somewhat quick, rolled pretty true, some pretty bare/sandy, and quite unreceptive. I hit a high ball with a lot of spin but couldn't spin back but a couple of wedge shots.

Wtf is up with 10? Even using a yardage book I couldn't comprehend the width and design. Was that necessary? It's the only hole that made me wonder, "What were they thinking?"

Hooked a drive onto the road on 7(?), just like old times. Ugh.

My SkyGolf watch didn't display the right yardage, which sucked. It made club selection more difficult.

Haven't played it, but fun to read some very nice, constructive reviews.

Wow, just looked at the flyover graphics. Were they trying to set a record for sand traps on every hole?

Ya know what...I don't think I got into any of the sand traps when I played out there earlier this month.

Got into a lot of that wispy but thick at the same time rough though.

Nom, I think #10 was designed to be a quirky hole that gives multiple options with the two fairways, and some risk / reward the placement of bunkers, etc.

The first time I played it I didn't know what to do, so I just aimed at the right 150 yd. marker. The second time I tried to bite off some yardage and aimed over one of the bunkers. I pulled the shot some but got lucky and hit it well enough to carry, and was left with 70 yards in or something like that.

I know nothing about course design so my comments may be way off base. Maybe if Mr. Blume sees this thread he can comment. I really like the hole now that I've played it several times. I agree, you don't see many like these, maybe that's why I like it.

Re: sand traps, lots of the fairway bunkers shouldn't be in play if you're playing the right tees and actually serve as great aiming points. I wish that Golfshot, SkyCaddie, etc. would get updated so it's easier to understand that because from the tee I usually can't tell if something is 200 yards away and a fairly easy carry or if it's 230 away and I shouldn't flirt with it. Most of the time, though, when I've thought I was going to be close to a fairway bunker I've been well past it and I'm not a big hitter.

Similar to Chipotle, I can only remember two fairway bunkers I've been in during my two rounds at the course (once on #10 and once on #12... made par both times, by the way) and both times they were really poor shots.

bagger I agree with you on the bunkers.

The traps in the fairway in "front" of #15 green fooled me the first AND the second time I played it. On a long approach they look like they're right in front of the green, but in reality they're somewhere between 30-40 yards in front of it. I'm guessing the distance because I didn't measure. Don't know if this illusion was on purpose but I'm thinking it was. Well done if so.

I couldn't possibly have played without a yardage book. When you have 200 bunkers its imperative to know the yardage to most. And the book is very well done.

I was in one greenside bunker all day, somewhere late on the back. Sand was just like I like it. Consistent and a little heavy.

[This message has been edited by nom de plume (edited 4/24/2014 6:46p).]

On 10 I ended up hitting a drive directly at the pin. Somehow finished right in the middle of all the bunkers 65 out. Turned out OK but I would not recommend this approach. Lol

The strategy for hole #10 has a great deal to do with where the hole location is set on a given day. If the flagstick is on the front left of the green, then the left fairway is the best angle of attack. If the hole location is on the front right, then the right fairway is the best angle of attack. The mound in front of the green makes approaches from the wrong part of the fairway significantly more challenging. The bunkering around the green is also situated to reduce the depth of the target if one plays from the wrong part of the fairway.

As noted above, the hole is designed to be an easy starting hole since it is followed up by two very difficult par 4s. The idea of the "ultra wide" fairway is to allow almost any tee shot to be in the short grass, making par a very achievable score.

In regard to the significant number of bunkers on the course, they are located and designed to describe the optimum shape of shot to play. The inspiration for the course is an early American style where bunkers were used as descriptive signals. Because the Campus Course is a public access facility, many of the bunkers are in between landing areas or short of the greens complexes. This reduces their impact on play, as evidenced by the comments above that most people are only in the sand a few times in the round. They are small in size and clustered together to get the maximum amount of descriptive quality without creating a burden on the maintenance staff. Although there are a total of 158 on the course, the total square footage is barely over 100,000 square feet. By contrast, Miramont has over 230,000 square feet of bunkers.

Hope this insight helps you to understand the reasoning behind what you see on the Campus Course, and I am glad that most of you are enjoying the experience. It will only get better, as Carter Hindes, Tanner Light and the Sterling Golf staff are doing an excellent job with the maintenance. As the course matures it should really begin to shine.

Any information about the possibility of offering student memberships? I'd love to play the campus course more often but it's hard to beat Briarcrest's $300 per semester student membership. However, Briarcrest is a 15-minute drive from my apartment so I'd be happy to pay more in order to be able to get daily access to the campus course.

I thought they always used to have a student program, don't see why it wouldn't still be offered.

Nom, thanks for the descriptions. I'm eager to play now.

Played Friday, 12:50 tee time. Myself and my 2 boys, youngest's 19th birthday. Wife road along and they did not charge us as we had a 4th and needed 3 carts. Thought that was a little cool, but I had just given the guy $191.55 for 3 green fee's.

To the course. Overall, would give it a 7, I was actually quite impressed. Not sure what I was expecting, but it was better than I expected.

The 9 par four's I new were coming, so was mentally ready. Went thru that 9 hole stretch in 1 under. Actually got lucky, not sure what hole, 13? anyway dog leg left, water by green, 1 foot tall rough on left. Had no idea all that was up there hit a draw that was pretty much right next to the water. Would not have hit driver if I knew that was there.

Overall, the grass is still a little young in spots. Middle of fairway sand wedge in hand and half an acre came up with club, couple of those issues were a little frustrating.

Most of the greens were in good shape, there were a few that were horrible, putting on dried, dead sand and grass.

I have no idea what they did with the tee markers, there are 5 sets. No red markers, white is behind blue, Maroon looks to be your typical blue, so confused there...

If, and I say if, they maintain this course, water it and the grass grows, and they fix the greens. This course has the potential to very, very good.

Would play again, but would prefer them to fix the greens. But again, this thing is maintained, it will be great.