Apache Stronghold vs. Victoria National

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Bill V. brought up a good point in the High point vs. Vioctoria National post and since I too haven't played Vic Nat I would be interested in seeing how it fared in "Ran Play" (My term for match play of golf courses ) to Apache Stronghold.

Lets hear it!

[Ran Morrissett]

Tommy,

Apache Stronghold remains on my very short list of courses that I most want to see - hopefully, one day we'll get there together for several rounds.

I was disappointed in GolfWeek's initial ranking of it in the 60s - I incorrectly assumed it would be much higher.

Is it a deal where its excellent design is penalized by its spotty conditioning?

Cheers,

PS FYI, in match play, I have High Pointe and PacDunes all square on the 16th tee but PacDunes sweeps the last three for a decisive victory.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Ran,
I too was a hoping it would get higher in the rankings, but I equate a lot of that to people who would rather play another round at Troon or some other inane Rees course then make the hour drive to the East.

It's unfortunate, they don't know what they are missing and even as bad as the conditioning may get, you hear most don't mind it.

[Matt_Ward]

TommyN:

Played both and I do agree with you about the quality of Apache Stronghold. Let's just be somewhat reasonable about those who mention the lack of detail at Apache Stronghold.

I think the layout is well done, but it's time for courses to realize that base amount of attention to detail as it relates to conditioning is not asking for that much.

Too many people won't make the trek to Apache Stronghold and that is their misfortune. I really liked Apache, but in comparing it to Tom Fazio's finest design (Victoria National) I'd say VN is a slight favorite now.

Improve some of the base elements at Apache and you have one helluva of a dogfight between the two.

Regards,

P.S. Without a doubt Apache gives you more value for the $$ than just about any other course in or around Maricopa County.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt, I'm asking for a "Conditions Aside" architectural analysis, hole for hole.

As Ran and others have done so well in the past, match play each hole against each other.

Get past the fact that the San Carlos Apache don't know how to maintain a golf course nor are open to learn how to do it.

[John Morrissett]

Tommy--

Tough question.  I guess I'll be the first to tackle it:

1st hole: Halved; while the green at AS is the best feature of either hole, the first two shots are not thrilling.

2nd hole: Halved; one of the better holes on each course; the option of being able to go right at AS makes it more strategic than VN.

3rd hole: VN; VN 1 up; as previously discussed, this hole at VN is one of my very favorite three-shotters.

4th hole: AS; all square; as much as I like VN's, AS's features one of the all-time great green sites, in a saddle between two hills with an open backdrop.

5th hole: AS; AS 1 up; while VN's has a lot going fo it, AS has one of the great natural greens.

6th hole: Halved; AS 1 up; I'm afraid I still don't quite see the "greatness" in AS's.

7th hole: AS; AS 2 up; super hole.

8th hole: VN; AS 1 up.

9th hole: VN; all square; I know Ted Sturges loves the 9th at AS, but it never sunk in on me; the variety of VN wins high marks.

10th hole: halved; all square; on paper it would look like AS would win, but the green at VN is enough to scrape out a half; I wonder if the fairways should be a bit farther apart at AS so that a player won't just aim at the central bunker and bomb it, figuring it will go left or right just enough.

11th hole: halved; all square.

12th hole: VN; VN 1 up; a tempting short two-shotter at VN v. one of the least distinctive holes at AS.

13th hole: AS; all square; natural, sweeping hole at AS.

14th hole: AS; AS 1 up; Good Redan in great setting; VN's is very, very difficult, but is not one of my favorites.

15th hole: halved; AS 1 up.  VN's is an atractive three-shotter that demands discipline while AS's is a fun and dramatic 4 1/2 par with a fun tee shot and neat green complex.

16th hole: VN; all square.

17th hole: VN; VN 1 up; my favorite two-shotter at VN.

18th hole: halved; VN wins 1 up.

The result probably could have been predicted as VN is so solid hole for hole while AS has a few indifferent holes.  Still, it's just about a toss-up.

Tommy--

Doing this really makes me want to return to AS.  I hadn't thought about it recently, but what a fun course. It's disappointing to hear that the conditioning still suffers.  Otherwise, I would be up for a golf-fest there almost every year!

[Tommy_Naccarato]

John,
Thanks for the match.

I too am having the "Jones" for a return to Apache Stronghold and maybe we could do a GCA outing this winter out there for the snowbirds of the East Coast and North factions of GCA.

#6 is such a great hole for me. I'm just enamored with short challenging par 4's that can produce and eagle or better to a 7 or worse on a whim.

I also think you are forgetting just how great the short par 3, 11th really is. That is unless your name is Yancey Beamer and you are still putting out there!

It's just a phenominal tee shot and great green complex and maybe my favorite 1-shotter Tom has produced to date. Mind you that Bill V. and I spent about 45 minutes hitting golf balls into the purple haze of the evening at the Redan 14th, Friday before the Ren Cup.

[JGA]

I love this site,very interesting discussion re two of the more interesting courses I've played this year. Vn conceived as a 'MAJOR SITE" with a huge budget and AS conceived as a tourist stop to help lure gamblers.  One course is lush, the other dusty.  Both are placed in glorious settings and have superior designs.  Both are very strategic;I think that AS routing is superior as are the green complexes.  VN gets the edge in variety of holes and variety of tee shots.VN is much more penal.  I suspect that medal scores would be substantially lower at AS but that match play events would at very high qua;ity at both sites.  While not strictly a criteria for architectural quality it is difficult not to enjoy the walk with na caddy at VN compared to the bumpy,dusty,noisy,smelly golf carts at AS(yes,I know walking is a option but at the time not practical)or the huge difference in conditioning.  There both grat course yet I wouldn't want to play either on a regular basis; VN is just too penal and AS too messy.It will be interesting to see if either course achieves its goal.  I don't foresee a US Open at VN; it could never accomodate spectators and I don't long waits for starting times at AS.Ouyt of ignorance or otherwise the course is not perceived as worth the drive by the metropolitan Phoenix crowd.  Pleased that there is a place for this type of discussion and my 2 cents worth.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I wasn't aware of the wait for tee times at Apache Stronghold.

It certainly is one of the best deals in golf and I copncur with you on several of your points regarding the routing and greens.

[JGA]

I meant to type I don't expect any long waits for starting times--sory

[Matt_Ward]

TommyN:

Agree for the most part with John's match of VN versus AS. Give VN only a one hole edge ... just proves what I said previously if detail were part of the conditioning program at AS it's stock would be even higher.

I guess too many people within GCA think of conditioning as an afterthought element. In my mind, it's what takes courses to the next level and accentuates what the architect imbued the course with.

Just a humble opinion ...

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt, I agree and I don't agree.

Of course I would be inane in trying to suggest playing off dirt fairways isn't that bad and Apache Stronghold is worthy of Top 25 credit because of it.

But there has to be a blind eye turned for the ignorance of the owner compared to the talent of the team that built the place. Apache Stronghold far exceeded anything new we have here in SoCal and I would dare to say that it would destroy a pefectly manicured Lost Canyons-Sky or Shadow in "Ran Play."

So Real quickly because I have to go, I'll do my version of Sky vs. AS

#1-halve (But the green and blind shot from the right on AS is far superior)
#2-Apache Stronghold (Although Ilike the huge green on Sky)
#3-Apache Stronghold (It's going to be close on the next few holes)
#4-Apache Stronghold
#5-Apache Stronghold
#6-Apache Stronghold
#7-Apache Stronghold
#8-Apache Stronghold
#9-Apache Stronghold

Front nine-Apache Stronhold 8 up

#10-Apache Stronghold (Match dormie)
#11-Apache Stronghold (Match over)(Didn't Bobby Jones win the Grand Slam on the 11th also?)
#12-Apache Stronghold (Might as well play it in!)
#13-Apache Stronghold
#14-Apache Stronghold
#15-Apache Stronghold
#16-Apache Stronghold
#17-Apache Stronghold
#18-Apache Stronghold

Now lets match play the facilties themselves:

1-Clubhouse-Lost Canyons +1
2-Service-Lost Canyons +2
3-Conditioning-Lost Canyons +3
4-Least Chance Of Being Scalped-Lost Canyons +4
5-More Populus of Rattlesnakes-Apache Stronghold-3 (A very close one)
6-Best Chances Of Getting Your Food in the Restaurant, Before The End Of The Next Millenium-Lost Canyons +4
7-Best Location For Burying A Dead Body-Apache Stronghold -3
8-Worst Payoff Odds Of Any Gambling Establishment Ever-Apache Stronghold-2
9-Best Chance Of Seeing Laura Ingalls Wilder In Person-Lost Canyons +3 (they used to film Little House On The Prarie there as well as M*A*S*H.)

[John Morrissett]

Tommy--

I agree -- Apache Stronghold is one of the first places I think of in this country for the prospect of playing more than 100 holes in a few days. (In that regard, how busy has the course been?)  I could just keep going round and round there.

I guess I wasn't as struck by the 11th as you.  The bunkering and the green were both good, but I didn't remember it being "special."  (I'd like to return for another look!)  The 11th at VN is a good hole -- about 220 across water with water and a bunker on the left and enough room on the right for people like me.  The simplicity of its design has some appeal, and I just can't let myself give the hole to AS.

The 6th at AS is a fun, beautiful hole.  I wanted to love it, but somehow that just didn't happen (maybe because there was little grass in the last 40 yards of the fairway).  Maybe it's hard to infuse but so much strategy on a straightaway short two-shotter (unless I were playing poorly, I would always hit driver).  Very good, but not quite "great."

At first I thought the Redan was all-world, but after the second round I left wishing that there was just a bit more pitch to the green.  Still, it is awfully good -- and what a great site for a Redan.
On reflection, AS probably lost several holes by a hair (the 1st, 6th, 9th, and 10th).

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy N:

The water in So Cal must be something these days if you think that Apache walks all over Sky Course by the margin you posted!!!

I'll say at best AS is a two-hole plus margin ... that's it! Since today is Sunday I'm being especially charitable.

Tommy, when you toss conditioning out the window you are really saying is let's just pretend golf is played from the "pure design" and not look at the turf where all shots are indeed played.

I can't do that and I don't when I rate for GD. I say this again for all those waiting to pounce on me that I don't stress conditioning to some inane level as it is demonstraed at ANGC but Apache is woefully short on most days. How it might be is nothing more than the woulda, coulda, shoulda school of let's pretend.

Apache Stronghold is a helluva course and I think any person who visit the Valley of the Sun is best advised to visit Globe. Kudos to Tom Doak on a wonderful effort.

The course's is design is part of the equation -- how it is maintained and presented on a daily basis is also no less important. Attention to detail in conditioning is what brings out the very best elements originally crafted by the architect. I'm not suggesting anything beyond what continuous attention can bring to such a marvelous design.

Regards,

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
If this was the case, then how come Bethpage Black/Pre-Rees was so highly rated when it was more or less run down and ill-maintained?

I would think it was because the architecture shined through on a golf course that certainly deserved the TLC that it eventually got. (But not forgetting the hatchet job on 18)

As I said, I think conditioning is part of it, just not as much as you, in fact it is part of the Golfweek critieria. I just don't dwell on it to the point that the architecture is superceeded by it. One of the great crimes of many panelists from every publication.

I think I have seen enough of both Lost Canyon's to say that they don't come close when comparing them to Apache Stronghold. The land for Apache Stronghold was far better golf land and not environmentally restricted.

I said it once, I think that with the land that they had for holes 4-7 on Sky, they should have made the whole course like that. I'm just not into seeing people move mountains to place environmentally restricted golf holes at 1-3; 8-18.

Is St. Andrews Old Course ranked lower on the GOLF world ranking because of conditioning?

I certainly hope not.

This "conditioning" is an American-thing that has little to do with the architecture of a golf course. What do you do if you go to rate a course and it's going through over-seeding (SSSHHH!!! This might wake up Czar Nicholas!)

What happens if the greens were punched a day before you got there? Does a course lose points simply because you didn't schedule your playing it at the right time?
\
At some point, I think Damian is right, you have to stop looking for the "shot resistance, especially if you might not be at your best on that paticular day.

When I go rate a course, I just figure that the round is going to be a givaway and not worthy to even dwell upon as far as ones strengths and weaknesses for the day.  I like hitting all kinds of shots to see if it is going to produce the same result over and over. If I see a open green front that is screaming bump and run (LC Sky#4) I'll hit 5 6 shots, as long as I'm not holding anyone else up. That afternoon, I had the course all to myself.

I'll even take pictures of something I feel I didn't get a good enough look at.

And as far as Apache Stronghold is concerned, as Ron Whitten would say, "That's my review, and I'm sticking to it!"

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy N:

When did I ever say conditioning "superceeds" the overall architecture? Please, I have a tough enough time putting my own words in my mouth!

When you say let's just look at the design --you are really saying that shots are not played from the turf. To me -- you can't separate them so conveniently and treat conditioning so indifferently.

You mention Bethpage Black. You're right -- I love the course but until most recently (post Rees) the conditioning was really spotty and in many ways took away the elements that Tille provided. I don't see the challenge of hitting 2-irons from backyard type grass that is 2 inches or more in height on fairways. Ditto playing from tees that have more slope than the mound at Yankee Stadium! I believe rating Bethpage Black prior to the end of the restoriation / modernization (or whatever the PC word is today) was premature. How is this course now? It's absolutely ready and a joy to play. The superintendent and staff have done an outstanding job although I wish Rees had left the course in a more natural state. The Black should look more wild and less prissy in its overall presentation. But that's just my opinion.

When Harbour Town Golf Links was dropped several places by GD because of inferior conditioning (minus the week of the MCI tourney) I believed that was fair. Just because Harbour Town is a "name course" with a special designer (Pete Dye) it does not get a free pass in my book from doing the same type of hard work that other courses are successfully doing.

What I believe I am hearing you say is that conditioning is really very small item in the overall scale of things. Yes, the original vision of the architect is to be commended, but no less important is how that vision is carried out on day-to-day basis. That's the responsibility of management and there aren't any architects that I am aware of that don't worry about how their creations will be tended to after they are finished or long since gone from the scene.

Just to be clear once again -- I am not advocating maintenance programs such as ANGC or those that are overkill and favored by architects such as Nicklaus and Fazio.

When I plan on making a visit to a particular site I make it part of my procedure to call in advance and ascertain where they are in terms of conditioning. Some courses, as you know, in the Southwest close down in the Fall for overseeding. They are not ready to be played and rating them at that time may carry an impression that is truly not reflective of their day-to-day presentation. I don't hold clear maintenance programs against any course (aeration and the like!) and by calling ahead I can try to be present when the course is clearly ready to be played.  

Tommy N, a few years ago Merion and a number of other outstanding courses in the Northeast had a really tough year for turf growth -- some of it was related to weather and some to poor practices. Should that affect their standing? In your mind -- it would not matter if they had dirt for fairways because the design is
so wonderful -- so pure.

I believe conditioning is clearly not in the same league as overall quality of land, routing and integration of superior shot values, but it does have a role in maximizing the qualities the architect intended. I don't "dwell on it" Tommy but I understand its function and role. You say, "conditioning ... has little to do with the architecture of a course." Help me out, but how the course is prepared will determine the method and style of shots you will play. How many courses overwater? In my experiences too many? Does that affect quality of the original design. Absolutely.

We see conditioning in a different way but I don't view us as being that far apart. Are we?

Last point -- I love Apache Stronghold, but you are really selling short a number of holes at Sky. You see the land at Sky being artifically created on environmentally sensitive land to create holes. I believe Dye (which ever one was responsible!) as being especially creative in getting holes to use such terrain.

Quick question -- what course has the better type of par-3's, par-4's and par-5's? Do you think the par-3 17th at AS is better than the 17th at Sky? How do you automatically rate #18 at AS ahead of Sky? Both are fairly similar and in my mind rate a draw. Look forward to your thoughts. I give Apache Stronghold the edge (a two hole margin at best), but no where near the blow-out proportion you advocate.

Regards,

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
I thought I posted my thoughts in a match play format?

If you go back, please read my words. Of course I would be inane in trying to suggest playing off dirt fairways isn't that bad and Apache Stronghold is worthy of Top 25 credit because of it.

If the condtioning is so important, then how come Ted Robinson's Tustin Ranch, which has conditioning and esthetics better then most private clubs I have ever seen, is not a top 100 course then?

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy N:

Never said that conditioning is more important than the overall architecture. All I said Tommy is to give it a bit more of a role than you seem prepared to do. See my previous post and explanation.

Still can't believe you see AS as a blow-out over Sky. Well, when we meet, we can discuss further over a cold brew!

Regards,

[Slag_Bandoon]

  Maybe we should ask the architect (Doak) if he wants Apache Stronghold to be left natural.  Perhaps he is attempting to free the Arizonians from the status quo of unnatural green in a desert environment.  An experiment, to see if a natural course is possible in that extremely arid climate.

 I know that's a stretch of long term architectural control but somebody's got to try it; might as well be Doak.
 
 I'm hoping to get down to Arizona to play  "Globe" National and Talking Stick this winter. My friend's wife is having a baby in a few weeks and I betcha he'll be aching for an escape from the sleepless cryin' filled nights.  I am a bad influence.

[DB3]

Matt and Tommy:

  I took the opportunity this summer while in Phoenix visiting my sister to go over and play 36 at AS.  I enjoyed reading both your thoughts on the course and its conditioning.  The conditioning was a little sub-par to say the least, but I thoroughly enjoyed the golf.  I also had a nice conversation with the super who told me some interesting stories about the grasses used.  
 As far as the layout goes, for the most part I really enjoyed the course; although I found a few holes slightly lacking, and I am nit picking a little here.  In particular #1, #16, #6, and maybe #18.  I love short par 4's, but from the back tee I drove the 6th hole twice with a three wood, and made 3 both times.  18 was driver, sand wedge both times, and I am still not sure what you are supposed to do on 16.  I am not sure if you are supposed to drive the wash or hit a two iron down the right side.  I couldn't seem to find any strategy to it, where is so many of the other holes the strategy just screamed out at me, like #4. .  Overall though I think it is really a great course on a super site, with a super set of green complexes and I look forward to playing it again, hopefully under better conditons.(I.E. hard and fast. I'm sure #6 would play better if a missed shot ran forever)  
  In regards to your argument on
conditioning, I think one obvious argument that you left out is whether a course such as AS that is supposed to play hard and fast,is really soft.  As can be the case the wrong conditions can certainly negate natural features an subtle slopes that might be intricate parts of the overall strategy of a hole, and such could be missed even by the so called experts.
  I was also wondering if either of you have played Barona Creek, and how would you rate it vs.  AS.  Lastly I would like to know if VN is public. If it is I might go over and play it this week.  Thanks; Dan Belden

[DB3]

   One final note on Phoenix. I definitly think that Talkin Stick North is worth a trip for anyone that enjoys golf architecture.  While the site is extremely lacking compared to AS, the architecture is superb..  Dan

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Todd would be the guy to ask!
(I have played Barona about 5 or 6 times this year.)

Yes, AS was wet in certain spots that could effect its playbility, but the fast and firm was in full effect when I played there last. (Almost 2 years ago, gasp! Time flies!)

Now I'm going to make a statement that might not make sense at this late hour, but the intent of the architecture is just SO good there that it overshadows the conditioning. Hard to believe isn't it?

When you went to go play there, had you heard about the conditioning beforehand yet you still went knowing the conditions?

And if so, would you say the trip was worth it and would you do it again?

I for one can hardly wait to get back!

[DB3]

Tommy:
 I did not know what the conditions would be, but I will most certainly be back.  I would very much like to play it again under hard and fast conditions. I think, actually I know that it will make for more interesting shots.  I really enjoyed the course and the architecture, definitely first rate stuff.  One good story I have is from the 5th hole where the day I played the pin was way back.  The first time around I found the speed slot down the left side and hit an 8 iron, second time around I bailed a little right on the tee shot and had a 5 iron.  The tee shot reminded me of the 3rd at Shinnecock, one of my favorites.
     Finally, I played Pacific Dunes a few weeks back when I was in Oregon for the Buy. com event. I had the misfortune of listening to the tragic events of the 11th on my way down there, but thoroughly enjoyed the course and the architecure.  I might be playing Stonewall outside of Philly in a few weeks.
  Lastly I think the architecture at Barona is worthy of AS.  Todd hasn't played AS yet, but I think we are going to try and play it this winter or fall.  
 P>S>   I am going out to Firestone today to get a look at the 8 million dollar Fazio renovated WEst course. He spent 8 mil on a course that was already there; while reusing green mix for tees, current top soil for fairways etc... he used a bunker style that I have never seen him use before, extremely severe with rolled down faces.  Unfortunately from what I have seen of it, it allready it looks like the same old Fazio. No strategy whatsoever, but pretty with really, really severe bunkers. Interestingly enough they told him they wanted a course as hard or harder than the South.  Who knows maybe the guy will suprise us one of these days.  
   If you are ever in Ohio let me know. I think Todd may have told you that I am a member of Canton Brookside, an old Ross gem.
 Dan

[BillV]

Another take

Disregarding conditioning, comparing architectural features (To avoid having to put on body armour and to set the criteria clearly)

1-AS 1up
2-halved 2 good holes, personally prefer AS
3-halved 3vs 5 is tough compare
4-AS AS 2-up
5 AS AS 3-up
6-halved AS 3-up  AS is more fun
7-AS AS 4-up
8-VN AS 3-up
9-half AS 3-up

10-halved both very cool holes AS 3-up
11-AS verygood short par 3! AS 3-up
12-VN AS 2-up
13-AS AS 3-up
14-AS easily AS 4-up
15-halved AS 4-up AS wins 4&3
16-halved two good green complexes, awkwardness of AS 2nd shot offset by tees longer than 160 VN Two of the more awkward holes AS 4-up
17-VN very good hole beats good hole AS 3-up
18-VN-AS 2-up

Good piece of land and sensitive routing beat $$$$ created course on a really cool site.  Which was my point to begin with.

Two entirely different modern courses.  Maybe blond, brunette  or redhead, I admit.

[BillV]

With PD vs PBGL on the board....Last chance.

Have that few played both?