[David Wigler]

Just for kicks, I thought it would be fun to match Victoria National against High Pointe, Fazio against Doak, a course in the top 100 vs. a course many Doak aficionados feel should be.

#1 Victoria - Both are rather ordinary opening holes but Victoria has a far more interesting approach shot into the green.

#2 Victoria - High Pointe has a cute bunker in the fairway but Victoria's is a far more interesting tee shot.  HP has a better green but not by enough to get the win.

#3 High Pointe - The approach to this green at Victoria is so blind it is silly and this might be the most demanding four on HP.

#4 High Pointe - Even though Doak did not slope the fairway correctly on the Redan, #4 at Victoria is just another version of #2

#5 Victoria - This visually stunning and extremely demanding par three blows away a fairly routine short four.

#6 Victoria - From the back tees this is a special four with a world-class tee box next to the fifth green.  HP has a regular two shot five.

#7 High Pointe - This is a close call but HP offers a really solid thinking man's four while Victoria offers a good but certainly not great three.  HP wins on the strength of the pot bunker and superior green.

#8 Victoria - this is a terrific long four with multiple approach angles while HP offers a very ordinary par four.  HP's green is better but this is one of Fazio's better green complexes and good enough to take the hole.

#9 Victoria - The split fairway, three tier green and water back drop win the hole over HP's 5 in a landslide.

#10 High Pointe - I know the fairway is steep but I like it and Victoria's 10 may be the most ordinary par five on the course.

#11 Victoria - This is a great head-to-head battle and Victoria's three wins easily.  Both seem simple (Except Victoria from the tips) but Victoria wins on better layout and an equal green.

#12 Victoria - This is a close one as both have strong offerings.  The tee shot and framing of the fairway bunker win the battle for Victoria.

#13 High Pointe - HP has a wonderful green while Victoria has a fairly week hole that put in a split fairway for something to talk about.  Victoria's may have more ways to play it but this is one of the best at HP.

#14 Victoria - This is close, as neither has a great offering.  Victoria has a terrific hole lessened by tree encroachment on the right side and High Pointe has a close to over-the-top fairway to an unreasonably small green to fit the approach shot.

High Pointe is Dormie

#15 Victoria - This is a terrific risk reward par five with a long approach over water or an easy 3-wood, 7-iron, wedge.  It is probably the best five on the course.  HP's three cannot compare.

Victoria wins 5 and 3.

Although the match is over, if they played on HP would win 16 based on Victoria being almost unplayable from the back.  Victoria would win 17 based on its strengths (It may be the best four on the course).  I would tie 18 as they both have solid closing holes.

My gut was that Victoria would win.  I was surprised that it wasn't closer.

[John_McMillan]

I've played High Pointe maybe 25 times, and Victoria National none, so I can't comment on the comparison, but I can on some of the points made about High Pointe.

I had never been a big fan of #6, but playing it several times this summer, my opinion has improved.  The wind strength and orientation along with the tee you're playing make all the difference in whether it will be a 2-shot or a 3-shot par 5.  That difference also changes how and from where you want to come into the hole.  There have to be at least 10 different ways to play this hole, and if you played it daily over the course of 2 weeks, you'd probably have occasion to play each of the 10.

I also think you've under-rated High Pointe's 8'th green - which really makes the hole.  Tom has written about the shallowness of the top shelf and the kinds of approaches it demands for a longer par-4, but the recovery play for shots which miss the green (and on a 450 yard par-4, these are common for me) are also very interesting.  With the sharp drop-off on the right front of the green, miss the green short and right when the flag is cut front, and you'll aim a little more to the left next time you play the hole.  There are also lots of "interesting" putts from one tier to the other.  I can't imagine what you would like about HP's "green," but not about its "green complex."  

Ten and Eleven to me at HP are ordinary holes, so I think I'd rate them a little less than you do.  I'd disagree, though, about HP's "solid" 18'th.  A group I was playing behind this summer described after their round (and after dumping 3 or 4 balls in the pond on 18), that the 18'th was a "magical hole."  My thoughts are it's more like the kind of magic Vinny Testavarde does for kids on the NFL's United Way commericial.  Doak has written that the 18'th has too much for the handicap player to do, and not enough for the scratch player - and I agree with that assessment.  One of my favorite ways to spend time after a round at High Pointe is with a drink on the clubhouse deck dreaming of ways to route an 18'th hole which would play better than the current one.  I'm not sure my plans could be executed with any reasonable budget, or within DNR wetlands regulations, but they're a fun mental exercise.

[BillV]

Haven't played HP, but the par 5's at Victoria national did not particularily impress me and I must comment.  #10 you didn't understand, Dave because you didn't look at the rest of the green.  There is actually a great little ridge on the approach to the green which keeps it from being even mildly mediocre.  The front is not much on that green, but the entire green may be one of the best, if not the most fearsome on the course.  This is the best par 5, but doesn't look like it belongs on the course.  A Principal's Nose on this hole would make it phenomenal (If Faz knows what that is).

#15 is a terrible hole with a claustrophobic tee shot ("Framed" well by gunch) and a virtually impossible 2nd shot unless you hit a 340 yard tee shot.  I hit it over 280 twice and never even considered going for it.  The run up area to the right of the green is window dressing and is a quagmire and will always be a quagmire.  It also has a drain in a bowled portion of it (Just as the 'run-up' area to the right of #3 has (Which also doesn't work due to soft conditions).

#3 doesn't care what you do on the tee shot  and only really allows a long second to the left side of the fairway to have any strategic reward at all.

#9 doesn't care where in hte fairway you hit your first or second shot, really.  It is really a wedge hole for most people.  #9 HP must really be a terrible hole to lose in a landslide.

#12 as a par 4 has little or no strategic flexibility due to a pancake green.  I was not impressed.

#4 is a better hole than #2 or #12 as a short par 4 due to a well-designed green and none of these short dog-leg par 4's has all that much challenge or reward to the tee shot, really.  All 3 are 2-iron or 3-wood, sand wedge.

Just another opinion of VN.  I posted additional comments under the course profile.  This course is a good course, but no way lives up to its press.  WE should probably start a thread on it since so many have played it recently.

[BillV]

A good match play might be Apache Stronghold vs Victoria National.  ?$3.1M vs. $31M.

[Tom_Doak]

Just for the record, David, I don't think High Pointe should be in any top 100 list.  But, it does merit a look for a very different design, some of which you've underrated.

I don't know how many times you've played the course, but 6, 8, 14 and 15 are much better than you gave them credit for being.  Fourteen is still one of the best holes I've ever done, although it's meant for a running approach and the turf doesn't allow it anymore.

That would make your match a lot closer!

[Tom_Doak]

A big P.S. -- everyone on this site can finish High Pointe with their one ball and have a blast.  Not so at Victoria National.

[David Wigler]

Bill

Victoria made a solid par on 10 while HP won the hole with a long birdie putt.  I understood what 10 was at Victoria.  10 at High Pointe is one of those quirky holes that you love or hate.  I think probably some people on this site would say it is the worst hole on the course.  I loved it.

8 and 14 were the closest two holes in the match.  HP's 8th hole is fairly ordinary right up until you get to the green.  The green itself is magical.  Coincidentally, 8 might be the best green complex at Victoria National.  The two high right bunkers and low left collection bunker fit the approach beautifully and the green has a subtle ridge and wonderful contouring.  IMO HP's 8th green complex is still better but not by enough to offset Victoria's comfortable lead in getting to the green.

Tom - I will have to pay more attention to 14 if you really feel it is one of the best holes you have ever done.  I did not think there was any fit at all between the requirements of a well-played tee shot and the shot needed to hit the green.  I see your point about the hole needing a run up and it being taken away by the current owners.  For arguments sake lets say you had won the hole and then (In a poor choice on your part) you had chosen Miles Byrne as your caddie and he went to the snack shop between 13 and 14 and accidentally added a fifteenth club to you bag.  It was discovered before the tee off on 15 and therefore only cost you the 14th hole.

I totally agree that the chances of playing Victoria with one ball are close to nil.  I have never equated one-ball courses with fun courses though.  I could play an entire golf season with one ball at Rackham and still be bored to tears.  I have never succeeded in playing one ball at Victoria, The Ocean Course, The Golf Club, or Prairie Dunes and yet I love all four.  When I get to Apache Stronghold or Lost Dunes, I can try the match again with one of your top 100 offerings.  I am curious to see how it goes.

[Ran Morrissett]

David, The approach to the 3rd at Victoria National is only blind if you a) are playing from the wrong set of tees or b) don't hit your first two shots far enough. Otherwise, it is a super approach to a fallaway green and the blind approach is a great way to semi-penalize the golfer who messes up one of his first two shots.

10-15 at High Pointe is still Doak's best stretch of holes and the equal of any stretch at Crystal Downs. Victoria National would beat it up on the front nine and in the last three holes but that stretch would make it closer than 5 and 3.

Bill V, I disagree with every point that you made re: the 15th, 3rd, 9th, 12th, and 4th.

TD, I easily played Victoria National with one ball and I'm still looking for the one that went over the 11th at High Pointe.

Cheers,

[John Morrissett]

Bill Vostinak—

Surprising comments about VN.

I love the 3rd hole.  It is a three-shotter where the first two shots actually matter.  Plus, as far as I can tell, it is wholly original hole.  My hat’s off to Fazio for building a hole so bold.

With the 9th, my impression was that the hole location does affect where you want to position your second shot.  For example, if the hole is front-right, you really don’t want to be pitching from the left half of the fairway as from there you have such a shallow target, with sand in front and water beyond.  I also think the back-left hole location is a good one, as it takes some nerve to go after it, even with just a pitch, with the water beyond.  Often green with the trouble behind (instead of in front) present more interesting approaches.

The 15th is a three-shotter that people want to make a two-shotter.  The downhill lie in the fairway frustrates people who think they should be able to go for the green with their second.  The lay-up second is an awkward one (in a good way) as the player who wants to leave himself a short pitch must play his second down the right side, forcing him to aim away from the flagstick (never an easy thing to do, even when not going for the green).  The tee shot is the most intimidating on the course, mainly because it is through the thickest part of the woods as well as being one of the few holes that cross the spoil mounds (as opposed to running parallel to the mounds).  I do agree that the heavy rough left of the fairway should be pushed back a bit.

I remember thinking that the 12th had a good green, esp. as the rear runs away from the player.  The key to the 12th is to play it from the right set of tees – where it is possible just to clear the corner with a BIG drive.  Fun hole.  

[Tom_Doak]

John M --

A friend of mine who is a sometimes USGA volunteer was just telling me last weekend about the 3rd at Victoria National and what a mess it is.  If you try for the green in two, you don't know if your ball went over the edge into the water or not, so it's lost and you're hitting four from the fairway.  That's a pretty severe example of risk / reward.

P.S.  My friend is also your father-in-law.

PPS.  Congrats on your new addition.  The Milwaukee boys won the Renaissance Cup again this year, so tell the new mom we need her back in the field to promote competition in 2002.

[BillV]

Ran (and John)

Then we agree to disagree.  I can't imagine many of those features working unless it is dry which Victoria National can't be for very long.  And check out the drain positions the next time.

[T_MacWood]

I thought third was one of the better holes on the course, it was one of the few holes where the spoils were actually brought out into play -- my biggest complaint was that the spoils weren't utilized more often to force decisions.

Likewise I really liked the 15th, for me the hole is more memorable than even the 17th and 18th, no doubt because of its green site -- after playing the hole few times like a par-4, I agree with John's comments its a 5. It also features the best integration of a bunker with the spoils, which I would've liked to seen more of.

The 9th is a very interesting hole strategically forcing you to choose on your layup and then between a low or high approach, but there something about it that I don't like, maybe its the water behind the green as a strategic element or maybe the hole seems too artificial or contrived for more tastes -- I'm not sure.

I didn't have any problem with the short par-4's. On the otherhand I thought the par-3's were too similar, with one very good exception.

[John_McMillan]

Ran -

I think your ball on 11 at High Pointe came down next to mine.  My gripe against #11 is the severity of the slopes behind and to the left of the green.  It's one thing to have slopes which deflect balls long or to the left, it's another to have them so steep that most missed shots careen into the pine trees.  An additional strike, in my book, against the hole is Doak's comments that the slopes have been softened from their original design.  Tom's comments about #10 at Victoria National probably also apply to #11 at High Pointe.  I wonder how many golfers have missed the green 10 feet to the left, and ended up playing their third from the tee?  Probably not that many, since most don't hit a provisional, then drive up and see how steeply sloped the left of the green is, and that their ball is nowhere in sight.  Most probably just drop a ball somewhere near the cart path and play their second from there (which avoids the nasty glares from the foresome behind if you had driven back to the tee to play another shot).

[John Morrissett]

Tom D--

Thanks.  Not to downplay the prestigious Renaissance Cup, but Lisa was more disappointed at not being able to represent Indiana in the Women's State Team Championship in MN.  

Mr. L has issues with the 3rd at VN (and lots other parts of the golf world).  Just because a hole offers Rules problems in a stroke play event does not mean it is a bad hole.  For example, the 14th at Pine Valley offers similar problems -- is a pulled tee shot in the water hazard or is it lost outside the water hazard?  (Granted, at PV there is only a 30 yard difference in where the next stroke would be played (assuming the hazard beyond the green is marked yellow; if it is red, then it is the same predicament as at VN).  At the end of the day, if these "problems" really bother us, they can be solved with one or two forecaddies (or a Rules official that remains on that spot).

[Ted_Sturges]

To:  John M.

I like the 3rd at VN as well.  Truly a Fazio original.  You are correct in saying that Mr. L has issues with the hole (and, indeed much of the golf world   ).  He and I had to agree to disagree on the hole.  The point I tried to make with him (which you make in your post) was that just because a golf hole poses rules challenges in a medal event, it does not mean it is a bad hole.  VN #3 is a terrific hole, which would be a great match play hole.  Indeed, I think VN is a much better course for match play than medal play.  (Sounds like a good topic for a new thread).

TS

[BillV]

I want to clarify that I am criticizing VN because of what it boldly says it want to be, a top 20 course. There are no truly sacred cows to me.

It is a fine golf course, it is a good test of golf, but it falls short in some areas.  For $31M it should get the job done!

I'll still stand on the point that #3 at VN is determined by where your second shot can be made to come to rest and how you get it there, for example.  Many of the other features don't work.  

I think there is an opportunity to make VN better by opening it up more and paying more attention to getting the details right.  

(On an unrelated topic, I would love to be able to photograph that place, sell calendars and reap the proceeds.)  My favorite spot on the golf course is the view down a long lake from the front of 15 green back to 14's fairway bunker.  It is spectacular.  I can envision many more long views and a better golf course by removing more of the trees and gunch and recreating on the course open areas as seen from the clubhouse.  

Get more details right and voila.  Get more features right and it doesn't need to be almost 7300 yards which is virtually unplayable for nearly everyone and not very hard for the elite player, quite frankly.

So that no one thinks otherwise, I'll also play VN anytime with my friends Ward, fellow bone-crusher JP Morgan and another guy who shall remain nameless.  No problemo.

An aside note to my pal JohnV, I had a fine time Saturday and Sunday, the golf course required me to hit some shots and concentrate.  And I will make it to OR one of these days.

[John Morrissett]

Bill--

In an ideal world, shouldn't a golf course be judged by what it is (rather than by what it thinks it is or what it wants to be or what others (e.g., the various rankings) think it is)?

For that reason, I have mixed feelings about playing a course for the first time with a member.  On the one hand, the member(s) can offer insight that I might not otherwise have gleaned.  On the other hand, it's hard not to be affected (positively or negatively) by a member's comments and enthusiasm on his course.

I have often thought that the best way to see a course for the first time would be to play it by yourself in a vacuum, without having read or seen anything about it beforehand.  

You raise an interesting point about the construction budget -- should that impact our thoughts toward a certain course?  On the one hand, it should as we should be looking at things from a strict architecture perspective -- how efficient was the designer, etc.?  On the other hand, is architecture really a bang-for-your-buck field?  Should we care if an owner could have spent less money?  Should we compare budgets when we compare courses, or should we just compare the courses, not caring how they came to be?

[BillV]

John

I simultaneously agree with you and hold my own points!

I first played VN sharing a cart with Jim Lewis of all people.  I then played it the next day with a member.

I must admit that I do try to almost always play a new course by myself on a quiet day.  This interestingly raises more than a few eyebrows. Would rather have the pro or a member or the worst of all a foursome to play with?  No thanks.

I sometimes get a bum rap as aloof and arrogant in a foursome because I zone in on the features.

As for the construction budget, it is hard to ignore in this case because everything short of terraforming (As with Shadow Creek-which I unfortunately haven't played) occurred.  This was with the intention of  "creating" a course of supposedly the highest character by the self-proclaimed master of creating unique holes of unrivalled character. (Loosely paraphrased ffrom a coffee table book that I own.)  

The bar was set pretty high by someone other than myself as I see it.  

[Ran Morrissett]

Bill, Can you please give us 5/6 examples of where you found the detail work to be lacking? Thanks.

[BV]

-#12 green
-fairway angle on 4 (Liked green)Must be a -great hole, I birdied it.
-fairway bunker angle on #12, arguably back tee or 2, didn't like tree on hill to the right, liked the hill
-#3 run-up area
-#15 run-up area
-framing trees on #7
-tree problems on #14
-silly double fairway on #13
-silly tees on #16
-much of 15
-claustrophobic gunch
-par 3's other than 6 are basically same club

OH! You said 5 or 6, I thought you said 56!

but you already disagreed with me, Ran.  Just as I expect better from Rees, I expected better.

OK!  It's the greatest modern course I saw last week!  Second best Fazio this year!  Best quarry-type holes ever.

Somebody's got to keep it from being a love-fest.  

Yawn....I tire.

[Will E]

Dave,
Why would you put High Pointe on the tee against VN? Are you considering HP when it was in it's prime? I've heard about how great it used to play and Rick Smith's "ground round" with Mr.Doak. It clearly doesn't play that way now.
I'm surprized that we don't hear more about Black Forest, it wins most of the matches I can think of.
I haven't seen VN, I wish you would have put up another course to face it, I hate for a Michigan course get beat; esp. that bad.
GO BLUE!

[dick_cesana]

Having played VN the same time Bill V played it I have to agree with his comments,the golf course is too hard for all but the top 1% of players.When you finish you don't say what a good day I had, I got it up and down 3 or 4 times, you end comparing with others how many balls you lost.I have a feeling this course will drop in all the important ranking's. THE STAFF WAS GREAT!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()