Myopia Hunt Club - World 100?

[bakerg]

I was fortunate enought to play this course last Monday in a charity outing and I just can't believe that this course does not reside on the World 100 list.  There was a thread a while back about this course being a solid 8 on the Doak scale and I would personally give it a 9.  

Everything about the course was superb.  The routing, the contour of the greens, the bunkering, etc.  I also thought that their collection of par 3's was exceptional.  

I would strongly suggest anyone to take the oppurtunity to play in one of the several local charity events that the club hosts each year.  The one I played in was $250 and it was worth that and more.  

I do have one question for anyone out there thay knows a lot about the club history.  Is the golf course called Myopia Links and not Myopia Hunt Club.  The reason I ask is on the scorecard it says Myopia Hunt Club but on the inside it says Myopia Links.  Just curious.  

[pdrake]

The name is Myopia Hunt Club.......inside the clubhouse they do use the word links to describe their course.....it did start out as a big Hunt club and then was quite the tennis club.  Now it is mostly a golf club......a wonderful place to spend an afternoon........

[Joel_Stewart]

Its a great course but World 100 seems a little strong.  

For fun, I'll play devils advocate and say I didn't think the closing holes were that great and with the first being a very short drivable par 4 and #2 a reachable par 5 it seemed a little awkward.  Then you have #3 which is a par 3 that is so long its barely reachable?  There are a number of blind shots which I personally like but some panelists don't like.  

On a positive note, #9 is one of my all time favorite par3's with perfect bunkering.

[Forrest Richardson]

Joel,

It is a great test, a superb design and a remarkable series of holes no matter when or where you pick them. I would place Myopia at the top of the world's greatest and most unique courses — perhaps in a small group of 30. It stands in this group as being very different and unlike so many other "greats". I believe that trait deserves a strong rating.

[ChipRoyce]

Joel -

Yes, 3 is a long hole, but not at all unreachable. I've hit 3 wood to the back of the green many a time, even in cooler weather.

May not be a world top 100, but if I had a short list a la Tom Doak's Gourmet list, would be up there every time.

[Martin Del Vecchio]

Joel, I assume by "finishing holes" you are referring to 17 and 18.  16 is fabulous par-3, almost equal to #9.

And perhaps you don't think #17 was "that great" because you successfully negotiated the slope of the green with your approach shot, and didn't end up in the front-right bunker.  The hole is certainly easy, as long as hit the fairway and the green...

[JakaB]

Redanman,

We are talking about Golf Magazine here....you don't really think Shoal Creek and Double Eagle are more worthy than Myopia...do you..

[bakerg]

Yes, I was going by the Golf Magazine's World 100 list.  I would put it above Ocean Forest, World Woods, and Baltusrol Lower that I have played that are in the World 100.  I agree completely with Redanman about the way cool lists.  And, yes that has to be one of the coolest logos in golf.  

In the end it won't change my life if this is ever ranked higher I was just amazed at what a great course was hidden back down that road.  

The par 3 9th hole is probably my favorite par 3 now and I didn't even hit the green.  

Just my 2 cents.  

[Mark_Fine]

Rank this course wherever you want - in my opinion it is superb and one of my favorites in the world.  It is the least played golf course in New England so very few people ever get to experience it.  A true golf architecture treasure and they are fortunately keeping it that way.  

[Joe Andriole]

I made a golfing swing through New England last week and was privileged to play at Newport, Carnegie Abbey, Wannamoisset, Myopia Hunt, Winchester, Salem and TCC in a 4 day whirlwind tour.  I'm not sure about top 100 lists but there are few places more enjoyable for an 18 hole experience than Myopia.  The routing is fabulous and the land first rate.  I was surprised that there weren't more fairway bunkers; the course was a little soft and there were several pedestrian holes.  However, there was so much that exhilarated the spirit. Hole 4 is almost perfect.  Holes 6,9,12,16 are unique and spectacular.  I think that the overall experience is much greater than the sum of the 18 holes and that connotes something special.  If I had to choose I would take Kittansett over MH but what a great choice.  As an aside the 3 Ross courses I played; Wannamoisett, Winchester, and Salem are similar yet so unique.  Wannamoisett is artfully crammed into 100 or so acres and you constantly seem to be returning to the center of the property but the holes are separate and unique.  The green complexes are the best of Ross that I have seen -- varied; tilted, crowned, punchbowlish etc --absolutely superb and wonderfully maintained.  I'd forgotten how severe the terrain was at Winchester and how rugged the course is--much more bunkering here and on a larger scale that befits the property.  Salem is also a delight though the green complexes do not equal its RI neighbor and the land more timid than Winchester.  There is a good routing  with interesting contours but less interesting bunkering.  Carnegie Abbey is a whole nother experience -- Donald Steel has created some unique holes in a terrfic environment.  There's a litttle quirk
and some very severe green contouring along this wonderful walk.  OT--what a good bar.  In the end I wonder WHY I live in Florida.

[Ed_Baker]

I would concur with Redanman even though I admit extreme bias towards a preference for older golf courses.

This site has taught me to be (more) open minded about golf architecture as a concept and to appreciate each golf course for what it is, rather than primarily by age or pedigree, but at Myopia that latter must be acknowledged.

There is no doubt that Myopia is an A plus golf experience, it has that same timeless elegance about it that all the great ones have.It also has very good golf holes with at least two world class holes(#3 and #9, in my opinion) and enough quirk to keep the player exhilerated, but it also has #17 which by it's banal ordinariness makes you remember it simply because it is decidedly ordinary among a collection of real characters. I would put #2 at Charles River in that same category for the same reason. Does it detract from the round or is it completely out of character, no not at all. But it's very existence would bump it out of the rarified air of WORLD 100 for me. World 100 golf experiences? Absolutely.

This probably is a topic for another thread but as long as I have Myopia on the brain, I'll throw it out for discussion.

All of these great old clubs have a bigger than life presence that grabs the golfer as soon as they arrive. Is it the fact that the golfer really has to respect the obvious stewardship that has endured and prevailed over all the vagaries of Golf Club politics and the immunity to the destructive forces for decade after decade? In my mind that triumph in remaining true to it's origin is really the measure of success for these rare old clubs. The ability to remain the same(provide the same excellent golf product and atmosphere) with out becoming obsolete or a dull anachronistic charicature of itself is remarkable enough in it's own right that a true golfer is not only aware of it, but beguiled by it. In the Northeast, I would put Kittansett and Eastward Ho! in to the same category of enduring stewardship and providing the same quality golf experience for decades without any overt evidence of a stifling authority presence. Everything just works well in an understated or (understood) effortless flow of efficencies that produces a superb golf day on exceptional golf courses without making anybody uncomfortable. What is that quality? Identity meld? What ever it is, Myopia has it in abundence, even the horses are content, but don't acknowledge them when they wink at you.

[Mark_Fine]

Here is another way to look at Myopia Hunt Club - Whether or not you think the course is one of the best in the world, if you are fortunate enough to play the golf course, there is probably a 100% chance you will not play or visit 100 courses that are any better in your lifetime.  Therefore it should be in everyone's Top 100  

One more thing, don't let a hole like the first fool you into thinking it is pedestrian.  The lure of a starting eagle is usually too much to take for most golfers to play it smart.  If you go for the green and miss pin high on the sides (especially on the right), you will be lucky to walk away with your par, very lucky!
Mark

[Forrest Richardson]

The previous comment by JG that "there are few places more enjoyable for an 18 hole experience than Myopia" sums up everything that really needs to be said.

[jefffraim]

If I may interject a bit in the design philosophy of Herbert Corey Leeds. First, he has been quoted as saying in the clubs archives that he took sadistic pleasure in punishing the duffer. If this sounds familiar to you Raynor fans it should.

"The poor golfer should learn to play the ideal links, the ideal links should not be brought down to the playing ability of the poor golfer."
                   -Seth Raynor

Leeds also took this concept to heart. He designed two others that we know of Palmetto Golf Club and Another course in Maine. The course in Maine stills has some characteristics left. Leeds was a member of MHC and he would play the course with friends and other members and if he saw someone get away with a shot and not be penalized he would drop a chip and a bunker would appear. Second, the topograhy and playing conditions of the site are not as penal as 1900. Obviously the topography hasn't change but the use of the topography has. When you play Myopia now you see bunkers in the rough (sometimes 20 yards in the rough) well if that rough wasn't there and the fairways were hard and fast if you didn't hit your ball into a 15-20 area the ball would roll sometimes 50-60 yards down a hill into a collection bunker that was death to get out of. If you thought Shinnecock played unfair this year Myopia would have been almost unplayable in spots.
Enough for now..............


PS 1st round at MHC this year I drove the 1st green and the pin was back left I proceded to putt my ball into a greenside bunker and make 6.  

[Forrest Richardson]

And I am sure Leeds took great pleasure in witnessing this.

[Brad Tufts]

Ed,

A few points to add about Myopia's Hole #17, a hole that I consider one of the most underrated on a course full of 1890 eye candy and highly rated holes throughout.  

#17 is one of the most simple and unapologetically strategic holes at Myopia.  It is sidehill architecture at its finest.  The tee shot must be driven down the left edge of the fairway, close to the OB stone wall, to gain the best angle to the green.  The land slopes rather steeply left to right, adding difficulty to the lefthand tee ball placement.  The green is small and firm (a recurrent theme at MHC), and slopes with the land, left to right.  A bunker guards the green short and right, and catches any approach that lands within ten or fifteen yards to the left of it.

A tee shot that remains on the left side of the fairway has a clear shot to the left half of the green, which often has to be landed short of the green itself.  A shot that finds the right side has to clear the bunker (and its collecting-slope surrounds) and hit the green on the fly.  This shot usually will not hold the firm green.

At first look, it appears to be a straight, medium length par four, but like everywhere else at Myopia, angles are built in.  The strategy is slightly different these days, with modern-wedge stopping power combatting the firmness of the greens. However, when the ground game was more prevalent 70 years ago, mid to long irons were used to approach #17, requiring a drive down the left-hand side to ease the running of the ball onto the green away from the bunker.

-Brad

Jeff, the course in Maine is Kebo Valley....donkey.

[SPDB]

in the case of MHC, i don't think the current golf course is a result of any enduring "stewardship," in fact, the club is probably more lucky than anything else. no one paid any attention to the club for decades.  as P alludes to above, golf fell out of favor for a while, and with it went the "stewardship." Only recently has it returned.  

[Martin Del Vecchio]

Brad, I couldn't agree more about #17; I tried to express it earlier, but I couldn't do it as eloquently as you did.

In a tournament I played there last fall, I arrived at #17 with an excellent round going.  I drove it down the center, which of course means it ended up just in the right rough with a half-decent lie.  Just indecent enough to cause me to make a strategic error.  I played for a flier, which I didn't get.  

On most holes, that would leave me 10 yards short of the green, with a simple chip.  On #17, I watched helplessly as my ball bounced short of the green (directly on line with the flag), then bounce and trickle in a perfect curve, into the front-right bunker.

From there, I had a difficult and shot (they're all difficult for me), and I couldn't help but notice that OB was just beyond the green.  I skulled it 2 feet short of OB, and ended up with a double-bogey.  

Simple hole!