The Shadow Creek Experience

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Gary,
I really don't have the time to get into it, which means, I'm going to get addicted to this computer, miss my morning walk, which is right now, "Matt Ward-WAYYYYYYY" more important then expounding negatives over a course many here think that they love.

I hate being pushed into being a person thats viewed as negative or has a negative point of view. I would rather my view be one that is in-line what I think allows a course its dignity and rightful place in the realm of GREAT, Good, Mediocre and Bad. Some may call it negative, but its just how I see it, and when there is ever a time I want to post a review of a new course visited, I want to do it so people will understand how I'm seeing it through my eyes, while not trying to influence in anyway their opinion of what they see.

To prove my point, when I played there, I even posted images of drawings I did of Shadow Creek to describe the golf holes to everyone because no one else could ever described them to me. Drawings were the only way I could do it because they don't allow cameras out there.

So, I understand what your asking for, and I'll give it to you later whn time permits.

But before I go for the rest of the day, until later tonight, here are a few of "negatives" since I have been described that way.

1.-Routing
Both the Front 9 and the Back 9 suffer from too many holes that back and forth parallel to each other. Personally, with that kind of wallet open for any kind of routing you could produce, its pretty boring. 1,2,3,4 back and forth. Transition hole to #9 changes direction, parallel holes at 6 & 7 and back to back at #7. Transistion for front and back nine, change of direction, in the same direction at #9 & 10. Two back and forth parallel holes at 11 & 12, and then a break at the par 3, 13th, which becomes a near exact replica of #2 from 200 yards in. Parallel holes, back and forth for holes 14, 15, 17, and 18. It may sound confusing the way I'm explaining it, but its far more unmemorable to try to remember it all.

2.-Repetition
Too many holes are way to similar to one another, especially around the greens and location of greenside bunkers. Way too many of the green complex areas are repeted over and over during various spots around the course. (More on this later)

3.-Putting Surfaces
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! (Imagine the sound of loud snoring)

4.-Containment Mounding
Fazio is different at containment mounding then others. he ties it in with the fairways, but its still just too much of it, and the result is nary a single fairway that is memorable. In example, where Rees Jones doesn't care if his fairways tie-in to his containment or natural contours; and the course just looks horribly placed, Fazio has tied it all in very well as Shadow Creek, its just that its all massive movements of land while doing it--literally waves of fairway deep in these walls of containment.

5.-Gimmicks
Its Las Vegas. You can get away with gimmicks when building something. Look at what they have built there--Paris, Venice, Egypt and its pyramids, A Vietnamese jungle, a African Jungle, the Caribbean Islands, etc, etc. etc.  Why not a mountains of North Carolina or Northern California (I have seen it described as both for inspiration)  The faux creeks look just too pristine and fake to me. #17, don't believe a single thing you read about Ben Crenshaw expounding the beauty of #17 at Shadow Creek. Asking Ben to say something negative about a competitors course is like asking Huckaby to say something negative about Purex Bleach in a press release. They're both just too nice of guys and they don't want to ruffle feathers. Just pull on them once in a while!  

The fact is that #17 at Shadow Creek maybe Wacko's and Wigler's most special grotto, but it isn't a golf hole. Its a circus of whats wrong with this kind of golf. Elevated tee to a flat green thats almost of like an island with a waterfall back-drop in an area that is planted with WAYYYYYY TOO MANY TREES. WOO! WOO!

Now, Please any of you guys see me posting or my name on the on-line screen on the opening page, please tell me to turn off the computer and get walking!

[THuckaby2]

Tommy - that is GREAT stuff.  Of course I disagree with your assessments, but I am glad you put them up there for Gary to see.  You do know your stuff and if one is to base the greatness of Shadow Creek on the worth of your opinion v. mine, well I know I am in for a losing battle.  I'm just glad I have Jim to help.

NOW GET OUT AND WALK.

One thing though, before you go.  I work for THE CLOROX COMPANY.  Purex is a tiny competitor we squash.  I'm happy to say whatever negatives about them you wish, though "irrelevant" is the most important.

 

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Gary,
One last item.

The thing I find most funny about all of this is that all of the pros on Shadow Creek, you'll never hear an exact description of any feature, any talk of routing, or strategies (the lack of them-a complete 180 on Tom Huckaby's opinion of SC and Strategy)

Until they talk about them, who you going to believe? Or do you just want to continue the "Hey everybody thinks its great so it is" hype of a place that is over-rated because of it.

Shadow Creek is a great experience, but I'll take Shady Canyon over it anyday. Far better golf architecture and a heck of a lot more strategic--for Fazio.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom I know you work for Clorox, and the point was you won't see Ben Crenshaw saying anything bad about Tom Fazio ala Clorox vs. Purex (I'm a Clorox man. I have the Whitening Pen in the other room to prove it!)

Gotta go walk!

[A.G._Crockett]

Tommy and Tom

You're getting sensitive.........

I'm reminded of Animal House when Kevin Bacon is getting his arse whipped by Niedermeyer's paddle:

"Thank you Sir!  Comp me again!"

"Louder, I CAN'T hear you!"

"THANK YOU SIR!  COMP ME AGAIN!!!!!!"

PS--glad you liked the course.

PPS-Barney did NOT make me do this.

Kevin Bacon was NOT in Animal House, much less whipped by
Neidermeyer!  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

A.G., Yes he was. A very young Kevin Bacon did in fact have his arse whipped by Dougie N.

[JakaB]

Would everyone please log out until at least 2:15 central so Tommy will go walk....it is tough but here goes...

[THuckaby2]

Tommy (for when you return from the walk):  aha!  Gotcha re Clorox/Purex.  Told ya I was slow at times.    You're right though - I don't tend to speak badly about anyone, even competitors.  You got me there.  Dammit.

As for the strategy at SC, well... man it's been a few years since I've been there, and maybe that proves your point, but I'd have to go over the book and remind myself.  I just do recall having quite a few fun strategic choices to make there.

So you have the lead in this, for now... I guess the supporters ought to mention more instances of the good, to counter your detail of the bad... but dammit I don't remember.

Which of course is damning in itself.  I ought to shut up.

AGC:  Kevin Bacon was indeed in animal house - he was the preppy frat boy being spanked in the initiation ceremony, and Niedermeyer was doing the spanking.  Rich's reference is exactly correct.

Go to any of the many web sites about this movie... you'll see....

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

I stand corrected (Thank you sir! May I have another?)  I decline, however, to visit an Animal House website, preserving what little dignity that is left to me, given the amount of time that I spend on THIS website!  (A Delta house in it's own right...)  

In my defense, I was thinking about the stable scene involving the "pledge pin", which I say out loud in my best Neidermeyer voice when the hockey player by that name is mentioned on Sportscenter.

[THuckaby2]

I stand corrected (Thank you sir! May I have another?)  I decline, however, to visit an Animal House website, preserving what little dignity that is left to me, given the amount of time that I spend on THIS website!  (A Delta house in it's own right...)  

In my defense, I was thinking about the stable scene involving the "pledge pin", which I say out loud in my best Neidermeyer voice when the hockey player by that name is mentioned on Sportscenter.

You remain a very wise man, AGC.

 

I am cracking up at this... I swear, I do the same thing... it's been one of the joys of hockey viewing for me that there is a Niedermeyer... Another one I do is in Belushi's voice, at the end of his famous "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor" speech... NIEDERMEYER!!!! (then the other guy jumps in) Dead!  Bluto's, right.  Psychotic, but absolutely right...

TH

[Jim Franklin]

Huck -

You have zero worries RE: Irish and Bruins. Neither has the firepower. As a rivalry game they may keep it closer than expected, but I see blowouts in both.

I don't think we have played either so I would love to see it. I have a good friend that is an SC grad in Newport Beach that I am sure to make a wager with if we do meet. He lives in Emerald Bay or something like that.

My boys still have UVA and VA Tech(played you guys tougher than I expected). Lest I forget at NC State this weekend.

[THuckaby2]

JIm - oh yes, potential pitfalls do exist.  More for Miami than SC - I just list Irish and Bruins as POSSIBLES, given the rivalries... but I too see big USC victories in each game.  Miami does have a tough road to hoe.  But I see that all panning out also....

So what we need to do is root against Oklahoma.  That ought not to be difficult.

Now back to Shadow Creek.  You are way better in touch with in than me, having played it way more.  Can you give some positives re strategy or other issues, to counter Tommy's negatives?

TH

[Gary_Nelson]

Tommy,

I've heard that each hole is isolated from the next.  How can you be bothered by the back and forth routing if you can't see the hole next to you?

Are the putting surfaces lacking the wild contours so favored on this forum?  Or, is SC a course with a lot of subtle contours that make you scratch your head and wonder why you 3-jacked a bunch of greens?


You say the course is repetitive.  Would you agree that "fixing" the course requires a re-do of the green complexes and bunker surrounds?

[Matt_Ward]

Jim F said:

"Put me in Huck's corner as someone that liked the course a lot. I paid to play, was comped as a gambler, and played as a rater and enjoyed each and every round. Is it the most difficult course in the world? No. Is the experience right up at the top of the charts? Yes."

Jim -- I have to ask you this -- the issue wasn't about the difficulty of Shadow Creek because frankly from the two times I played it the course was fairly matter-of-fact in what it expects from those who play it.

That's not the issue for me.

The word "experience" and what is directly related to it needs to be defined. I seriously could care less about having some guy massage me when I get to the course and do all the gunga din run around type stuff so many "king for a day" type places try to follow. Is that the "experience" people are referring to.

Shadow is fine for that ... Cascata is even a step ahead with all the hand holding that's provided.

The issue is really about the sophistication of the design and the memorability of the holes. People have a tendency to confuse or lump the creation of Shadow Creek with the actual golf that's there. I see that as two separate issues.

Despite all the vague mentioning of "experience" you rarely, if ever, get any details on specific holes at SC. I mean it has its moments but they are as fleeting as daylight on a February afternoon.

I don't doubt the golf is quite good -- very good in spots. Is Shadow Creek a top 100 course when the golf -- the guts of the course is weighed? I don't see it from the ones I have played. Clearly, a top ten placement -- which SC attained in the Digest poll over 10 years ago was truly a mistake in overestimation.

The "experience" in being pampered when taken to Xanadu is no doubt unique and heady. It can overwhelm the mind and play to the ego.

Shadow Creek is a leading example of man's ego to conquer and impose his will on nature. It is folly for people to somehow equate that part of the equation with the qualities (lack thereof) of the true core of the course and that to me is the finished product -- e.g. the architecture and what came from it. Not the process in how it was built or all the "servicing" you receive once there.

[George Pazin]

Am I the only one on here who would feel a little uncomfortable with the pampering at a golf course that everyone is lauding?

[THuckaby2]

Well of course we disagree on that, Matt.  I'll continue to state a position I've held for years here, and that is that there is far more to a golf course than what you call "the guts" or "the meat" of the course.  If that's all that matters, then why play?  Why not just walk and study?

Golf courses remain meant to be used for the playing of golf.  And far more goes into the playing of golf than just "meat", "guts", hell "architecture."

And the playing of golf at Shadow Creek is a unique experience, from the artificial but incredible beauty of the course, to all the treatment one receives, to the incredible engineering achievement, to the darn fine golf course itself.  Now obviously off-course treatment should be given relatively little weight in this equation... but I can't agree that it doesn't matter at all.  If one is treated nicely, it makes it far easier to enjoy the activity.  If one is treated poorly, it becomes more difficult.  Many other non-design related things go into what makes a course enjoyable, or not... For a lot of golfers, the presence of caddies is a definite plus... the ease of the course to be walked... the views looking out from the course... the historical relevance, in terms of great things having been done there, with the ability to walk in the footsteps of the giants... none of these have anything to do with design or architecture, but again, to say they don't matter seems silly to me.  We do not play with our eyes or hearts closed.

To me all of this does matter, and makes for the sum assessment of a golf course.  Assessment of "architecture" is an entirely different thing, one I believe is best taken on by the practicitioners themselves.  Golfers can assess golf courses.

I'm a golfer.

Shadow Creek is a damn fine golf course.

I know you completely disagree with the way I look at things, and most people in this forum think I'm insane for all this.  The funny thing is, 99% of real-world golfers tend to think I'm right on.

Just wanted to post the opposing view.

 

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tommy,

I've heard that each hole is isolated from the next.  How can you be bothered by the back and forth routing if you can't see the hole next to you?

Are the putting surfaces lacking the wild contours so favored on this forum?  Or, is SC a course with a lot of subtle contours that make you scratch your head and wonder why you 3-jacked a bunch of greens?


You say the course is repetitive.  Would you agree that "fixing" the course requires a re-do of the green complexes and bunker surrounds?

Gary,

The isolation, while many will concur is on every hole, when I came across the two parallel holes at #3 & 4, I was actually quite taken aback how beautiful it really was, looking out on to the fairway of #4 across a very calm and pristine pond that separates the two holes for a bit, and then continues on with the containment ad naseum.

I suspect Tom Fazio is the type of architect that will not chance any risk of two groups of golfers coming with-in sight of each other--it may have even been a requirement here except for this one paticular place.  The containment is just too mind-numbing and dumbs-down some of the more important aspects what golf is all about. I just don't want to always feel trapped in one paticular area--I came out there to feel free and relaxed, and at Shadow Creek, for all of its expanse--there is a certain air of claustraphobia to it.  

To many pine trees perhaps?. Actually, I think its all of the containment with-in containment and for golf, it it eventually has an effect.

Like I have said though, many will expound how much they love the course and how great it is, but you never hear any of them talk about any of the individual holes or certain features. In fact the hole I have only ever heard talked about how beautiful #17, which I don't think is even a golf hole to speak of. Probably the least architecturally interesting hole out there.

As far as the putting surfaces, well if I said they weren't that good, I'm sure you'll get someone to come-back and say they are.  All's I know is I love golf greens and these are simply boring.  As far as complexes, Fazio has this variation of greens that either goes right to left or left to right that he uses about 6 -10 times a round on any most given course.  Its a green that features tough pin plamcents in the very front and the very back, sort of "L" or "Kidney" shaped, and he has a bunker(s) protecting the sides of those greens and a false front protecting the very forward portion of green.

He uses it or variations of it on holes 1,2,11,13,14,15,& 16, and all of them feature the punch-bowl/arena-like green complex that acts as a back-stop for any awkward shot.  Truthfully, Shadow Creek is like a Dial-O-Matic golf course with all of these pre-conceived notions of directing you how to play. As far as putting on the greens, personally, I this notion of no one not being able to three-putt is pretty funny. I think we are all grown-up enough to realize the human condition and when we may not be at the top of our games and/or how that can change between rounds on any given notice. That's the mystery of th Game that guides us to keep on trying. BUt as far as greens that would be really worth it to stay out there and study them for an extra couple of hours, like say someone would do at Friar's Head or Winged Foot--Notta Chance!  

Thats jst an example of the difference from having a GREAT course and one that is good or mediocre.

Fixing the course?  No, I don't think the course needs to be fixed because its perfect in their eyes and I have to say, the created something that was needed in Vegas.  Why correct the golf course that raised the bar of golf courses there?

Look how many courses in Las Vegas and others, want to take Shadow Creek's spot in Las Vegas!

When I was there, We had just missed the Faz the day before!  Which could have been really interesting! They had been renovating many of the bunkers on the course. Ironically, I like this style of bunker, but its nothing like that big puffy thing thats going on at Merion! :

[THuckaby2]

Am I the only one on here who would feel a little uncomfortable with the pampering at a golf course that everyone is lauding?

We've discussed that before, George.  Perhaps you would.  I know I would feel very uncomfortable with legions of servants fawning over me. I hate getting my hair cut for God's sake.  Please understand that is NOT what happens at SC.  There are no massages, etc.  You do get picked up in a limo, and if you can have a sense of humor and suspend your disbelief, well it's kinda fun.  After that, well they do like to show you the locker room and Bush's locker, Jordan's, etc.  To me it's like a show, just fun.  The range is cool in that each foursome has its own little slot... Then off to the course, where it's typically your group + caddies and not many others, if any, anywhere to be seen.

That's a pretty darn fun way to play, having a course to one's self.

So don't get too hung up on pampering, etc.  I'd not like that very much either.

What happens is once inside those gates, well... it is a show but they make you feel at home.  They really do.  A lot of that is due to the classy and gracious Director of Golf.  

It's not pampering, it's "welcoming".

I guess this is very difficult to explain.  But I knew I was definitely a fish out of water there, yet I felt very much at ease and welcomed.  Maybe it doesn't make sense... but I sure felt more welcome there than MANY private clubs I've been to.

TH

ps - damn, now Tommy's back and this could get good... but I am off to face the long drive home.  Likely won't check in here till tomorrow.  Enjoy!

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt Ward Says: The word "experience" and what is directly related to it needs to be defined. I seriously could care less about having some guy massage me when I get to the course and do all the gunga din run around type stuff so many "king for a day" type places try to follow. Is that the "experience" people are referring to.

I thought I made that pretty clear myself?

George, I'm not the type that likes all that pampering either. It has nothing to do with golf, but for the guys with big money in Las Vegas--its everything!

This maybe the perfect reasoning alone to NOT consider Shadow Creek a golf course at all. Though its its shtick.

Matt Ward Says Again: The issue is really about the sophistication of the design and the memorability of the holes. People have a tendency to confuse or lump the creation of Shadow Creek with the actual golf that's there. I see that as two separate issues.

Despite all the vague mentioning of "experience" you rarely, if ever, get any details on specific holes at SC. I mean it has its moments but they are as fleeting as daylight on a February afternoon.

I don't doubt the golf is quite good -- very good in spots. Is Shadow Creek a top 100 course when the golf -- the guts of the course is weighed? I don't see it from the ones I have played. Clearly, a top ten placement -- which SC attained in the Digest poll over 10 years ago was truly a mistake in overestimation.

The "experience" in being pampered when taken to Xanadu is no doubt unique and heady. It can overwhelm the mind and play to the ego.

Shadow Creek is a leading example of man's ego to conquer and impose his will on nature. It is folly for people to somehow equate that part of the equation with the qualities (lack thereof) of the true core of the course and that to me is the finished product -- e.g. the architecture and what came from it. Not the process in how it was built or all the "servicing" you receive once there.

As said in Shadow Creek thread way before, this is where Matt Ward and myself are in 100% complete agreement--an odditty.

I would only hope that Matt would go over my list and see if he agreed with anything I have spoke about in it, to both see if I missing something or, if we even agree on anything architecturally about the course.

[Jim Franklin]

Sorry to miss all of this lively banter, but I am heading out the door to New York. Still have to pay the bills.

It was my feeling that the course was designed so you wouldn't see anyone else. Nothing wrong with that unless you are claustraphobic. As for containment mounds, I guess you hit every fairway and at least two putted every green because they are so bland and easy so you probably posted a 68. Is that about right?

I loved the risk/reward par 5 fourth hole and 18th. My two favorite holes were 9 and 15. Sorry, but I liked the meandering creek.

I need to catch a train so I gotta split. Hopefully this conversation will continue when I get back.

[JakaB]

Please note for all you Golf Digest bashers out there....Golfweek has Shadow Creek ranked 6th best modern....And Shivas says it is the serious rag....I think Golf Digest has Shadow Creek at 48th or so.....

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sorry to miss all of this lively banter, but I am heading out the door to New York. Still have to pay the bills.

It was my feeling that the course was designed so you wouldn't see anyone else. Nothing wrong with that unless you are claustraphobic. As for containment mounds, I guess you hit every fairway and at least two putted every green because they are so bland and easy so you probably posted a 68. Is that about right?

Jim, ALL of Fazio's courses are designed so you won't see anything else. Or at least the strong majority of them are that way. (Shady Canyon isn't as pentulate.)

I loved the risk/reward par 5 fourth hole and 18th.

I bet that risk/reward par 5, 4th maximized your shot values too, didn't it!

My two favorite holes were 9 and 15. Sorry, but I liked the meandering creek.

I bet you did love those creeks! You didn't bring up #1. though. You don't notice any similarites between #9 and #1? However, we are in agreement regarding the 15th. Its a very good golf hole. So's the 5th.

I need to catch a train so I gotta split. Hopefully this conversation will continue when I get back.

Have a nice ride, and while your on the train, sit and lay your head back and think of a really great course like Friar's Head or Pacific Dunes or Bandon Dunes or Sand Hills or Apache Stronghold or Wild Horse or Kingsley Club, etc, both architecturally from a golfer's standpoint to challenge and his ability to just enjoy the golf for what it worth in the enviroment it is situated.  It willmake the train ride that much more enjoyable!

[Matt_Ward]

John K said, "Please note for all you Golf Digest bashers out there....Golfweek has Shadow Creek ranked 6th best modern....And Shivas says it is the serious rag....I think Golf Digest has Shadow Creek at 48th or so....."

John -- what can I say -- I'm only one voter -- I guess it must be all the gunga din pampering that swayed quite a few of my fellow brethren who voted that highly for it.

Frankly, Shadow Creek being 6th when a layout of such strong and consistent character (the golf part that is!!!) like Black Mesa in New Mexico does't even make the listing makes me want to cry.

Hey John let's be fair now -- the Digest had SC ranked among the top ten of all courses not too far back in memory. And when you compare a 48th position among all courses it really comes out to the same level as what GolfWeek haswhen you factor in the classic and modern ones that are voted upon separately.

Tommy N:

Now we have to stop agreeing so much -- next thing you know Ward will be in agreement with Moriarty (or vice versa) and then the world will really take notice.

All in all, SC is oddly like the essence of Vegas -- it's the show -- the fanfare -- the buzz of lights and attention -- SADLY, for SC and even for a good part of Vegas when you move from nightfall back to daylight and really see what's present you find very little depth. That's SC -- whatever good holes are there -- and the course does have a few -- is fleeting -- like I said before -- like the sunlight on a late February afternoon.

One other thing -- Tom Fazio does have some excellent examples work that really showcases quality golf holes. Places like Black Diamond / Quarry, Glenwild in Utah (not even rated or even played by many), Galloway National in NJ and Karsten Creek in OK are all solid and first rate golf courses -- in my mind, those examples I just mentioned, are all textbook quality golf courses that I would want to play again and again. I'd love to ask Fazio if having Shadow Creek stand as the best example of his design portfolio is really something he believes is the case when compared to his other efforts.

[Gary_Nelson]

Tommy,

I appreciate your write-up.  Someday I'll get to play the course and can post my own review.

This GCA discussion board is certainly forcing me to look beyond the "niceties" offered at CCFAD's and look more seriously at the design of the course instead.  It's tough to do it with my usual group of chain-smoking, beer guzzling, 110 shooting friends.  GCA is sort of my oasis.  Thanks for your posts.

Gary

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Gary,
Matt sums it pretty spot on here, and I'll add another.

Think of the differences between staying in a Five-Star Hotel, like the The Waldorf or the Ritz in New York or the Four Seasons or the Ritz Carlton in London, Paris or Hong Kong.

Then think of the difference when you stay at the Mirage, the MGM, Bally's etc. (Omiting the Venetian and the Bellagio which are pretty nice also)  

That's the difference between Shadow Creek and say a truly great course like Garden City or Plainfield, or Fenway or Winged Foot or Friar's Head or NGLA or Maidstone (Opps! Sorry Matt! Maidstone makes my list!   etc.!) or Piping Rock or The Creek or Yale or Riviera or Pine Valley or Merion (old Merion) Cypress Point or SFGC or Olympic or Sand Hills or Pacific Dunes or Apache Stronghold or The Valley Club of Montecito, etc. etc. etc.

I have never stayed in any of these with the exception of the normal 3-4 Star Hotels in Las Vegas that think they are Five-Star.  I even enjoy staying at them! If any of the Four Season's or Ritz's in London, Hong Kong or Paris are as opulent as the ones in Newport Beach and Dana Point, then the Venetian or the Bellagio are the only ones that come close, and they aren't THAT close.

Gary, looking or not looking at the niceties is like the Red pill or Green pill from the Matrix. One allows you to live the life you have been living with knowledge of enslavement to the Matrix. The other is the wholesome truth, and while it may not seem pretty, Knowledge of the subject is an addiction in itself. Be very careful!

[Tags:]

Tags: