Muirfield Village: just how good is it?

[PThomas]

thought this might be timely this week...

on past threads I've read where some have said it's a housing development course......

just how good is it? (full disclosure:  I haven't played it -- yet!)

does it lose points for 12 being a copy of Augusta's 12th?

hasn't the 17th been redesigned?

does the fact that the pros chew it up hurt it?

for sake of this argument let's exclude conditioning, even though I  guess it's one of the best in the world re this

might I suggest you give it a number on the Doak scale for comparison purposes....

[ian]

thought this might be timely this week...
Since it is popular not to like the course, I will defend it.
on past threads I've read where some have said it's a housing development course......
that's quite overstated, housing shows up, but it certainly does not dominate the course
just how good is it? (full disclosure:  I haven't played it -- yet!)
Too much reliance on water as primary hazard and a little modern to my taste; but it is still quite good. The 14th for example is excellent and worth seeing. Worth playing
does it lose points for 12 being a copy of Augusta's 12th?
If the Eden hole and the Redan are revered enough for copies, is the 12th at Augusta is not? Of course not.
hasn't the 17th been redesigned?

does the fact that the pros chew it up hurt it?
No, nor does that make other course poor either, they are just that good.
for sake of this argument let's exclude conditioning, even though I  guess it's one of the best in the world re this
might I suggest you give it a number on the Doak scale for comparison purposes....
6

[PThomas]

thanks Ian....

a 6 certainly does not place it in the great pantheon.....I believe T Doak gave it an 8 many years ago

but I wonder if MV is a course whose reputation has gone down over the years for some/many?, as it is very modern as you stated.....

[Tim_Weiman]

Paul,

I'm one of those people who thinks of Muirfield Village more as a housing development than an appealing golf course. While I understand Ian's suggestion that housing doesn't "dominate" the golf course, that aspect still stood out for me......after my first visit and subsequent visits for tournaments in the late 1980s (Ryder Cup and Memorials).

For disclosure's sake, my total experience at MV is walking the entire course 5-6 times, though my few invitations to actually play the course I haven't been able to coordinate.

Often we hear people argue "well you haven't played the course......so how can you comment?".

Perhaps.

But, I wonder about a course that I walk that many times and don't even come away with a feeling of wanting to actually play it.

Something just seems to be missing. Charm......character.......something.....I don't know what it is.

[Jim Franklin]

I really liked it and did not think the housing was that big a deal. I hate housing tracts, but this did not feel like that to me. I would give it a solid 8. the Golf Club in Columbus is better, but Muirfield is #2 in that city.

[Peter Galea]

But, I wonder about a course that I walk that many times and don't even come away with a feeling of wanting to actually play it.

Why waste your time walking it?

[Forrest Richardson]

The routing is 70% of Muirfield. It flows and unfolds quite well. Desmond Muirhead was responsible for this.

[Nick Pozaric]

I have played many great courses and say this is one of my favs.  The housing doesnt take away anything at all.  The feel you get while playing this course to me seemed like it was  special place.  There are many great holes on the course that after playing you wont forget.  I played 2 yrs ago and still remember every hole like it was yesterday, somehting that cant be said for many other courses

[Doug Sobieski]

Anybody have any thoughts on the walking aspect of the course? Personally, the fact that almost EVERY (with the possible exceptions of 10 to 11 and 17 to 18) green to tee walk is uphill is something that has always bothered me about the golf course.

The other thing that wears on me is the one-dimensional nature of the short game options. Missed greens typically result in a string of recoveries made with as much loft as possible, whether it's from the thick rough or the deep bunkering.

Here in Columbus, I think most people that have played all of the Big 4 would place it #3 in the immediate area behind TGC and Scioto.

[Jerry Kluger]

Where does Double Eagle fit in.  

[PThomas]

Doug-- do you know if Jack did those walks so a lot of the holes could play downhill, which is how he likes to/used to like to design holes?

another fun fact:  in his book Pete Dye said Jack told him those greens stimped at 16 one time!

is Scioto that good?  I believe T Doak said the "redesign" there was really bad..

[BCrosby]

I cringe when I see the two trees in the joint of the 18th fairway everytime I see MV on TV.

They appear to be standing in a sea of bunkers.

As far as I can tell they penalize shorter players that can't reach the corner or serve as a double penalty for people that find the bunkers. Both very bad ideas. Do they have a higher and better purpose? What was Nicklaus thinking?

Bob

[Mike_Sweeney]

I won't jump in, I

Redanman,

Can you please explain the meaning of "I won't jump in" to the rest of us?  

[T_MacWood]

redanman
I think #2 in Columbus is fair...a distant #2 IMO.

[Doug Sobieski]

Paul:

I think trying to make so many tee shots play downhill is the main reason. But I think it's overkill.

As far as the general sentiment of people I've polled here in town, keep in mind that there aren't that many that care about the architecture, so it's probably not fair to say they are rating the golf course, but rather the experience. It may be possible that MVGC feels very "cold" compared to the Scioto.

Personally, of the two courses that are flip-flopped by most as #2 in town, I like MVGC in small doses, but would prefer Scioto as the course to play on a regular basis.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pete Gelea,

My first experience walking Muirfield was following Seve at the Ryder Cup......he was pretty amazing and well worth it.

Subsequent visits were for the Memorial.....before I kind of got burned out on the place.

There are a few holes I would like to play (e.g., #14), but no burning desire overall.

[Peter Galea]

That makes sense, Tim.
Better than looking for Tom Paul's dog!

[Scratch_Nathan]

Paul -

I think MV is not a truly great golf course, but a good "collection" of golf holes.  Each one presents beauty and challenge and they're certainly all different and memorable.  As individual golf holes go, #s 5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 18 are particularly good IMHO.

On the downside, some of MV's holes seem to fight the natural slope of the land to create the containment that Nicklaus favors (contours that bounce balls toward the middle).  It was the first stadium style course (before TPC Sawgrass) so those perimeter mounding features are exaggerated even more.  Given an extra point for being innovative... but that's a bit of a backhanded compliment.  For me, this gives a the course a contrived appearance and feel.  If you're really into this architecture stuff, you're radar is up, and these things I mention are very noticeable.  To the average golfer, none of these detractions would even register, so with MV, perhaps ignorance is bliss.  Even the streams and features that look the most natural tend to draw out my cynicisms because I know they're most likely the work of heavy equipment and sculpting rather than mother nature.

All this being said, MV has a great golf atmosphere.  An invite to the home course in the home town of the game's greatest champion (and designed by him as a tribute to Augusta National - his favorite place) is hard to turn down.  Hitting the shots the TOUR pros play is always a thrill... It's just a different animal than most courses I find incredibly appealing.  Do I look forward to playing it again...of course.  Would I rather check out Double Eagle or The Golf Club or Scioto if given the choice (now that I've played MV twice)?..absolutely.