Is Vijay right about Shaughnessy?

[Jerry Kluger]

Vijay Singh was quoted on the Golf Channel as having said that Shaughnessy is the best course the PGA Tour will play this year including the majors - for those of you who know the course how good is it?  

[Mike_Young]

yes

[Jeff_Mingay]

Shaughnessy is a very good golf course; if only a shadow of its former self.

Opened in 1960, it was Vernon Macan's "last hurrah" following six decades in the business of golf course design.

The course is laid over a big, gently rolling site along the Fraser River Inlet, and originally featured wide fairways, fallaway greens, centre fairway bunkers, etc. Unfortunately, much of Macan's original design has been erased over the years.

I know a few Shaughnessy members. They report the set-up for this week is very one-dimensional (anti-Macan!). Most holes feature very, very narrow fairways bordered by deep rough. In fact, the driving and rough is so demanding that juniors, seniors, ladies and high-handicappers haven't played much over the past few months!

I'd put Shaughnessy near the top of my list of Canadian courses that could benefit greatly from some restorative-based work.      

Is Shaughnessy as good as Riviera though? TPC Sawgrass? Harbourtown? I don't think so. Not right now anyway.

[Jerry Kluger]

It would be great if one day either the Golf Channel or one of the broadcasting channels discussed the history and design of a course like this so it can be appreciated, and perhaps the membership will consider restoring it to what it was.

[Philippe Binette]

No matter how good...

Can't be better than St.Andrews... and Pinehurst 2

[A_Clay_Man]

THE REPETITIVE DEMANDS OF HIGH AND STRAIGHT IS NOT GOOD GOLF, TO WATCH OR PLAY.

However, Veejay's positive statement is one of the top three things one should say before doing anything

[Matthew MacKay]

Shaughnessy is very good, and likely more interesting when it's not on roids for The Open (that's Canadian Open for non-locals ).  There are some great holes, including an excellent stretch of par 4's (9,10,11) but also some pretty mediocre holes on the flatter section of the property.  There's is a better course across town up yonder in the hills (Capilano).  The pros like it because it has long par 4's and is very predictable.

All these Tour guys are prone to hyperbole...remember, Vijay and a few others were brought to Shaughnessy earlier in the year for a "preview".  I had to chuckle when Vijay said Shaughnessy "blows Hamilton away", both because that statement is ridiculous and because the ED of the RCGA is a member at Hamilton.

[Jeff_Mingay]

I would agree, Shaughnessy is not as good as Hamilton.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

There's a website:

http://www.shaughnessy.org/index.cfm

[Jeff_Mingay]

I just glanced over the club's web site quickly. Interesting that Macan's name doesn't appear.

[Jerry Kluger]

Look's like the pros aren't exactly eating it up - scores are pretty high.

[Wayne_Kozun]

No matter how good...

Can't be better than St.Andrews... and Pinehurst 2

Those were not PGA tour events they were run by the R&A and USGA.

[Philippe Binette]

He said, including the majors

[Gerry B]

not a chance imho

it is not even the best course in vancouver -

here are a couple of regular tour stops to compare it with if one were to debate messr singh:

riviera / pebble beach - i rest my case

[Jerry Kluger]

Vijay's home course isn't too bad either.

[Jeff_Mingay]

redanman,

You're web observation is correct. Shaughnessy could stand to lose some trees; many trees in fact. It's a claustrophobic course.

I'm sure if ol' Vernon Macan was around today and had his way, he'd order the chainsaws to fire up!

I think one of the reasons the pros are praising Shaughnessy is because it's straightforward, particularly this week with fairways no more than 25 yards wide. There's no guess work. Hit it straight off the tee then straight onto the green. As I understand, there aren't many other options.

Isn't that the way most of the pros like it? Hit it here... then here... then here.  

[Bill_McBride]

I'm getting ready to head home after a few days here in Portland OR where I've been playing Macan's Columbia-Edgewater where I've become a non-resident member.  The description of Shaunnessy fits CECC to a tee, rolling fairways, fall away fast greens, deep bunkering.  It's not long (6678 from the tips, very playable from blues at 6375) par 71 but very challenging.  The trees planted in the 60's have lined most fairways thickly with tall arbor vitae (think giant Sequoias).  I'll post a picture when I get back of #6 fairway which looks like the corridor of the gods or something.  Macan's routing is really good, it does a bit of back and forth to keep the flow moving.  I'm looking forward to playing more in the future.

Redanman, it does have a bit of Cal Club feeling in that there are just too many trees that choke the corridors a bit from place to place.  But it doesn't have the chutes that Cal Club has, where a slightly off line tee ball can result in a 100 yd drive!

[Rick Shefchik]

When one of the foremost practioners of the "blast away and wedge it out onto the green" style of play says he likes a golf course, warning signals should flash...

[TEPaul]

"Jeff
I tried to tangentially imply that earlier. "

redanman:

Did you have some problem with just coming right out and saying it?

[Ian Andrew]

Could it use a few trees removed, absolutely, but the course is full of tree enthusiasts.

But it's not rediculous like a few here seem to think. What may be throwing you off is the height of the trees. This is the Pacific Northwest, which means many of these trees are much higher than easterners are use to. Many of the trees are large enough to be spectacular in their own right.

The club is attached to the stupid line of trees on #1 (because it is a short par 5 for them, and on the left of 11 for the same reason.

I played there last year, and did not find the trees unreasonable. Additionally the short driveable 14th would not be near as interesting without the trees that squeeze the approach.

Vijay loved Sahallee and this course has the same feel, but I also think the 500k paid to him and three others for a promotional game a month prior had some influence too.

[Robert Thompson]

I actually have played Shaughnessy several times and never found it overtreed. The trees are often large and simply act to define holes. I'm sure Ian is right when he says it could lose some of these trees, but it isn't a particularly tight course -- there's lots and lots of driving room out there when it isn't set up for a Canadian Open. Actually then it is a fun course, with some fascinating greens and bunkering. I don't know how much it has changed, but my guess is actually not all that much. It is built on a small piece of property and the boundaries are much in dispute, since it was leased from a local native band.
A rock solid course -- as good as anything played this year on tour? No. But it certainly is better than 90% of what they played....

[Jeff_Mingay]

Rob,

Macan's routing is basically intact, but his bunkering schemes are largely gone. The course has been reworked on several occasions since 1960. I think a few greens have been rebuilt, too. And, of course, trees have multiplied and grown!

Macan's writings about his design at Shaughnessy are fascinating. I'm in the process of tracking down an early 1960s aerial of the course. I'll share it once it's received. I suspect we'll be surprised how much the course has changed.

[Chris Perry]

One of the local articles stated that much of the character of the course (for the pros) is that it doesn't need to be 7400 yards like most of other courses they play all year, and can still play just tough (regarding par) because of the narrowness, heavy rough and small greens.

If I recall, Sahalee isn't much more than 7000 yards either, however I think the trees there are just a tad taller.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Chris,

You can take any mediocre, heavily treed golf course with tiny greens, narrow the fariways, grow the rough to 4-6 inches and it'll be tough. Even for the PGA Tour pros. That kinda set-up doesn't showcase fine golf architecture though.  

[Ian Andrew]

Jeff,

I don't see Shaughnessy in as bad a light as you do.

Could it use some trees removed?.....of course
Is it badly overtreed?....I didn't think so
Is Shaughnessy a classic layout?....not in my opinion, but it is still quite enjoyable to play because of the large variety of cants in the greens including one fall away green and a redan style green at the third.

I'm real curious about your bunker location excercise. I know some of the changes (like the 4th), but I'm also curious to see how much is in the same location.

You can take any mediocre, heavily treed golf course with tiny greens, narrow the fariways, grow the rough to 4-6 inches and it'll be tough. Even for the PGA Tour pros. That kinda set-up doesn't showcase fine golf architecture though.
Does this not describe the set up for Hamilton, which after the Canadian Open is concidered one of the top 100 in the world.