[Matt_Ward]

I had the pleasure in touring the new Nicklaus course called Pronhorn in Bend, OR and although temperatures and wind conditions (gusts upward of 40 mph) prevented my play this time around -- I did tour the facility with the head professional and to say I was blown away (no pun intended) is an understatement.

The Nicklaus team has made a concerted effort in moving away from what Jack did earlier in his design and you can see that clearly with Pronghorn. The site is on soft rolling land and there is a profusion of juniper trees that dot the landscape. I was told the greatest number of juniper trees are in Bend save for a location or two in Israel.

The course provides plenty of width but it's the detailing and the desire to allow the site to not be overpowered with plenty of bells and whistles that makes Pronghorn a very unique and special place.

The course tops out at 7,381 yards from the tips and sports a 75.4 CR and 144 slope. Given the altitude -- about 3,500 feet above sea level -- the effect is about one or two clubs max.

Bend has IMHO the best summer weather in the USA. In addition, Pronghorn is located in a micro-climate area that facilitates more play than say Sunriver which is roughly 1,000 higher in elevation.

The elements that team Nicklaus are doing now have dramatically taken Jack and his talented team to another level. I have been most fortunate to have played the other examples of his recent work and the batting average for team Nicklaus is clearly moving up. You don't see the same tired and pedestrian concepts that far too often the Tom Fazio camp routinely bring forward time after time.

Pronghorn has plenty of wherewithal to test all players and fortunately Jack and his team didn't see fit to bring in the armada of bulldozers and try to create some overblown canvass.

It will be interesting see how the companion TF designed course matches up against the original 18. I could hear all the machinery pushing ahead with the TF course when I was there and the likely opening for 9 holes looks to be spring / summer of '06. The remaining nine holes will likely open towards the end of next year.

Seeing and playing the two will be a most interesting comparison when I return there next year.

P.S. One other thing -- turf wise Pronghorn is simply too good to believe. The entire detailing is world class from the many golf courses / clubs I have ever visited.

[wsmorrison]

There is no substance to this post and nothing regarding architecture.  Matt, what's the deal?  Juniper trees, yes.  Was the architecture an afterthought?

[cary lichtenstein]

Wayne:

Give Matt a break

Cary

[wsmorrison]

I don't know, Cary.  Here's a guy that allegedly is capable of seeing so much in one visit yet reports so very little of architectural value.  If he's on the road and doesn't have time for a comprehensive report of the architecture, surely we can all wait till he has the time.  I find little of interest in most of his reports while others seem to hold him in much higher regard.  I'll give him a break if he refrains from using the term "delicious" in his next analysis and "partner" in his response to my criticism  

[Lloyd_Cole]

After WM's comments I looked back to re read and..

surely - 'The elements that team Nicklaus are doing now have dramatically taken Jack and his talented team to another level. I have been most fortunate to have played the other examples of his recent work and the batting average for team Nicklaus is clearly moving up. You don't see the same tired and pedestrian concepts that far too often the Tom Fazio camp routinely bring forward time after time.'  is advertorial, at best.. what gives??

[Joel_Stewart]

This is the same course that Tom Doak discussed recently in the fairways are like puting greens, super tight and cut very low.  Matt briefly mentioned the conditioning but I would like to know more about it.

[Brian_Gracely]

I had the pleasure in touring the new Nicklaus course called Pronhorn in Bend, OR and although temperatures and wind conditions (gusts upward of 40 mph) prevented my play this time around --

So is the course unplayable when the weather is cooler or windy, or did the ProShop not want you to play because they though the weather might effect your score and hence your opinion of the course?

[Matt_Ward]

Let me go through all the little bitty whines from those who have decided to throw pot shots.

The day I was in Bend I experienced a weather pattern that truly out of the norm. Let me mention that the day after my visit to Bend there was singificant hail at a OSU / Boise State football game in Corvallis. The cool Canadian mass of air that descended is far from the norm as Bend is generally the best summer weather for golf that I can say with a high degree of certainty. The day before temps were in the mid-80's with just a gentle breeze.

The weather was extremely chilly -- temps in the mid-50's with a 30-40 mph wind blowing. I did not get to the course until late in the afternoon -- around 3:00 PM. The decision not to play was solely mine -- it had nothing to do with the club or their personnel.

I personally believe that playing courses in extreme conditions doesn't assist the overall evaluation of the course -- it doesn't have anything to do with Gracely's ignorant comment about my score.

To the credit of the club personnel -- especially head professional Lindsey Taft -- I toured the entire grounds with him and stopped at nearly all of the holes for a careful review of the individual holes and the playing angles needed in order to succeed.

Let's talk about the course specifics for my dear couch potato "friend" Wayne.

The course finished second behind Sutton Bay for Best New Private from Golf Digest and I have to say that Digest got the results backwards. Unlike Sutton Bay which depends upon its isolation in Agar and with having a Lake border the bulk of the course -- the Nicklaus design at Pronghorn is totally encapsulated on gentle rolling land that is engulfed with the juniper trees I mentioned. I hasten to mind the juniper trees are used as a frame and do not encroach on the appropriate playing angles one would need to play in order to score. For those who are thaaaaaaat wild then sad to say you need to spend more time at the practice range than at any golf course.

Let me mention the question put forward by Joel S -- the turf conditions at Pronghorn are miles beyond some of the finest clubs I have ever played. The fairway turf is cut so tight and so low you can actually putt with little effort. The differences between fairway and putting greens are also hard to distinguish. In addition, the bunkers are edged appropriately --you do have some fescue grass jutting out from the tops of a number of the bunkers but it's well done and can be quite a chore should one's ball land there.

Let me state another fact -- I have personally played somewhere between 50-65 Nicklaus signature designs. For all you bellyachers out there -- hint Llyod and Wayne -- I can say this with some sort of certainty. The detailing that team Nicklaus is applying now with a number of their more recent efforts is well done -- the layouts are routed in a complex manner and the variety and substance of the individual holes work very well. Let me also point out that Tony Pioppi said the same in a recent article on the same subject in Links Magazine.

Jack has now moved towards a more playable architectural scheme -- provided the correct tee box is used -- incidentally -- at Pronghorn -- minus one or two holes -- you find no more than three tex boxes for the bulk of the holes.

Pronghorn is not about massive earthmoving as in Jack's earliest works. The land is used as it was minus a few elements that had to be included -- there is a stream which turns into a pond on the long par-5 8th hole and also at the par-4 13th.

The course starts out in benigh fashion with the 380-yard first hole. No more than two holes ever go in the same exact direction as the routing takes you to all corners of the property. The 2nd hole is 572 yards and here you can cut-off the right fairway bunker in order to have a go at the green if you are long enough and on the proper line.

The 3rd is a well done long par-3 -- 254 yards in length. Here Nicklaus inserted a high rise to the right of the green that players can use to feed the ball into the greensite. I have to add the slope I just mentioned is not some sort of pimple or Loxahatchee tee-pee mound. It fits the hole and the eye quite well.

Two of the more unique holes at Pronghorn are short par-4's -- the 4th at 331 yards and the 12th at 342 yards. Both of these holes would likely not be part of earlier Nicklaus efforts. Why? The sheer detailing and originality of what is required goes far beyond what I saw / played in earlier Bear layouts. The 4th features a center-placed bunker and a lone juniper tree occupies the far left side of the fairway. You need to stay left to secure the proper angle into the green. The hole is similar in some ways to the 16th at Pac Dunes that Doak created. Please do not think it is carbon copy -- it isn't -- but I wanted to insert an example to give folks a better idea.

The 12th is even better -- a supreme short par-4 and one that I would include with the likes of the 14th at Bandon Trails. Here you face a narrow fairway that goes slightly uphill -- and generally plays downwind for the bulk of the season. The green is diagonally angled and sits above the fairway on a narrow table-top. The green is protected by two juniper trees to the left of the target for those who want to secure the proper playing angle from that direction. Again, both holes are well done and they are a fine balancing act against the longer holes you encounter at Pronghorn.

One of the best holes on the course is the par-5 15th -- 543 yards. It is an uphill three shot hole -- save for the long hitters -- and it has been photographed a number of times and likely been seen by those who have viewed ads for Pronghorn. The hole looks tougher than it appears -- the sign of quality architecture IMHO -- because you have more room in the driving zone than appears from the tee. The hole has a cutoff juniper planting that serves as a break point and they cut-in around 85 yards from the target. The player who hits the fairway has a wealth of options and you can decide to play short or go over them as you prefer. It is a marvelous hole that is both scenic and challenging.

The simple fact that anti-Nicklaus people (some inhabit GCA!!!) can't stand is that the Golden Bear is not akin to the formulaic Palmer designs you see today. Jack is not a celebrity who wants to design courses. His team is now producing a range of quality layouts and the sheer detailing, complexity of the routings and the high shot value requirements are certainly being merged with each of his signature layouts. Jack's team is also placing a much more richer understanding of how to make the better player "work the ball" off the tee while at the same time keeping in mind that not all those who play such courses are going to be single digit handicaps as so many of his earliest designs seemed to be -- one can view the original Geronimo at Desert Mountain as a perfect case study in that regard.

I look forward to returning and playing the Nicklaus effort at Pronghorn and it will be very interesting to see how the Nicklaus layout is viewed against what team TF are doing now.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
Not trying to be overly critical here--as I have in the past--I to was a bit flumuxed when there wasn't much description from your latest pleasure. (You seem to start out every one of your GCA course review posts this way)

This is just a suggestion: If your not going to discuss architecture, perhaps take a camera and get some shots of the architectural features that you feel twizzle your cork. (so-to-speak)

So yes, I agree with Wayne, Lloyd, David and countless others in expressing the request for more architecture, less travelog. It's certainly a great privilege you get to see these places in all sorts of different locales, doing it in a less commercial, more descritptive manner would only benefit this site as well as the education of others. Also it might help some of us figure out exactly the who, what, why and how of your ideals, which are sometimes, architecturally-speaking, puzzling.

Besides, I would like a better idea what they have created at Pronghorn, the "Who-What-Why-Where & How and frankly, your description of it just didn't get it done.

Cheers From a GCA Knucklehead

[wsmorrison]

"Let me go through all the little bitty whines from those who have decided to throw pot shots."

The so called "itty bitty whines" are a response to the legitimate shortcomings in your posts.   Call it constructive criticism if you like, it is an attempt to get you to write something substanitive about golf course architecture.  I suppose it worked to a degree as your follow-up was an improvement in the sort of things many of us (Lloyd, Tommy, Joel, David and others) are interested in.

Frankly I could care less how many Nicklaus courses you've seen.  That seems to be an overriding theme of yours.  You constantly throw numbers at people.  Well, I for one am not impressed nor do I see much in the way of correlation between the number of courses you've seen and your ability to describe the architecture.  Try reading some Jim Finegan, he's one of the very best.


"Let's talk about the course specifics for my dear couch potato "friend" Wayne."

This couch potato spends his time seeing and writing about classic courses as that is what I am studying.  I don't have time to search for newer courses that is why I would hope for more substance that might give me direction for stopovers on my travels.  I get off my ass plenty to see courses but these days it is mostly for work.  I will tell you, I may not see the number of courses you do but I spend a lot of time looking and playing over multiple visitits.  This is why I feel strongly that I see more when I go and  my revisits are key to a comprehensive understanding.  This is why I can say with certainty that you cannot learn much from a single visit and why your conclusions and rankings are not of much value--certainly not to the extent you think they are.

Look at that first post of yours on this thread.  What is of any importance except that you disseminate that you've seen another course that nobody else has.  Big friggin' deal.

"Let me state another fact -- I have personally played somewhere between 50-65 Nicklaus signature designs. For all you bellyachers out there -- hint Llyod and Wayne -- I can say this with some sort of certainty. "

This bellyacher is not impressed.  You throw these numbers around and expect people to correlate that to some sort of greater understanding.  If you and Lloyd go to a course neither of you has seen before, there is no doubt in my mind that Lloyd will discuss the architecture to a far greater depth than you are capable of.  His eye and mind grasp concepts and finds commonalities in ways you cannot begin to comprehend.  And he doesn't constantly strive to impress.  

Why don't you write as you did in your follow-up description.  It had substance and meaning.  Jeez and you didn't even use the word delicious to describe a feature, imagine that.  And stop being so sensitive; this is not whining and bellyaching.  The fact is you see more courses than any of us have the time or inclination to see.  If you want to report information to us, and it is a worthwhile effort, do it as regards architecture.  Not ranking which is your wont, but an analysis of the architecture.  And stop bragging, it weakens your credibility.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
When I originally posted my recommendations for a better GCA life, I didn't see you had posted your snide remarks to both Wayne & Lloyd 30 seconds before.

Well, let me say this about that:

I have a lot more confidence in their opinions then I do yours. I also don't think you realize the quality of their study and observation compared to your quantity.  I see there opinions as being much more genuine. I always seem to think of you being more of the course collector-type that likes to go to cocktail parties and Bar Mitzvahs and pronounce your knowledge, while pointing out everybody else's lack there of. Where as a Wayne and/or Lloyd seem to make intelligent observations while never really ever portraying a level of superiority like you do. They aren't selfish and arrogant.

I do think that the suggestions I've made in my previous post above, would be a better way of posting for you here on GCA. I also think that abstaining from calling people "couch potatoes" and "knuckleheads" as a much better way to win friends and influence people, or at the very least, increase circulation of New Jersey Golfer and the Jim Engh Marching & Chowder Society.

Yours in Golf,
Head GCA Knucklehead
T Naccarato

[Tommy_Naccarato]

BTW, Thanks for posting better, more thorough thoughts on Pronghorn. Imagine how much better it would be in pictures to go with your descriptions.

[Mike Erdmann]

Matt, what was your take on the 13th hole at Pronghorn?  I really, really like Pronghorn, but to me the 13th seemed a bit out of sorts.  I liked the centerline bunker, which adds some neat strategy to the hole, yet the greensite didn't seem to fit the rest of the golf course with the lava cliffs framing the green and the waterfall cascading down the cliffs into the lake.  For a golf course that hugs the natural contours so well, this greensite just came across a little contrived.

[Jonathan Cummings]

There a previous post on this...  

Pronghorn champions the ground game like possibly no other Nicklaus course.  The conditioning borders on antiseptic it is so good.  It is a players course where shot making will give you an edge over muscle playing.    It is a pleasure to play and one that you could play over and over again.

Agree completing with Mike that no. 13 is a little out of sorts.  In contrast the hole before, short go-for-it-or-not par 4, is nothing short of brillant.

JC

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

The 13th stands apart from the rest of the design -- no doubt. In some ways team Nicklaus seemed to bring back into play some of the earlier "eye candy" aspects of previous work from years ago. I concur with the  center placed bunker -- it is nicely done in order to keep the player honest off the tee against the left side bailout.

I did like the back bunker the way its wraps itself around the far side of the hole.

Clearly, Jonathan is 100% on target -- the qualities of the 12th far exceed that of the 13th.  

The 13th really didn't need all the H20 -- possibly more use of the native juniper trees would have worked much better.


To the High Priests here on GCA:

I love you all who practice the "I know much more than Ward could ever know" approach. It's amazing how such people can proclaim such expertise when their butt is cemented to their living room couch. How nice.

These are the same high priests who can't see the fact that team Nicklaus does "get it" and can deliver on top quality courses. Excuse me -- forgive me -- Jack Nicklaus can design great golf courses. I mean how dare I even begin to link the words great golf courses and Jack Nicklaus design?  

I mean how can I credibly say such a thing? Of course, to the high priests here on GCA it doesn't matter about personal field research. Of course -- it doesn't matter to them -- they don't have anything close to offer in the area of actual field research. It's just the same drivel about personalizing the arguments on Ward. And when Ward raises the point about field research he hears all the whining on about how its so beneath me to do such a thing. What a beautiful crock of BS.

But no, these same high priests see only their certain few protected designers as being capable in designing world class golf. If the course doesn't have the name of Tom Doak, Gil Hanse, Crenshaw & Coore and now Mike DeVries -- all talented men no doubt and a good number of their designs that I personally favor in a big time way but not all mind
you -- then the rest of the universe be chucked into the ocean of ignorance. The single fact is that by doing personal research in the field one can see the talents of a great many people and clearly team Nicklaus has advanced the ball considerably in terms of their design portfolio. I have gone into great length and detail on such layouts ranging from Hokuli'a on the Big Island, Cimarron Hills in Austin to Outlaw at Desert Mtn in Scottsdale, to name just three. The qualities of Pronghorn exceed all of them and that is quite an accomplishment.

I took the time to explain several aspects of Nicklaus at Pronghorn. The desire not to overwhelm the land is there -- the sheer detailing in tying together all aspects fo shotmaking through a compelling and rich diversity of holes is also there. More importantly, the course conditioning is simply world class level stuff. I guess the high priests here on GCA will allow me to make that comment since brother Tom Doak stated it previously.

Guys -- I have a very simple retort -- if you don't like my comments or what I write -- don't read it or comment upon it.

Guys -- one last thing -- stop with the micro-whining and personalizing about everything. It comes across as envy that some one can and does play the courses in question. If you have a counter viewpoint on the merits or lack thereof the courses in question then respond in kind. If you can't accept the spirit of the information presented -- one with the depth and database behind it -- then bark at someone else. I have a thick skin but it's so clear to me and countless others who lurk how silly and baby oriented many of you happen to be.

If you have a counter viewpoint to any courses I play please play the course(s) in question and I'll be happy to discuss / debate. Otherwise -- retreat to the temple of ignorance that many of you inhabit.  

Shivas:

Appreciate your attempted constructive comments. I have offered detail on a number of holes and why Pronghorn is a very special place.

[wsmorrison]

You know what?   You are a pompous ass.  Someone who notes that your description lacks substance and architectural content is a high priest on GCA?  Why don't you just start comparing us to Muslim extremists again?  

"These are the same high priests who can't see the fact that team Nicklaus does "get it" and can deliver on top quality courses. Excuse me -- forgive me -- Jack Nicklaus can design great golf courses. I mean how dare I even begin to link the words great golf courses and Jack Nicklaus design?  "

Get down off your high horse and get a better grasp of reality.  No one said Nicklaus and Company can't design a great golf course.  I/We said your reports tend to be shallow and meaningless.  You yourself changed the content and tone in your response so you must have sensed that there was a good deal of truth to our constructive criticism.  Yet you act the poor injured genius that nobody understands.  Well, you are no genius and people cannot understand why you look down on others because they haven't seen twenty-two Nicklaus courses in North Dakota.  

What do you know about field research?  I don't think you know what it is.  Have you ever sat down in an archive to study the evolution of a golf course and the architecture at length?  What percentage of courses do you see on more than one occasion?  I suggest this would interfere with your never ending quest to see as many courses as you can and to make sure you let others know about it.  Well those notches on your cardboard belt are of little interest to me.

You visit/play a lot of courses.  That is a fact not an endorsement of analytical skill nor anything else.  You are not, to my thinking, capable of making a substanitive statement about golf architecture to a fraction of the degree others I know who have seen far fewer courses than you.  For instance, you criticize the analytical abilities of Lloyd Cole, whom you have never met and don't know a thing about.  Now is this is an example of your unbiased analysis and research ability?  If so, it sucks.

You are the whiner and crybaby on here that can't accept constructive criticism.    

"Guys -- one last thing -- stop with the micro-whining and personalizing about everything.  It comes across as envy that some one can and does play the courses in question."

Envy?  What are you talking about?  Are you that delusional?  What is there to envy?  That you are in Oregon playing your 61st signature Nicklaus course?  You really don't have a handle on our/my values to think others/I envy you.  I can think of a lot of things I'd rather do like go to my son's football game, or sit down with a nice glass of wine on Tom Paul's patio and talk golf architecture, or meet with superintendents such as Mike McNulty, Matt Shaffer, Scott Anderson, Sean Remmington, Adam Jessie and Mark Michaud.  Or hang out with pros like Scott Nye, Adam Messix, Eric Peveto, Bill Kittleman, Pete Trenham and Tim DeBaufre and meet with real golf writers like Jim Finegan, Colin Sheehan, Mark Rowlinson, etc.  And finally playing golf with the likes of Lloyd Cole, Mike Cirba, Jim Sullivan, Craig Disher, Steve Sayers, Mark Studer, John Yerger, Mike Trenham and many more...even Mike Malone once in a while    Well, let me take that back.  Maybe not Mike Malone  

"If you can't accept the spirit of the information presented -- one with the depth and database behind it -- then bark at someone else. I have a thick skin but it's so clear to me and countless others who lurk how silly and baby oriented many of you happen to be."

Call someone who disagrees with you silly and a baby; I don't care at all.  There are three silly things associated with you.  Firstly your premise that the more you see the better you see, secondly that others who have seen less know less than you and thirdly that swing of yours  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Nicely put Wayne.

Matt, you make this personal when others are just asking for a better description. You result to name calling. Nice. A very mature attitude. You know everything and anybody that winked an eye of attraction at an old course is a couch potato and high-priest of golf course architecture discussion.

This is precisely why I never subscribed to New Jersey Golfer!;)

As far as skipping your posts, I just wanted to see a descriptive word on Pronghorn's A-R-C-H-I-T-E-C-T-U-R-E. I suggested--in a nice way mind you--the use of photography to better describe some of your points. I did it when I visited Jim Lipe's Outlaw course, why can't you do it at Jim Lipe's Pronghorn course?

--Do you know how to take photos Matt?
--Do you want help posting those photos?
--Do you even own a camera?

Matt, You have to admit, and I want you to admit it, that your opening thread had little in the way of content. Come on Matt, admit it! Go back and look at every post you have ever made about any course you ever played that you liked and posted about on here and you'll see that your post was almost like a form letter--you just filled in the blanks.

Course Review Form (Short Version)
Matthew J. Ward Editor New Jersey Golfer

I had the pleasure in touring the new_________ course called __________ in __________,_______ and Insert weather conditions here-- I did (circle one) tour/play the facility with the head professional and to say I was blown away (no pun intended) is an understatement.

The (circle one) Nicklaus/Engh team has made a concerted effort in moving away from what (circle one)Jack/Jim did earlier in his design and you can see that clearly with_________. The site is on Describe type of land here and there is a profusion of _________trees that dot the landscape.

The course provides plenty of width but it's the detailing and the desire to allow the site to not be overpowered with plenty of bells and whistles that makes __________ a very unique and special place.

The course tops out at 7,_____ yards from the tips and sports a 75.__ CR and 14__ slope. Given the altitude -- about _____ feet above sea level -- the effect is about _______ clubs max.

________ has IMHO the best summer weather in the USA. In addition, ___________ is located in a insert climate here area that facilitates more play than say ___________which is roughly _________ higher in elevation.

The elements that team (Circle one) Nicklaus/Engh are doing now have dramatically taken (Circle one)Jack/Jim and his talented team to another level. I have been most fortunate to have played the other examples of his recent work and the batting average for team (Circle one) Nicklaus/Engh is clearly moving up. You don't see the same tired and pedestrian concepts that far too often the Tom Fazio camp routinely bring forward time after time.

____________ has plenty of wherewithal to test all players and fortunately Jack and his team didn't see fit to bring in the armada of bulldozers and try to create some overblown canvass.

P.S. One other thing -- turf wise _________ is simply too good to believe. The entire detailing is world class from the many golf courses / clubs I have ever visited.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()