National Golf Club of Canada

[ian]

I read four different references to the course in the last two weeks. Thought a few pictures would be helpful. It was Canada's number one course for a very long time till Highlands took the crown, only to pass it on to St. Georges.

The course was by Tom and George Fazio and was built in 1974. The course has been made slightly easier over time, but still is one of the toughest tests in Canada. There is no question that this is the best modern course in Canada, and even though I perfer the older layouts, I personally have no problem with this being the number one course in the country.

As the photos display, the land is outstanding and Tom (and George?-listed only some times) put together a great routing with many great holes. I don't know where this fits into Tom's body of work, but it is very early in his career. It is still my favourite course by Tom, and I think what I like is that everything isn't shaped to be receptive or for playability. This course is tough. Many landing areas are extremely tight and many greens repel the ball away. Most of the holes run naturally through the landscape, I have often wondered if he would have moved more earth if he did it now.

Some of the best courses many architects have done were there first, I have often wondered if this was the case.


the 3rd shot to the par 5, 4th

the 180 yard par 5th

the tee shot on 7th, an incredible two shotter

after a perfect drive another 200 in to the 7th green

the second shot to the 11th

the 13th green taken from the hill right of the fairway

the 17th green site, 430 yard par 4, taken from the clubhouse
one of the most photographed green sites in Canada.

[Coral_Ridge]

Knowing that Fazio has not had as much praise as some of the Golden Age Architects, could one deny the strategic interests shown here with these excellent pictures.  I would like to hear from some who have had the pleasure of playing this golf course.

Does it come down to the green complexes?  The pictures don't show those in any detail.  But the approach shots certainly look challenging and well thought out.

[ian]

The greens are very difficult and have a lot of undulation. They often run dramatically out one side and hitting an approach in is very testing. He has one very wacky (top hat style) green on the 12th, a reachable par 5 with a creek coming into play the whole way. The 6th is very unusual, it has a high roll in front centre like the 14th at St Andrews that deflects shots. There are many things like this that I have never seen on any of the rest of his work.

[henrye]

I have played the course a few times as a guest so I better go easy here.  The course is good, but I believe hugely overrated.  It simply is not one of Canada's best in my opinion.

The landing areas off the tees are not tough, but the greens tend to be small with severe slopes.  This is even more pronounced due to the US Open style conditioning which they maintain the course in.

The setting gives a suburb-urban feeling with some monstrous modern homes overlooking some of the holes.  Yuk.

Overall, this course is easily forgetable and as such I don't think it deserves to be included in a group with Canada's best.  Difficult - yes.  Good golf - yes (but just about all golf is good, isn't it?).  At any rate, I have always enjoyed my games there, but it has been the company, not the course which has made the day.

Ian.  You're in the Golf business and I think you mentioned previously that you had a hand in Osprey Valley (Hoot) and Bigwin.  Those courses are a few of Canada's best modern designs.  If you have some pics to show off, I think the community would be impressed with your firm's work.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Ian,
You've been playing with that bunker-building software again, haven't you?

[Tom Doak]

I'm already on record in The Confidential Guide as not liking the course very much ... partly because it was hyped as Canada's #1, and I saw five other courses around Toronto I liked better in the same week.

This is one of those times when a course's rating depends on the neighborhood of the reviewer.  National GC is reminiscent of a lot of Jack Nicklaus courses in America in the late 70's and early 80's -- nasty greens with sharp undulations, and a difficult test of golf.  (Albeit that National is on a much prettier piece of land than most of Nicklaus' courses of the period.)  I've seen a lot of those, so I didn't think it was anything special.  But, there aren't many comparable courses in Canada, so in its home territory it is perceived as unique.  It also has some tournament history that no one outside Canada knows about.

[ian]

The first time I played the course I felt it was too difficult to be great. Playing the course over and over has made me appreciate while still tough, its more playable than I thought.
Is it in my top 10, no; but do I struggle with anyone else holding that opinion, no. Its a damn good modern golf course.

Tom D, While I accept your opinion, you can't take anything in seeing five courses in a day. Seeing a course is not playing a course, walking gives more insight than riding in a cart. 5 courses in one day, 5 trips in a cart, how can you evaluate them fairly?

[henrye]

Ian.  You say that you accept Mr. Doak's opinion, but then you question the basis on which it is made.  If you accept it, then you accept it - full stop.  You say the National is a damn good modern course -  OK, no argument here.  I do however struggle with someone holding the opinion that this course fits within the top 10 in Canada.  How could they?  They could not have played many.

I should state my bias here.  My favourite hole is the controversial snaking par 5 12th with that shallow wide green.  Most critics pan the hole, but I think it's the most interesting.

Things I don't like about the course......Its fairly wide open off the tee - tree lined to simulate classic parkland, yet I never feel isolated.  I get the sense I'm tucked away in suburban Toronto - and I am when there.  Mr. Doak has it right when he says its similar to a Jack Nicklaus course.  The only Nicklaus course we have here in Toronto is Glen Abbey and I prefer it to the National.  If the National was public and Glen Abbey private, I would guess the rankings would be reversed.

As for my favourite modern in the area, its Osprey's Hoot.  The 3rd, 8th, 12th and 13th are my favourite.  Ian, you guys have created a course there that will likely go unnoticed for a while but in time will grow to be appreciated.

[Craig Van Egmond]

Ian,

   If you read Tom's post carefully you will notice it says 5 courses in the same week and not the same day. I would agree 5 courses in one day would be too much.

[TEPaul]

I played there over ten years ago I guess when the course's reputation was way up there. It was a hard course alright and I think the wind was howling when I played it. I don't remember the holes too well now but those pictures are good to see.

Look at that 5th hole. Fazio should figure out how to loose some of that bunkering--some of those landforms have enough going for them where they don't need all that--it makes the course look too generic modern age to me--bunkering is there just because he could put it there--probably just trying to frame the green or something.

But I do remember some of those greens, their angles, some of the highly dramatic internal contours and one (on the back nine I think) that sure had the proverbial elephant buried in it. Pretty cool to play really.

I think there are better courses in Canada though although I don't know them well. London Hunt is the only Canadian course I do know well.

My best recollection of National though was this enormous black swan that apparently came steaming across the pond on #16(?) and chased me all over the fairway! Damn thing was trying to kill me and I didn't do a damn thing to it. If the guy I was playing with hadn't yelled at me I might not have even seen it coming!

[Jeff Mingay]

Lorne Rubenstein, a former member, speaks very highly of the National GC of Canada. I respect both Lorne's and Ian's opinion of the course. They've both played the course more often than I have. But still, in my view, I'm not sure the National even cuts "top-10" in metro Toronto, nevermind "top-10" in the country.  

I think there are some awkward holes out there, starting with the 12th and 18th (both par 5s). And too many forgetable holes. I generally have vivid recollections of golf holes/courses I've both played and visited. Granted, I've only visited once, but still, stretches at the National are a blur.  

Talking to other Canadian golfers over the years, I've noticed the National really appeals to low handicappers (like Lorne!).

[TEPaul]

Jeff Mingay:

A lot of the holes at National (Canada) are a blur to me too, and I sure do agree that if the course is anything it is one very much geared to the low handicapper and the low handicapper who's a lot longer and a lot better than I am!

I really hate to use the term but to me National is an extremely high "shot value" golf course through and through! A lot of courses like that were being built in those days!

[henrye]

TEPaul.  That Black Swan still guards the 17th and 18th fairways, but the old guy has mellowed with age -just a hiss and bark now.

[TEPaul]

henrye:

I've mellowed with age too but you tell that old guy if I'm back up there again and he pulls that on me again he's gettin a 1 iron right in the chops! I'm sure it won't be the first time!

[Tom Doak]

Ian,

For the record, I did play The National, with Lorne Rubenstein who has always been one of its biggest fans.  We saw about ten courses in five days in Toronto; played four of them; walked every one.

I have walked as many as five courses in one day before -- in the mountains of Colorado, no less -- but I agree that it is hard to remember too much about them long after the fact.

In truth, I can't remember that much about the front nine of National GC either.

[TEPaul]

Tom Doak:

A couple of people have told me over the years something about your memory for golf holes but I'd like to hear it from you. They said you have sort of like a total photograhic memory recall for holes and such. Is that true?

[Jeff Mingay]

There's no way Doak's photographic memory of golf holes is better than mine (ok, perhaps we're level, at best!)  

Nonetheless, DOak's and mine, and Tom Paul's blurry vision of the National GC of Canada speaks volumes from my perspective.

[ian]

Occasionally you regret what you said.

Tom D, I appologize, I misread the comment. You have played it and I had assumed you had a bit of a blitz through Toronto's courses.

Jeff, I have blurry memories of Highland Golf Links, but that's probably age because I know the course is great.

Henrye, I don't care for the Abbey, never have. Again, your right I should have accepted his (and others) opinion. I agree with you about the setting, the homes are attrocious; but I don't hold that against the course. I like the way it tests your game if you aggressive and punishes you if you can't make the shot. I played a conservative game and found it much more forgiving than I had ever thought. It made me appreciate the course more.

I will confess that I have been curious to find out what modern courses do get support (on this site). Few do, but is that any suprise. I do like the National, but obviously very few others do.