Top Five in the Chicago area

[Andrew Cunningham]

What are your Top Five in the greater Chicago area, and why?  If you had your choice - albeit a very difficult one - would you play Medinah No.3 over Butler National or perhaps Rich Harvest Links over Chicago Golf Club?  Maybe Shoreacres instead of Olympia Fields.

Personally, I haven't played any of the above so I really cannot comment, other than what I have watched on TV or read in books.  So I would like to know what my esteemed GCA aficionados think.

Thanks,


Andrew

[cary lichtenstein]

In no particular order:

Cog Hill #4
Chicago
Medinah
Shoreacres
Butler

[PCCraig]

As a Chicago Golfer, my top five...

1) Glen View Club...very very underrated
2) Onwentsia CC...Doak redesign, very very good.
3) Shoreacres...a classic
4) Knollwood...of all the tree lined "country club courses" on the north shore, this is the best.
5) Wilmette GC...public, but my home course growing up  

[Andrew Cunningham]

Guys,

Is Butler National the most difficult course in the Chicago area?  I've heard second hand comments that even today's touring pros would struggle big time if the course was set up for a PGA or US Open.

Cary,

Interesting that you have Cog Hill No.4 as a your number one when all I hear is that it is WAY overrated.  I really have no idea since I've only ever played it on Links 2003 and watched it on TV.

Andrew

[PCCraig]

Butler is very very very hard...esp. so not that it has been lengthend to something like 7400 yards.

Cog Hill is good, solid chicago-style parkland course. But it isnt really anything special. There are so many underrated "hidden" gems in the area.

[cary lichtenstein]

Andrew:

Coghill and I go way back, it  holds special memories for me and I think it is underrated...just my take

I have a friend who is a member at Bulter, and he told me this is his last year, that they have further toughened the course and it is no longer fun to play. I haven't played it in 12-15 years now

Cary

[cary lichtenstein]

Pat

Wilmette?

Cary

[Wayne Freeman]

Still waiting for my chance at Chicago later this year, but I can't imagine how it wouldn't be in everyone's top 5.  Haven't played Butler either, but I hear it's great.  Of the ones I've played:
                  Shoreacres-   a true joy.
                  Medinah #3-  great ambiance and history
                  Skokie-  really solid
                  Black Sheep-  David Esler's debut is a stunning
                            links layout.
                  Glen View-  agree that it is a sleeper-
                                    beautiful
        I would put Olympia Fields, Rich Harvest, Onwentsia, and maybe Cog Hill in a list of courses to definitely play.  

[A_Clay_Man]

I would put Beverly way ahead of Dubbs. Skokie, Shoreacres and Butler too. Ravisol ain't bad either.

Some of the older clubs must be a treat. I know Briarwood is, and assume that all male club, whose name slips my mind at this exact moment. I think Bob Hope was a memeber...still not coming. But it was a place that one could only dream of playing.

Waveland is still a must see. I reccomend only trying when it's 58 degrees and misting. For that matter Jackson Park, probably hasn't been all that altered, in the last 109 years.

[Jim Franklin]

How about Bob O'Link?

[redanman]

Chicago G.C. and your four personal choices from

Butler
Bob
Shoreacres
Beverley
Skokie
Dubsdread
The new Über-exclusives
etc.

There's a plethora of good stuff in Chicago, a few great ones, it's not like the GAP or the MGA  where the top 5 are world-class.

[mikes1160]

Shivas,

I'd like to see your top five in daily fee courses.....
 

[tlavin]

My top five:

1. Medinah #3
2. Butler National
3. Olympia Fields North
4. Shoreacres
5. Beverly

The next 5:

1. Skokie
2. North Shore
3. Cog Hill #4
4. Knollwood
5. LaGrange

I haven't played Black Sheep or Onwentsia, so I can't comment, but I would find it hard to believe that Onwentsia would be in very many top 10 lists.  I'm a member at Olympia and Beverly, but I really do believe that Medinah and Butler are superior tracks on an overall basis, despite my belief that the design and routing at Olympia are better.  Medinah and Butler are simply much more demanding from any tee markers.

Finally, LaGrange is a quiet little gem in the Western suburbs.  I'm sure that plenty of people wouldn't have it in their Top 10, but what the heck!

[Andrew Cunningham]

What about Black Sheep?  Golfweek puts it at 53rd in their Best Modern category.

Speaking of rankings, how can Golfweek rank Medinah at 57th and Golf Digest at 15th!  That's a massive difference in my mind.  Especially given the fact that GD doesn't award bonus tradition points anymore.

[Evan Fleisher]

What about Black Sheep?  Golfweek puts it at 53rd in their Best Modern category.

Speaking of rankings, how can Golfweek rank Medinah at 57th and Golf Digest at 15th!  That's a massive difference in my mind.  Especially given the fact that GD doesn't award bonus tradition points anymore.

Andrew,

Easy!...just look at the make-up (i.e., handicaps) of the relative panel memberships.  I think that for GD panelists the harder the better, hence the higher ranking.

But that's just MY take...

[Tom Huckaby]

Andrew:

Easy!  Just look at the make-up (ie groupspeak mentality and total devotion to quirk and more so to whatever Dr. Klein says) of the Golfweek panel.  Thus for GW panelists the quirkier the better, and Medinah has very little quirk.... and Dr. Klein must not have liked it much.

But that's just MY take.

TH

ps - JUST KIDDING!  But Evan, a broad brush in one direction deserves one in return.  

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

This going to be fun when Paul Richards sees Beverly's place.

[tlavin]

The Golfweek ranking for Medinah is a bit of a mystery, IMHO, especially since Medinah was recently reworked by Rees Jones.  Say what you will about the quality or distinctiveness of his design work, there is no question that Medinah is a much better and more interesting golf course after the renovation.

There might be a bit of renovation fatigue setting in with those who knocked Medinah.  It has been reworked, revamped, redesigned so many times that it is difficult to remember what the original design was like.  Sounds a lot like Augusta, dontcha think?

The changes at Augusta, from a championship golf perspective, have to be viewed favorably.  The jury will decide Medinah's fate in August after the PGA, but I think it will hold up quite nicely.

[Andrew Cunningham]

Who the hell is Paul Richards, and why wouldn't he like Beverly C.C.?

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I do not think the changes at Augusta are viewed favorably from a Championship point of view. The new trees on 11 have been poorly recieved. The changes at 7 and 4 are not universally liked either.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Who the hell is Paul Richards, and why wouldn't he like Beverly C.C.?

Andrew,

Paul is a once-frequent poster on GCA (he has over 3000 posts here), who is a member (and club historian?) at Beverly.

[tlavin]

I do not think the changes at Augusta are viewed favorably from a Championship point of view. The new trees on 11 have been poorly recieved. The changes at 7 and 4 are not universally liked either.

Here's my argument: Putting the architectural merits or demerits aside, the revamped ANGC surely identified the best golfer.  The top five players in the world were all in contention.  Former champions Crenshaw and Couples played great (at least half of the tournament in Ben's case).  And in the end the golf course got a champion who could do it all that week.  Mickelson bombed it off the tee and worked it off the tee.  He hit great iron shots.  He was patient.  He was not reckless.  He was deft on the green surrounds and he putted magnificently.  In short, he did it all.  Various contenders had problems with the tee ball or the flat stick.  All in all, from purely a major championship perspective, I think that the changes at ANGC helped identify the best golfer last week.

Having said that, I recognize that many were not happy with the alteration to the golf course, particularly at number 11, but if you are one of the people who runs the Masters, I would think that you'd be basking in some reflected glory this week.

[Mike_Cirba]

The Golfweek ranking for Medinah is a bit of a mystery, IMHO, especially since Medinah was recently reworked by Rees Jones.  Say what you will about the quality or distinctiveness of his design work, there is no question that Medinah is a much better and more interesting golf course after the renovation.

There might be a bit of renovation fatigue setting in with those who knocked Medinah.  It has been reworked, revamped, redesigned so many times that it is difficult to remember what the original design was like.  Sounds a lot like Augusta, dontcha think?

The changes at Augusta, from a championship golf perspective, have to be viewed favorably.  The jury will decide Medinah's fate in August after the PGA, but I think it will hold up quite nicely.

Terry,

I'm not sure I'd agree about Augusta, but could you describe in some detail what makes the Reesent changes at Medinah "much better and more interesting" for those of us who haven't seen it?  

Could you describe the extent of his changes as well as what you see as the overall benefits.

Thanks for your insight.

Mike

[tlavin]

I've only played it once since the work was done, but the bunkering is more consistent and more penal.  The bunkers frame the holes much better from the tee and fairway.  They cut down a couple hundred big oaks, many from around greens, to aid in turf health and they regrassed the greens.  Last year, the greens were in very good shape despite drought conditions and they seemed to have a more subtle and tough-to-detect quality about them.  Finally, the 17th green is back down near the water where it needs to be and there were some changes to 18 that I just can't recall.  I'll be out there in about a month so I'll try to update then, but in the meantime, I'm guessing Shivas can weigh in.

[Mike_Cirba]

I've only played it once since the work was done, but the bunkering is more consistent and more penal.  The bunkers frame the holes much better from the tee and fairway.  They cut down a couple hundred big oaks, many from around greens, to aid in turf health and they regrassed the greens.  Last year, the greens were in very good shape despite drought conditions and they seemed to have a more subtle and tough-to-detect quality about them.  Finally, the 17th green is back down near the water where it needs to be and there were some changes to 18 that I just can't recall.  I'll be out there in about a month so I'll try to update then, but in the meantime, I'm guessing Shivas can weigh in.

Thanks Terry...it's a course I've always been fascinated by from television yet haven't been to yet.  

I certainly applaud bringing 17 back down to the water just in concept...the last change to that hole seemed awful.  

I'm also interested to hear more from you and Shiv.