[CharlestonBuckeye]

http://www.dispatch.com/osusports/osusports.php?story=dispatch/2006/05/17/20060517-C1-00.html

Stretched 200 yards to 7444 and par drops from 72 to 71.

Q.  Anyone know if there are still just two sets of men's tees?  

[RJ_Daley]

Bumping this... I can't believe it isn't up to 4 pages of comments already.

I'll start.  It sounds like they now have a great TPC toon-a-mint course.  Perhaps it will be a future PGA championship venue.

Take off the name of MacKenzie and Maxwell, it is a shame if the University continues to trade on those names as a marketing ploy.  It is strictly a JN production now.  Almost every green has been smoothed out, relocated, and returfed. (according to the sidebar work phasing description in the article) It sounds like they made it as if Perry Maxwell never existed.

I remember some years ago, Dr. Hurdzan (also an OSU grad) spoke of a turf nursery out of the aeration cores, to provide for green restoration.  I've seen that work here with a very talented super managing the project.  I think they should have gone with Hurdzan, not JN.

[Chris_Clouser]

I reviewed the list in the article and looked at the course's website to see if the before and after photos reflected those changes.  Some did and some didn't.  What I did notice was that the look of the bunkers has changed completely.  Some look fairly good, some don't.  But I applaud the effort to have these photos on their website.  Helps give an idea of what they did.  

Not so sure I really care for the movement of the greens on 4 and 16, but those are items it would be hard to judge unless at the course.  

The truth of the matter is that a Jack Nicklaus course sounds a lot more prestigious than an Alister Mackenzie or Perry Maxwell course.  Especially in Columbus, Ohio I have a feeling.  

[Tom Roewer]

I reviewed the list in the article and looked at the course's website to see if the before and after photos reflected those changes.  Some did and some didn't.  What I did notice was that the look of the bunkers has changed completely.  Some look fairly good, some don't.  But I applaud the effort to have these photos on their website.  Helps give an idea of what they did.  

Not so sure I really care for the movement of the greens on 4 and 16, but those are items it would be hard to judge unless at the course.  

The truth of the matter is that a Jack Nicklaus course sounds a lot more prestigious than an Alister Mackenzie or Perry Maxwell course.  Especially in Columbus, Ohio I have a feeling.  

Having played in the Ohio Stae High School Tournament there 3 times and on many other occasions I would be hard pressed to recognize much now.  The pictures side by side help to show a (at least they are using the word renovation) transformation into a JN course.  Looks too familiar to me.  It kind of makes me feel as I did after seeing the transformation of Bethpage Black from wild and woolly to smoothess and sameness.   Scarlet # 13  now almost makes me cry.

[RJ_Daley]

Chris, thanks for calling attention to their website gallery of photos, before and after.

I need to modify my comments after seeing the gallery.  I will continue to think that they should just stop referring to it as MacKenzie-Maxwell course in any manner.  As much as I can see, the greens do not have any of the Maxwell Rolls that you can even see in these photos of before.  The recontoured greens seem to have interesting long sweeping slopes, and false fronts on some, etc.  Just not the internal contouring many of us revere the Maxwell Roll tradition as we know them and are visable on the 13th.

The remodelling work appears in photos to have created a wonderful new course.  But, it is a new course.  It is a JN course.  I am very supportive of the tree removal.  The bunkering is very well done, IMHO.  Although, I am one that doesn't like the blinding white sand.

[Dub_ONeill]

I would not rely too much on the before and after photographs to assess what has been done to the green contours.  The fourth green has been moved and is new. The 14th green is in the same location, but it has been completely redone so that it is now open in front. I believe mostly what has been done to some other greens (#2 and #7, for example,) is to remove the most severe slopes near the edge  particularly near some of the greenside bunkers.  There was a stated effort to maintain exactly the same internal contours on most greens.  They were stripped and are being grassed with some new strain.  The idea that the 16th green has been "relocated" is not accurate.  Its false front has been modified to create more pin locations, but it still sits where it always has.   The most noticeable changes are that the greenside bunkers have been redone from the old saucers into more complex shapes; fairway bunkers have been increased in size and complexity and moved from the outside of several doglegs to the inside of those holes (a few new bunkers have been added as well); a ton of trees have been removed along fairways and around greens; and some of the natural areas have been cleaned out during the construction process.  It is not clear to me whether this is permanent or not.  With the exception of the fourth hole the routing is unchanged.  I believe it is inaccurate to say you would not recognize the course as it now appears.  I too will miss the look of the "dirty" sand.  

[JLahrman]

A couple of questions for anyone who has played:

Exactly where is the fourth green now?

On #14, are the new back tees where the old forward tees were, making the hole play straight on?

The article says 10 yards have been added to #18.  With only ten yards it will still be possible to drive it through the fairway for better players.  If there is a new bunker on the right side of the fairway, is this now an iron/hybrid off of the tee?

[Dub_ONeill]

No one has played it yet.  The women's NCAA will be played there the end of this month and members' play will start the first week in June.  The new fourth green is about 80 yards to the right of the old green's location and the fairway now angles right from the original tee so that a second shot to this green will now be across the pond which sits very near the green.  The fourteenth hole will use the old front tee and play as a par four.  This was done the last time the men's NCAA played the course and was the highest scoring hole compared to par.  As to 18, the new tournament tee is actually right behind the 17th green so that it is either a very sharp dogleg or a carry over some large trees to cut the corner.  I don't think the 10 yards added to the regular tee will change the way it plays, at least for chops like me.

[Glenn Spencer]

Where do you go for pictures of this?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paging Tom MacWood.

Tom MacWood is probably as familiar with the golf course as anyone on this site.

He can probably address a good number of your questions.

[Kirk Gill]

http://ohiostatebuckeyes.cstv.com/golfcourse/

[Chris_Clouser]

Dub,

Sorry I had read the statement in the Dispatch article thinking they had moved the green.  After re-reading it I see that it was just me going too fast through the article.  You are right, it did not move.  Thanks for pointing that out.

[Glenn Spencer]

Thanks Kirk!

[Joe Hancock]

Is it the angle of the photo's or did most of the putting surfaces get elevated?

Joe

[Dub_ONeill]

Its the angle of the photographs.

[RJ_Daley]

Joe, in reading Chris Clousers fine book on Maxwell, it seemed he was greatly influenced by TOC on his one visit there.  He incorporated his greensites into the surrounding terrain on a low profile basis. Many of the photos in Clouser's book bare that out, and many of the pre remodell features of the Scarlet look like that sort of green design, rather than elevated greens.

[Joe Hancock]

Thanks Dub, and RJ,

It just "appeared" that the remodeled surfaces might be a foot or two higher in overall elevation than the originals, based on the photo's. But, knowing how difficult it is to capture elevation on an image, I figured I better ask.

Some of the approaches appear to be a biit steeper than original, but that too could be angle of picture deception.

Joe

[RJ_Daley]

Joe, I thought some of them looked raised as well.  You'd almost think they would have to raise them some to get proper modern drainage, as I assume the reworked greens have had more understructure added from the original Maxwell construction methods.  I can't fault them for that.

[noonan]

I will go play there as soon as the weather breaks in Ohio.

My wife graduated from OSU.

[Tom Roewer]

I will go play there as soon as the weather breaks in Ohio.

My wife graduated from OSU.

I'm hoping to play there between June 9 and June 14 if it's possible so hopefully I can report back.

[Dub_ONeill]

The current announced plan is for the course be open for members only play during the month of June.

[Glenn Spencer]

I am with Tom Roewer here. I do not like the looks of 13 at all. I always loved that hole the way it was. #12- I hope they didn't mess with that too much, hitting and holding that green was always a challenge whether with the second or 9 out of 10 the third shot from 80-120. #4? I thought it was one of the best gambler par 5's I have seen, I can't imagine much of an improvement there. I really will miss that hole, I am sure that it looks niice and all, but they really messed with some of my favorite holes and shots. Why take the pine trees out on #1? I loved they way they intimidated you on the first. #10 and #11 looked like they improved and remained the solid part of the golf course, 9 as well. 8? I don't know, I think I liked that as well, this should be really interesting. I am not in the know, how many changes have to be made, away from the original architect's plans for it to be considered the new guy's design. I have no basis to say this, but I am would think that this is somewhere near it. I don't know, please tell me, it seems like a lot for a renovation, but like I said I don't know.

[Matt_Cohn]

It looks pretty stunning now. But it's hard not to think that maybe the bunkers are a liiiiiittle bit overdone. Maybe they thought the course would look like every other course in Ohio if they just did "normal" looking bunkers. Were they trying to evoke Mackenzie?

Also, will those bunkers hold their shape over time?

[Lou_Duran]

I saw in the paper this morning that a young lady from Pepperdine shot a 68 in the first round of the NCAA Div. I tournanment.  This brought up fond memories of watching Curtis Strange shoot an "easy" 67 (with a double on #3) during the final round of the NCAAs circa 1975 (Wake Forest won with Jay Haas winning the medal).

Comments and observations from anyone who has seen the course since it has re-opened would be appreciated.  I toured Scarlet last summer while in construction, and with exception of #4 (a par 5 I liked very much back in the 1970s), I thought that the changes were very positive.  Just the tree removal and bunker renovations alone seemed worth the effort.  Is the finished product that much better than what was there before?  If so, what keeps the course from being on the raters' radar?  

[RT]

Any recent pics. I am curious yellow.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()