News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« on: May 28, 2006, 09:29:45 PM »
I played Purchase for the first time on Saturday.  Other than the first couple of observations which are things that really struck me, the rest are in no particular order of alleged importance.

First, the green complexes are surprisingly (too me) hospitable - not nearly as severe as I expected to find.  The putting surfaces and surrounds aren't flat and they're certainly not uninspired.  But, given Purchase's reputation in these parts (and Nicklaus' overall), I was expecting a lot of big-time contours that would be near-impossible if they were stimped on the high side.  Not so - getting to the green is more of a battle than putting once you get there.
Admittedly, the speed of the greens on the day I played was not at a tournament level, but given how many opportunities my poor ball striking presented to deal with chipping, bunker shots, "short sided" flop shots and long putts, I had a good opportunity to envision what life would be like on 12+ surfaces.  It wouldn't be pretty if you were above the hole, but not impossible either.  The teeth of the course is in the shot values, IMO and you could play it every day without feeling beaten up.  My personal flip side to Purchase would be Stanwich - a routing I admire but with 8-9 greens just too severe to be playable (at least for me).

Second, I was very pleasantly surprised to see that the numerous wetlands that the routing had to work around did not result in a single "awkward" hole.  There is only 1 lengthy walk from green-to-next tee box (17 to 18), but the integrity of the shot values is totally uncompromised by, for example, forced 5 iron lay-ups off the tee or 8 iron second shots on par 5's.  Only #10 really maxes out a drive at 220+ yards and none of the par 5's preclude a full second shot for a reasonably competent player IF YOU HIT YOUR DRIVE IN THE RIGHT PLACE.  Given my past experience with EPA-driven routings (and Purchase has wetlands on at least 7 holes I can remember), I expected 1 or 2 forced lay-ups.  Not only are there none of those, but the wetland holes are really pretty good in their own right and a couple of them (e.g. #4) are excellent.

Third, there was not a single hole that I didn't really care for.  Considering that every other course I have ever played about which I can say the same thing has a name like...well, you get the point.  That doesn't mean that Purchase is a better golf course than Pebble (I don't like #15, for instance) or TOC (I don't much care for #'s 1,9 or 10 there), but this track has 17 1/2 very solid holes (see #10 above) with not a clunker in the bunch IMO.  I'm no rater but that part sure fits my Top 100 criteria.

Other thoughts:

While Purchase is very definitely a tree-lined course, there are no Stupid Trees.  If you're in the fairway or on a tee box, you have no branches in your way.  I'm told that the club is always looking to remove trees and that I might not have been so positive 3 years back, but that was then and this is now.  Somebody there gets it when it comes to (less) trees.

Except for the wetlands (a big "except"), it's pretty good property.  The elevation changes are significant but not overly abrupt.  I would liken the up/down part to Pine Valley - not the easiest course you ever walked but nothing really unpleasant on the uphill and no Mickey Mouse shots going downhill, either.  While it's somewhat wedged in between I-684 and White Plains airport, none of the holes feel cramped and you have to look hard on almost all of them to see another.

Purchase would be a good stroke-play tournament course if the quality of the field was strong enough to keep it out of the trees and get around in less than 4 1/2 hours.  A Met Open would work there - not sure the full field for a Mid-Am qualifier could finish by dark.  You can lose a lot of golf balls there if you're hitting it crooked.

Like most Nicklaus courses, the power fade off the tee is a huige advantage.  All the sharp doglegs are to the right and several of the wetlands that cross the fairways cannot be cleared from anywhere left of center off the tee.

#6 is a pretty fair Redan-like hole.  The back bunker is missing but chipping from where it would be is dicey.  The front bunker has good challenge and putting from right to left would be real tough if the greens were fast.

Other than #9, which is a short-ish par 4, there's no deep rough and none is really required to give a hole difficulty.

The greens aren't so huge, but they are (mostly) deep enouigh to add 3 clubs from fron-to-back on most every hole.  Thus, 6900 yards on the card could be 6700-7100 depending on the hole locations.  None of the greens are small - the few that are semi-shallow are quite wide.  Sebonack, by comparisaon, has very small greens.

All in all, without making the greens at all "controversial", Nicklaus has built a very good golf course in spite of significant EPA restrictions.  I was impressed.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2006, 09:52:54 AM »
Can't let this one get off the front page.

Maybe Brad Klein or Tom Doak will chime in.

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2006, 10:03:26 AM »
Chipoat, I actually have the jurisdictional wetlands map for the site in a JPEG file, with four different boundaries of wetlands, depending upon municipality (town, county, state, feds). I'd be happy to email it to someone if they can post it here.

Given what that patchwork looks, it's absolutely amazing (and impressive) to me that Nicklaus Inc. could get a routing done at all. Unfortunately, I think it overwhelms any other discussion of greens and everything else about strategy outside of the major point of the site, which is the fact that as a result of the permitting demands, there are 17 forced carries over wetlands/water hazards, which makes it less than a thrill for anyone to play.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2006, 10:23:21 AM »
Brad:

I didn't count 17 forced carries so let me review the scorecard.

It probably isn't a lot of fun for the very elderly or for the many woman who can't carry a golf ball more than 150 yards with their very best.

But then, neither is Merion or Pine Valley.

Although Crump had the luxury of routing his forced carries wherever he wanted (which is clearly a huge help), I count 10 forced carries (not including the par 3's) over 8 waste areas and 2 water hazards.

You've hit my major point which is that the wetlands requirements have NOT overwhelmed the integrity of the final routing or a discussion about anything else.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2006, 10:25:56 AM by chipoat »

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2006, 10:29:33 AM »
For various reason that you can imagine, I haven't been there in 8-9 years, but I seem to recall 17 (of course, I include par-3s), including three on the par-5 7th alone, which violates one of my basic rules of design, namely that a hole should not have more forced carries that a man has testicles.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2006, 10:30:54 AM by Brad Klein »

Matt_Ward

Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #5 on: May 30, 2006, 09:50:28 AM »
chipoat:

Have to offer this -- can;t stand the course because the very issue that's often raised -- playability. The course is simply one re-load after the next for the average player because of the amount of wetlands / forced carries and all the other designed minefields one faces.

Chip -- you mentioned that the wetlands has not "overwhelmed" the final routing but it's really a queston of how you define "overwhelmed?"

CC of Purchase is clearly from the pre-Nicklaus days because the courses coming forward now are more replete with the word option being front and center.

No doubt there are a few holes of note but for me the layout represents a very clear statement that golf can only be played one way at the course. Have the kind of regular member play you see at other courses and you wold need an amry of forecaddies and all other such assistances when playing there.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #6 on: May 30, 2006, 12:46:54 PM »
Brad:

I count 8 including the par 3's but I'm known to be oblivious about most things (ask my wife) so you could be right.

I believe you cross 2 wetlands on #7 and the 2nd is greenside so that seems like a regular pond/creek to me.

Matt (and Brad):

What pleasantly surprised me about Purchase was the lack of forced LAYUPS off the tee and/or on the 2nd shot of a par 5.  Forced carries don't bother me as long as they're do-able and the alternative isn't a 100 yard pitch.

As crooked as I hit it, I lost exactly 1 ball (fat 5 iron) that I would have hit into a front hazard anywhere else.

With deep rough, I concede it could be a miserable day for most people - but so are many courses in Ireland and Scotland.

Purchase isn't WF or Quaker, but with 17 1/2 good/excellent holes, I think it's a fine test.  While the number of wetlands is kind of ubiquitous from a visual perspective, Pine Valley has a whole lot of sand, too.

I guess that's why there's chocolate and vanilla.

Matt_Ward

Re:Report from Golf Club at Purchase
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2006, 10:26:43 AM »
chipoat:

Given the limited size of the current membership it speaks to the issue of what people define as a worthy golf experience.

The layout had to be deal with a myriad of issues and you get a mixed bag of worthy holes and ones that were forced upon the site.

I salute Team Nicklaus for getting a complete facility there but the overall outcome is one that clearly doesn't reflect where the Bear is headed in today's golf design market IMHO.