Longaberger--give it a chance

[Matthew Sander]

Jason,

When initially reading this post, Chaska Town Course came to mind for me as well. I don't think it answers Matt W.'s question in being a "great" course. Although, I thought it was very good and should be near the top of the list for best municipal courses. You're right, there are just enough "head scratcher" holes to lower its overall impression. I know the 18th can be a polarizing hole, but it is part of an exciting finish; a really short 4 (16), a long difficult 4 (17), and the risk/reward cape-like par 5 18th. It wasn't the easiest walk, but it was doable. You're right though, after a long, hot, humid round that post 18 hill can look a little daunting...

I do remember reading somewhere that one of Art Hill's hallmarks is one hole with a tree in the fairway...

[Jason Topp]

Jason,

When initially reading this post, Chaska Town Course came to mind for me as well. I don't think it answers Matt W.'s question in being a "great" course. Although, I thought it was very good and should be near the top of the list for best municipal courses. You're right, there are just enough "head scratcher" holes to lower its overall impression. I know the 18th can be a polarizing hole, but it is part of an exciting finish; a really short 4 (16), a long difficult 4 (17), and the risk/reward cape-like par 5 18th. It wasn't the easiest walk, but it was doable. You're right though, after a long, hot, humid round that post 18 hill can look a little daunting...

I do remember reading somewhere that one of Art Hill's hallmarks is one hole with a tree in the fairway...

Chaska definitely does not fit within the definition of "great."  By definition, however, few courses can fit such a definition.  I think I have always walked the course.  It is very walkable but is often a 4-1/2 round simply because of the distance you need to walk on the back nine.

[Ronald Montesano]

Andy,

I hit driver from the tips on #4 (I average about 260) and would have been about 200 out, from the flats, due to the downhill nature of the hole...I pulled it left and had to punch a half 7-iron to 100 yards.  If a golfer does not get it down to the flats, she/he would be wise to lay up to 100 and hit wedge in to the par five green.  If one gets to the flat and wishes to have a go, there is room long and left to miss, with short right being the only wet miss.

Ron M.

[Matt_Ward]

Steve:

I critique all architects and don't just select one for special mention. If you bother to check out various posts I have stated that there are many under-the-radar architects that get little mention but have done some notable work. I also mention how the "star" architects here do not always hit home runs either.

I didn't "undermine" Art Hills. I simply said that I have not played a layout of his that the word "great" would be used. As an FYI -- great for me would mean national consideration.

I've played a far sampling of Art Hills courses over the years and while a number of them are very good -- I don't see any being that good to merit special consideration or the application of the word "great."

Just my opinion -- if you see it different that's fine.

[Ronald Montesano]

I was going to toss in a few candidates for greatness, but that would be a thread whack, so I'll go back to Longaberger and embellish.

What I liked:  I enjoyed his greens.  The collection of putting surfi is varied, with many sitting at apparent angles to the approach (and others, not so apparent until you get to the green.)  They have segments for a variety of pin locations.  I did not notice very many unpinnable areas, so that impressed me.  I found the close green miss had a great opportunity for a successful and unique recovery and the bunkers were eminently playable.

What I disliked:  It seems Hills did not make the extra effort to avoid the penal hazard.  The property, in my estimation, is shockingly littered with wetlands...in fact, out beyond the 11th hole, there seems to be much land that might have been purchased, with more options afforded for golf holes that didn't negotiate/compromise themselves with wetlands.  In addition, as I pointed out in an earlier post in this thread, Hills likes the sharp, end-of-hole dogleg around a featured hazard.  Not all of these hazards are truly penal (resulting in penalty strokes.)  It seems to serve to frame the green from front/below.  It is not always possible to negotiate these hazards with anything but an air shot.

[Kris Shreiner]

Matt,  Per your National consideration tracks question. I've only played Old Memorial, so far as I'm aware. The course was very good IMHO, but don't know if I could put it in the "great" category.  Fringy top 100, perhaps. Certainly better than many tracks we see float in and out of the Top100 on whatever lists. I liked the routing, interesting contouring and movement, solid bunkering and interesting greens, especially considering the generally flat topography.
Conditioning was great, firm in fact, despite having had a fair bit of rain just prior to my playing it. No doubt, the sandy base helps with drainage. Overall the experience was superb. BEST GROUP of caddies I've ever had in a foursome and I'm a tough critic. They were a pleasure. The entire operation there is very well run and I'd tee it up there anytime!

[Richard Hetzel]

I was going to toss in a few candidates for greatness, but that would be a thread whack, so I'll go back to Longaberger and embellish.

What I liked:  I enjoyed his greens.  The collection of putting surfi is varied, with many sitting at apparent angles to the approach (and others, not so apparent until you get to the green.)  They have segments for a variety of pin locations.  I did not notice very many unpinnable areas, so that impressed me.  I found the close green miss had a great opportunity for a successful and unique recovery and the bunkers were eminently playable.

What I disliked:  It seems Hills did not make the extra effort to avoid the penal hazard.  The property, in my estimation, is shockingly littered with wetlands...in fact, out beyond the 11th hole, there seems to be much land that might have been purchased, with more options afforded for golf holes that didn't negotiate/compromise themselves with wetlands.  In addition, as I pointed out in an earlier post in this thread, Hills likes the sharp, end-of-hole dogleg around a featured hazard.  Not all of these hazards are truly penal (resulting in penalty strokes.)  It seems to serve to frame the green from front/below.  It is not always possible to negotiate these hazards with anything but an air shot.

Ron,

Would you agree that Art designs courses that are pretty straight forward and "fair"? I have played over 20 of his courses and I find them all to be very "playable" in all spots. Nothing "nationally recognizable", but all good golf courses.

[Ronald Montesano]

Richard...I would say that, at Longaberger, he was probably handcuffed by two entities:  the wetlands and the corporate wags who wanted a killer course.

I found Bay Harbor to be incredibly fair.  The Links (which is not really a links) has the best and only downhill Redan I've ever seen...number four, I believe.  Unfortunately, I found the staff to be a bit pretentious, but that has nothing to do with GCA. The par five, number seven, was incredible...you felt like Columbus, heading to the ends of the earth.  It was too bad that they had to use a piece of inland (better suited for the quarry or preserve nine) terrain for their ninth hole, a jungle beast if there ever was one.  I also found the quarry nine to be quite fair, despite the forced carries on a few of the holes.  I felt like the ball on one of those little plastic games where you try to get the ball to spiral up the cone, round and round, into the hole at the top.  The whole nine laid itself out beneath you; you knew that eventually, you would reach the floor, then ascend again.  I did not play the preserve nine.

The AH course at Boyne Mountain was also incredibly welcoming, challenging and memorable.  I believe that for overall worth, I would rate Longaberger third of the three Hills courses I have played.  I would place Bay Harbor at the top, with the Boyne Highlands course a half-notch behind.  Longaberger was a great course for me (4 or 5 handicap who plays the tips on most courses) but not for lesser players.

[Richard Hetzel]

Ronald,

Bay Harbor was just "OK", IMO the AH course at Boyne was a much better, and aesthetically pleasing golf course. I think it is the BEST AH course  that I have ever played out of all of them.

[Ronald Montesano]

Did you play all three nines at Bay Harbor, Richard?  How would you rank them?  I quite enjoyed the subtleties of the Links, contrasted by the largeness of the Quarry.  Why just "ok"?

[Shawn Arlia]

I have played many art hills courses, easily in the double digits. I ve always felt that he designs solid golf courses. Longaberger is a solid golf course. I dont understand why people hate number one. You cant reach the tree, so basically, its a drive midiron shot. tough green keeps birdies to a minimum. My favorite stretch is 5-8 with six being the best IMO. Eight gets alot of attention. If you re a long hitter, then the left fairway is the optimal play. The average player can take that route too, but he best hit his best drive. Now the right fairway slopes big time to the left, so the play is a big hook or power draw. the ball is above your feet usually for the  second, but you are able to hit it short, and let it run onto the green, or play it really short and be given a very makeable up and down opportunity for par.
If i had to rate his best courses i ve played, it would go like this. Bay Harbor, Longaberger, Thoroughbred, Red Hawk Run, Shaker Run.

[Richard Hetzel]

Did you play all three nines at Bay Harbor, Richard?  How would you rank them?  I quite enjoyed the subtleties of the Links, contrasted by the largeness of the Quarry.  Why just "ok"?

No we only played the Bay side and the Quarry. They had some sort of member thingy on the third 9 that day. I guess the Quarry nine was somewhat contrived is the best that I can describe it. We played it since we were staying at Boyne and got on for a CHEAP rate. I could never see paying the rack rate for BH.

It wasn't bad, I just felt let down as my expectations were higher. It was a 54 hole day, BH, then The Ross Memorial and then The Moor Course.

[Criss Titschinger]

My favorite stretch is 5-8 with six being the best IMO.

I'll agree with the later part of this statement. 6 was my favorite hole on the entire course. A very good short par 4 with plenty of options off the tee. I believe my group went 3-4-5-6 on that hole. The 6 took driver. Me, the 4, took 4-hybrid.

8 just doesn't do it for me. I found the left option to be the only option. I'd rather have a flat lie with 120 yards over water for the approach, than uneven line to a narrow green. I think a much better split hole in Ohio can be found at Boulder Creek where the safe route is safe, but the riskier route reaps a genuine reward.

I can't see how that tree on 1 would be in play for anyone but the longest hitters with wind at your back. Like someone said earlier, it's a driver/mid-iron hole. 4's another one that has a picturesque tee-shot, but there's much more risk than reward for going for it in two.

I have to say my favorite stretch was from 9 to 11 as others have mentioned.

One of my playing partners that day, after a having 5-jacked 16 thanks to a ridiculous pin position, described Longaberger as "typical Arthur Hills B---s---. I don't go that far, but I don't think it's the best public course in Ohio.

[Ronald Montesano]

Ahhh, now you've hit on it...the expectations factor.  Heaven forbid I ever play certain courses for which I have expectations...they'll never meet reality at a common place.  Some might surpass, I admit, but most won't.

I never felt that Quarry was contrived.  I thought it was a golf course that fit the land.  It provided the opportunity for heroic shots on drives and approaches, and finished quite nicely.

I agree that much of Bay Harbor is over-the-top expensive (I believe the toilet paper was free...) and that the rack rate would not be affordable in my world.

Shawn, what level golfer are you?  The reason I ask is, my partner and friend did a slow burn during his 16-ball donation to the marsh people of Longaberger.  He was incapable of the consistency required of the routing.  I agree on #1...if you're playing the RED tees, you might reach the tree.  I faded right, below the bunkers, and hit an 8 iron over the green from the tips.  Even if you're in the bunkers, 8 iron is all you'll have left to the green.

Shawn, what did you think of the par three holes at Longaberger?  Now that I consider them, I can't recall one that stood out...it seemed like I hit the same club into each one, never a good sign.

[Steve Lang]

  So TRricks O'Hoo  i take it you wouldn't want to play 100 holes at Longaberger without plenty of balls?

[Ronald Montesano]

Steve, I would be fine there...I didn't lose a single ball.  I'm a traveling five handicap that plays from the tips most days.  I'm 5'9" with a repeating swing.  If I played 100 holes at Longaberger, it would be pretty challenging but I'd make it through.  Rule of thumb is, if you're worried about losing the ball, play cheaper golf balls.

Hills always gives you a side to miss...it isn't always an easy recovery, but it's a playable recovery.

[Richard Hetzel]

Ronald,

Don't get me wrong about "expectations". Anything ranked #1 is fair game for high expectations of the Travelling Golfer!

Now that said, if Longaberger was near Cincinnati, it would be my first choice for a public. I would even place it ahead of Stonelick and anything thing else "here".

Place it within 2 miles of Mannakiki in Cleveland, and I play Mannakiki every time at half the price!

[Ronald Montesano]

I have yet to play Mannnnnaaakkkkkkkikkkkkkki and would like to, soon.  What you say makes perfect sense.  Architecturally, what would you say are three correctable steps at Longaberger?

[Shawn Arlia]

Ron I am a seven handicap in my traveling league. Usually i play between 6400-6700 yards. My game revolves around my short game. I tend to make a lot of putts. I pitch and chip reasonably well. If if was to update my clubs, i might have a better game, but for now, my old hogan apex irons are the weapons of choice. As for the par threes at longaberger, i didnt care much for them. Five is the best of the bunch. Nine is okay. I felt the green was boring. Ive seen it before. The two on the back were basically the same hole. So yes, i agree the par threes are average at best. But i felt the par fives were strong holes. Yes four not the best hole to go for it, but seven is a strong par five, ten is well placed do or die hole, and sixteen is a nice risk reward as well. The par fours have good variety to them. Six is my favorite. But even number three is a well designed hole where the choice drive is hit over the fairway trap to gain the best angle. Eleven has already been discussed. Fifteen is strong, along with seventeen. And eighteen is a ball buster of a hole. Its a big scale golf course. It definitely catches your eye.

[Mark Saltzman]

Andy,
This is what a gca'er I played with a couple days ago said.  Not exact words so I wont quote it, but about what he said..
--'The first hole is stupid, a joke.  A huge dogleg right, like 420 from the tips, and way uphill with a tree in the middle of the fairway that cannot even be reached with the drive.  But then the second hole, its magnificent, and the thiord as well.  But then the fourth, just stupid.  People have hit a SW to a 3-wood into that hole and everything in between.  If you want to lay up then you are on this huge downslope unless you go back all the way to 120 yards, where there is finally a flat lie.  The hill is so steep that if your drive catches it it could go well over 300 yards and is an easy birdie which is dumb,l because of lack of opitons.  Then the fifth hole, a GREAT par three.  Man, Jordan, the whole course is like that, just up, and then down...'
So Andy, those are a couple hole descriptions I have heard first hand...

I played Longaberger today and am enjoying reading through this old thread..

I'm sure I'll have responses to other old posts but wanted to first address this one:

I don't get everyone's problem with the tree on one.  No way, I mean no friggin way, is that in play for 99% of golfers.  From the 6500 yard tees it was 250 yards over the first bunker and the tree is probably 30 yards past those.  280 uphill from the the two from the back set... the tree is there to keep the bombers in check; it makes those 300+ yard hitters actually think on the tee shot.  It's fine with me.  What about the trees in the fairway on 16 at Oak Tree National, 18 at Pebble Beach or 6 at The Golf Club, are those also stupid jokes?

Moving on to number 4.  I suspect this GCAer layed up, but not boldly near the lake.  Yes, shots laid up in the 100-140 yard range will be played off a downslope.  But, if you lay-up near the lake, as I did and leave 70 yards, you will have a flat approach. 

I liked the 4th on the whole, though I was told it is a major cause of back-ups.  Yes, the green is too small/narrow for me to ever risk going for it in two, but as a pea shooter that's ok.  I suspect, as Andy suggests, for longer hitters the risk/reward is about right.  Tough for long hitters to lay-up from inside 250, no matter how difficult the shot.

My biggest issue was the flowus interruptus.  Really a bizarre routing choice with the transition from 4 green to 5 tee, no?

And 5 is a great par-3? Really? Why?

[Mark Saltzman]

18 was pretty damn mundane!!

Seriously? How do you define mundane?

btw, I made three from the right fairway on number 8.

[Mark Saltzman]

15-18 is a pretty good stretch of holes to me, and I liked the false front on 18 green to complicate the long finisher. The "mundane" holes at Longaberger that you mention beat the pants off the "mundane" holes at a lot of places I've been.

Andy, I agree but not about the false-front on 18.  Wasn't this the only hole on the course with this feature? Felt out of place to me and unnecessary given the difficulty of the hole and green. 

[Michael George]

I believe that the strength of Longaberger is the par 4s.  I enjoyed 2-3, 11, 13 and 15 and 17-18.   I think the par 3's are generally weaker than other courses.  Mark, I agree on #5.  In my opinion a boring hole that seemed out of placed, especially with the long drive from 5 green and to #6 tee. 

Longaberger is intended to be a fun golf course for the general public that does not want to walk.  It is.  Is it for the walking nazi's, no.  Is it for the minimalists, no.  But it serves the general golfer very well and is enjoyable to play.

[Mark Saltzman]

Michael, well said.  

I agree, really a good mix of par-4s.  Many of the par-4 tee shots (if you play the correct tees) will give the option of hitting less than driver.  The long par-4s are some of the best holes on the course -- 2, 13 and 18 are all very strong.  But the mix of short par-4s at 3, 6 and 11 and it's a good  set.

Also agree the par-3s are the worst part of the golf course.  Not a notable one in the bunch.  I would say they are a way to get from one hole to the next, but with so much acreage I have to think Hills could have done better.

[Andy Troeger]

Mark,
I only played the course once, back in 2006, so my memory these days is a little hazy! I agree with your general impressions though for the most part. I know the one hole I had issues with was #4 because the risk/reward balance is out of whack given the second has to be almost perfect to find the green from any distance. You have to be able to get down to that flat area to not have an awkward approach to a tough target.

I don't the par threes as a set are especially great, but I did like #9 which struck me as an attempt to replicate the angles of #12 at Augusta. Its obviously not the original, but I like the effort and I think they got the shallow green right from my memory. The par fours do strike me as being the strength of the course.

Don't really remember #18's green in enough detail to comment beyond what I said back then!