News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Tom Scupholm III

Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« on: July 05, 2006, 11:49:31 AM »
What is everybody's opinion on Art Hills.  New courses and Redesigns.  Not my favorite.  But so many people seem to love his work, especially here in Michigan.  

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2006, 11:57:36 AM »
Without question, the worst of all time. There is no close second place and there never will be.

Tom Huckaby

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2006, 11:59:12 AM »
Glenn - don't leave us hanging - would you let us know what you really mean?  This wishy-washyness just has to go.

 ;D ;D ;D

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2006, 12:05:54 PM »
You live in Michigan.  ::) Now that is Hills country.  ;D I live in Ohio, I like to think of it as his vacation home.  ::)

John Kavanaugh

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2006, 12:07:04 PM »
Tom S III,

How bout posting under your real name or telling us a bit about yourself...I'm kinda curious why a guy with interest in the board would ask such a question.  Please don't tell me you are another 12 year old with a passion for architecture...We are going to have DateLine on our ass if we aren't careful..

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2006, 12:08:27 PM »
Glenn - don't leave us hanging - would you let us know what you really mean?  This wishy-washyness just has to go.

 ;D ;D ;D

TH,

There are so many on this site that know more about architecture than me, including yourself, but when it comes to recognizing BAD golf holes, I like my skills.  ;D Arthur never makes me work too hard to recognize.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2006, 12:30:13 PM by Glenn Spencer »

Jordan Wall

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2006, 12:12:12 PM »
Admittedly I have only played one Art Hills course, but I have played it many, many times.  One thing I like about it is that each time I play it a new challenge is presented to me.  Yes, many holes have OB, but Hill's did not do that, and the houses are not his fault.  I have never heard of Harbour Point as being hated on this site, though if everyone had played it I am sure there would be some mumbo jombo talk on how bad this or that is...

I can not necassarily call Hill's good though, because even though I love Harbour Point, I see enough things in the course (which btw is one of his best) that is not on many great courses, yet is on many poor courses, at least from which I have played.  One big problem of his is containment mounding.  Ask Glenn, even though there is some goofy architecture at Longaberger there is probably plenty (ie-too much) of containment mounding.  To many, including myself, this is unnattractive, especially when it is over used.
Also, he has many weird lay up shots that people do not like.  Even on Harbour Point there are some of the weirdest lay up shots that I have ever seen.  On the 15th hole, the fairway ends 140 yards from the hole, then drops eight feet, top another ten yards of fairway before going into a deep ravine.  Because the hole is downhill and downwind, and just 421 from the backs, it doesnt really give the better player an option but to hit it straight in the fairway, while limiting the distance the player can go,
The greens on Hill's courses, at least Harbour, aree decent, but nothing compared to say Doak or C&C.

That is why most people do not like Hills.  
And I just told you about one course, really..
 :-\

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2006, 12:17:04 PM »
Dunes at Seville is one of my favorites.
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Tom Scupholm III

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2006, 12:18:02 PM »
John,
I live in Michigan and over the long weekend ran into several people who raved about Shepards Hollow.  I have never played it but have played several other AH courses and I really haven't formed an opinion good or bad.  I am just looking for other opinions of his work.

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2006, 12:22:56 PM »
JW,

Good description of 15, that sounds like a real winner. The thing is, I don't prefer houses or anything like that, but I have never made them a part of my architectural opinion of the place. Housing is interesting in the case of Hills. Fox Run has none whatsoever and its 18th it is a WHBH (worst hole by Hills or Worst Hole in America, aren't they the same) candidate and Pipestone is littered with them in places and it has a WHBH candidate, of course #18 as well. I have never held housing against Hills, his courses are bad no matter what the situation. Stone Harbor is just flat bad to begin with, the houses there are actually a nice distraction.

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #10 on: July 05, 2006, 12:25:06 PM »
What is everybody's opinion on Art Hills.  New courses and Redesigns.  Not my favorite.  But so many people seem to love his work, especially here in Michigan.  

This sounds like an opinion to me.

Steve Hyden

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2006, 12:38:35 PM »
Although not a feature that has gained much popularity in the design community, around the time many modern architects started employing containment mounds, at Tampa Palms Arthur Hills pioneered the use of their polar opposite - rejection mounds or what the membership refers to as "Arthur's Hills," which direct even slightly off-line tee shots into the swamp that the course was carved out of.  These features are also called "Arthur's @#$#!&^ Hills" and their creator Arthur #&$$@?! Hills.  Interestingly, the membership overwhelmingly love the course, maybe because there are so few interesting ones in the area (Copperhead and Pine Barrens for sure, maybe Old Memorial but I haven't played it).  But it's the kind of layout where the exact shot is dictated to the player almost every time.

In contrast, Monday I played his Dunes Club near World Woods and it's a nice, naturalistic routing with some holes reminiscent of Pine Barrens.  Like the once very promising El Diablo, Dunes is woefully under-maintained due to budget constraints.  Both would be fine courses if they only had a little money.

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2006, 12:40:32 PM »
From the Dunes at Seville write-up:                                 Hills is no stranger to superb sites. Over the last 10 years, he has worked with some incredibly advantageous properties in the country. Some of the most memorable bay and oceanside courses to open in America during the 1990’s have come off the boards of Hills’ Ohio-based firm (Bay Harbor, Half Moon Bay, and Lighthouse Sound come immediately to mind), but even today he’s hard pressed to name many properties he’s designed that outshine the Seville site.


I bet he is hard-pressed alright. I thought lawyers had no shame, marketing people are the worst. How can one say this stuff. I might have to change jobs. This some of the most memorable bay and ocean stuff reminds me of a friend of mine. He has beaten me once, sort of twice out of about 150 times playing with each other. He always says, ' Sometimes you win, sometimes, I win.'  Sometimes times Hills gets the most out of the property and sometimes he doesn't, I guess, is how the firm would market him.



« Last Edit: July 05, 2006, 12:42:55 PM by Glenn Spencer »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2006, 01:01:37 PM »
Glenn,
Quite obviously you have never sampled the Ted Robinson brand of golf architecture.......

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2006, 01:04:56 PM »
Tommy,

I don't know anything about Ted Robinson, except some course that I think you guys were talking about in California about a month ago. Is he in Hills' class? This can't be. I would like to hear some more.... please.

Brian Cenci

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2006, 01:08:46 PM »
I have played 3 Arthur Hills courses in Michigan.  Thoroughbred, Akers - West (he did the redesign and rerouting work) and Bay Harbor.  A good friend of mine on this site (Dave Neveux), who we share nearly identicaly opinions on what is a good or not good course, has played Sheppard's Hollow and Fieldstone.  I also know Arty has done Red Hawk in Northeast Michigan that is listed as one of the top publics in the state.

My friend tells me Sheppard's is better than Lakewood Shores - Gailes, Eagle Eye and Tullymore (similar top public courses in Michigan).

I personally like his work but do not think he is necessarily a great architect.  Overall from what I've seen and played of his courses I think he produces a good product when all is completed.  Are there a few querky holes....yes, but every architect seems to have one or two on a few courses that seem a little weird.  

I think Thoroughbred is overall a good course considering the location amongst many swamps and lowland areas and a difficult course at that.  Although #2 is one of the dumbest holes I've ever played.  

I like Akers-West, except that the way the routing was done you end up playing 4 par 3's in just 6 holes.  

Bay Harbor is a good course as well.  Although considering the property another architect might have done a better job.  The Quarry 9 at Bay Harbor is my favorite there.

Overall I think he takes a bad beat on this site.  He produces what I feel are good golf courses that for 99% of the golf community are considered good courses.  The 1% that seem to dominate this site I don't think like him because his last name isn't Doak, Coore or Crenshaw.

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #16 on: July 05, 2006, 01:09:30 PM »
What is everybody's opinion on Art Hills.  New courses and Redesigns.  Not my favorite.  But so many people seem to love his work, especially here in Michigan.  

Did Glenn put Tom S up to this?

Jordan Wall

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #17 on: July 05, 2006, 01:10:02 PM »
Im starting to wonder who is more popular here.

M.Wie or Art Hills..

Doug Ralston

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #18 on: July 05, 2006, 01:10:49 PM »
Good!

My 1st post and it will be controversial.

Glenn;

I have played Fox Run, which is very near my home, a few times. What did you think of the rest of the course? It is challenging, beautiful, and even from the short tees I must use every tool in my bag. It is a 'tough nut'. Glenn, #17 & #18 are my two FAVORITE holes on the course. Though moderate from the back tees, #17 allows you to choose anything from a medium iron to a fairway wood to lay up; then you must decide how to approach. With water right, and a rough hillside left, you want something you can be confident of holding, or you must play left, obviously. a beautiful challenge.

Then comes #18. From MY short tees, my 190 yd all out drive [yep, that's it] will, if hit accurately, leave me close enough to the lovely lake to make a decision. How much of that lake can I bit off, and to what purpose? I will usually, because it is FUN, hit my 5-wood diagonally across, with enough room to carry not only the lake but the small diagonal fairway, and into the light rough on the hillside. each time it has left me a pitch under 80yds to a long narrow green, but not too hard. Of course, that's when i three putt for my 6, but what the hell.....it was fun and gorgeous.

The best Art Hill Co golf course I have played BY FAR, and my favorite all time course, is Eagle Ridge, at Yatesville Lake St Park in Kentucky. While Dale Hollow and Hidden Cove have gotten publicity as the 'Crown Jewels' of this fantastic golf trail in the 'hinterlands', Eagle Ridge plays like no other. I mention it now, but will describe it in detail in another post, I hope. I mention it now, as i said, to tell you about the hole you will definitely think is 'WORSE' than #18 Fox Run. That is #4 Eagle Ridge.

#4 is a 580 yd par-5, from the back, with a 220 yd forced carry over a chasm [lots of those at ER] to a fairway that bends left to right around a ridge. if you do not hit it 250 or so, please move up a tee. If you do, and you DID, and it's in the fairway, you now have one of the toughest shots in golf to play. there is a drop through foot high vegetation and rocky area, of perhaps 80 ft over a 190 yd stretch, to a VERY narrow lower fairway, water right and hillside rough and outjutted trees left. With a very straight shot you are now read for a wedge to the long green, water still right, trap and hillside left, and a fallaway to a collection area behind. If the pin is in the back, just be short. I promise you, any par you get here win you the hole! It's dropdead beautiful, as is the rest of this unique, monster tough [144 slope, 153(!) front, 135 back] golf course. When I walk off it, more than any other course, i wonder why I am leaving

Needless to say, i disagree with you Glenn, about Art Hills Inc. Shaker Run is a pretty sweet course to, you know? This is not to say i do not like other designers i have played, but just I think maybe you are a bit tough on this one.

Doug

David Neveux

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #19 on: July 05, 2006, 01:16:41 PM »
I absolutely love the job he did at Sheperds Hollow.  I really thought it was an intriguing course and I plan on making a return trip later this summer.  Since I only played it once I really can't speak specifics on the holes I thought were great.  I will also be playing Red Hawk this sunday, which is another Hills' design in East Tawas.  Everyone I've talked to has liked it, I will post my opinions later.

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #20 on: July 05, 2006, 01:23:22 PM »
Glan,
Art Hills doesn't even come close to the style and brand of Ted Robinson brand of golf architecture. Some here will tell you of some course in Salem, Oregon called Trysting Tree and that it's not bad, or another one in Bend.

He is the epitomy of landscape architect run amouk in the golf industry.





If the pictures aren't enough, then I can provide a design philosophy for you if needed.

Jordan Wall

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #21 on: July 05, 2006, 01:27:16 PM »
Here is the 15th at Harbour Point from just above the little 10 yard fairway eight feet below the real fairway, which you can kind of see on the bottom left of the picture.  Just a really weird lay up shot, which I do not at all get.  Imagine being stuck on the doiwnslope between the two fairways.


Eric Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #22 on: July 05, 2006, 01:29:28 PM »
Glan,
Art Hills doesn't even come close to the style and brand of Ted Robinson brand of golf architecture. Some here will tell you of some course in Salem, Oregon called Trysting Tree and that it's not bad, or another one in Bend.



Tommy,
As a Trysting Tree Alum, I need to correct you as to the location of Trysting Tree.  It is east of the Willamette River, across from downtown Corvallis (AKA the home of the NCAA baseball champion Oregon State Beavers).

GO BEAVS!

Doug Ralston

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #23 on: July 05, 2006, 01:30:51 PM »
Several of you have mentioned courses from our goal of goals, the wonderous public golf courses of Michigan. Shepard's Hollow, Tullymore, Eagle Eye and Red hawk are on our 'want to' list, along with such notables as Timberstone, Pilgrim's Run, Black Lake [oops, another 'evil' designer, that Reese Jones.....sorry], and if we can summon the money for fees, Forest Dunes, Bay Harbor and of course Arcadia Bluffs.

Michigan seems to have better public golf courses that anywhere. We have so far only managed to get a 'night and day' trip up from Cincy to play a Southern one, and chose a simple one to start. The Majestic lived up to it's name, if in no other way, just by have 1500 acres of beautiful, animal rich, land. We also found it enjoyable, all 27 holes. If this is #25 in Michigan [according to Michigan Golf Magazine] then we cannot WAIT for the really good ones  :)

If there are other public 'must plays' with GF under $100, I will certainly like to hear of them from you.

Doug

Glenn Spencer

Re:Arthur Hills - Good or Bad??
« Reply #24 on: July 05, 2006, 01:35:20 PM »
Fox Run is a nice place to play golf. That site would be fun to do just about anything on though. For someone like me the 18th at Fox plays completely different. At 553 or whatever the drive has to be pounded to get in any kind of position to do anything. The damn fairway has a false front for the love of god. From the back the only acceptable shot is 250-300 in the air and straight, but not too straight, otherwise you could bounce to the right and that is real trouble. The right rough, yes that is right, the right rough leaves you a diagonal shot that needs to be hit left to get to the fairway from a sidehill ball below your feet stance. The other option, if you are far enough back of the trees is to hit an 80-yard lay-up shot and then come in from 150-170. Hills will always leave the 80-yard lay-up. If I hit it good, my options are, go for green from 250 and hit it up on the most obscene hill in the world or try and hit a 5 into the smallest runway fairway imaginable, but have to hit it good because the water is short, but not too good, because the outrageous hill is there and you will just pull your 4th into the water or once again, the 80-yard lay-up shot. 17? the second is fine. The tee shot is a little much from the back tee. Shaker Run? 3 and 6 are as bad of holes as you can find. Just because 3 is pretty, doesn't mean you have any options off the tee. Your tee shot must be hit 220-245 and dead straight, otherwise you are courting a 7. Great hole!! You should make your way up to Pipestone in Dayton. It has some great holes as well. 2 and 18 are right up there.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2006, 01:35:58 PM by Glenn Spencer »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back