[Philippe Binette]

Last Thursday, I played 36 holes in Vermont, 18 at Ekwanok (a really good private course) and 18 at Okemo Valley (a good resort course) and noted an interesting contrast.

Ekwanok is a fairly open course with wide fairways, fairly wide entrance to the greens, solid but not overagressive bunkering etc.

Okemo Valley is fairly narrow because of the fescue roughs, has some force carries, not a lot of room around the greens to run the ball etc.

Should it be the other way around, private course have generally better players so they could have a course like the one at Okemo Valley.... and Ekwanok could be perfect for public play....

Why is it the way it is? Why on public course, the design or maintenance is generally overdone...

[Dan_Callahan]

Phillippe,

I've played both courses and absolutely agree. At Okemo, If I hadn't been playing with a regular there were a few holes I wouldn't know where to go. I think it was at the 9th (a par 4) when i stood on the tee and had no idea what i was looking at. I pulled out an iron, thinking I would lay up to the only part of the fairway I could see. My friend told me to hit driver over some trees on the right. I did, and ended up about 10 yards short of the green in the center of the fairway!.

There was also a drop shot par 3 mixed in there that was impossible to judge distance for the first-time player.

Ekwanok, on the other hand, is one of my all-time favorite golf experiences. A beautiful, open layout and often there are only a handful of people on the course. there are a few holes, like the long par 5 (maybe the 8th?), where some local knowledge really helps. Nothing like Okemo, though, where I've got to believe the average round exceeds 5 hours because of the quirky design.

[Brad Tufts]

I will second what Dan has said about the two courses.  

The challenges at Ekwanok are more subtle, they hit you over the head with them at Okemo.

Ekwanok enjoys a meadow-like property in one of the most picturesque valleys in New England.  Okemo climbs, falls down, and traverses a rather steep mountainside location.

Ekwanok is one of the best courses in the Northeast.  Okemo might be the best mountain course in Vermont, destroying the competition in the ski-area related golf arena, as Sugarbush, Haystack, and probably Killington, Stratton and Mt. Snow (haven't seen those last three) most likely aren't as interesting and well-conditioned.

Okemo had some very interesting ideas that I had never seen before, like the building of a few holes directly into the mountainside with ups and downs like they were on flat undulating ground.

As to the comment about public course challenges being overdone, I don't know if that is necessarily the case at all times.  It may be here because there are so many of these mountain course choices in VT, Okemo may have needed to distinguish itself in the beginning with conditioning and a slightly newer take on the heavy elevation changes and the thick backwoods that usually border every hole on courses of this type.

Despite the fact that the two courses are as different as can be, they both have some quirk and both require some local knowledge to score!

[Tom_Doak]

The private course (Ekwanok) is almost 100 years old, and was built at a time when there was no need to generate interest in the course by achieving a high slope rating or "memorability".  They just built a good course that was pleasant to play, not too long.

I haven't seen Okemo, but from the description, I will assume that like many modern courses, they were trying to hard to be recognized.  It's also possible that they had environmental issues which made the course harder to get around ... not a problem in Ekwanok's day.

[Philippe Binette]

If we get out of those two courses...

my question is that it's a strange reality (even though it's hard to generalize) private course seems more fit for public play than public course

[Pat Jones]

Concur 100% with Tom.  Those resorts and CCFADs are often what I call "bag tag" courses.  You play there once, get your brains beaten out, collect your souvenier bag tag or hat, and never go back.

[Dan_Callahan]

I read a review of the new Lake of Isles courses (Golf Digest, maybe?) that made this same observation. I haven't seen them, but the comment was made that the public course seemed better suited to private play, and the private course—with apparently no blind shots or other "quirks"—a more natural fit for the public.

[Tom_Doak]

The same thing has been said about the two courses at Pumpkin Ridge.  The public course had the small greens, and the private course had the large greens.

However, with that exception, I think we are really comparing the MODERN courses to the OLDER courses and finding the former, overdone.  Even most "minimalist" designs have a hell of a lot going on, and maybe three times as many bunkers as the best new designs of 1955.

[Mike McGuire]

Phillippe-

Did you notice a lot more signage on the public course?

You know.... Do this,  don't do that,  can't you read the sign.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Phillippe-

Did you notice a lot more signage on the public course?

You know.... Do this,  don't do that,  can't you read the sign.

Or the following at the private:  "Long haired freaky people need not apply"!

[Mark_F]

The public course had the small greens, and the private course had the large greens.

Tom,

Isn't that something that could be said about the Fingal Course?

On my soirees around the site, the greens there, for a semi-private course, look like they will be smaller than the already small greens on the private one? 7, 8 and 10 in particular.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()