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.


tlavin

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #50 on: August 17, 2006, 10:30:56 AM »

While it's no shock that Terry would stick up for one of his fellow journalist, It's been my experience to seekout specialists for their insight. I'd certanly call Geoff Shackelford and Brad Klein two such specialists. Both have experience that extends beyond Cook County and have ZERO axe to grind when it came to their reviews.


Hey, let's be clear here, I think the world of Brad Klein and generally share his sensibility when it comes to golf course architecture.  And maybe I'm a little flinty in defense of the big course in my hometown, but I have a legitimate difference of opinion with Brad on this course.  I have plenty of experience beyond Cook County, but I ain't no Brad Klein when it comes to critiquing (is that a word?) the architecture of a golf course.  Doesn't me he's right here and it doesn't mean I'm wrong; it's all opinion.

So, Adam, I am like you: I seek out the opinions of experts.  I don't necessarily always agree with them, but smart people always listen.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #51 on: August 17, 2006, 10:34:01 AM »
I apologize if this was already covered here but is the course now a representation of Bendelow or is it now a Rees Jones design?  I don't mean this in a derogatory manner.  I'm just wondering if any restoration work was done?  

tlavin

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #52 on: August 17, 2006, 10:46:39 AM »
I apologize if this was already covered here but is the course now a representation of Bendelow or is it now a Rees Jones design?  I don't mean this in a derogatory manner.  I'm just wondering if any restoration work was done?  

I think that it is fair to say that it is a combination of both.  I don't think Jones was there to restore lost Bendelow touches.  Rather, he was there to fix some problems that had been created in past decades where Greens committees played amateur architect and tried to modernize the golf course.  Jones attempted to create a consistent and cohesive look for the golf course, especially from a bunkering standpoint and he moved some earth to remove some blind shots and rebuilt greens to better suit tournament play.  Most significantly, he moved the 17th green back down near the water where it belongs.  So, what you get is an old-time golf course with an old time look and feel that has been juiced up to be able to provide the game's best with a good test.  It's not perfect and it's not a golf museum, but it is a solid, consistent and relentless golf course.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #53 on: August 17, 2006, 10:52:34 AM »
Thanks Terry.  I'll have to get back out there at some point.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #54 on: August 17, 2006, 11:08:43 AM »
Mark,

I would say Rees was very restrained.  Brad gave him a B- on the restoration aspect, saying he was just as concerned with consistency and championship play as he was with Bendelow's look.  Thats not a bad approach considering how the bunkers had morphed into big ovals over time.

People focus on 17 and 2, which have the most apparent change and fit the least well.  However, many greens got the bunkers put right back where they were, albeit reshaped for new drainage and some design consistency.  With the exception of the bunker behind 2 green, I think most could pass for an old bunker.  As I mentioned earlier, the bunkers on 9 green were problematic because the green sets so low to the ground. They show up as slivers.  

The bunkers on 4 and 13 green sat a bit higher than they had to - I have seen this dilema, in that there was room to deepen them and make them look more natural, but how deep do you want those bunkers, given both are long par 4's?

Overall, I fail to see how the course in general and the redo by Rees generate any ill will.  It was meant to be a championship test and it is.    
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

T_MacWood

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2006, 02:04:37 PM »

Brad gave him a B- on the restoration aspect, saying he was just as concerned with consistency and championship play as he was with Bendelow's look.  Thats not a bad approach considering how the bunkers had morphed into big ovals over time.
   

Huh? A B- on the restoration aspect? Was this a restoration?

What is Bendelow's look and where did Rees restore Bendelow's look?

tlavin

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #56 on: August 17, 2006, 02:14:54 PM »
On the webcast, Jones said that restoring the old Bendelow look was very much on his mind.  He said they rebuilt seven greens "to make it more classic" and that he believes that he is good at redoing golf courses because he can "put [his] head in the original architect's head.

He also said that he removed several features that created blind shots, including a rise in front of the 8th green.  He said he was trying to allow the golfer to see the shot in front of him if at all possible.

I don't know that there is an identifiable Bendelow bunker style, but Jones clearly has a consistent look in place at Medinah.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #57 on: August 17, 2006, 02:26:04 PM »
On the webcast, Jones said that restoring the old Bendelow look was very much on his mind.  He said they rebuilt seven greens "to make it more classic" and that he believes that he is good at redoing golf courses because he can "put [his] head in the original architect's head.

He also said that he removed several features that created blind shots, including a rise in front of the 8th green.  He said he was trying to allow the golfer to see the shot in front of him if at all possible.

Anyone else see a gigantic incongruity between these statements?
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Mike_Cirba

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #58 on: August 17, 2006, 02:32:34 PM »
On the webcast, Jones said that restoring the old Bendelow look was very much on his mind.  He said they rebuilt seven greens "to make it more classic" and that he believes that he is good at redoing golf courses because he can "put [his] head in the original architect's head.

He also said that he removed several features that created blind shots, including a rise in front of the 8th green.  He said he was trying to allow the golfer to see the shot in front of him if at all possible.

As I mentioned in a previous post, you can't make this stuff up.  

If I have this right, Rees;

1) Says he was doing a Bendelow "restoration"
2) Rebuilt seven greens to make it "look more classic".
3) He can "channel" the original architect through his head.
4) Removed any blindness.
5) Created bunkers that look like "Mackenzinghast", that famous Golden age wizard whose bunkers looked the same from site to site.
6) Made sure he allows the golfer to see everything in front of him.

Good...I bet it's awesome.   ;D


Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #59 on: August 17, 2006, 02:40:38 PM »
Not too long ago, Brad Klein told us that critical acclaim and popularity were quite different things.  Presumably, a course widely enjoyed and highly regarded by the playing public may be actually rather ordinary or mediocre when examined from the learned, finely-tuned perspective of the critic.

Brad once suggested to me that I tended to like most of the courses I played.  Playing the game I love, mostly at the top 200 to 300 courses in the country at that time, I was guilty as charged.  Certainly, I didn't visit a new course with a predisposition to find fault (or be critical), though I had/have no problem differentiating or fleshing out things I liked or didn't like.

I've only played Medinah once, and though not among my personal favorites, it is a grand course.  It is anything but boring in my opinion, difficult off the tee, but yet forgiving enough around the greens to allow for some well played recoveries.  It is a course where one can use all the clubs in the bag to hit a wide variety of shots.  And while three of the par 3s go over water, they play remarkably different.  My largest negative was the sharpness of the R to L doglegs on a few par 4s.

As to the course being too difficult for the average player, I guess someone forgot to inform that chap. The course was packed on my only day there, and the member who hosted me told me that he has no shortage of friends, business associates and clients who drop whatever they're doing on a moment's notice for a round on #3.  I know that his two other guests were in no hurry to get their round over with despite the triple digit scores they were accumulating.   BTW, this is the opposite of my experience at Winged Foot, where my host and his guests often prefer the less demanding East Course.  Maybe having more forgiving greens and surrounds on an already difficult course from tee to green is not such a bad thing.

   

John Kavanaugh

Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #60 on: August 17, 2006, 06:01:10 PM »
Do the low scores prove the analysis wrong..It is hardly a boring slog today..

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #61 on: August 17, 2006, 10:05:54 PM »
I couldn't help but thing the same thing as I saw the leaderboard light up red today.

Nick Church

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Klein Pounds Medinah
« Reply #62 on: August 18, 2006, 04:29:34 PM »
I just have to say --- I really enjoy reading the back and forth debates.  It sometimes intimdating as I realize how much more experience & thought has gone into developing each your perspectives.  Yet, I always leave thinking I learned at least a little something.  If nothing else, one more element to notice as I play the courses in my area.

Thanks guys!
« Last Edit: August 18, 2006, 04:30:37 PM by Nick Church »