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.


Mike Erdmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #100 on: February 15, 2007, 06:23:39 PM »

I'll take a swag.  That would be Tumble creek near Cle Elum in Washington state.

I would have to think that and Wicked Pony would have to be about 5000 feet.


I'd bet that The Rawls Course in Lubbock, TX is closer in elevation to Apache Stronghold.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #101 on: February 15, 2007, 06:27:52 PM »
Lubbock is the lowest at 3000 feet, Bend is 3500 feet, but I'm not sure if Remington Ranch is up in the mountains/foothills surronding the area or down on the flats.
Ballyneal comes in at about 3800 feet.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2007, 06:32:42 PM by Kalen Braley »

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #102 on: February 15, 2007, 06:35:38 PM »
Kudos to Mike.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #103 on: February 15, 2007, 06:40:51 PM »
I'm guessing its Ballyneal, as it and Apache are pretty much at the same height.  I thought it was TumbleCreek but stand corrected.

Jay Flemma

Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #104 on: February 15, 2007, 06:41:41 PM »
Well if lubbock is 3000, then its the rawls course...

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #105 on: February 15, 2007, 06:45:14 PM »

I'll take a swag.  That would be Tumble creek near Cle Elum in Washington state.

I would have to think that and Wicked Pony would have to be about 5000 feet.


I was surprised Garland, Tumble Creek is not even 3000 feet.  

Perhaps Wicked Pony will be at 6000, there are some high spots in and around Bend.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #106 on: February 15, 2007, 10:32:39 PM »
Correct elevations for my courses:

Apache Stronghold and The Rawls Course are both right around 3240 feet, but there was more variation at the former ... The Rawls Course was actually all between 3237 and 3241!

Ballyneal is between 3700 and 3800.  Tumble Creek is only 2200.
I'm spacing out right now on exactly what elevation Wicked Pony is.

Rock Creek is 4960 feet at the seventh tee and 4510 at the seventeenth green, and yet I still think it will be pretty walkable.

The 6000 foot property is in the Lake Tahoe area.  I'm out there in two weeks and then maybe I can tell you something more about it.

At the opposite end of the scale, the highest point at Riverfront is 23 feet above sea level, and there was a spot at the start of the sixth fairway at Barnbougle that was less than two meters above sea level.

Tom Jefferson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #107 on: February 15, 2007, 10:56:16 PM »
Re: Wicked Pony elevation........I was in the Bend area over the weekend; the house we stayed in just above the Deschutes was 3200 feet or so.  So that might make Redmond, downstream a couple miles, about 3000 feet.  Wicked Pony must be no higher than that, I imagine.

Tom
the pres

Jim Nugent

Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #108 on: February 16, 2007, 12:20:30 AM »
Jerry,
With it being on the reservation and the Apaches not to keen on outside interference, I  don't see anyone coming to the rescue of the course.
The Apaches just have no interest in operating the course as a business, at least in the manner most of us would consider to be business-like. Maybe its because due to other revenue sources the course doesn't need to turn a profit, or maybe it's because if they did run it well more folks would play, and many in the tribe don't view non-tribal members on the reservation as a plus.  


Don, why did they build the course in the first place?  

John Kavanaugh

Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #109 on: February 16, 2007, 12:50:25 AM »
With the upcoming PGA and GCSAA shows why not propose a scholarship or mentor program for young indian lads that will choose to stay on the reservation.  There are a large number of courses popping up on their land that need care.  The BBGE would be happy to participate in such a noble cause.

Matt_Ward

Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #110 on: February 16, 2007, 10:04:55 AM »
Jim / Don:

Clearly the broader issue with AS that is RARELY discussed is the management of the facility. The San Carlos Apache clearly need to do an in-house analysis on just what it is they wish to do with the property.

The go one step -- fall back two steps show -- doesn't work at all and frankly it is a shame to see such a unique design have to be caught in these predicaments.

No doubt the turf issues are subject to this back and forth situation.

The smart play would be for the Apache to follow what the Santa Ana Pueblo did with Twin Warriors just north of Albuquerque -- in that particular situation the Native-American influence is still front and center and they have a renowned group (Hyatt) involved with the day-to-day care / management.

The issue is really does anyone involved with the existing group see beyond the tree tops and understand the nature of the forest. We shall see ...


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #111 on: February 17, 2007, 09:58:52 AM »
The Arizona Golf Association did work with the Tribe early in the planning and development of the course, discussing everything from caddie scholarships to funding turf school for Tribe members so they could run the facility independently.  But the Tribe just hasn't followed through with most of it.

Tribal politics are just the same as small town politics.  In this case, the real reason for what's happened is that the family of the one Tribe member who really saw the light on the potential benefits of golf to the Tribe has fallen out of favor, and the family now in power is not following through, partly out of pettiness and partly because they don't know or care much about golf.

I will take down that last paragraph shortly because I am the only one here who fully appreciates that you don't want to mess with Apache politics, but I hope that some of you see it and start to understand the position we're in with respect to changing the direction of the course.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #112 on: February 17, 2007, 10:03:18 AM »
It's always interesting - and all too frequently, disheartening - to see where individuals' different motivations lead them.
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

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #113 on: March 06, 2007, 12:41:35 PM »
Jim,

An update; I was at AS last week.

The conditions were as I remember them in winter - dormant Bermuda on the fairways and growing bent on tees and greens.  The fairways are shaved shorter than I remember them so the lies are tight, but there is generally good coverage in the fairway.  At the edges and transitions to the desert there are barren patches where the underlying gravel shows through.  Here are a couple of pictures:







The tees are generally OK.  In a few cases there are barren patches but they don't put the blocks on those areas.  Here are a few pictures that include part of the tees.  Two not so good and one that is fine.










The greens are generally OK, albeit a little fuzzy.  Despite being fuzzy they still are speedy enough and challenging because of the internal movement in the greens.  The only one with issues was the 8th where there were some sandy patches.

On a positive note there were some signs that they were attempting to manage the course conditions better.  Many entry points to the fairways were roped off to try and keep wear and tear on the fairways down.  At least one tee on the 16th was resodded.  There was some work on irrigation piping going on.  Looks like they were trying.  But, as long as they don't overseed in the winter it'll be a challenge to make the course look good to the majority in the winter.

Service was fine for me.  It's not a CCFAD so you have to carry your clubs from the car.  And there's no cart girl.  But the shop person was pleasant.  The starter was pleasant.  And there was no pace of play issue so no need for a marshall.  In fact we were never closer than two holes to any other group.

And, lastly, it's $55 (or $45 if you walk).  About a third or less of the price of most in Phoenix.

Given the architecture and price, I think it's worth playing as a visitor.  If it was my home course the conditioning might weigh on me after a while.

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #114 on: March 06, 2007, 12:51:54 PM »
Bryan-

Finally, someone posts concrete evidence to be admitted in the ongoing debate about AS conditions.  Thanks for sharing...these photos are of far greater value than the writings of people who have not been to AS in weeks, months, or years.

;)

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #115 on: March 06, 2007, 01:01:12 PM »
Ryan's dead on, thanks Bryan.
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

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #116 on: March 06, 2007, 01:04:14 PM »
Thanks Bryan.

As a counter-Veblen consumer, I really regret not getting there last October.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Chris_Blakely

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #117 on: March 06, 2007, 04:05:22 PM »
Second Sean's comment, when I visit my brother who recently moved to the area, I plan on driving out and playing it.

Chris

Doug Wright

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Apache Stronghold
« Reply #118 on: March 06, 2007, 04:24:59 PM »
I've been there twice, the second time when the conditions
were "spotty," certainly not as good as reported by Bryan.
I'm on record as saying AS is worth the trip even if the conditions are spotty
if you enjoy solid golf course architecture.
If conditions are critical to your enjoyment
of a round of golf, then look elsewhere.  
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 04:28:03 PM by Doug Wright »
Twitter: @Deneuchre