[ed_getka]

Our intrepid world-travler James Bennett is coming into town soon on his way to Scotland. After Rustic Canyon in the morning,we may go over to take a look at Lost Canyons in the afternoon (so James can see what kind of land shouldn't be used for a golf course) Which one is the preferred course by the GCA cognoscenti?
   I can't imagine any rational person leaving Rustic to go see Lost Canyons, but stranger things have happened.

Anyone interested in getting together for dinner Monday night on the Rustic side of LA?
 

[Tommy Williamsen]

Ed, I am not enamored with either course.  The sky course was designed on ground that is not suitable for golf.  If they had snow and put in a chair lift it might be good for skiing.  The Shadow Course is also on hilly ground but at least you feel like you are playing golf instead of "Sky" diving.  Actually the Shadow Course has a number of very good holes.  I'll say one thing, they both rate high on beauty.

[Michael Robin]

Ryan Simper is going to smack me, but I agree with Tommy, the Shadow is superior to the Sky, although the 17th on the Sky is quite dramatic.

[ed_getka]

Tommy,
   I'm with you on that one. I have been up to the clubhouse twice, but have absolutely no interest in seeing those courses from what I've seen from the road and clubhouse. We don't want James thinking every course in the US is great though.
   I must say that James' opinion rose in my estimation when I heard how much he liked Plainfield on his last trip through the US.

LC is billed as Dye, who did the actual work there?

[Joe Perches]

Which one is the preferred course by the GCA cognoscenti?

This one of the hoi polloi prefers the Sky course, because it's a tad more walkable, quieter, less spoilt by roads, the sightlines have fewer houses, the green to tee distance shorter than Shadow, the terrain less severe, and I just can not abide #5 and #13 on Shadow.  I believe the opening holes on each nine on Sky are very dull and too similar.

I do think Lost Canyons is a very interesting exercise in golf course development.  Given that land, what could be done better?  Designing a couple of the holes to cross the canyons with forced carries for tee shots might have made the experience a bit more fun.

[Aidan Bradley]

"although the 17th on the Sky is quite dramatic."....Michael Robin.

[ed_getka]

I do think Lost Canyons is a very interesting exercise in golf course development.  Given that land, what could be done better?  

Joe,
   That's just it,they shouldn't have done anything. Given the severity of that land, I wouldn't be surprised if they got the most they could out of it. That doesn't mean they should have built courses there. How would you compare it to what was done with the land at Stone Eagle?
    Not to mention that at SUPER twilight (2:30pm) it will still cost us $15 more than Rustic in the morning.

[James Bennett]

Our intrepid world-travler James Bennett is coming into town soon on his way to Scotland. After Rustic Canyon in the morning,we may go over to take a look at Lost Canyons in the afternoon (so James can see what kind of land shouldn't be used for a golf course) Which one is the preferred course by the GCA cognoscenti?
   I can't imagine any rational person leaving Rustic to go see Lost Canyons, but stranger things have happened.

Anyone interested in getting together for dinner Monday night on the Rustic side of LA?
 

Thanks Ed

Looking forward to seeing some SoCal golf next next week.  I get into LA Friday lunchtime (the 16th), and leave for the UK Wednesday afternoon (the 21st).  I expect SoCal will be a lot dryer than NorCal was in early April 2006 (the wet version of El-Ninio).  I'm hoping to see some similar climatic conditions to Southern Australia - certainly more condusive to golf than I expect Scotland will be at the end of the month.

If anyone wishes to catch up and discuss golf matters, IM me.

Re golf courses built on difficult land.  In October 2005, I saw Abama in Tenerife that Donald Steel built.  I forget the exact elevation change (something like 500 feet or more) but that was a challenging site.  I have no desire to walk that course as a golfer.  In April 2006, on the way to Plainfield, I saw Morgan Hill.  Now that is a challenging site for an architect to build a golf course on.  Unfortunately, I didn't see Kelly Blake Moran's Lederach, so.  Locally near Adelaide, we have a course some 15 years old now that was a real estate development.  It is quite good, but the routing involves 4 separate descents/climbs on reasonably steep slopes.  Not a great walking experience either.

It is interesting to look at these sites and balance up the influences of the courses natural attributes with those applied by the architect, and subsequently by the course superintendent.  Sometimes, the original land is a 'sow's ear' - its pretty hard to make a silk purse from one of them.

Looking forward to seeing 'canyons' and 'barrancas', and whether areas near Adelaide have similar features (given similar climate issues).  And some other GCA'ers.

James B

[Jeff Doerr]

Aidan,

You make me want to play every course you take a picture of!

Cheers, Jeff

[Forrest Richardson]

From what I have seen of Lost Canyons, it is an amazine engineering effort — and, as the image shows, a striking course. While most here will applaud Bel-Air, I really see no difference in terms of the designers' efforts with respect to fighting the land. Both were up-hill battles (pardon the pun), yet they produced golf courses that are enjoyed by many and continue — both of them — to be respected.

(P.S.  — I believe in my research about Bel-Air, it was apparent that many [back then] did not feel the course should have been built in the canyons. I cannot recall the source, but maybe Lynn S. has some history on the feelings surrounding the hills above LA being turned into a golf course when Bel-Air was conceived.)

[Matt_Ward]

Ed:

For what it's worth -- play Sky -- skip Shadow IMHO.

[Aidan Bradley]

Jeff,

Thanks for the words of encouragement. #18 below, a windy day.

[Bryan Izatt]

Ed,

Are we to understand that your definitive opinion is based on a drive by in your car and viewing from the clubhouse??

I haven't played the Shadow, but I thought the Sky was interesting and dramatic.  Some scenic drop shots off some of the par 5 tees.  Some areas are flat and some run along ridges or the side of the hills.  There is at least one fortress green.  The 17th is a visually spectacular par 3, and tough to boot.  (If it had an ocean instead of a canyon to the left it might look like CPC #16.

My one issue with it wasn't the topography, it was the wind.  Don't know if it's always like that, but it was a wicked 3 club wind on a perfectly clear day when I was there.  Seems Aidan caught it in similar conditions.

The price may be higher than RC, but isn't that true of anywhere in greater LA?

I think it's worth visiting if you're at all interested in how to build courses in hilly difficult terrain.

And, the scenery's not bad either.

[ed_getka]

Bryan,
  Of course it is not my definitive opinion. I haven't played the course. I don't need to see every course in the world and of the many that I do want to see Lost Canyons is not on the list. I have never read one thing here that makes me want to play either of those courses. I am more than happy to take James there so he can see what was built on a difficult property. I have seen what Tom Doak and Mike DeVries have done at Stone Eagle and Greywalls to know what is possible on very severe properties. Both courses are excellent. Now if someone comes on here and tells me that a course at Lost Canyons is better than either of those two examples then I will be happy to take a look.

[Michael Robin]

Bravo Aidan!

[rjsimper]

I cannot smack Mr. Robin too hard given that I've not played the courses (just walked around some, borrowed a cart once) but I give him a hard time because out of the perhaps 50 people I've spoken with who've played both courses, he is one of maybe 3 total who prefer the Shadow to the Sky.

So let's just call it a tap

(The Tri-tip sandwich in the clubhouse is EXCELLENT)

[Jeff Doerr]

Aidan,

Great stuff - how'd you get those perfect waves in the bunker?  

[Aidan Bradley]

Jeff,

As the Californians would say........it was the wind dude, extreme,rad, like totally cool man.

Or as we would say in Ireland, the fu--k-n wind was blow'n.

[Tim Leahy]

You might want to play the Shadow this time because it may not be here long. I understand that they have sold the land for the Shadow course to condo developers and it will be plowed under soon. I have played both courses and found the Shadow more playable although both courses are challenging and almost unplayable in the wind.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I don't mean to belabor the point.  I agree that the Sky is the more striking of the two courses and dramatic.  It is also fun to hit a downhill tee shot.  Nonetheless, the down hill tee shots at sky are more like hitting off a "sky"scraper than off an elevated tee.  They are fun but....

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

Our intrepid world-travler James Bennett is coming into town soon on his way to Scotland. After Rustic Canyon in the morning,we may go over to take a look at Lost Canyons in the afternoon (so James can see what kind of land shouldn't be used for a golf course) Which one is the preferred course by the GCA cognoscenti?
   I can't imagine any rational person leaving Rustic to go see Lost Canyons, but stranger things have happened.

Anyone interested in getting together for dinner Monday night on the Rustic side of LA?
 

Ed,

I played Rustic last week for the first time (loved it), and inquired about playing Lost Canyons, and time and again the guys I played with said to check out Moorpark CC (a Peter Jacobsen design).  That seems to be close by to RC... love to hear what others say about it.

[Joe Perches]

check out Moorpark CC (a Peter Jacobsen design)... love to hear what others say about it.

http://www.moorparkgolf.com/home2.html

It's not my favorite golf course.  Moorpark is generally very well conditioned.  There are 3 nines.  I have not played the newest 9.  There was quite a lot of earth movement done, with many elevated tees.  it's a difficult walk, there are repetitive dropshot par 3s, one of the par 5's is just silly.  There's a short dropshot par 4 that plays like a 220 par 3.  The green surrounds can be poorly shaped.

A good resource is Greenskeerer.org.  Here is their review:
http://www.greenskeeper.org/southern_california/golf_courses/details.cfm/ventura_and_santa_barbara/Moorpark_Country_Club

Ryan Simper has played Moorpark recently.  Perhaps he'll say something about the course.  Here's an excerpt comment from greenskeeper on Sunday, March 11, 2007:

* Have to mention an amazing run of holes rsimper had. He hits hole 9 Canyon Crest in 2 and taps in for birdie, next hole on 1 Ridgeline, he just misses birdie and settles for par, next hole he drains a 45 foot putt for birdie, and for an encore, he just misses the green left on the par 5 hole number 3 with is second shot, calmly hits a pump-and-run from just off the green, over 100 ft from the hole, into the cup the for eagle! 4 under in four holes and he could have been -6 for the stretch! Now remember, we’re battling, no joke, 30mph winds. Rsimper has got some serious game.

[Michael Robin]

Hey Joe, did Ryan pay you to post that?

[rjsimper]

Hah! I guess fame (infamy?) comes when you least expect it.  Despite the vitriolic and offensive rumors that Mike...ahem...Mr. Robin has been spreading around, Joe is not on the Ryan Simper payroll for that one.  Heck, I didn't even know John had posted that on greenskeeper...it was a hell of a 4 hole stretch, though  

You know what? I liked Moorpark.  I'm not sure that I'd ever advise anyone to play it over Rustic, but in comparison to Lost Canyons I'd have to imagine thats a person-by-person call.

I played one of the older nines (now called Ridgeline) and the new 9 (Canyon Crest).  The Canyon Crest definitely appeared to be the newer nine...crafted in response to the criticisms of the early layouts which took a lot of flak for their severe target nature.  There was more width than the other nine without a doubt.  The course is very pretty with tons of dramatic views and occupies some fairly severe property.

As Joe noted, the course is all but an impossible walk.  Holes backtrack over a hundred yards in many cases from green to tee.  There are some excellent holes and some very goofy holes, including the par 5 Joe mentions which I assume must be the 5th hole on the Ridgeline, a 650 yard downhill job that nobody realizes you can't play a booming tee shot down the right side and cut the apparent corner (of which there is none).  Downhill may be an understatement.  Potentially the only rival in the area this hole has is the 18th at the Shadow course at Lost Canyons.

The conditions were a bit more shaggy than most expect from Moorpark - they're just getting ready for aeration so that should solve some of the issues.





 

[ed_getka]

Wayne,
   Glad to hear you are getting out for some golf again. Rustic is certainly a fun place to play. It has been too many months since I've been there so I am really looking forward to Monday with James Bennett.
   I haven't been to Moorpark yet. The feedback I've heard doesn't make it a compelling visit. I'm much more interested in seeing the Armand Hammer course Tommy and the guys go to periodically, Soule Park (sp?) that Gil Hanse reworked, Ojai, and Forrest Richardson's work at Olivas Links.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()