[Greg Krueger]

Thoughts on SCC? Is it typical Nicklaus? They don't seem to be tearing it up, except for the man! Seems kind of soft, why
are they not scoring lower?

[Matt_Cohn]

First of all, I think they're shooting pretty low scores. Remember, it's only a 16-man field; and through 41 holes, you've got -15, -12, and -9. Almost a quarter of the field is -9 or better on the front nine of the third round - that seems like low scoring to me!

I think it's a fun enough course to watch once a year, because there are definitely some opportunities for major swings - not just birdie/bogey, but eagle/double or par/triple or whatever else.

Architecturally I'd say there's an interesting mix of holes - short, long(er), easy, hard(er). It might be a better test for those guys at 7,300. There don't seem to be any truly long holes. In particular the "long" par-4 #14, at 446 or something like that, is a driver and a very short iron or wedge.

[Bill Brightly]

What do you think about a rock collection/flower bed in the middle if the 7th fairway at 280 off the tee?

[Steve Lapper]

Having been in there a few times, I hate it!!! (Now that also answers Matt Ward's thread on the conflict of personal experience with objective criticism..ha!)

This absurd external and protruding centerline hazard serves only the purpose to ask for the tee shot to find one side of it or another. Unlike a bunker it offers the further hazard of occasionally forcing a drop (even more stupid. IMO).

In general, I like Sherwood and think it one of JN's better efforts on a  canyon floor property, but #7 (often playing as #16 for members) would be a far greater hole with the damn rock garden grassed over and humped (something akin to #8 at Quaker Ridge).

[Bill Brightly]

I just watched Tiger bomb his drive past the rocks, and Furyk 2 inches short. Jut seems silly to me.

[Matt_Cohn]

What if it were a bunker?

[Steve Lapper]

What if it were a bunker?

Would be much better IMHO!!!

[George Pazin]

Honest question: Is every tee elevated?

[Steve Lapper]

Most of them.
There some severe canyon undulations on that terrain.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

It's by far the best Nicklaus I've ever played.

Is it a great golf course? Hmmmmmmm??? Well, that would be tough to really come up with enough reasons to put it up against some of the better courses in the land. There are some really good holes. The times I've played there, I've only played it back nine first like the tournament play. I think it works as a golf course better that way. There is some slight repetition at 9 & 18. You could really lose yourself at those holes, but the degree of movment there is pretty neat.

It's a neat place. A beautiful area of Southern California. If you drove about another mile or two past the club, you would be saying to yourself, WHY COULDN'T THEY BUILD SOMETHING OUT HERE? I think the land is that much better. (for golf)

The tournament 15th hole might be the most ridiculous hole out there. Not just because of the lovely water extravaganza, but more, expecting a Higher-mid to high-handicapper to hold a green so shallow. Even fr a low handicapper, it's a pretty daunting task. It's just TOO penal.

As far as #7 and it's rock formation. Well, it's strategic. I'll give em' that much. I found the hole to be pretty decent to play and the green is something you really have to have some knowledge about when hitting to it. It's sort of penal too--to some extent.

Remember when Duval hit behind this thing in one of those Tiger vs. Duval shootouts? Or was it a Shark Shootout?

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

Tommy:

Does every par-3 guarded in front allowing only an aerial approach?

Anthony

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tony,
Pretty much everyone of them. 17 is sort of a short, uphill little number, and it isn't as punishing.

[Matt_Cohn]

The tournament 15th hole might be the most ridiculous hole out there.... expecting a Higher-mid to high-handicapper to hold a green so shallow. Even fr a low handicapper, it's a pretty daunting task. It's just TOO penal.

Tommy,

How is that any different from #12 at Augusta?

Sherwood #15 is 180 from the blacks, 170 from the blues, and 150 from the whites, significantly downhill.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
Seems like it was pretty tough on Furick, no?

For a very good player, this hole is no problem. Of the times I've been fortunate to play Sherwood, and I've played there with some decent players--each time, it has been one of the more difficult holes on the course for at least two of us.

I'll word it again: ....but more, expecting a Higher-mid to high-handicapper to hold a green so shallow. Even fr a low handicapper, it's a pretty daunting task. It's just TOO penal.

It's an intimidating golf hole because there is no relief or safety which to hit to. There is nothing wrong with this once or twice during the round. But at Sherwood, there seems to be a more penal nature to many if not most of the golf holes. This isn't a negative unless you play there regularly, every week. For me, I would rather keep on driving past towards Rustic and go keep on trying to figure out how to beat #6, 11, 14, 15, 16 & 17. There are so many different ways which to try.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
One other thing: I think the name of the title sponsor is a perfect explanation for the course.

[Tommy Williamsen]

My wife and I played Sherwood a few years ago and just really enjoyed the round.  The rock outcropping is a little goofy but not too much more than the one that used to be on number 8 at Quaker Ridge.  The par threes are strond\g and the par fives are week.  The par fours are varie but do not have any really long ones.  I am not surprised that the scores are low.  

Now the locker rooms all world.

[Matt_Cohn]

Tommy,

"tough on (big-name pro)"

"one of the more difficult holes on the course"

"...to hold a green so shallow. Even for a low handicapper, it's a pretty daunting task."

"intimidating...no relief or safety. There is nothing wrong with this once or twice during the round."

Sounds like #12 at Augusta to me! So your opinion is that there are just too many intimidating and penal holes during the round, and #15 at Sherwood puts it over the top. Right?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
I'm saying it's tough for an average member who plays there more then the five or six rounds* a pro does during the year--IF--he gets invited to the toonamint.

(*including practice round and pro am)

Let me ask you this: What do you normally hit at Sherwood #15? I know of people that swear by a rescue wood there, and it's still a tough hole for them. They are intimidated. Maybe that person will comment. (Come on GB!)

For a player of your caliber I'm going to guess and say your hitting normally a 6 or 7 iron tops. Depending on the wind, in that corner of the property, the wind can sometimes play havoc holding up shots. Especially if a Santa Ana condition exists in the winter. It's brutal out there.

I'm going to take a guess and say that Tiger & Co. were probably hitting anything from 7 or 8 irons, depending on the pin and the wind. If you noticed during todays toonamint, Tig's cleared to the left side of the pin, but there was a collective gasp there for a second by Maltby & Hicks. For that pin, which I think is probably close to the most difficult on that particular green, they were reduced to shooting darts. Great players have no problem putting spin on a golf ball. They can hold greens at that height and that length much easier then say a 5 or 6 or more index.

Also, the shot is much more downhill then Augusta #12. Part of the thrill of Augusta #12--at least what I think looks to be part of the thrill--is that you know the lake is there. You know the front bunker is there, and the green is easy to hit on the fly. But if you hit too far, then your faced with an extraordinarily difficult shot that risks rolling into the pond. Yes, the same can be said of Sherwood--to some extent, but it isn't exact, and it isn't what I would call reminiscent.

If that is what Nicklaus and Co. were trying to accomplish down there in Thousand Oaks--to try and recreate Augusta #12, well, I think they missed. It's just not that interesting of a golf hole, probably marred more by it's dumb blond characteristics; mind you, bitchy dumb blond characteristics.

Don't get me wrong, I like Sherwood. It's a great place to play. But personally, architecturally, it does have some characteristics that seem to present themselves over and over and over during the day. (Just as Tony pointed out.)

[David_Madison]

What if the #7 rock formation was instead a stream that went all the way across the fairway, forcing a lay-up 280 yards or less off the tee? It's still doesn't seem like that would leave too long a shot into the green. Would anyone complain then? You still have that option with the flower/rock outcropping as well as the choice to try to go left or right. And aren't having more options a positive hole trait?

[Kalen Braley]

Tommy,

On Sunday both Tiger and Furyk hit a 6 iron to that front pin location.  Tiger just barely made it to the green and Furyk was way short, (in fairness I think he did hit it a little chunky)

But I think this confirms how long that hole really plays.  If its a decent downhill shot and Tiger is hitting a 6 iron to a front pin, thats gotta be at least 200 yards from that back tee.

[Matt_Ward]

Gents:

I have played Sherwood twice and while the scenery -- both internal and external is impressive -- the overall detailing of architectural quality didn't really make me say wow.

I have had the pleasure in playing a good sampling of what Nicklaus has done and frankly Sherwood -- minus the considerable wherewithal of its members (the lockeroom is beyond what words can add), its tony location and the continued beneficial exposure via the former Shark Shootout and now the Tiger World Challenge is a good example of a course that is somewhere in the middle of pack of courses that I have played courtesy of the Great Man.

There's a few holes of note but none that would make me hop on a flight and rush out to play -- although I am partial to the closing hole -- much tighter than TV indicates.

I remember quite well when Sherwood was rated by Digest as a top 100 layout. Much of that was tied to the opening hype because Jack has done far better since then.

[Lynn_Shackelford]

I thought Doak summed it best on Sherwood.
Typical client/designer overkill.

I haven't have the opportunity like Tommy to gain access except once.  But I watched the Shark Shootout for years.  I have seen have the players play it for more than 15 years.

Today it has, like most courses, become too short for the Tour players.
As for the rock (s) in the fairway, it was accidentally dropped there during construction and the foreman lobbied hard to leave it there.  I am not into vertical hazards, thus a big pot bunker there would be preferable IMHO.
If you like the course you probably don't have much in common with Mr. Morrisett on what a golf experience should be.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()