Rating the So Cal publics

[Jon Spaulding]

I liked the Goose; a decent number of strategic holes, well conditioned, fair price, stock S&C bunkering, which is a bit melodramatic but certainly serve as aesthetic hazards.

The only thing its missing is Duvall jumping out of the chopper and saying "I love the smell of dairy in the morning"

[rjsimper]

Goose Creek - a solid but easy layout.  And, the 18th hole is horrible.  It's definitely worth playing and with a generally flat piece of land (and as Jon pointed out, smelly) S&C did well for themselves.  1 and 10 are very similar holes also.  I've played it 3-4 times.

Matt,

I have not played Sandpiper, nor have I played Pelican Hill post-redo (and the first time I played it was LONG ago) nor Ike post re-do, only the babe a few times.

Lost Canyons Sky - given the land, it's not half bad.  I wouldn't rave about it and think a place like Rancho Park or Griifith Park is better, but there are some truly excellent holes.  Having only played it once, I can't get into detail about much but from what I recall, there are some very good things and the very bad things are understandable (though not necessarily forgiven) due to the nature of the site.  The 17th hole is a tremendous par 3, even aside from the view.

Trump -

Well, this is not a great golf course.  However, I'm on record as saying it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.  It's treated like it's the single worst golf course in the world, when in fact it may just be the single worst value in the world (green fees jumped to I think 395 on weekends now?)

The 18th hole I think is actually quite good, and having seen the before and after I think Trump did quite a bit to improve the place.  Again, some absolutely offensive holes there - the par 5 on the back that goes uphill and crosses 1 or 2 native areas - extreme southwest corner of the property running south to North, and of course the fact that all holes run generally N-S is a weakness.  My guess is if it were set in the mountains instead of on the ocean, it'd be like Lost Canyons Shadow (which I've only driven around but not played)....expensive, some people will play it and like that kind of thing, but it's just not for me.

I have always admitted that I am an ocean whore, but I don't really take that into account when judging the architecture of a course, only my desire to play it....and yes, I'd rather play at Trump than Lost Canyons Shadow (i suspect...) if given the choice all things equal because of the setting.

Not that it matters to the course, but I give Trump a lot of credit for taking a few housing lots and turning them into a world class driving range.  For all the bad that is said about the man, those are million-dollar lots...you can actually see what they did (unless it's been updated) by going to google earth and looking at the map-view and then changing to satellite or hybrid view.  The range is wonderful (though sometimes in use of mats)





Regarding Rancho Park, I think it's a solid public course....I ranked it in what, my top 12?  There are some very cool holes out there, and I think the course really stands out on the back nine.  Is it worth a 2 hour waitlist and a 6 hour round?  Maybe once every couple of years...but I think the LA area is full of unspectacular but very solid munis (Griffith Park, Rancho Park, Los Verdes, Rec. Park in LB) - nothing like a Bethpage or Harding Park, but if not for the impossibility of playing them all, I'd have spent more time on each (though I probably have played Los Verdes 30 times)

[John Kavanaugh]

I have not seen Santa Anita mentioned yet.  I found it to be a far better value than either Rustic or Barona, but then again I find Koreans delightful.

[Jon Spaulding]

Santa Anita will be in my top 10 when I get around to making the list.....

[rjsimper]

I have not seen Santa Anita mentioned yet.  I found it to be a far better value than either Rustic or Barona, but then again I find Koreans delightful.

By corollary, would you therefore find me half-delightful?

Santa Anita I have not played in probably 10 years....but I recall at the time thinking it was pretty enjoyable...then again, at the time I also thought waterfalls were neat.

[Matt_Ward]

Ryan:

Quick response ...

If / when you play Sandpiper you will find a course that demonstrates that ocean views don't mean squat when it comes to outstanding architecture. Ditto Torrey South. Sandpiper does have one excellent hole and I'd include it among my all-18 public SoCal listing -- the short 10th is simply dynamite. Plenty of options and it doesn't need an ocean to bolster it.

If La Purisima had Sandpiper's location the net result would be even more love from those who liked it previously and probably less negative -- even from you.

The ocean effect has a way in adding points to the botton line on any course.

In regards to Sky at LC - I like the course a good bit although I'll be the first to admit it doesn't help to have such a severe site -- especially on the back nine. The real weaknesses for me were the 1st and 10th holes -- both are rather similar and not very compelling.

You mentioned the 17th and I do like it too. Frankly, the uphill 16th is one very demanding hole and stated length can and will fool many players.

The downhill 12th is also a solid par-5 because of the risks of the narrowing driving slot the further you go down the slope.

I know there was plenty of discussion previously on GCA regarding the severity of the land for the closing hole given the constraints of how the course was ultimately routed. Still, a cool drive to make from the elevated tee -- you just have to decide what club works best. The putting surface is also well done given its overall lack of size and slope.

I have not played Trump's new creation yet -- but given the so-so reviews I have seen from a number of people I have to question if it's simply an 18-hole layout with a spectacular view and nothing more.

[John Kavanaugh]

Ryan,

Santa Anita is bare bones great architecture that may be missed by the casual observer.  I would guess that you would love the course more now than even back then...Of course this is based on my own poker loving engineering mind.  I would say half a delight about hits it...now if you had attached an umbrella to your push cart it would have been WFO delightful.

[David Ober]

Goose Creek - a solid but easy layout.  And, the 18th hole is horrible.  It's definitely worth playing and with a generally flat piece of land (and as Jon pointed out, smelly) S&C did well for themselves.  1 and 10 are very similar holes also.  I've played it 3-4 times.

What don't you like about the 18th at Goose Creek?

[David Stamm]

If / when you play Sandpiper you will find a course that demonstrates that ocean views don't mean squat when it comes to outstanding architecture. Ditto Torrey South. Sandpiper does have one excellent hole and I'd include it among my all-18 public SoCal listing -- the short 10th is simply dynamite. Plenty of options and it doesn't need an ocean to bolster it.

 

Matt, I would agree about the 10th. Outstanding hole.






I would say there is at least a couple of more holes that are noteworthy. I thought 2 was a very solid par 4.

[Matt_Ward]

David:

With all due respect to your photo ability -- seeing the hole in person is even better !

I like the daring aspect of the tee shot -- the player needs to decide how aggressive / conservative to play. The approach is also no automatic because the green isn't really that big. You also have the daily fluctuations of the wind.

Strong players can help their cause with a line of play that cuts the corner but the shaping of the shot must fit the ground conditions that are given.

Yes, I like the 2nd hole at Sandpiper but the 10th from a comprehensive design thrust -- both on-course elements in tandem with the ocean view makes for a thrilling hole.

One final thing -- when the pin is cut in the far left it takes a deft touch to get your approach all the way to that location.

If memory serves the hole is roughly 380 yards and it serves the point that quality par-4's in the area of 375-400 yards can be delivered.

[Tim Leahy]

I second the 2nd at Sandpiper as a great hole, also 11, 12, 13, 14, and 17.

[rjsimper]

Goose Creek - a solid but easy layout.  And, the 18th hole is horrible.  It's definitely worth playing and with a generally flat piece of land (and as Jon pointed out, smelly) S&C did well for themselves.  1 and 10 are very similar holes also.  I've played it 3-4 times.

What don't you like about the 18th at Goose Creek?

Most of all I think it's entirely out of character with the rest of the course.  That hole screams of "Palm Springs Ted Robinson retirement course"  Kind of makes me think of the 18th at Royal New Kent. 

The other thing I think is that the fairway isn't quite properly oriented for the hole - it sets you up for a left to right shot but in actuality this isn't the ideal play, as the hole is much longer than it appears and the landing area for which a L to R drive would be useful is more like 275+ (if i recall correctly). 

If the shot is going to be a clear left to right fairway, I think that it should offer some sort of incentive to playing the properly shaped shot...I haven't played there in maybe 2 years, but I recall that a 270 yard draw up the left side will still find the fairway, as opposed to a hole like 18 at Sawgrass where a fade runs through the fairway.

If the water must be there for reservoir purposes, Id maybe even shorten the hole and give some sort of incentive for either biting off some of it, or playing a fade.

[R_Paulis]

Sandpiper's #13 was the subject of much debate when we used to play it in the early 90's. The par 5 hole has a fairway running along the ocean cliff side. The primary green is elevated, juts out towards the ocean, and the approach requires a carry over a small canyon.

My regular golfing buddy felt it was a weak par 5 since he couldn't go for the green in two due to the carry. Sandpiper was my home course but I have not played it in a decade, so I was wondering if today's technology has reduced the hole to more of an eagle opportunity, albeit a risky one.

I really enjoyed the hole but given the feedback on La Purisima #15, I refuse to endorse it until the community has spoken.    

[Greg Clark]

Matt,

I would be intetsted in seeing your rating of the best 10 -20 SoCal publics.  If I missed it I apologize. 

[David Stamm]

Sandpiper's #13 was the subject of much debate when we used to play it in the early 90's. The par 5 hole has a fairway running along the ocean cliff side. The primary green is elevated, juts out towards the ocean, and the approach requires a carry over a small canyon.

My regular golfing buddy felt it was a weak par 5 since he couldn't go for the green in two due to the carry. Sandpiper was my home course but I have not played it in a decade, so I was wondering if today's technology has reduced the hole to more of an eagle opportunity, albeit a risky one.

I really enjoyed the hole but given the feedback on La Purisima #15, I refuse to endorse it until the community has spoken.    

IMHO, the right green works much better than the left.

[R_Paulis]

Sandpiper's #13 was the subject of much debate when we used to play it in the early 90's. The par 5 hole has a fairway running along the ocean cliff side. The primary green is elevated, juts out towards the ocean, and the approach requires a carry over a small canyon.

My regular golfing buddy felt it was a weak par 5 since he couldn't go for the green in two due to the carry. Sandpiper was my home course but I have not played it in a decade, so I was wondering if today's technology has reduced the hole to more of an eagle opportunity, albeit a risky one.

I really enjoyed the hole but given the feedback on La Purisima #15, I refuse to endorse it until the community has spoken.    

IMHO, the right green works much better than the left.

I always assumed the right green was primary. I don't recall exactly when, but I believe the left was added as an alternative. I never quite understood why it was added and it detracts somewhat from the visual of the hole in my opinion. On very rare occasions (fierce wind, or very poor second shot) I would aim left even with a right green pin placement since there was a bit more safety in coming up short or going long on the left and I would land on the secondary (left) green.

Was the left green put in place to give the right green some recovery time, or was there a concern that the right was in danger of "slipping" away?

[Joe Perches]

I always assumed the right green was primary. I don't recall exactly when, but I believe the left was added as an alternative

My recollection is the reverse.

[Brian Noser]

http://www.greenskeeper.org/southern_california/los_angeles/Santa_Anita_Golf_Course/index.cfm

Ahhh Santa Anita... I played there once and really enjoyed it. The ponys across the street are a good time as well, beautiful place.There are a lot of cool features that you don't see on normal courses that are 25-35 bucks to play. It is a very good change of pace from the normal California golf. I particularly like the Fairway of 18 there is a good pic of that on there. Also some other pics on the site above that are not very good and the Review is Awful  ...

[John Kavanaugh]

http://www.greenskeeper.org/southern_california/los_angeles/Santa_Anita_Golf_Course/index.cfm

Ahhh Santa Anita... I played there once and really enjoyed it. The ponys across the street are a good time as well, beautiful place.There are a lot of cool features that you don't see on normal courses that are 25-35 bucks to play. It is a very good change of pace from the normal California golf. I particularly like the Fairway of 18 there is a good pic of that on there. Also some other pics on the site above that are not very good and the Review is Awful  ...

Brian,

Thanks for the link...Did I miss an inside joke when you say the review is awful?  I was amazed at the consistently positive reviews.

[Tom Huckaby]

JK:  a frequent GCA contributor wrote a lot of of the reviews on that site.  Thus the inside joke.  He can ID himself if he wishes.

 

[Brad Tufts]

I'm rarely inside the inside joke...so here's my comment:

"When are we going to see a gk.org in Raleigh?"

I've also voiced my thought that gk.org would be great in northern cities.  The site's focus on conditioning/aeration alerts would be great for seasonal opening/closing dates in the North, as well as aerations that most courses do two times per summer. 

I also have a view that golfers in winter cities are more rabid for the game during the season as a result of the abbreviated golf year.  This could help a gk.org become popular in these new cities very quickly.  Golfers in CA, AZ, NV can generally set their own offseason, or take none at all. 

[Brian Noser]

I wrote the one on that course and took the pictures that is why it is so bad... Mr simper also wrote quite a bit more for the site and much better as well. I have voiced this already as well Brad,I want it to come to the Lou also.  It was and is a great site for conditions and updates. Hopefully the site comes across the country there are many areas/cities that would benefit from this type of site...

[Forrest Richardson]

Enjoyable thread. (Does Matt W. really think we will trust his West Coast judgement...?    )

La Purisima is a favorite. I was only there once, but recall fondly Bob Graves and the pride he took in showing the course to his friends.

Thanks for the few mentions of Olivas Links. I have made it known that this course is getting too little attention from raters and the media. Frankly, it is difficult for a small municipality to orchestrate the massive public relations that can be afforded by Ojai or others. At $35-40 it pays the bills and allows the public golfer to have a solid course to play...but not much is left over to hold events or underwrite much more than a grand opening BBQ.)

Fortunately it has been getting mentions and play — and little by little it is being visited by the usual cast of characters (writers, course evaluators, etc.). BUT...it is still off the beaten path of those who need to catapult it forward even more.