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.

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2010, 11:29:14 AM »
Chuck, I pulled this up because I did a search for Whittaker Woods, which a  buddy played recently and said it was memorable for it's quality, or lack thereof.

But, I think of golf in regions, not state lines. If it's doable in a day trip, it's in the same region.
Logged
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2010, 12:12:31 PM »
Yes,

Lost Dunes is a CDGA posting course, although I wouldn't put any Michigan courses in the Metro Chicago area although they're certainly as close to most of us as Sugar Grove is...And yes Knollwood and Bob-o-Link should be included, as well as Butterfield....Merit Club, unfortunately, should not....
« Last Edit: September 16, 2010, 12:27:33 PM by Jud Tigerman »
Logged
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2010, 01:43:37 PM »
Pat:

I didn't see Chicago Highlands in your analysis, but the back tees are 7463, with a rating of 76.3 and a slope of 141.

Cheers!
Logged
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #28 on: September 16, 2010, 01:50:25 PM »
Quote from: Jud Tigerman on September 16, 2010, 12:12:31 PM
Yes,

Lost Dunes is a CDGA posting course, although I wouldn't put any Michigan courses in the Metro Chicago area although they're certainly as close to most of us as Sugar Grove is...And yes Knollwood and Bob-o-Link should be included, as well as Butterfield....Merit Club, unfortunately, should not....

Butterfield is quite good as it was renovated by Steve Smyers
Logged
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #29 on: September 16, 2010, 03:26:37 PM »
Quote from: Paul Thomas on September 16, 2010, 01:50:25 PM


Butterfield is quite good as it was renovated by Steve Smyers

I've repeatedly heard quite the opposite.
Logged

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2010, 03:50:08 PM »
Quote from: Ryan Potts on September 16, 2010, 03:26:37 PM
Quote from: Paul Thomas on September 16, 2010, 01:50:25 PM


Butterfield is quite good as it was renovated by Steve Smyers

I've repeatedly heard quite the opposite.

Ryan,

Interesting.  Haven't been out there since the reno.  I know they were dealing with a bunch of drainage issues and lost some members over the assessment.  Were the comments you heard specifically related to the renovation?
« Last Edit: September 16, 2010, 03:52:03 PM by Jud Tigerman »
Logged
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2010, 05:34:42 PM »
Yes, the people I've spoken to have really really disliked the re-do....which is surprising to me as I usually like Smyers work.  I can't opine on it yet as I haven't played it.  I look forward to playing it soon.

Logged

Mark Smolens

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2010, 06:35:34 PM »
From what I've heard, the bunkers are deep and difficult to get out of, and many of the senior golfers at the Club hate them. The creek has been widened and deepened in places (the course got a grant from DuPage County to help pay for the renovation as they improved the drainage and water retention capabilities) and it comes into play a lot more. I have not played it, but drove around with the pro on Memorial Day weekend, and it looks incredible. As I recall Paul Thomas has been around and liked it. . .
Logged

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #33 on: September 17, 2010, 09:59:02 AM »
Quote from: Paul Richards on September 16, 2010, 01:43:37 PM
Pat:

I didn't see Chicago Highlands in your analysis, but the back tees are 7463, with a rating of 76.3 and a slope of 141.

Cheers!

Paul:

I posted this in 2008, if I redid the spreadsheet it looks like CH would be high up on each list!
Logged
H.P.S.

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #34 on: September 17, 2010, 10:28:12 AM »
Quote from: Pat_Craig on September 17, 2010, 09:59:02 AM


I posted this in 2008, if I redid the spreadsheet it looks like CH would be high up on each list!

Of course it would be high-up on each list.  It has the greatest greens ever constructed and/or maintained.   ;D
Logged

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #35 on: September 17, 2010, 10:43:41 AM »
Quote from: Shivas on September 17, 2010, 10:26:24 AM
Quote from: Mark Smolens on September 16, 2010, 06:35:34 PM
From what I've heard, the bunkers are deep and difficult to get out of, and many of the senior golfers at the Club hate them.

My sister belongs there and what I've been told, it's not just the seniors.  Naturally, most of the women are having real problems with them, too.  All in all, though, they like it.   

Most of these re-do's take time for the members to get used to them.  Even if Smyers air-lifted Pine Valley and dropped it right at 31st and Midwest, there'd still be whining initially.  The question is whether there will still be whining in a year or two.

was the prior Butterfield any good?  I was told that one of the nines was really mediocre and that now all three nines are of a higher and equal quality
Logged
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #36 on: September 17, 2010, 10:52:17 AM »
I liked all three nines.  I thought they could have hammered a few trees but it was a wonderful old golf-course....that time really hadn't passed by.  The nine on the northwest side of the proeprty (red?) did have some water issues and I'm told that is solved.

Like I said, I haven't played it and I look foward to doing so.  I'm just surprised at the reation as I was expecting a positive uproar like we heard when the South course at Olympia opened.

[It would be interesting to see why one was so immediately successful and why the other was not so much].
Logged

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Chicago Golf Course Analysis
« Reply #37 on: September 17, 2010, 11:49:26 AM »
Cornish and Whitten list Butterfield as a Langford/Moreau original, with renovation work by (three guesses, first 10 don't count)......

Packard, and Killian&Nugent.

I thought I read somewhere (here?) that the Buttfield reno was an attempt to recapture some of the original style of L&M, and deeper and wider bunkers would be part of that.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up