Hello and Shadow Creek pics...

[Tony Gorski]

Hello to all...

I've been reading GCA for the last few years and thanks to Ran for making me a recent member.  I've been fortunate to play great courses over the years and, as most of you, love the study of golf course architecture.  I hope to add some good color to many of the posts, and I also hope to learn from the experts out there.  I'll post some basic info about myself on the "Who Are You Guys" thread.

I thought this group may be interested to see Shadow Creek up close...

Built by Steve Wynn in 1989, the Tom Fazio design in Las Vegas is somewhere between Fantasy Island and Jurassic Park.  I was constantly reminded of Richard Attenborough’s character in Jurassic Park when the theme park creator often said “we spared no expense”.

Immediately after the limo driver successfully managed the Fort Knox security gate, it was as if we entered Utopia…pheasants were feeding, swans were swimming, exotic birds everywhere…instant tranquility and paradise.  Amazing what Vegas money can do.

It is a typical Fazio-esque "beautification" approach to architecture, but I'm not sure how much of that was Fazio and how much was mandated by the owner. 

The course has some great hole layouts.  As most of you know, they are shutting it down this year to redo the green complexes.  As you'll see, some of the current complexes are adequate but plain...a bit of irony given the context of Shadow Creek.

I'm posting pics of most of the holes to give you a feel for the routing and layout as they progress. 

Hole #1 - par 4, 404 yards
The course starts off with a straightforward par 4



Hole #1 green
After a good drive, it's a wedge into this green.



Hole #2 - par 4, 401 yards
The fairway opens up past the trees.



Hole #3 - par 4, 443 yards
One of the better holes, a good tee shot leaves 7-9 iron from here.



Hole #4 - par 5, 553 yards
Dogleg left, reachable par 5.



Hole #6 - par 4, 476 yards
Straightforward approach shot on this long par 4.



Hole #7 - par 5, 567 yards
Another reachable par 5 that lets you run it up to the hole.



Hole #8 - par 3, 181 yards
A Fazio par 3.  One of the better green complexes on the course.  Actually, the par 3's are touted as some of the best holes on the course.  Curious to hear your thoughts...



Hole #9 - par 4, 409 yards
The line is the bunker on the right.



Hole #10 - par 4, 426 yards
A solid par 4 to start the back nine.



Hole #11 - par 4, 327 yards
The only short par 4 on the course.  A go at the green likely leaves you in the front bunkers, with a fairly easy recovery shot and a chance for birdie.



Hole #12 - par 4, 395 yards
A good drive leaves only a wedge into a very accepting green.



Hole #13 - par 3, 232 yards
A long par 3 with trouble everywhere but left.



Hole #14 - par 4, 473 yards
A difficult dogleg right long par 4 with a challenging approach shot.  Wynn built his home (one of only two on the course) just to the right of this hole.  The "spared no expense" phrase again comes to mind as you see pieces of it on your approach shot.



Hole #15 - par 4, 438 yards
Another difficult par 4 with right-to-left sloping fairway and a creek that runs in front of the green.



Hole #16 - par 5, 617 yards
A long par 5 with undulating fairway that makes the 2nd/3rd shots interesting.



Hole #17 - par 3, 164 yards
The last of the Fazio par 3s, and probably the most photographed.  Island green with a waterfall running in the background.  A little too much for my taste, but an interesting tee shot to a postage stamp green.  And remember, this was desert flatland. 



Hole #18 - par 5, 527 yards
A very solid par 5 to finish the round.




In the end, if you can get past the artificial nature of it all, the sensory overload (e.g. #8 and #17), and the rather bland green complexes (which will be improved this year) on many of the par 4's and 5's, there are some solid hole layouts out there.  And when you're walking the course, you do stop more than once to take it all in as you can't deny the natural beauty of this unnatural landscape.

I'm curious to hear thoughts...

[John_Conley]

What time of year where those photos taken?  The browned rough helps define the fairway route.  Looks great. 

Courses always look tighter to me in pictures, so I'll assume it is actually golfable.  Looks unplayable to me!

As for the par 3s...they look busy.  That was my first thought and then your final comment is about sensory overload.

[Jeff_Brauer]

John,

Yeah, my one design comment on the course was that with the thousands of imported trees, all the holes came out with similar width corridors. I think a few wider ones would have made the course even better.

Tony,

The 11th and 12th were designed for visual illusion. The bunker size on 11 was supposed to make the green appear closer than it is on the approach.  The bunkers on the 12th are gradually smaller, the green is about 3000 sf and they use a small flag to create the illusion of a longer approach.  When I played 10 years ago, it worked.  Somehow the short bunkers have diminished in size from then and I don't get that impression from your photo that it still does.  As always (and probably ususal) I could be wrong.  At one time the 8th featured some kind of wildlife, not unlike San Simeon orignally had wildlife running around, but it cost too much to keep.

BTW, when I played I happened to run into Steve Wynn, who noticed I was taking pix and told me it was strictly forbidden.  Just out of curiosity, has that policy changed?

[Ryan Farrow]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

[Philip Gawith]

Thanks for posting Tony. It is nice to get a look at this well-known course which i have never seen before. I have been round Trump National at West Palm Beach which I think is a similar creation - lots of manicure, variety, elevation etc from nothing - and also built by a Fazio.

I like the look of the 4th....

As for the shorts, 8 and 17 certainly feel claustrophobic while the long one looks very difficult!

[Tony Gorski]

What time of year where those photos taken? 

Courses always look tighter to me in pictures, so I'll assume it is actually golfable.  Looks unplayable to me!

Hi John - These were taken in March this year.  And the fairways are not wide by any stretch.  While the fairways were narrow, the rough was cut short and made for playable approaches/recoveries.

[John Moore II]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

The rough was dormant, thats why its brown. I don't think water has anything to do with it really.

I think this course really made Fazio into what he is; I also feel its been hard for him to shake this idea that he manufactures golf courses. Though I have played at least one (Eagle Point) that is entirely manufactured and others that come off as less than natural. He can build natural golf courses though when given the right piece of land (Victoria National and Forest Creek (North)) and I think he is often stereotyped by many on this site for the unnatural look of many of his courses, though they do not all look that way.

--Should I make it to Vegas, I will certainly try to play Shadow Creek.

[Dean Stokes]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

I would hazard a guess that the rough is probably dormant bemuda and the fairways are green due to overseeding. Only guessing though....

[Tony Gorski]

Tony,

The 11th and 12th were designed for visual illusion. The bunker size on 11 was supposed to make the green appear closer than it is on the approach.  The bunkers on the 12th are gradually smaller, the green is about 3000 sf and they use a small flag to create the illusion of a longer approach.  When I played 10 years ago, it worked.  Somehow the short bunkers have diminished in size from then and I don't get that impression from your photo that it still does.  As always (and probably ususal) I could be wrong.  At one time the 8th featured some kind of wildlife, not unlike San Simeon orignally had wildlife running around, but it cost too much to keep.

BTW, when I played I happened to run into Steve Wynn, who noticed I was taking pix and told me it was strictly forbidden.  Just out of curiosity, has that policy changed?

Hi Jeff -

You're correct on 11 and 12.  Here's a picture of the bunkers in front of 11...


And 12 didn't have the effect on me to your point.  Here's approach at 12.


As for the 8th wildlife, we saw dozens of exotic wildlife a a few of the holes.

As for Steve Wynn and pics, I wasn't aware but I suppose it was good I didn't have the chance to meet him on the course.  Thanks for the heads up.

[Matt_Cohn]

From here, it just doesn't have that "wow" look like it did 10 years ago.

[Patrick_Mucci]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

You must be very young.

That's how all rough used to look before wall to wall irrigation systems were introduced.

Looking at the pictures, if every Weeping Willow was removed, I think it would enhance the views of the holes.

[Ryan Farrow]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

You must be very young.

That's how all rough used to look before wall to wall irrigation systems were introduced.

Looking at the pictures, if every Weeping Willow was removed, I think it would enhance the views of the holes.

Patrick, I am young, not naive, nor stupid.

Just saying after 500 Dollars my expectations are pretty high since your giving me a far lesser course than Pebble or Bandon or hell, just something real. I want perfection and I'm sorry, dormant bermuda is not perfection at that price.





On a serious note, is there a reason why they don't overseed the rough if no expense is spared?

[Chip Gaskins]

i actually like the contrasting colors of grass.  the dormant rough plays almost the same as over-seeded, no?

[Tony Gorski]

I am also a fan of the contrasting colors.  Ballyneal had the same effect when I played and it definitely added to the dramatic vistas, etc.

[Dean Stokes]

On a serious note, is there a reason why they don't overseed the rough if no expense is spared?

Ryan, my serious question would be: why DO they overseed the fairways? I'd much rather pay $500 and see the course looking browned out, hard and running fast. I think the tees and fairways look fake and the rough looks great.

[Rick Shefchik]

The ubiquitous checkerboard mowing pattern offends my eye more than the browned-out rough.

[Ryan Farrow]

O.... COME ON GUYS!

This is one of the most outrageous golf courses ever built and you want browned out rough and no mowing patterns? Do you really think any of the other 500 dollar greens fee paying guests would agree with you?



And did we really get a Ballyneal and Shadow Creek comparison?

[Tony Gorski]

not a comparison of golf courses...........as that's easy.  but the contrasting colors.  I don't believe everything has to be in full, deep green Augusta colors to pass for acceptable and scenic terrain.

[Mike Golden]

based on these photos I would much rather play World Woods or Galloway National, I'm underwhelmed...

[Kyle Harris]

O.... COME ON GUYS!

This is one of the most outrageous golf courses ever built and you want browned out rough and no mowing patterns? Do you really think any of the other 500 dollar greens fee paying guests would agree with you?



And did we really get a Ballyneal and Shadow Creek comparison?

I'd be quite sad knowing that some of my $500 went to an unnecessary expense as overseeding. Especially on a course with so little play.

[Matt MacIver]

I had heard about all the mounding built to separate the holes and screen out the rest of the desert, but I was hoping there would be some fairway contouring, too, but it appears not all they all look, relatively, flat - true?  That would be a shame, in my book.  I know pictures don't do the course justice, but based on these it might have slipped a few notches on my list of things to see....

[PThomas]

I am also a fan of the contrasting colors.  Ballyneal had the same effect when I played and it definitely added to the dramatic vistas, etc.

i third this thought

[Ryan Farrow]

I am also a fan of the contrasting colors.  Ballyneal had the same effect when I played and it definitely added to the dramatic vistas, etc.

i third this thought

I fourth this thought, for Ballyneal and similar courses!

[Matt_Cohn]

Hole #4 - par 5, 553 yards
Dogleg left, reachable par 5.




Hole #9 - par 4, 409 yards
The line is the bunker on the right.




Hole #15 - par 4, 438 yards
Another difficult par 4 with right-to-left sloping fairway and a creek that runs in front of the green.




Hole #17 - par 3, 164 yards
The last of the Fazio par 3s, and probably the most photographed.  Island green with a waterfall running in the background.  A little too much for my taste, but an interesting tee shot to a postage stamp green.  And remember, this was desert flatland. 




Hole #18 - par 5, 527 yards
A very solid par 5 to finish the round.

[John_Conley]

That brown rough looks terrible. Hey I'm all for using less water and all but if I'm paying 500 dollars I don't want to see that. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Widen the fairways and import a few tons of pine straw.

Fishers Island probably isn't high on your list then.