[Phil McDade]

...anyone on the board played this, and able to comment? It's part of the Zion Park District, far northeast corner of Illinois, just south of Kenosha, WI. Opened in 1999. The aerial makes it look to be quite an interesting course -- wide fairways, split fairways, centerline bunkers.

[PCCraig]

I've played two or three times. It is a pretty solid course considering the land isn't much to be desired. The course is well maintained and this time of year it should be quiet out there.

I believe the course sits next to a garbage treatment plant and if the wind is coming in the right direction get ready to plug your nose!

If you are interested in a 36 hole day check out Thunderhawk down the road.

[Brent Carlson]

Phil,

The front nine was above average but I had to stop playing because the potent smell was making me feel ill.  It reminded me of many courses built in the last 15 years - mixed heather with some wetland.  Overall you get good golf at a muny price.

How does it compare to Thunderhawk?

[Mark Smolens]

We did not make it to Shepard's Crook this year on the Weekly Challenge Golf Tour (too much construction on n/s highways would have resulted in too small of a field), but SC is well worth the trip.  Much cheaper than its municipally owned counterpart, Thunderhawk, but generally on my visits has played much faster and firmer.  A very reasonable effort at creating a linksy feel, especially with the extremely firm green surfaces (lots of bitching and moaning by the players at our last event there in May '07 -- try to explain that that's the way a links course is supposed to play, but most people want to throw a wedge at the pin and have it stick. . . ).

I'm guessing that Dan Moore's oft-recommended Spring Valley in southern WI might be close enough to SC to permit 36 holes between the two -- though located in Zion, there is at least one hole that abuts the border between Illinois and WI.

[Jim Tang]

I've played there once, maybe 7 years ago.  Pretty nice golf course.  The front side is short and tight, while the back is a bit longer and more open.  Fairly flat land.  They don't have a driving range.

I thought Thunderhawk was the superior golf course.  TH splits time between open, rolling land and the woods. 

[Trey Kemp]

Phil,

I played there quite a bit when I lived in Chicago.  I will post a few pictures later this afternoon.  To me its the best value in Chicagoland.  Pretty solid course for the cheapest rates around.

[John Kavanaugh]

It is interesting that this course opened the same time the power plant closed.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zion_Nuclear_Power_Station Has this had an impact of the course and community.  I was lucky enough at one time to live in beautiful Waukegan until around 1988.  I was a member of Bonnie Brook and would have enjoyed this course.  One of the most fun jobs I ever had was writing an evacuation plan for a possible meltdown of the plant when I was DoPW for nearby Lincolnshire.  The fun part was pretending that I would stick around an help a bunch of spoiled 1980's Yuppies out of town while my family fried.

[PCCraig]

Charming John! 

[Eric_Terhorst]

Phil,

I've played it several times this summer and enjoyed it quite a bit.  It's a remarkable value at $42 weekend, and Foster did very well to create interest and variety with the property he had.  After a not too difficult short par 4 starter, there are outstanding shortish par 4s (2, 3, 7, 12, 13, 17) and longish par 4s (5, 6, 10, 15), each with a distinct strategic problem to solve.  The par threes include 4, a very long test (240 from the back) with a fine run-it-up green, 8, a mid-length over wetlands, 11, a 200-yarder where again you can bounce it on, and 16, a drop-shot shortie with wetlands at the side and back.

My only design quibble is with the three par 5s--they all are long, >550 yards, and 9 and 18 are quite similar, with snakey fairways and big fronting bunkers requiring an aerial approach.  Superficially it appears the final hole might have been a shorter risk-reward with options for 2-or 3-shots, but it isn't.

It is ALWAYS firm and fast in my experience.  Once in August it was such a beautiful color (brownish-light green with hints of purple), that I went out of my way to tell management how great it was, and to ask them if that's what they were looking for.  The answer was yes, and they are diligent in fending off the golfers that Mark Smolens mentions who don't get it. 

IMO it's much better than Thunderhawk, which is too green by comparison and mostly target golf.  I happily drive by TH to get to SC.  Add in the  10-minute tee time intervals (unlike all the North Shore publics and Spring Valley), and it's become my favorite close to home standby.

[PCCraig]

I’m not sure how anyone could think SC is better than Thunderhawk. I think Thunderhawk is about as good of a routing and challenge as anything in the north suburbs. If it was closer to Chicago it would be $150+. A good hint is Mon-Thurs pre-8am its about $45 to play with cart.

[Phil McDade]

Pat:

I've heard similar complaints about Thunderhawk, for what it's worth. I haven't played it, but just wanted to let you know Eric's not a lone wolf on this.

He is, however, a strong contributer to the fast-and-firm caucus here on GCA, which may explain his partiality to Sh. Crook.

[Trey Kemp]

Here are a few pictures from Shepherd's Crook and Thunderhawk.  I actually took these pictures on the same day and it was a little wet, so I apologize in advance for the quality of the pictures. Anyway here you go:

SHEPHERD'S CROOK
















THUNDERHAWK

[Eric_Terhorst]

I’m not sure how anyone could think SC is better than Thunderhawk.

I think all you have to do is look at that hideous amoeba-shaped bunker in the first TH picture.  You can tell just looking at that picture vs. the bunkering at SC which design is more thoughtful.  The TH routing is OK, I like the plains then forest routine.  But the "challenge" on many holes is in avoiding all the wetlands.  There's a par 4 on the back--#14?--that I recall hitting 5-iron 9-iron into.  Target golf at its worst--not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

[Phil McDade]

Personal preference, but I much prefer this look:



to this one:



The first one looks multi-dimensional; the second one looks formulaic and one-dimensional.

[Sven Nilsen]

After 36 yesterday on the Illinois/Wisconsin border (18 at SC in the morning and 18 at TH in the afternoon, each under $40, each round under 3 hrs), thought I'd share some thoughts on this old thread:

1.  Both courses are playing about as fast and firm as can be expected for an early season round.  The greens are still growing in, so not quite yet in ideal condition, but the firmness of the turf was notable. 

2.  I played the last 7 holes at SC with one of the guys who built the course for the park district.  He made a great point about the budgets for the two properties, with TH costing almost 3x as much to build.  Explains why the normal in season rates are about twice as much at TH despite the two courses being extremely similar in quality and style.

3.  An earlier commenter made the point that TH can be target golf at its worst.  I believe this to be an extreme overstatement.  There is really only one hole that takes the driver out of your hand on the tee box (14), but the width of the hole and the options you have off the tee do not suggest "target golf," rather judgment.  The wetlands are present at TH, but only come into play if the golfer takes an aggressive line off the tee.  For example, the second hole (par 5) offers two options off the tee, (a) play the direct line with a carry over a marsh, or (b) play a shorter shot to the left with the knowledge a well struck ball may carry through the fairway into trouble.  A very Lido-esque decision to me.  On either side, there's plenty of room to afford for a less than extreme miss.  The 8th offers a similar decision on a short par 4.  Drive towards the green and take on a long carry or play a safe shot to the right and face a more difficult shot into a sloped green.

4.  Both courses place a premium on tee shot placement (but not to the extent it becomes target golf where a drive off line is punished certain death).  At SC, the landing areas are extremely wide, but just about every hole has a preferred side of the fairway for the approach.  The 5th hole is a great example, requiring a tee shot to the left to take a large tree short and right of the green out of play.  At the tenth hole the player is asked to challenge bunkers on the left in order to get the ideal angle into a green protected by a bunker short right and a green that shrugs off shots from the right.  The only hole where the angle of approach did not seem to matter was the 14th, where the best line is straight in order to take on the 600+ in the shortest possible route.   At TH, the theme appears to be protection of the ideal landing area by well placed obstacles.  On the 4th, an angled fairway bunker protects the shortest line to the green and a turbo slot that can add an extra 20 or 30 to a drive.  The 7th, a snaking par 5 through the grasslands, similar left side bunkers impede into the shortest line while further on bunkers on the right protect the best angle into the green.  Placement is at a premium, but there are plenty of options to play away from the trouble.

5.  The ground game is an option.  I can think of only a couple of holes between the courses (the above discussed 14th at TH and the 18th at SC) where a running shot cannot be played into the green.  There are several holes where the option may be precluded if the hole is not played on the optimal line, but generally its is always an option (even on most of the par 3's). 

I could go on and would be happy to do so if anyone wants to continue the discussion on particular holes.  In short, I think the two courses are a blast to play and offer a ton of strategic options.  At the prices they're asking right now, you can't go wrong with either, or both.

[Sven Nilsen]

Shivas:

I disagree that TH is an aerial course first.  I can count the shots requiring the ball to be in the air on two hands:

Tee shot on 2 (if played to the right)
Tee shot on 3 (there is an option to run it up to a left pin)
Approach on 5 (to clear a small burn 70 yds short of the green, not sure if this really counts as a run up could definitely be played)
Tee shot on 6 (only to a back left pin)
Tee shot on 8 (only if going for the green)
2nd or 3rd shot on 11 (depending on how hole is played)
Tee shot on 12
Approach on 14
Tee shot on 15
2nd shot on 16
Approach to 18

There are only two greens where an aerial approach shot must be played (14 and 18).  At 14 you'll have a short iron in your hands, so I have no issue with the requirement of lofting the approach into the elevated green.  Same story for 18, where only the longest players will try to challenge the green in 2.

I can understand why the wetland areas may be off-putting, but in reality I don't think they're in play as much as they may appear from the tees.  As for the holes that play through the woods, there are a few spots where tree encroachment seems to be an issue (right side of 6 and left side of 18), but otherwise they're some of my favorite holes.  I actually think the trees on 14 work for a layup hole.

Not sure what to make of your comments on SC, other than I'm assuming you mean that the terrain lead to the creation of the more target golf style holes (5, 7, 8 and 17?).  I think both courses offer a good mix of wide open holes (where strategy is still an issue) with some tighter more demanding shots on other holes (but always with options). 
 

[Bradley Anderson]

The story goes that the Zion Park District Commissioner asked Keith Foster to build something similar to Shoreacres, his personal favorite course, 10 miles south. The story also goes that Foster took his shaper down to Shoreacres one afternoon and told him to study those shapes and replicate them at Shepherds Crook. Having played both courses I can say that they did a wonderful job of borrowing elements from Shoreacres.

There is a lot of great Public Golf up that way. Bonnie Brook in Waukegan is a wonderful walk in the park experience with beautifully maintained turf. Midlane is a good golf value up that way too.

Thunderhawk spares no expense in maintenance, and they probably spent 8 times as much on building it than they did Shepherds Crook, but its not half the golf experience.

[Phil McDade]

The story goes that the Zion Park District Commissioner asked Keith Foster to build something similar to Shoreacres, his personal favorite course, 10 miles south. The story also goes that Foster took his shaper down to Shoreacres one afternoon and told him to study those shapes and replicate them at Shepherds Crook. Having played both courses I can say that they did a wonderful job of borrowing elements from Shoreacres.

There is a lot of great Public Golf up that way. Bonnie Brook in Waukegan is a wonderful walk in the park experience with beautifully maintained turf. Midlane is a good golf value up that way too.

Thunderhawk spares no expense in maintenance, and they probably spent 8 times as much on building it than they did Shepherds Crook, but its not half the golf experience.

A review of Bonnie Brook here (sorry no pics; they have a few on the course website), just down the road from SC:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,30036.0/

[Jud_T]

Only reason to play TH over SC IMHO is that kids play free on weekend afternoons with a paid adult.  Also some of my knuckleheaded low hdcp friends prefer the connect-the-dots challenge

[Sven Nilsen]

Jud:

The connect the dot concept makes me think of the Harvester in Iowa, which ironically is a Keith Foster course.

[PCCraig]

I played SC about 3 or 4 weeks ago on a cold Saturday (it was 50* in the city...40* in Zion  ). The green complexes at SC are really fantastic, with some classic templates seen (redan, punchbowl, short, etc...). The GCA is certainly better at SC than Thunderhawk, but I have to admit playing in the shadow of an active garbage dump isn't that great and that Thunderhawk's property is 100x better. I can only imagine what Foster could of done with the same principals on TH's land. 

Since it was so cold out that day, the course was near empty, and my wife and I played in roughly 2 hours and 50 min walking. Only downside to the day was my wife noticing we were really close to the Kenosha outlet malls and negotiating a not so quick trip. 

[PCCraig]

Just a quick article from the local golf course reviewer for Crains Chicago Business:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/mag/article.pl?articleId=33491

After playing SC and Thunderthawk recently I've rethought my opinion earlier in this thread and would probably rate SC higher than I did in the past. The author above seems to think the sparse clubhouse is a negative...however I would find it anything but and is actually somewhat refreshing.

Maybe Shepherd's Crook could act as a host to a little mini-GCA outing in the near future?

[PThomas]

Pat - i'd be interesting in playing SC again

[Jud_T]

Pat,

One of the top handful of public courses in the area IMHO....For the money, SC and Ravisloe can't be beat.....

[Michael Baldwin]

I played SC weekend before last.  Although I haven't played any notable courses, this was by far the most fun I've had on a golf course. It was a fairly windy day and the conditions were firm, presenting quite a challenge. 

Some might complain about the spartan nature of the clubhouse but I would argue it's appropriately understated.  Not to mention the rocking chairs facing the 18th green provides a spectacular spot to have a couple beers and watch the last groups come in.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()