News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Matt_Ward

Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2009, 10:53:59 PM »
Cliff:

Among the mid-Atlantic and New England states -- I think one could make a very good case that Massachusetts has the best combination of public and private courses in the area.

JNC:

Of all the states I have played in America I'd have to say besides my home state of NJ I have played plenty of golf in The Empire State.

I don't doubt the quality public courses in western NY -- but keep in mind that the bar for their recognition is low given the overall piss poor nature of what calls itself quality golf in The Empire State. The Black draws much of the fanfare -- although I have somewhat soured on the layout -- because of the recent penchant to bastardize the course with overly extreme length and narrowness.

When NY went through a "surge" of public course development in the 90's the overall gains versus what was gained in other states in my mind is night and day. States such as Colorado, Oregon, Nevada, to name just three, made big time leaps forward on the public side. Even my little state of NJ has a better overall depth of courses from the public side than NY.

I've got to state this again for YOUR benefit. You have not played SN but you are then going off in stating that it has "no standout holes" and that it's only asset is its stern test. There's more to the course than that. I said this before -- Rulewich did a stellar job in routing a layout through a series of wetlands AND still achieving playability -- provided one plays the appropriate tees as Ron said he had not when he played there.

JNC, before you extrapolate some sort of conclusion about modern golf with SN as your prime example -- I would repsectfully ask you to play the course before jumping off with such a high bridge.

Clearly, you have the right to avoid SN for any number of reasons. I would just ask that you not apply your core beliefs to a place that is a bit more than what you might believe. In one of your comments you stated, "A demand for shot-shaping is certainly something I look for in a golf course ..." Well, SN has that in plenty of situations. I'm not saying Leatherstocking is not fun and for those who prefer such old school layouts it will be high -- very high -- on their list of must plays.

In regards to BB -- I have seen many people who have come to the Black and had their proverbial butt kicked-in and left swearing never to return. Unfortunately, too much of what constitutes BB today -- is about monster length and little in terms of finesse. Having Tiger win there in '02 was a great validation but I long for the days of when the Black provided a better sense of elasticity and strategic implications.

JNC, my point on NY public golf was that The Empire States has the widest gap between what it offers publicly and what is available on the private side. I can't think of a state that is remotely close -- save for Pennsy which would earn my silver medal vote and I have said so previously. As good as the privates are in those two states -- the public side is really shocking for its low level stuff -- albeit with a few exceptions as has been noted.


Mike McGuire

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #51 on: March 21, 2009, 11:36:38 PM »
Posted by: Steve_ Shaffer  Posted on: Yesterday at 05:13:03 pm  
Insert Quote  
With all the praise here, Vista Verde does NOT appear on the AZ list of top 25!!!

 
Steve,

you are correct.  Even though I have played VV only once, it is definitely better than about half of the courses on the list.
Maybe it suffers from the fact it has almost no publicity.  I have told friends about it, and these are guys that play ALOT of golf all over, and most have never even heard of it.



Maybe it suffers from not having a clubhouse?

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #52 on: March 22, 2009, 05:13:43 AM »
These in-state lists are always tough.... highly criticized no matter which magazine does them.

So re the CA list, heck I have few quibbles - looks close enough to me.

Just curious - great things have been said about Soule Park (I haven't played there in almost 30 years so I don't know one way or the other)... where should it be inserted, if at all?

Here's the list:

1. Pebble Beach Golf Links, Pebble Beach (No. 7 c)
2. Spyglass Hill, Pebble Beach (No. 15 m)
3. Pasatiempo, Santa Cruz (No. 29 c)
4. Rustic Canyon, Moorpark (m)
5. Barona Creek, Lakeside (m)
6. PGA West (Stadium), La Quinta (m)
7. CordeValle, San Martin (m)
8. The Classic Club, Palm Desert (m)
9. Torrey Pines (South), San Diego (c)
10. Indian Wells Golf Resort (Players), Indian Wells (m)
11. DarkHorse, Auburn (m)
12. Coyote Moon, Truckee (m)
13. Links at Spanish Bay, Pebble Beach (m)
14. Indian Wells Golf Resort (Celebrity), Indian Wells (m)*
15. Whitehawk Ranch GC, Clio (m)
16. Pelican Hill GC (Ocean South), Newport Coast (m)
17. Maderas GC, Poway (m)*
18. Saddle Creek Resort, Copperopolis (m)
19. Eagle Falls GC, Indio (m)*
20. Pelican Hill (Ocean North), Newport Coast (m)
21. La Quinta Resort (Mountain), La Quinta (m)
22. Stevinson Ranch, Stevinson, (m)
23. Trump National, Rancho Palos Verdes (m)
24. Harding Park, San Francisco (c)
25. Olivas Links, Ventura (m)*





I would have Spyglass at 4 with Pasa taking it's spot and Rustic at third.

David - what you suggest would be in the measurement "noise" for ANY rating panel.

JC

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #53 on: March 22, 2009, 08:50:45 AM »
Re: Vista Verde

I thought raters rated a golf course and not clubhouses. I remember playing Troon North when it first opened and had a trailer as a temporary clubhouse. That didn't hurt their rating.


"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #54 on: March 22, 2009, 10:08:10 AM »
Matt,
NOW I get it.  Yes, the gap is enormous between what New York has in private versus what it has in public.  Blame the democrats.

JNC,
Yes, you are correct, there are some fine upstate private clubs that don't compare with the best of what is available near the well-funded city of cities.

Ron,
Oh, wait, I'm Ron.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Mike McGuire

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #55 on: March 22, 2009, 10:37:28 AM »
Re: Vista Verde

I thought raters rated a golf course and not clubhouses. I remember playing Troon North when it first opened and had a trailer as a temporary clubhouse. That didn't hurt their rating.


The raters shouldn't car but if the course suffers from lack of publicity does that hurt the rating? Jim Dawson and I dragged 2 foursomes to VV this spring. Even tough the course played fine it had no chance to impress because of the lack of a clubhouse.. not even a trailer.

Perhaps our group is not that architecturally savvy but they do get around. Typical players and they are not going to go home and tell others about VV.


Dan Moore

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #56 on: March 22, 2009, 11:09:02 AM »
To all the Chicagoans here:

Where would Ravisloe fit in as a public course in Illinois?

Architecturally Ravisloe should rank in the Top 5, easily in my opinion.  However, the length of the course will keep it out of the top 15. 

I have to agree that Bollingbrook does not belong anywhere on this list; can't wait to see the 8,000+ John Daley course. 

I'd give a shout to Steve Halberg's Oak Grove near Harvard, despite one very ackward hole, the 11th, the course deserves more recognition.  Another is Mistwood a very fine Ray Hearn design. 

I'm with Terry Lavin, the Chicago area really does lack good architecture in the public arena, particulary in the modern era. 
"Is there any other game which produces in the human mind such enviable insanity."  Bernard Darwin

Brian Joines

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #57 on: March 22, 2009, 02:09:02 PM »
Andy,
Two other things I find odd is the appeal of Prairie View.  I think it is a fine course and perhaps a top 10 to top 15 in the state, but no where near the #1 position where I see it all too often.  Raters must love that pristine conditioning, but it is way overpriced.  Also, how does Plum Creek get on this list.  The front nine is sooooo booorrrringg, with the exception of the 4th hole.  The back nine is better, but only when compared to the front.  It is full of forced carries and highly manufactured housing golf that is really the worst Dye course I have seen in the state.  I guess all things with the Dye name are considered good.


Chris,
I don't think I'd blame it so much on Pete Dye as the list being fairly Indy-centric. French Lick and Warren are present but most of the others are within an hour of Indy. Mystic Hills likely would be a more deserving Dye course to list.

I haven't played Prairie View or Harrison Hills so I dcan't really debate their placements. However, I would personally put Trophy Club, Warren and Rock Hollow above Purgatory and probably the Ross course at French Lick. The Fort is my personal favorite and would imagine it deserves first or second position.

tlavin

Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #58 on: March 22, 2009, 04:20:39 PM »
To all the Chicagoans here:

Where would Ravisloe fit in as a public course in Illinois?

i think it would fit in the top 10*


*truth-be-told dept:  i'm a former membr of Ravisloe


I've always been fond of Ravisloe, but there's no way in my mind that it makes the top ten.  It's a nice, little course with some interesting holes and some fun greensites, but the corner of the golf course on 183rd street is entirely forgettable and there are too many dead straight par 4's.  Playing at Rav was always about more than the golf course; it was about the mellow vibe, the awesome clubhouse, the second floor men's locker room, the great food and the vestiges of the all-Jewish cultural stuff in the south suburbs of Chicago.  The golf is just fine, but the rest of the experience is just gone, which will ruin it for me.

Having spent 100 years as a private surely gives it some cachet among the public courses, but not enough to get near the top ten in the state.  Heck, when it was a private, it would barely slip into the Top Forty in the Chicago district.


Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #59 on: March 22, 2009, 06:43:02 PM »
Terry, please check your email.

Brad

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #60 on: March 22, 2009, 07:34:11 PM »
I am still trying to figure out how Dr. Klein compiles these state lists, since he states every year that it is IMPOSSIBLE to compare classic and modern courses and the numbers don't mean the same thing.  :)

Even apart from that quibble, arguing over placings on this list is pretty silly.  I was just reading my copy of GOLFWEEK and the difference in rating between the 90th course and the 100th on the national scale was 0.02 points out of 10.  So on the state lists, you are arguing about the difference between a 5.29 and a 5.26 ... which would be totally meaningless if you didn't put rankings in front of them.

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #61 on: March 22, 2009, 09:58:15 PM »
Dr. Doak (I am assuming that by now you have been awarded an honorary doctorate somewhere),

I am wondering where I have stated that it's impossible to compare Classic and Modern. Would welcome the reference. If it's an inference on your part, I would simply argue that we make the distinction at Golfweek but I have tried to be pretty careful in not claiming that comparisons are impossible. But perhaps I have forgotten something.

By the way, unlike some real doctorate-type people in golf (Mike Hurdzan, Frank Rossi) I never use mine since it's irrelevant to the golf stuff. Wouldn't want to make a false claim for expertise.

Brad

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Break It Down: Golfweek's 2009 Best Courses You Can Play...Thoughts
« Reply #62 on: March 22, 2009, 11:00:37 PM »
Hmmm...good point.  Doak does claim that Klein "states every year," so he must have a referential point in mind. 

That does bring up a tantalizing yet unresolvable point:  is it possible to compare old fashioned to new fangled?  What would an architect today do with the quarry on which the Country Club of Buffalo sits?  What would specific architects do with it?  What would Ross do differently today than he did in the Roaring 20s?  Impossible questions with non-existent answers.

I resolve in 2009 to NOT play the tips on every course I review/photograph.  I resolve to better understand the middle tees and therefore, have a point of reference for courses like Saratoga National as they relate to a five, not a scratch, not a +5.  One step down, eleven steps to go.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back