[THuckaby2]

Great stuff, Mike.  Rich has also summed up the "issues" here perfectly... very interesting...

I just have two comments:

1. Please let's lay off poor beleaguered old Golf Digest.  We've battled this umpteen times already and there are many reasons TKC might not have made the GD list besides perceived low points on resistance to scoring.  All such possiblities are on the five other threads on which this has been discussed already...

2. Do you guys ever work?  

Jealously,

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

I love this thread!  Partly (mostly?) because I am completely ignorant of the facts!  Let me tell you (whether or not you really want to know...) what I am "hearing."

1.  The Kingsley Club is a great golf course
2.  Crystal Downs is great too
3.  From his first post, Mike Cirba (and others) would, in effect rate them equally.  From other posts, this implies a 8-9 on the "Doak" scale.
3.  This implied "rating" means that
   a.  KC is one of the best courses built in recent years, probably as good as Pacific Dunes and a small number of others
   b.  CD is probably overrated, at least by Tom Doak and some magazines
4.  CD is overrated because (primus inter pares) at current agronomic "ideals" its greens are not flexible enough to allow for more than one sort of approach shot to any particular pin position.  I would call this "the paradox of how 'fast and firm' is the paradigm of 'target golf.'"

Rich;

In quick response...

1) Yes
2) Yes
3a) Yes, although just a notch below PD & Sand Hills based on what I've seen, but as good (I think better) as Whistling Straits for instance.
3b) I just wouldn't give it a "10" as they do for some of the reasons I've outlined, plus a few holes that don't deserve that lofty status, but it's certainly a "9".
4) I have nothing against the current maintenance meld, and from the shaggy practice green, it does seem that grass is growing in northern MI.  I think I'd have to understand more of what you're suggesting before I can say I agree or disagree.

[ForkaB]

Mike

I'm trying to suggest/posit/guess that courses which may look "strategic" do not in fact play "strategic" if there is only one way to the pin (or "par" or.......), due to maintenance "unmeld", or whatever.  I have always maintained that "The" Open 2000 was the ultimate in "target golf" when Tiger just hit from point A to point B monotonously (and brilliantly) due to the way they set up the course and his ability to read that set up and execute a strategy against it.

Are such banal situations what we mean when we talk of "Golden Age" architecture?

I have more questions, but I must take my 5-year old to tennis lessons.....

[George Pazin]

I love this thread!  Partly (mostly?) because I am completely ignorant of the facts!  Let me tell you (whether or not you really want to know...) what I am "hearing."

CD is overrated because (primus inter pares) at current agronomic "ideals" its greens are not flexible enough to allow for more than one sort of approach shot to any particular pin position.  I would call this "the paradox of how 'fast and firm' is the paradigm of 'target golf.'"

It sounds like CD might be too fast & firm, leading to target golf. Tom P's prior post implies that it's not always like that & when setup in a better meld, it might be better.

I think your paradox would be better stated as "how too fast & firm is also target golf."

2. Do you guys ever work?  

With the amount of posting many of us do on here, one could easily conclude that none of us work.

[THuckaby2]

George:

Great point and TOUCHE!  

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Rich;

No, I wouldn't quite phrase it that way, at all.

At Crystal Downs, there is enough fairway width on most every hole to permit "more than one way to the pin" on most holes, and the first cut of rough is not overly penal and permits reasonable recoveries, as well.  

That's much different than the US Open bowling alley approach where the only workable strategy is to hit the ball into a 25 yard skinny fairway with deep, thick, "pitch-out" rough on each side, and then hit the green or try to chop it out of rough again to a fast green.

My contention has more to do with the combination of slope and internal contour of the greens themselves, as well as the complexities and demands of their immediate surrounds.  Depending on hole location, there were more than a few greens where there was ONLY one place you could be to have a reasonable chance at getting up and down, whether chipping or two-putting.    

That doesn't necessarily dictate the type of approach shot to be played, but instead dictates the only "reasonable" position to finish in for any chance at success from there.  Think #11 at Pasatiempo and I believe you'll see what I'm getting at.

Is that due to modern green speeds?  I don't know, but I believe CD doesn't want them running above a 9.  Some greens like #11 I'd imagine would still be severe even if they grew rough on it, so pronounced is the combination of slope and internal contour.  

Played at stroke play every day, they would eventually drive the most stoic, balanced individual to a case of the yips, and eventually, utter madness.  

[ForkaB]

Thanks Mike, for the elaboration

I still wonder, if you have a green and/or pin position where it is impossible to get close unless you hit your tee shot to position A and strike your 2nd precisely and wisely, whether or not it is due to "architecture" or green contours/speeds, is that not "target golf", in effect, if not in the conventional wisdom definition?

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

I'd say a 9 on the stimpmeter would probably be ideal for Crystal Downs. I've played there maybe a dozen times and the greens were always a nice speed not all that quick because they really can't and shouldn't be with some of that contour. But we never had any problems playing the course, putting, recovering from around the green whatever.

#11 is the only hole I recall that you really had problems two putting but only if you were in the wrong place. So the idea was just not to get in the wrong place.

Every golf course has its own unique "ideal maintenance meld". That's almost the entire point of the theory of the "ideal maintenance meld"--to figure out exactly how any golf course plays ideally. To figure that out one has to analyze the architecture of any course and then put a maintenance process on it that basically highlights all the available options of the architecture.

Firm and fast conditions is just one type of maintenance meld application and for the older courses is primarily a "through the green application" not necessarily the green surface itself--that area is a whole other consideration.

[Mike_Cirba]

I'd be interested in hearing from David Wigler and Matt Ward (back in town) and any others who've played both to see if they agree or disagree with what's been stated so far.  

[larry_munger]

If this course is so good, how did GD miss it??? Didn't the head of the GD panel give it a raving review?

Tom Paul, given that you have played Crystal Downs so much, just find it a bit suprising that you haven't talked about it more, from reading Doaks comments would have thought it would have been worth just a short Tom Paulen essay?

[TEPaul]

larrym:

I remember Crystal Downs pretty well but I haven't been out there in over five years which happened to be before I really got into architecture. But I plan to go pretty soon and I sure would be happy to give my opinion of it when I see it with hopefully a more observant eye. Plan to go the the Kingsley Club too.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Paul;

I'll be really very curious to hear your detailed thoughts on both courses.  I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun!  

[Matt_Ward]

I've been battling some pollen attacks since my return from the Southwest, however, my spirits have been raised considerably since reading this thread. I am so utterly glad that Mike Cirba, Geoff Childs and others who accompanied them on their recent Michigan trip have now weighed in on The Kingsley Club. Glad to see some learned gentlemen weigh in on this topic (sorry guys for the Golden's mustard approach ).

TKC has been one course that has been held down by the sheer ignorance of quite a few people -- not here on GCA I might add. I'll say this again it is quite amazing to see Ron Whitten's lucid comments when he reviewed the course and how the panel at GD -- that august group (save Tom Huckaby ), completely fumbled the ball. Not only did the course not crack the top ten best new private -- the magaizne has it no better than 22nd in MI (I don't know whether to laugh or cry)!

Alright -- enough of the carpings about ratings. I've had the pleasure in playing both courses and I believe the reputation of Crystal Downs is centered around the savage (more poltically correct -- extreme) nature of the greens when at 10+ on the stimpmeter. You cannot -- repeat cannot -- be on the wrong side at anytime to have an even remote opportunity to up'n down.

The course plays features some of the toughest rough you can find and the usual Michigan weather (always so balmy can make for an interesting adventure. I dare say when conditions offer super speed greens and the wind is howling I don't know many 6,500 yard courses that play as demanding as CD. Does that make it great -- well, that's another question.

I agree with much of what Mike has said and I believe the finishing aspects of the CD is a bit on the lite side. I mean how pedestrian is the 18th at CD? It's almost as weak as the 18th at CP!

TKC is fun golf to the max. There is a challenge for both the long and medium length hitter and the greens just reward fine execution and placement. I can't think of a better front nine I've played among new courses that have opened in the last 10-15 years save for the existence of Sand Hills and Pacific Dunes. Just how fun is standing on the 9th tee and pondering what you want to do!

The back at TKC opens up with a letdown with the 10th and the 11th is good but not great. Once you reach the 12th the course once again revives itself and the 13th is an absolute peach of a hole. I disagree with Mike on the 15th because there comes a time when you face a hole that really puts the screws to you and demands the big play. I don't doubt the green can be tough to hit but so what -- does one have to have some aircraft carrier size green?

The finish at TKC is good -- but not great as well. Clearly, if you had two front nines the course would be beyond words.

I agree with the folks who did a course to course analysis and said the results were a square match. I've always been most impressed with TKC, and, as I said at the outset, am glad to see the design of Mike DeVries receive the kudos it so richly deserves. Lastly, I believe the comments about the two courses is not so much a lessening of Crystal Downs but an elevation of TKC. In my opinion, I have TKC just outside my personal top 50. Anyone venturing to the area who can play both is well advised to do so. TKC is certainly not the "B" act by any means.

[Mike_Cirba]

Matt;

In case I wasn't clear, I LOVED the 15th at TKC.  In fact, it is one of the most unusual, original, non-stereotypical long par four's I've seen.  The green is just hysterical, and I can imagine it scaring the bejeesus out of most low-handicappers.

I'm reminded of Tom Doak's comment;  Who says a par four can't include a chip and a putt!  

[THuckaby2]

I'll say this again it is quite amazing to see Ron Whitten's lucid comments when he reviewed the course and how the panel at GD -- that august group (save Tom Huckaby ), completely fumbled the ball.

I do appreciate the exception, Matt!  From everything I hear I can't imagine I'd disagree with the growing chorus of raves from people here re TKC... and I am certaintly running out of explanations as to why it didn't score higher in the eyes of my GD brethren.  Great stuff in any case....

TH

[David Wigler]

How easy is it to get access to Kingsley and Crystal Downs, I wonder? (Northern Michigan is a long way from Western Scotland, but that's certainly a trip I'd like to make someday...)

Cheers,
Darren

Darren,

This got missed.  The Kingsley Club is still fairly easy to get on.  They are actively trying to acquire national and international members (And they know that once people see the course, they will be hooked).  If you made a call to them and explained who you are and where you are from, they would very likely be quite accomdatiing.  Cyrstal Downs is a different issue.  They are right by a major summer resort area for both Detroit and Chicago people.  Between Memorial Day and Labor Day (The end of May to the Beginning of September) they are almost impossible to get on unless you are playing with a member.  Outside of that period, they can be accomodating if you know a Golf Professional who will make a reference call for you.

Mike,

I have argued that Kingsley Club may be the finest new course I have seen (Have not seen Sand Hills).  That written, CD gets the nod in my book.  Maybe I am influenced by history.  Devries is a genius though and after twenty or thirty years, I would not be surprised to see Kingsley right next to CD in rankings.  Kingsley is the rare course that opens low (Because of how different it is) and improves in the rankings each year.  I only wonder if Mackenzie gets credit for blind shots because they were quirky and fit his period of design and Devries gets criticised for them because they are not modern in style.

[GeoffreyC]

Matt- I wonder if you could comment on your perception of the demands of KC with regards to the GD category of "resistance to scoring"? Its not an overly punishing golf course (a good thing) and that might be the only thing I could possibly think of that the GD guys could criticize.

I thought that #15 was one of the absolute best long par 4's I've seen. The bunkerless greensite is awesome.

David- we saw your name in the guest book.  Are you coming back east any time soon?

[David Wigler]

Geoffrey,

I hope so.  We still need a round together at Yale.  Please give me a shout next time you are in my backyard.  I would have loved to host you out at Plum Hollow before you went back home.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike C:

Mea culpa on my failure to read your comments accurtaley -- that's what happens as you sneeze and are trying to type at the same time!

I concur with you and Geoff regarding the 15th -- it is a helluva long par-4 that will never suffer fools. It puts the added backbone that any course needs to have with a long par-4 of this type.

Geoff:

I can't speak specifically to the numbers on resistance to scoring that TKC did not receive but I found the course contained just enough challenge to move it beyond being simply a superb member's course. The bounce of the ball can do strange things and the player has to pay complete attention when hitting shots throughout the round at TKC.

Take for example -- the downhill par-5 6th. When I stood ont he tee I hit a few different tee shots. One was with the 1-iron to simply get position to the left of the ridge that guards the right hand side. I then hit a driver -- pushed it a bit -- and it landed in the hay. The next one I smoked and was able to get by the mound and have a 4-iron to the green.

There's plenty of similar decisions you must analyze BEFORE pulling the trigger at TKC. I just personally believe the idea that some huge mass of "raters" could fundamentally miss such a course when the architecture editor of GD raves about the course clearly indicates to me how wide a gap there is between those who think they know golf and others who truly possess an appreciation for greatness.

Is TKC among the more difficult courses I've ever played?
No --it's not. But the course has enough depth to keep both the better player and the mid-range player seeking to play the next shot with a great deal of anticipation and zest. The detailing of the greens is also a major league product and the player must have the wherewithal to create a whole range of little chips and pitches whenever a putting surface is missed. Working the ball off the tee and with your approaches is also at a high level.

What may make TKC difficult to assess a rudimentary degree of difficulty is that you can pile up a score without really feeling like you're being bulldozed. Some courses take the "in the face" approach and hammer you with all the minefields of water, out-of-bounds and the like. TKC has plenty of teeth -- it just doesn't bite you in such "over the top" fashion.

I concur with David W -- in time the fanfare will eventually reach TKC and I see the course as just being behind the high acclaim you always find (quite rightfully I might add) with Sand Hills and Pacific Dunes.

TKC is a "must play" for any real lover of the game because it never ceases to entice and captivate you with each play.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Darren,

This got missed.  The Kingsley Club is still fairly easy to get on.  They are actively trying to acquire national and international members (And they know that once people see the course, they will be hooked).  If you made a call to them and explained who you are and where you are from, they would very likely be quite accomdatiing.  Cyrstal Downs is a different issue.  They are right by a major summer resort area for both Detroit and Chicago people.  Between Memorial Day and Labor Day (The end of May to the Beginning of September) they are almost impossible to get on unless you are playing with a member.  Outside of that period, they can be accomodating if you know a Golf Professional who will make a reference call for you.

Thanks for responding, David. Two further questions for you:

--How do you get to Northern Michigan by air? (Where do you fly into?)

--Apart from CD and TKC, what else figures prominently in an ideal Northern Michigan to-play list?

By the by, I'm interested in reading this thread in that for the first time in my recollection I'm seeing less than super-enthusiastic comments about Crystal Downs. It's amazing how "It's great!" can become "It's great, but..." when there's a bit of local competition.

Cheers,
Darren

[NAF]

Matt,

You place the Kingsley Club just outside your top 50.  I have it in my top 20. But on the FUN factor, I have it as #2 behind Royal Cinque Ports which is a heck of a task master but something about that ancient crumpled links speaks to me.  Perhaps Mike DV's use of natural bowls, crevices, humps, hollows etc taints my rating of the course but one area that you are dead right about is the Kingsley Club can sneak up on you.  In my 2 rounds with Mike, Geoff and Brad last week I hit the first 5 greens in regulation both times.  I was a composite +2 and +3 over after 5 holes despite this.  And that I give to Mike's wonderful contouring of the greens (and a little to the fact I don't putt like Faxon).  I guess I refell in love with the course at the punchbowl green of #4, I had left myself in the left bunker to a back left pin position but I remembered Mike DV had told me the back of the green would funnel a ball toward the center.  Instead of hitting an explosion shot, I hit a 20 yard chip out of the bunker past the pin (while an agape Brad Miller watched in horror and then smiled) and after the ball went 10 feet past the hole  it creeped back and back to just 2 feet from the pin.  Further fun shots, banking it in with a long iron off the left side of the wonderful par 3 5th.  The same type of shot can be had on the 18th off the left side of the green to aid you to get close to a middle or right pin position.  And I have not even talked about holes like #9 or #13, #15 and #16.

The only places I have played in my global travels that offered this type of experience are British links, Woking, The Addington, West Sussex, Royal Melbourne, NGLA, Sand Hills and Pac Dunes.  Obviously, that is wonderful company.  While at Crystal Downs I felt runover when I finished my round, I always felt at the KC that today could be the day for a great round if only I decided to have fun with the course as it would provide me plenty of ways to create shots.  You can't put a rating on that.

Darren Kilfara:

You also have Doak's 2 other courses to play around Traverse City.  High Pointe is 15 minutes from the Kingsley Club and Black Forest is about 1hr.  Both are excellent although you need a cart for Black Forest and a TON of bug repellant.

[Craig Van Egmond]

Darren,

     You would fly into Traverse City. Arcadia Bluffs is worthing seeing as are the 2 Doak courses that NAF mentioned.

[larry_munger]

maybe KC was to easy for the GD guys to get on? how about someone coming clean a telling us why this gem got no respect except from the boss. If I where a GD guy, I would seriously think of retirement. here is, from this board (not played it)what looks like a GW top 20-30 modern if not better and its only #22 in MI??? as per GD

[GeoffreyC]

Matt- I agree with you concerning the challenge and options at KC.  I was just trying somehow to justify using the GD criteria for their obvious dissing of this wonderful course. You can play so many different shots with such interesting visual results (as Noel described) that KC must rank way up there on the fun factor.

[Matt_Ward]

The folks from the GD panel who did weigh in on TKC must be related to the Red Sox brass who thought they made a good deal when they shipped Babe Ruth to the Yankees.

Geoff:

You're right -- the f-u-n factor is clearly present at TKC and it amazes me how Arcadia Bluffs -- which is also a fine course -- has reaped mega publicity while TKC still toils as an also-ran course -- that is if you accept the present rating positions it occupies. I don't -- and obviously others concur. To be fair the GolfWeek poll should have had TKC much higher than where it is now.

Noel:

When I say TKC is just outside my personal top 50 I have to add that many of the courses ahead of it are a bit more demanding and in some ways more intense than TKC. That's just a personal preference -- but I can say that if I should be back to see TKC in the very near future I know it's a course that will grow in stature because when I first played the course I drove from Whistling Straits all the way through northern Michigan before arriving at TKC late in the afternoon. Seeing the shadows and the fescue blowing in the wind made for a memorable day.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()