GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture
What am I missing about Hazeltine that the PGA of America keeps seeing?
George Pazin:
Hazeltine takes a lot of crap, but judging solely by TV from the recent PGA and US Am, it looks like a very nice piece of land. Not Bandon-like, or Nebraska-like, but if Oakmont can be a top 10 course on western PA land, almost any land will work, given the proper attention to detail.
I can't speak as to whether Hazeltine has that attention to detail. But I'd be surprised if it weren't a lot better than the all knowing cognescenti say...
JR Potts:
--- Quote from: Jay Flemma on July 01, 2009, 09:07:03 AM ---
I intend to let fly at Medinah in my PGA Championship preview as well as point out the shortcomings of HazNat. There are a lot of similarities on several levels. I'll partly let fly because I want to use the pieces I write to promote GCA, and partly because I think Medinah makes itself an easy, funny target, and partly because a lot of other writers feel the same way.
--- End quote ---
Why not let it rip? It fits perfectly with your agenda. What, "Medinah makes itself an easy, funny target, and partly because a lot of other writers feel the same way?" Seems to me to be a whole lot of group think going on with your proposed "article." What, are you trying to ingratiate yourself to the other "writers"? Why write an article about a course that has little to no relevance to this year's PGA because "other writers feel the same way"?
That's a solid journalistic basis for a story.....keep up the good work.
BTW - When did you play Medinah?
JR Potts:
--- Quote from: George Pazin on July 01, 2009, 08:34:00 PM ---Hazeltine takes a lot of crap, but judging solely by TV from the recent PGA and US Am, it looks like a very nice piece of land. Not Bandon-like, or Nebraska-like, but if Oakmont can be a top 10 course on western PA land, almost any land will work, given the proper attention to detail.
I can't speak as to whether Hazeltine has that attention to detail. But I'd be surprised if it weren't a lot better than the all knowing cognescenti say...
--- End quote ---
And George, Hazeltine is a good golf course and good test for quality players. There are trees on the property, that cannot be ignored.....but as many on here fail to grasp, trees can be an effective hazard and not all golf courses that are tree lined are bad....some people may even, gasp, like them.
I find that most of the criticism about long tree lined courses comes from those that aren't good enough to set foot on the first tee. And when we're talking about a private club like Hazeltine, the course doesn't have to be playable to everyone....only those who choose to join the club and those who are playing in PGA Championships and Ryder Cups. If it were up to me, the Jay Flemmas, Geoff Shackelfords, Bradley Kleins and other non-paying "guests" wouldn't set foot on my private course...unless of course, they were paying guests of a member.
Dan Kelly:
--- Quote from: Jason Topp on July 01, 2009, 09:26:44 AM ---I would argue that holes 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 16 and 17 are very good holes and that there is not a bad one in the remainder. The greens are good to very good with several interesting and unconventional contours. The course is a pretty good one for a PGA because it allows players with different strengths to contend - just look at the leaderboard from the last PGA - it included long hitters, short hitters, ballstrikers and short game guys.
--- End quote ---
Well said, Jason. I think 3, 6, 7, 10, and 14 are wonderful golf holes, both for the members and for the pros.
I also like holes 5 and 13.
As I've said before: I liked Hazeltine better in its original, wild-and-woolly incarnation. 1, 9 and 18 were all more interesting holes, in my opinion, as sharp doglegs than are their straight replacements. The much wilder greens were more interesting. And I particularly loved the old, 345-yard 17th (the hole PJ Boatwright reportedly said had to go or the USGA would never return) -- and I would restore it in an instant if I could. Make Hazeltine a par-73!
Some of the snobbery on this thread is just astonishing to me. I'd play Hazeltine any chance I got.
I'm not saying it's the greatest course in the world, but it doesn't merit anyone's scorn.
John_Conley:
If anyone works the archives well they will find the same thread from 2002, only the participants are Barney and me instead of Flemma and Topp.
I'm from the Twin Cities and think the area has several great tracks. I don't think Hazeltine is one of them. That said, I find it peculiar that I'm always defending Hazeltine. It is a lot better than you are led to believe.
First off, the site is not flat. Somehow Barney was certain it was. In fact, the course sits on the highest point in Carver county. (I sound like Klaven. Pretty sure it is true.)
As for the holes? #1 is a nice starting hole. As mentioned before, #3 is pretty cool because you have a swale for the second shot landing area, causing awkward approaches. I think #6 is a cool par 4. #8 is a good short par 3. #10 is a hole with a great approach shot down the hill to the green near the lake. #11 is open, but has enough of a shape to it to require accurate approaches to reach in two. #16 is obviously one of the more photographed holes anywhere and was immortalized in a Bud Chapman painting. #17 is where it turned against Scott Simpson in the playoff with Payne Stewart, a pretty god par 3. While #9 and #18 are numbingly boring holes, but they are testy and make you earn a par. Fitting final holes.
Bad course? Hardly. Best in the area? No. In line with several other tournament venues? Yes.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version