[Lawrence Largent]

I played 36 at the Ross course at French Lick this past Sunday and came away with mixed emotions.  I would like to hear some of the boards thoughts on the course in particular the par 3's.  I'll chime in with mine later.  Also if anyone knows who was involved with the work that was done recently.

[Chris Flamion]

Discloser:  I have not been to French Lick, ever.

My father recently went down for a weekend and played both courses.  His quotes on the Dye "standard Dye, Pretty, Challenging, and Head scratch worthy."

But He Gushed over the Ross Course, saying "Best Old Course I have ever played."  Please note this comes from a man who was a +3 in the late 70's and played all over the country on the old school style mini tours.

I am planning on making the trip next year but until then that is all I got.

[JLahrman]

I last played the course in 2003, before the work obviously, so I can't comment on it.

But the course was, and probably still is, a ton of fun to play.

[Chris_Clouser]

The Ross Course is among the top handful of publicly accessible courses in the state after the work done there.  The greens are some of the best in the state with only two or three courses even in the same conversation.  I think the long par 4s (5 and 12) are the best two holes on the course.  The 2nd was also quite good.  I think the par 5s are both a little wanting, something just seemed to be missing on both of them.  The par 3s seem a tad repetitive in their shot requirements even though they look totally different from the tee, with the exception of the short 16th.  I also think they might be a touch over the edge and into penal  design with the length necessary for them.  Of the bunch I think the 13th is by far the best.  The only other thing I would note is that a few of the holes (1, 10, 11 and 18) seem too much alike.  Overall though I think it is a great course but perhaps a tad overpriced.  I've played much worse courses that get much higher ratings.

[Jay Cox]

The Ross course might be the most underrated golf course in the country.  

I say that having only played it on one day, although I did play around three times on that day.  We were supposed to drive over to Sultan's Run to play in the afternoon, but couldn't tear ourselves away.

The greens are simply superb.  From just that one day over two years ago, I can still remember the details of over half of them.  They give a tremendous advantage to the player who can control trajectory and favor the correct miss, but at the same time make recovery play interesting rather than an exercise in futility.

The par 3s are tremendous holes individually because each one asks for a difficult shot and extracts an appropriate penalty -- not a draconian penalty, but not nothing either -- for failing to pull it off.  The 13th and 16th are just two of the coolest holes I've ever played.  

Collectively, I suppose one could argue that they're too long.  If I recall correctly, 4 was around 200 yards and 6 and 13 both around 230, with 16 at around 140 being over 50% shorter than any of the others.  But it's not like the rest of the course forces you to hit an overabundance of very long approaches, with only two par 5s, one of which is completely unreachable.  And to me at least they do not feel the least bit repetitive.

I think the Ross course belongs in the same class as Yale and Highland Links -- rugged courses that embrace difficult terrain rather than fighting it, and are great fun to play as a result.  But I think it might be an even better course than those two, and that's coming from one of the biggest fans of the Yale course there is.

[Jay Cox]

The par 3s seem a tad repetitive in their shot requirements even though they look totally different from the tee, with the exception of the short 16th.  I also think they might be a touch over the edge and into penal  design with the length necessary for them. 

Chris, I imagine you've played the Hill course far more often than I have, so I'm inclined to defer to your judgment.  But my memory of the par 3s is much different.  I thought that (a) they all ask for quite different shots, even if the lengths are somewhat similar and (b) they are not penal in the sense that anything other than the worst miss allows for a difficult, but possible (and typically fascinating) recovery shot.  What do you think makes them too similar?  What do you think makes them penal?

As an example: the fourth for me is a long iron, and on the day I played you had to do two things with the long iron shot to be successful.  First, you had to get it over a quite steep bank fronting the green.  Second, you absolutely, positively had to keep it below the hole; anything above the hole and not very close in meant a likely four.  It was no mean feat to do both of those things at once, since that meant hitting either a soft shot with a long club or playing something low and creative into the bank.  While none of the recovery shots seemed easy, none of them seemed impossible, either, unless you ended up both above the hole and on the wrong side of one of the vertical ridges coming in from the back of the green, in which case you needed to take your medicine and put your chip somewhere that would allow you to make four.

That to me is very different from six, which for me was a fairway wood to a receptive green with a bowl in the back (meaning that the primary challenge was to a hit a very long shot very straight, but eliminating the need to hit an unusually soft shot), and from thirteen, where the green is a series of bowls and the real test is controlling the distance on a fairway wood shot (something I hardly ever find myself asked to do).   And sixteen, as you say, is just a completely different kettle of fish.  It's over 50% shorter than any of the other par 3s and it makes you think a tremendous amount about placement and trajectory even though you only have a wedge or a nine iron in your hands.   

I think both thirteen and sixteen are world class, and that the other two are worthy holes as well.

[PCCraig]

I played the Ross course for the first time this past May and had a blast. The course has a cool open "country" course feel and features some awesome and wild greens. I found the course very playable and even the super long par-3's were not too hard as the greens are all huge.

Jay's comparison to Yale isn't actually all that far off...even though I had never thought of it before, but it's a very good one.

I believe the work was done by Schmidt and Curley (sp?).

[Andy Troeger]

I played the course quite a few times as a teenager (obviously before the renovation) and quite frankly didn't really even like it. As time went on I think I realized why others did, but it took going back this year to really appreciate the course. It literally went from outside my top ten publics in Indiana to #1. Some of that certainly had to be the improvements made, and the rest was probably my tastes changing.

I don't think its ideal to have so much length in the par threes, but I still wouldn't change either #6 or 13 in the name of variety. To me #4 is short enough to make it quite a bit different than the other two, and I think its very beneficial that #16 is very short. To me the biggest weakness is that there are many par fours in the same yardage range, so there are a lot of driver and short-iron approaches. Many holes have downhill tee shots with uphill approaches. The greens do make the golf course and the restoration really added character and perhaps some needed length that makes the course the challenge that it was meant to be given that it held a PGA in the 1920's (guessing a bit at the year but I think it was about 1924-5).

[Chris_Clouser]

Jay,

For some reason I was thinking all but 16 played at about the same length.  I'm probably mistaken though, 4 might be shorter than I remember.  I think the thing about the three longer holes is that they all force a mandatory carry and all of them are over 200 yards.  There is just no other option.  And believe me, most people that play there are not skilled enough to worry about getting to the correct section of the green, they are just concerned about getting near the green and avoiding the hazards if they can hit it that far.  I agree that 16 and 13 are the best two of the four holes and are special, but 4 and 6 are not anything I haven't seen at other courses.

I think the course is one of the best in the state but it isn't without its flaws. 

[Eric_Terhorst]

I thoroughly enjoyed the Ross course, and with the exception as Chris says of finding a couple of par 4s that play similarly, found very little to complain about.  There are some neat shorter par 4s, like the sharp dogleg #8 with its green that slopes 7' from back to front, #9 with a blind shot up hill, #11's skyline green, and #17 with a punchbowl as I recall.  I like the par 5s better than Chris, especially #7, a wide meandering river kind of hole with a terrific green.

I don't understand the comments about lack of variety in the par 3s.  I think it's important to not marry yourself to one set of tees when playing the course.  The par 3s can be played 166-184-208-119 from the "Regular" tees, or throw in a couple of forward tees and back tees if you like to mix it up.  13 is a brute--move up to 164 if you've already played 4 and 6 at full length.  Chris, I believe 13 can be played with a run-up shot, and as you can see from the pic below #4 could theoretically be played with 2 short shots. 

#4



#6



#13 Side View

[Chris_Clouser]

Eric,

Great point on the use of different tees.  I think I will just have to revisit French Lick and do the Ross course again to see if I can be wooed by its charms as I clearly must not have been taken in on my most recent visit over a year ago. 

[Rob_Waldron]

I just came back from a trip to French Lick where I experienced both the Dye and Ross courses. Let's just say I scored 12 shots better on the Ross. I really enjoyed the bunkering and greens complexes at the Ross. I often ask myself why modern greens are not designed with similar undulations. I thought having three par 3 holes in exess of 225 yards was a bit ridiculous. Can you imagine what it was like without modern day equipment in the 20's? After playing the first two par 3's from the tips we decided to moved up a notch on the third one and played it from only 200 yards. I loved the short little par 3 15th. We had a front right pin and my second shot from the front bunker (with a backstop) was much easier than my playing partner's putt from 30 feet above the hole!

[Mark Pritchett]

I played the Ross course last summer and came away impressed.  I enjoyed the "open feel" that Pat mentioned.  Most of the Ross courses I have played are more of the tree lined variety.  The greens were bold and interesting, but at kept manageable speeds.  I think it was about $85.

Well worth playing if you are anywhere within a couple hour's drive.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()