[John Blain]

To those of you out there who have played both any opinion on which course is "better"?

[Jim_Kennedy]

I wouldn't say better, just that I'd rather play Ekwanok on a day to day basis.

[Dan_Callahan]

I agree with Jim. Ekwanok is one of those courses I could play every day and love it more and more with each round.

[Ronald Montesano]

Haven't played Ekwanok, nor have I played Taconic since the renovation...as a result, the jury is really out on this one.  That said, I could play Taconic or The Orchards for a long, long time.  Ekwanok would have to be something special to reach that shelf.

[Jim_Kennedy]

It is, and I'd bet you see it that way after 18. 

I'd place it #1 of the three for repeat plays.

[John Blain]

In my opinion, Taconic is somewhat more interesting than Ekwanok, although I love playing Ekwanok. The more interesting holes at Ekwanok seem to be more towards the back of the property while the holes around the clubhouse(1,2,3,16,17,18), while they are good holes individually, you could make the case they are also fairly nondescript. Taconic, the back nine in particular, is very, very strong. I know I'm being nitpicky here because both places are in the "special" category. I just think Taconic would be more enjoyable on a daily basis but I know I'm splitting hairs because they are both terrific.

I have to admit, however, that the ambiance of Ekwanok (especially on a nice late summer day) is unparalleled. From the caddies to the understated clubhouse to the history of the place it's pretty darn good.

[Greg Ohlendorf]

The views at Ekwanok are absolutely spectacular and hole 7 makes it worth playing just on it's own. The course has a grandness not found at Taconic , which is also very good, but Ekwanok day in and day out is just more special.

[Jim_Kennedy]

JP,
So far we have three votes for Ekwanok, two for Taconic, and one(I think) for The Orchards. 

It could be a good way to rate courses, just pit a few of like-quality against each other and see which of them wins  "The DIDO"   

 

[Joel Zuckerman]

I've played Taconic about 3 times, Ekwanok only once.  My vote would be for Ekwanok...partially because the layout intrigued me, but also because it's harder to get on, and we always tend to covet that which is harder to access----its exclusivity gives it more desirability and cache, at least IMO.

[Ronald Montesano]

At the risk of alienating JZ, I suggest we throw out the "privilege" aspect of Ekwanok.  If the goal of this thread is to determine the strength of the course, private vs. municipal (or in this case, college-owned land run by a separate board) should have no bearing.  To demonstrate my goodwill, whoever wishes to invite me out to Ekwanok so that I can give a well-informed, unbiased opinion, step forward!!!!

[PThomas]

i played both before the work at Taconic....based on that, definitely Ekwanok

[John Blain]

There is no question that part of the charm of Ekwanok is the setting, the history, the exclusivity, the caddies, the understated clubhouse and on and on. Throw in Frances Ouimet winning the 1914 US Amateur and the fact that it was the first golf course ever designed by Walter Travis and you have a pretty special place.
If I had one round to play and the choice was between Taconic or Ekwanok I would likely choice Ekwanok. However if I had to choose between the two to play every day I would likely choose Taconic. I just think overall as a golf course Taconic has more character and would be more fun for everyday play. I think Ekwanok , as good as it is, has some nondescript holes and over time may be become boring. Just my opinion FWIW which isn't much!

-John 

[ChipOat]

As a golf course (i.e. what's on the ground) - Taconic.

As a total golf experience - slight edge to Ekwanok.

Sort of like my preferring NGLA over Shinnecock although I think SH is the "better" golf course.

[Tom_Doak]

Ronald:

I have not seen the new work at Taconic.  Come to think of it, I haven't seen Ekwanok in a long time, either.  But I could get on either one, so privilege has nothing to do with me saying that Ekwanok is an easy choice for me here.

[Ronald Montesano]

Thanks, Tom.  I thought for a moment you were inviting me out when you mentioned the ease with which you can access either course.  I'm not a smiley emoticon guy, but you can imagine one here.

Egalitarian that I am, my question is, can the surroundings (including the privacy) be excluded from the judgment process?  I don't fault Joel for bringing it up, but question whether it is germane to the question.  E.G.  I had the great fortune to play Pete Dye GC this summer, my first trip round one of those enclaves (into whose company I would group Sand Hills, Rock Creek, Idaho and the many others that have sprouted this last quarter century).  As I think back to the experience, I'm able to create a venn diagram of sorts where the golf course evaluation occupies its own oval.  It's the only just way I know to create a proper evaluation of the course's merits.

That's not to say that the winding driveway nor the coal mining theme didn't catch my eye.

[Ronald Montesano]

Having taken a look at GCA's Ekwanok piece (http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/ekwanok-country-club-vt-usa/ekwanok-country-club-pg-ii) and recognizing my own affinity for Travis (Cherry Hill, Lookout Point, Stafford and 16 holes at Orchard Park), I can easily envision a challenging, frustrating and memorable first round around Ekwanok, then a greater understanding as time went on.  How is the overall property?  Taconic rises to that ridge along which #14 and #17 run, with five holes beyond it (2, 3, 4, 5, 6).  Is the Ekwanok grounds more rumpled, more diverse?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()