News:

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


Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Laurel Valley
« on: August 14, 2009, 02:01:44 PM »
I just accepted an invite to go up to Ligonier, PA, in late August to play 36 at Laurel Valley over two days.  A few searches revealed that LV isn't the most beloved course on this site -- comments included "zzzzz," "long slog," and "overrated" -- but not much in the way of details about the course or at least things of interest.  Soooo, anything that is particularly noteworthy or that I should be looking forward to?

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2009, 02:13:39 PM »
Don't worry about the "if it wasn't built in 1905 or by Doak or C&C it sucks" crowd on here. You will enjoy Laurel Valley. The back nine particularly is quite fun and #10 is one of my favorite holes anywhere. First few hole are a bit boring but it spices up from there.

Chris McKnigt is a true gentleman and will make your expereince memorable.

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2009, 02:39:59 PM »
Don't worry about the "if it wasn't built in 1905 or by Doak or C&C it sucks" crowd on here. You will enjoy Laurel Valley. The back nine particularly is quite fun and #10 is one of my favorite holes anywhere. First few hole are a bit boring but it spices up from there.

Chris McKnigt is a true gentleman and will make your expereince memorable.

Pfft, that's a cheap shot.
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2009, 02:43:17 PM »
Don't worry about the "if it wasn't built in 1905 or by Doak or C&C it sucks" crowd on here. You will enjoy Laurel Valley. The back nine particularly is quite fun and #10 is one of my favorite holes anywhere. First few hole are a bit boring but it spices up from there.

Chris McKnigt is a true gentleman and will make your expereince memorable.

Pfft, that's a cheap shot.


Call it what you wish.

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2009, 03:18:51 PM »
Carl:

I've opined previously that LV is overrated.

The course is usually wet to the max -- tee shots can routinely back-up or have little roll, if anything at all.

Dick Wilson, IMHO, did better designs -- his work at NCR / South and Meadowbrook Club on LI are two quick examples. So is Pine Tree in Florida.

Pennsy has a solid depth of private clubs -- some of which are underrated. In my mind, LV and the Grace Course at Saucon Valley make me shake my head and wonder what the fuss about them is about.

Curious to hear your comments after playing there. Please realize my thoughts don't have to do with the people there or the service any guest receives -- just on the architecture and the nature by which the course is presented.

ClarkW

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2009, 04:10:32 PM »
I will admit that I've said in the past that Laurel Valley is overwatered and there is too much emphasis on green green green, in my opinion. As a result this makes a relatively lengthy course play even longer. I've always wished that I could play the course in ideal firm and fast conditions. It would make an already good course play much, much better. Now, having said that... I will say that Laurel Valley is one of the nicest days at a private club that you will experience anywhere. Everything about the place-- the clubhouse, staff, food, accomodations, golf facilities, location-- is absolutely first class. Let us know what you think after you return. Enjoy!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2009, 04:41:28 PM »
Carl:

I'm interested in what you have to say about Laurel Valley in 2009, as well.

Thirty years ago, places like Laurel Valley and Moselem Springs were high in the GOLF DIGEST rankings.  I don't think it was all about them being long and difficult ... I think that 30 years ago, they were the "remote destination clubs" of their day, like Sand Hills and Rock Creek are now, so that part of their appeal has been upstaged.  But I'm curious to hear from someone whether they think the design has stood the test of time well.

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2009, 08:24:23 PM »
Tom:

The issue is not whether LV is a fine course -- the issue is whether it has been able to sustain itself given the vast range of top tier layouts that have emerged in the last 25 years. I can remember playing Moselem Springs years back and found the course entertaining but not really so grand as to be better than a range of NJ courses that received little or no attention.

LV has benefited from a connected membership -- having also hosted majors of one type or the other -- and clearly having AP in the shadows to help when matters happened is not bad either.

As I said previously -- other Wilson layouts should get more attention -- LV and to a lesser extent Saucon Valley's Grace Course maintained themselves for such a long time I have to wonder what people see in them -- unless that is they are not playing a broad range of newer layouts that have emerged in the last 25 years or so.

Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2009, 03:25:22 PM »
I had the good fortune to get invited to spend two days at Laurel Valley last week -- we played 27 holes the first afternoon, stayed over, and then played 18 the next morning.  I certainly agree with Clark and Greg that it's a class act:  great facilities (including several very cool cabins), terrific food, and excellent staff.  As always, all commentary about the course shouldn't detract from the wonderful non-golf experience. 

As for the course, it's got some great stuff:  #10 is indeed a great hole and #18 is a great risk-reward par 5 to finish.  It's also a good test of golf (and a brute from all the way back).  But in general I was underwhelmed and think it's overrated by GD, which has it in the top 80 in the U.S.  Part of the problem is the maintenance; while there were very few blades of grass out of place, it was way too wet, and the result was that a lot of the slopes in the fairways and greens were fairly irrelevant when hitting full shots -- you just aimed and fired.  I'd love to see how it plays in firmer, browner conditions -- I think it would require a *lot* more thinking than it currently does.  In fact, there were only a few times over the course of 45 holes where I really had to think about the kind of shot I wanted to hit.  Ultimately, though, even if the course were firmer it would still be ranked too high at 80 (IMHO, of course). 

So how does it stack up against other remote destination clubs?  For starters, it feels a lot less remote to me than Sand Hills, Rock Creek and (to some extent) Ballyneal -- it's about 4 hours from Philly, 3 and change from DC and Baltimore, and an hour from Pittsburgh -- so you don't have quite the feeling of being away from civilization.  Also, perhaps the layout was considered cutting-edge at the time (though I doubt it), but now it feels like just another very good, but not great, U.S. parkland course; I haven't been fortunate enough to play SH, RCCC or BN, but I think it's pretty obvious they don't have that feel.  To pick another non-remote semi-destination club with which to compare it, if I could choose whether to point the car northwest to Laurel Valley or southwest to Kinloch, I'd choose the latter 8 or 9 times out of 10. 

Did I have a good time?  Absolutely.  Would it be my top choice for a road trip from DC?  Not even close. 

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #9 on: September 04, 2009, 03:28:48 PM »
Did I have a good time?  Absolutely.  Would it be my top choice for a road trip from DC?  Not even close. 

So you didn't fly into Arnold Palmer Airport? :)

Thanks for sharing the report. Were there any holes of note?
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2009, 05:10:40 PM »
George:

As I mentioned, I thought the 10th hole was great.  It's a medium-length, dogleg right par 4 with a downhill tee shot from tees that are right beneath the clubhouse.  There are trees and a stream right, but you really want to cut off as much of the dogleg as possible because the green is uphill from the landing area and sits alongside a small pond at the top of that stream (the water is set off by a stone wall, which is a theme that recurs throughout the course) -- the farther right you go off the tee (i.e., hugging the dogleg), the closer you are to the green and the better the angle.  Also, when you're on the green, you really feel like you're in the middle of the Pennsylvania woods next to a beautiful pond/stream (which for all I know is man-made).

Unfortunately I didn't take pictures and I don't think the club has a website....or at least I haven't been able to find one.

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2009, 01:18:16 AM »
Carl:

Be curious to know how wet the place still is ?

Were drives routinely hitting ground and either splatting right there or rolling a mere 5-10 yards?

I do agree that even with ultimate firm and fast conditions the Wilson design doesn't have compelling architecture to drive the place to such a high level as defined by the Digest poll.

Carl, have you played any other Wilson layouts and if so what were they and what were your impressions?


Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2009, 09:17:36 PM »
Matt:
The fairways were very soft and very lush, but only 2 or 3 were so wet that the ball would stop right where it landed.  I haven't played any of Dick Wilson's other courses except Dubsdread (and I don't have a club how much of his work was still left in the 1995-96 timeframe), so I don't have a whole lot to say about his body of work.

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #13 on: September 08, 2009, 07:33:06 PM »
Laurel Valley has been discussed many times on this site.  Here is a link to one of the previous threads.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,36414.msg743794/#msg743794
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back