GD Best New for 2009 Comes Out -- Sagebrush Wins in Canada

[Matt_Ward]

Jim K:

The issue of what is really "new" has been an ongoing problem with Digest. I pointed this out years ago to the folks there when Kingsley was bumped from when it really opened -- to the next year when more people could see it. Frankly, something is new for a short period of time -- let's say one year. One cannot simply extend the "new-ness" further down the line when such "new" connection bumps up against other courses that are more truer to the spirit of such a designation.

When facilities are thrown into a leftover bag because not enough of their folks have seen the course -- you run the likely risk that courses from one year can be lumped with others. The resulting hodge-podge can certainly make one's head spin and say, "Huh!"

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,
Interesting, so if a course opened in mid-April of 2009, as WV did (according to the Olympian and the Seattle Times), it has the chance of being best new for 2010?. 

This is harder than knowing if you bought a new car or a leftover.   

OK, you may have me there. My memory was that Slag's event there was in May b4 the actual opening. But if they held the opening before May 1, then one would think it should have been in the list.

[Dale Jackson]

Jim K:

The issue of what is really "new" has been an ongoing problem with Digest. I pointed this out years ago to the folks there when Kingsley was bumped from when it really opened -- to the next year when more people could see it. Frankly, something is new for a short period of time -- let's say one year. One cannot simply extend the "new-ness" further down the line when such "new" connection bumps up against other courses that are more truer to the spirit of such a designation.

When facilities are thrown into a leftover bag because not enough of their folks have seen the course -- you run the likely risk that courses from one year can be lumped with others. The resulting hodge-podge can certainly make one's head spin and say, "Huh!"

I understand what you are saying Matt, that some times courses do not get enough ratings in a year and are passed on to the next year.  But, by far, the bigger problem is the developer/architect not requesting the course be considered for best new until the year after it opens.  Golf Digest (and Golfweek I suspect) does not put a course on its list unless requested to do so.

And actually, I do not see this as a problem, more times than not a new course I review could use another few months grow in.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Matt,
I've often wondered how the course that opens towards the end of the cycle has the time to get enough players out to rate it. Seems like Wine Valley will have to wait until next year to be in the running for, or win, 'Best New'.

Does GD have a minimum time, like the course has to have been open for at least 3 months, etc.?

[Matt_Ward]

Dale:

Let me just say this -- when a course opens is a factual time frame. No doubt the ownership decides when to open it -- but when it does open -- that is the date you work off for the purposes in determining if something is new. Once a course goes beyond a year -- it's no longer "new."

If a course has opened -- that means the entire 18 is open -- and should the ownership hold the course back for whatever reason (grow in and the like) - it still stands to reason the course has already opened and the clock is ticking for the purposes of any such designation.

The reason I say this is to avoid deliberate manipulations that can happen because sometimes a course may wish to not have to endure certain competition and be in a stronger position the following year.

The Kingsley Club situation was a classic example of how a course was bumped - not because of the ownership's desire -- but because the magazine was slow on the trigger in getting people to review the facility. Frankly, if one keeps one's eyes and ears open you can tell where the key candidates will be coming from in ample time for any such review.

And actually, I do not see this as a problem, more times than not a new course I review could use another few months grow in.

[Matt_Ward]

Jim K:

The time frame is one year -- but Digest sets the time frame of when such a year starts / ends. In this case it's a May time frame.

The issue is that courses can manipulate the "official" time they have opened -- even though they have for all practical purposes been opened several months before that.

I subscribe to the belief that once the doors open for play -- the clock is ticking.

As I said to Dale -- it doesn't take much of a rocket scientist to figure out which "new" courses are ones that need to be visited. Those who are slow on the switch clearly demonstrate to me that it is they who are behind the times.

[Jim_Kennedy]

So let me get this straight. A course that was going to be considered for the 2009 list has a minimum of about 6 months to a maximum of about 18 months in which it can be seen by raters. If that's true than you'll always have some courses jockeying their opening dates if they're anywhere near the April 30th cut-off. Who wants to settle for 6 or 7 months of 'chatter' when you can stretch that out into 18?

[Tom_Doak]

Jim:

Actually, lots of courses used to want to bump UP their opening dates if they were sure they'd get enough raters to see their course, because winning Best New a year earlier meant they might sell their memberships faster.

I guess now that none of them can sell any memberships, they might as well sit back and wait on the ranking, too.

[Garland Bayley]

Jim,

According to Golf Washington, Wine Valley's official opening was early June. I know they had planned on opening earlier (and Slag had planned an earlier GCA outing); but they had trouble with unseasonably cold weather inhibiting grow in.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Garland,

What's a couple of weeks amongst friends 

So it looks like it's going to have a two year roll out 

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

You hit the nail squarely on the head -- "extended" time frames can happen and as a result it's possible for some courses to have a much more condenses time for review while others get a far longer "opening."

One of the benefits of this site is that more accurate opening info is usually posted here.

Another interesting element that seems to be gaining momemtum is the partial opening -- as seen by the new Doak layout in Bandon. This allows people to see what's there similar to a trailer of a movie and when the final rollout does come about allow for even more attention and possible critical acclaim. I would think others would try to do that.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tom,
Bumping 'up' seems more realistic for all the right rea$on$. 

Matt,
That could very well be the plan of choice for courses that don't necessarily rely on pre-sells, initiation fees or memberships.

[Matt_Ward]

Curious to hear from those who have played Sagebrush and how they saw the elevation changes within the property?

The pics I have seen look awesome. Curious to also know how the layout stacks up against other top tier competition from the side of Canada?

thanks ...

[Jim Franklin]

Congratulations Rod & Jeff & Ron Prichard & Tim Liddy & Andrew Staples

Pikewood seems to me to be a case of conditioning and access.
The course looks like it is on a cool site.
It looks like an impossible walk - even though there are no cart paths.
Long walks between green & tee - a couple huge ones.
Long holes - none short.
The back looks much better routed than the front.
Narrow clearings - not thinned out enough on the edges.
It is clearly in the Testing & pretty category.

My thoughts exactly. I am still stunned RCCC did not win. RCCC is in my top 5 all time and I have played a bunch of places. It has long holes, short holes, variety galore. I just don't see that at Pikewood, but I have not played it. It may knock my socks off if I play it so I need to give it a chance. RCCC knocked my socks off and cart over .

[Bob Jenkins]

Matt W,

I have only played Sagebrush once, and that was with fellow GCAer, Will McEwan, this past August. We both loved the place.

The green complexes are generally huge, diverse, interesting and appealing to the eye. On almost each hole, I would stop at 20-50 yards out and just look at the green and try to take it all in. Different approaches constantly came to mind. I could not wait to see more! The greens were also in great shape.

The only similar experiences I have had in North America would be Ballyneal and Pacific Dunes. I have not played any of the Nebraska courses or the links style courses of Long Island to be able to compare. Sagebrush is a very "big" course in that the features all seem large and the course spreads out. With the nearby hills and Nicola Lake in view on many holes, it is very picturesque.

The fairways were actually quite wide, although in many cases, you would not come to that conclusion while standing on the tee. Playing to the correct side of the fairway was very important on most holes as the approach would be much, much different and more difficult from the wrong side. The tip sheet on where to aim was very helpful.

Will and I played in a cart. As has been said on this site many times, it would be a difficult walk. I think the next time I am there I will give it a go, but not if the temperature is in the 90s or above, as it typically is around there in the summer. It has also been pointed out that the big elevation changes are from green to tee on a few holes. One could go through individual holes re the elevation changes but there are no, what I call, "goofy" elevation changes. By that I mean, there are no holes where you stand at the edge of a cliff and look straight down and try to figure out if it is an 8 iron or a 4 iron. #9 at Chambers Bay comes to mind and is one of only two holes I do not like at that course. #1 is a medium length uphill par four to a massive green and it climbs quite steadily, especially in the last 50 yards. That would have as much climbing as any hole that I recall. In short, the elevation changes are significant but not overwhelming by any means.

I knew Sagebrush would be good but did not imagine how good it is. As Will said, it was probably as much fun as I have ever had exploring a new course.

I cannot wait to go back in the spring. Hopefully it may be possible to organize a GCA event and if so, I will be working on it.

Bob Jenkins