A step in the right direction at Medinah?...

[Jud_T]

(from Chicago Sun-Times)

Medinah's 15th gets facelift

The latest renovation of Medinah's No. 3 course has created something the course never had before -- a drivable par-4 hole. Architect Rees Jones shortened the 15th hole from a 392-yard par-4 to one measuring 280. A pond fronting the green and extending down the right side of the fairway will make a great risk-reward hole when the 2012 Ryder Cup matches are played at the famed layout.

Jones' latest work was a $1.5 million project that involved the rebuilding of 11 greens. The others were rebuilt to USGA specifications in 2002. No. 3, now in the final stages of renovation work, is scheduled to re-open June 18.

[Matt Bosela]

I also read yesterday that the club has hired Armen Suny to help prepare the course for the '12 Ryder Cup.  Suny worked at Merion, Cherry Hills, Castle Pines and Shadow Creek, among others and shares co-designer credit with Rod Whitman and Richard Zokol at Sagebrush.

[Matt_Ward]

One has to wonder if a course undergoes that MANY changes -- and if few of them were really notable to start with -- then just how good is the course period.

Medinah No 3 is Michael Jackson of the golf design world.

How the members handle it all is beyond me.

[Garland Bayley]

Good work guys. Let's keep bashing courses like Medinah, and maybe we can generate some work for the architects on this board.

[Matt_Ward]

Shivas:

Glad you took the bait -- I don't see ANGC in the highlight reel either. If you have noticed I've said the changes brought upon by Hootie and his cohorts really mystify me and others.

Dave, did you think throwing ANGC forward would provide the cover for the nnnnnnnnth job Medinah No 3 is doing?

You're smarter than that -- right.

[Richard Choi]

[Garland Bayley]

Richard,

Your last posting is being blocked here for being obscene and tasteless.
 

[Jud_T]

Medinah No 3 is Michael Jackson of the golf design world.

[Richard Choi]

Garland, did that fix the problem?

[Phil McDade]

See, I think Michael might have been at his best mid-facial change, the "Off the Wall" - "Thriller" era, when he'd obviously had some work done, but not as extensive as the later freak-show years (and albums).

Maybe Medinah during the Lou Graham era, then?

[Garland Bayley]

Garland, did that fix the problem?

Yep

[Michael Huber]

Q:  How was the 15th hole before the renovation? Was it a fun hole?  Just another hole?  A bad hole?  A hole worthy of total replacement?

[Terry Lavin]

Q:  How was the 15th hole before the renovation? Was it a fun hole?  Just another hole?  A bad hole?  A hole worthy of total replacement?

It was a real snoozer, sort of jammed in the corner of the property, with a good view of the Shell station, back in the day.  I'm excited about this renovation for several reasons.  First, I hope that they will have fixed the greens, because they were flattened out too much the last time Jones had a whack at the course.  The greens lost a lot of interest to me.  Hopefully the internal contouring will be much improved.  Second, the new 15th hole has the chance to put at least a dose of fun into a golf course that can tend to be a hard slog if you're not a scratch golfer.  Finally, I'm hoping that they cut down enough trees to make a difference, but I'm not holding my breath.

Medinah gets its fair share of criticism and a lot of it is warranted, because it seems like the poster child of committees falling prey to the fad of the moment and changing the golf course on a whim.  I have some reason to believe that this time will be different, because it seems like the leadership of the club has recognized the errors of past regimes and I'm told that they've largely gotten out of the way of the architect, the construction crew and the superintendent.  That would be a good thing, IMHO.

[Greg Tallman]

Matt:  you wondered whether Medinah could have ever been any good in the first place because it's had so many changes - positing that the existence of extensive changes means that the original couldn't have been very good.  I noted that ANGC has also had extensive changes, which would refute you theory unless you also believe that ANGC wasn't very good in the first place, either.  Now, you're implying that the ANGC was good in the first place...which, of course, refutes your original thesis.  So what exactly were you baiting me into ... proving your thesis wrong?  Guilty as charged on that one...    

Am I lost or is Matt saying something totally different than you suggest?

I believe he is saying ANGC was great and now is less than great whereas the argument is that Medinah in orginal state was not that good and now chooses to make wholesale changes in an attempt to achieve greatness, or even to be considered pretty good.

Perhaps one day the two will meet squarely entrenched in mediocrtiy?

[Phil_the_Author]

Matt,

You wrote, "Dave, did you think throwing ANGC forward would provide the cover for the nnnnnnnnth job Medinah No 3 is doing?"

Have you seen the course since it was redone? I'd be surprised if you had since it isn't scheduled to reopen for three more weeks, though you might have gotten an early peek. The reason for asking isI have a hard time undertanding how you can be critical of the redesign "the nnnnnnnnth job Medinah No 3 is doing..." if you haven't even seen it.

I hope I am wrong and you have, but it would be disappointing to hear you panning work without having seen it. Whether one agrees with your opinion or not, I've never gotten the im[pression that you judge work sight unseen.

To paraphrase a long forgotten youngster from the ehady days of baseball's beginnings and first major scandal, "Say it ain't so, Matt... Say it ain't so..."

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

I've been going to Medinah No 3 since the '75 US Open -- I have not seen the Rees Jones version under discussion now -- whatever number that is now. But, I have played the course when in town for the major events. No problem in disclosing that but my original comments still stand -- the place has botched it with every "new" and so-called "improvement."


Dave:

Here's what you forget amigo -- Medinah has NEVER gotten it right.

ANGC has ... the post impropvements from after Tiger came onto the scene were not smart at all. The ones that took place right after WWII were really major league improvements to the original Mackenzie layout.

Overall, the batting average for ANGC is a good bit better than Medinah No 3 -- Dave, face it -- the place has the benefit in being in the Windy City and there are not many other big time venue options there -- too bad that BN can be back into the mix.

Medinah No 3 for me is the Baltusrol of the Midwest -- in sum -- time for other venues to take their place in my opinion.

[JR Potts]

Phil:

He hasn't seen it.  Up until 5 days ago, only about 30 people have.

[David Stamm]

(from Chicago Sun-Times)

 
The latest renovation of Medinah's No. 3 course has created something the course never had before -- a drivable par-4 hole. Architect Rees Jones shortened the 15th hole from a 392-yard par-4 to one measuring 280. A pond fronting the green and extending down the right side of the fairway will make a great risk-reward hole when the 2012 Ryder Cup matches are played at the famed layout.

 

Oh Rees, you cutting edge trendsetter you......

[Matt_Ward]

Dave:

ANGC was good -- it got even better -- post WWII -- then Hootie screwed it up.

Medinah No 3 was never that good -- had the benefit in being in the Windy City -- it's proponents are just like the nickname. Medinah is the Baltusrol of the Midwest -- if you think that's a compliment then wrap your arms around it.

[Matthew Rose]

Any changes to #17 this time around? Seems like they've tinkered with that a million times.

I always kind of hoped they would route one of those par-threes along the lake instead of over it.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Any diagrams?

280 sounds like a 3wood - with no one laying up.
The water would befit most laying up.

Seems a little bit much.

[Garland Bayley]

Any diagrams?

280 sounds like a 3wood - with no one laying up.
The water would befit most laying up.

Seems a little bit much.

That's about what I thought when first reading the thread.

[Phil_the_Author]

Matt,

Just because all of the other re-do's of the course turned out poorly (in your opinion) that is no reason to pan this one done by Rees. That doesn't bode well to me in trusting your judgement of courses for you obviously approach some of them with a pre-conceived judgement and agenda, and that is simply wrong and unprofessional.

I am really very surprised. By having done that already you can't give a review of the course after you've played it and be critical of it and expect it to be respected and accepted.

Imagine being the book critic who hated everything that J.D. Salinger wrote and proclaiming that his new book "Catcxher in the Rye" would prove to be a collossal waste of time and money and would be quickly forgotten.

It may be that the redesign isn't good, but unles you've played it you simply can't state that it is so...

[Tim_Cronin]

Q:  How was the 15th hole before the renovation? Was it a fun hole?  Just another hole?  A bad hole?  A hole worthy of total replacement?

It was a real snoozer, sort of jammed in the corner of the property, with a good view of the Shell station, back in the day.  I'm excited about this renovation for several reasons.  First, I hope that they will have fixed the greens, because they were flattened out too much the last time Jones had a whack at the course.  The greens lost a lot of interest to me.  Hopefully the internal contouring will be much improved.  Second, the new 15th hole has the chance to put at least a dose of fun into a golf course that can tend to be a hard slog if you're not a scratch golfer.  Finally, I'm hoping that they cut down enough trees to make a difference, but I'm not holding my breath.

Medinah gets its fair share of criticism and a lot of it is warranted, because it seems like the poster child of committees falling prey to the fad of the moment and changing the golf course on a whim.  I have some reason to believe that this time will be different, because it seems like the leadership of the club has recognized the errors of past regimes and I'm told that they've largely gotten out of the way of the architect, the construction crew and the superintendent.  That would be a good thing, IMHO.

It was also the first hole I ever played at Medinah, in the media day for the 1988 U.S. Senior Open. Tee shot into the right rough, a failed chop out, a big third to the green and two putts for a cozy bogey. "This course is a snap now that I've got the rough figured out," I said to myself. Seventeen humiliations later...

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

Help me out OK -- have you played Medinah No 3 ever? Or are your comments solely being pushed forward from the deep left seats. My comments on the previous changes have been echoed by a number of others Phil -- you make it sound like mine is the lone dissenting voice -- far from it amigo.

I never panned the Rees change in question because I have not played it -- yet. I've played the course four (4) times and each of those visits came after so much hype about the changes being the FINAL version of what would be needed.

Phil -- please stop with the pontificating about being "unprofessional" and all the other Father's Know Best dictums. My mind is always open to what might be possible but for you to suggest that the past should be throw completely out the window is a bit much indeed. Medinah No 3 needs to demonstrate that it has some sort of s-t-a-y-i-n-g power from the design side of things. Making changes every 4-5 years doesn't show that to me and a good number of others.

I've disclosed the fact that I have not played the latest version of what the course wants to be. I do have every right to be a bit skeptical that the newest inclusion will not be much more than the sum total of what's been done previously. Batting averages do mean something Phil.

p.s. Now maybe Rees can fix the 18th at BB which I have played numerous times and stiill see it as a major weak link for the Black.