News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #175 on: March 08, 2002, 10:59:41 AM »
Darrin,

I have a few glaring errors on my Michigan resume.  I have heard great things about Tullymore, but have not been there.  I am planning an early season trek to the west side of the state and that is on the list.  I have never heard of Grand View.  Is it worth a look?  You are right about Katke Cousins.  It is a fine golf course.  Between U of M, Sharf, Katkie, and Forest Akers, SE MIchigan has some wonderful University golf.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

darrin

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #176 on: March 08, 2002, 11:37:04 AM »
David:

I will be playing Tullymore, St. Ives and Thoroughbred come early-May.  I'm looking forward to it as I've heard great things about Tully and Thoroughbred (though mixed on St. Ives).  Grand View was recommended by a friend, and is supposed to be one of those "hidden gems" we always hear about.  It's located in the tiny city of New Era which is only 5 miles or so from the Thoroughbred...hopefully, if I have time I will check it out.  An internet search for this course is not very helpful, but it did receive the coveted 4.5 star from Golf Digest!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

JohnH

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #177 on: March 08, 2002, 11:54:20 AM »
David,

Your absolutely right about the university golf in Mi.  If you haven't already, let me recommend Hawk Hollow in Lansing, one of Jerry Mathews best.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Ben Cowan-Dewar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #178 on: March 08, 2002, 12:23:12 PM »
Matt,
Glad to see Spyglass and PGA so close for you too.  I think I will call them a tie at third, definitely behind Pasa.  Played it just a few weeks ago and it was really superior.

Great course.

As for Primm, I am not a huge Fazio fan, but I really enjoyed Primm, both courses.  Far superior to Revere in my mind.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #179 on: March 08, 2002, 12:25:50 PM »
John,

You are right about Hawk Hollow.  It is a very solid golf course.  I did not realize it was affiliated with MSU though.  Has MSU moved from Forest Acres to Hawk?  If yes, do you think it was a good move?  There is one other public course in East Lansing that I really like as well.  It is called something like Timber Ridge?  I would rate them Hawk, Forest, Timber.  What do you think?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

JohnH

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #180 on: March 08, 2002, 12:39:46 PM »
David,

Sorry for the misunderstanding, Hawk Hollow is not affiliated with MSU as far as I know.  I have played Timber Ridge as well as both Forest Akers courses, but I personally think the Akers are a notch below Timber and Hawk.  It's a toss up between those two as far as I'm concerned.  Jackson County has two new excellent publics, Calderone and Grande, if you ever are in that area.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Steve Johnson

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #181 on: March 08, 2002, 02:07:49 PM »
Matt and David et al,

This is really a fantastic site.  Thank you for all the great posts.  As a novice in terms of golf course architecture, I think I'll learn a lot here.

I am really surprised about many of your ratings, so please help me understand . . . I'm a 5.7 index, but again, know little about course design . . . just what I like.

Meadows Del Mar is not a very good course for a variety of reasons.  I played it again over the weekend and it is still brown.  What San Diego course still is dormant and can get away with charging $140?  Couple of good par 4's.  5's are not very good at all.

Redhawk is not my favorite course either.  The starting hole sets a bad tone with a target par 5 and not a good landing area.  Not top 20 for me either.

HMB -- Ocean and Inland.  I thought Ocean was very overrated.  Many of the holes were far too similar.  Reminded me a bit of the back nine at Torrey North.  Par 4's that parallel each other back and forth.

Matt, please help me with Maderas vs Barona.  Despite hosting the golf school, it has received zero press.  That's a course I absolutely love.  Great set of holes -- good starting hole (#2 is weak).  Variety of 3's, 4's, and 5's.  Course is always in excellent shape.  Bunkering is well placed.  Fairways are narrow in the right places.  Landing areas are fair.  Besides #2, I am not crazy about the par 5 8th hole or the par 4 16th.  Except for those 3 holes, I think it's the best course in San Diego.  Help me with what you mean by fairway lines and how that makes Barona so great.  I like the course but it makes my second ten not first.

Agree with Fort Ord.  Don't agree with Pacific Grove.  Poppy is a better course.  Don't agree with Tony Lema but haven't played it in good shape.

Also, Desert Dunes has slipped over the years.  Used to be better conditioned and a little less windy (is that possible?) about 5 years ago.  Some of the trees have either fallen or been removed so the drives are a little less challenging.

Eager to play Pelican, Stevinson Ranch, La Purisima.

What about Cinnabar?  My brother's favorite course but no mentions here . . .

Matt -- please tell me more about why Barona is so great.  I'm eager to learn more about course architecture and design.  BTW, I played in a tournament there and was 3 under after 6 and 1 under after 11.  You'd think I'd love the course after that.   ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #182 on: March 08, 2002, 02:17:33 PM »
Steve:

No mention of Cinnabar because it just plain doesn't belong in any top 20 or 30 conversation.  I live right near it, play it often... there are 3 nines and all are great, I'm damn glad we have it, but it just falls short here.  OK, maybe top 30 it sneaks in, I don't know.

Pacific Grove is an "acquired taste."  Rough around the edges but just plain fun.  I can see putting that above the WAY more polished, but way less "inspiring" Cinnabar most definitely.  

But there is room for argument there anyway!

Re "Tony Lema", have you played it post-renovation or are you talking about the old course?  It's now called the Tony Lema course at Monarch Bay Golf Club... just wanna make sure we're talking about the same thing.

Re HMB Ocean, are talking about the new Arthur Hills design, correct?  I don't find many holes alike there and there are a few holes that are just plain wonderful, and I really like the routing and "flow"...

Re Barona, I'll let Matt explain it - he's far better at it this than I am.  My take at what makes it great is that each hole gives you "choices" off the tee, the greens are freakin' BRILLIANT, and Todd is channelling MacKenzie with those bunkers.  But Matt hopefully will elaborate.

Looks like you get around our state, anyway.  Thanks for the comments!

TH

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Steve Johnson

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #183 on: March 08, 2002, 02:56:18 PM »
Tom -- haven't played Cinnabar but good to know it shouldn't be on top of my list.

I have not played Tony Lema since the re-design -- only going on friends' opinions who have played it.  I'll give it a shot b/c I like your list of courses.

Re: Half Moon Bay, we are talking about the same relatively new Arthur Hills-designed course.  I'm just not as impressed.  You are right that the holes are not all the same, but there's a point where you can stand and see all the holes (just like Torrey North back 9) and it really takes away from the specialness of it.  At least they've taken advantage of the ocean unlike the other course.  I know you won't like this, but I think the other inland course has better holes than the Ocean.  They just seemed more traditional to me.

I'm going to play Barona again in a few weeks and will make note of your comments and Matt's future comments.  BTW, the second hole green is almost unfair.  If you're on the left side of the green with a left middle pin placement, it is IMPOSSIBLE to end up within 20 feet of the hole.  Same with #3.  I guess that's the challenge, but I would argue that wherever you are around the green, you should be given an opportunity to put the ball within 10-15 feet of the pin (that's not that close) without hitting a miracle shot.  Greens tend to be a little too big for my liking at Barona.  I know I'm going to get shot on this board for saying anything negative about it . . .

BTW Tom, since you live in the area, what do you think of San Juan Oaks?  I haven't played the course in 4-5 years, but seem to think highly of it. (as an aside, I tend to like both traditional and new courses, which is also an unpopular opinion.  For example, I like Winged Foot West, Bandon Dunes, Blackwolf Run River, and World Woods Pine Barrens almost equally (all are different but special).  Blasphemy, I know.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Stettner

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #184 on: March 08, 2002, 03:55:03 PM »
Steve:
I really hope you go to Pacific Grove and take another stab at it. I know it's short and the front nine is less than stellar, but man the golf is fun, and that back nine is one of the most natural in all of golf.
Huckster:
Gimme a call. 510-681-3083
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Will E

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #185 on: March 08, 2002, 06:03:59 PM »
Craig,
I'm wondering if you enjoyed Desert Canyon. I thought that it was one of the most spectacular settings ever. I don't think much of the design, a challenge to build on the site I'm sure. I find it hard to believe that Matt liked it. If it's worthy of such a high ranking it doesn't make WA out to be much of a state for golf, IMHO.

Also, the inclusion in the rankings of almost all new courses is rather unique.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #186 on: March 08, 2002, 06:21:22 PM »
Mike Cirba,

I played it many years ago, quite often.  It was the site of my first 18 hole round.  I shot 124, and I'm not sure I counted correctly.

I remember several interesting holes and would like to return for a round with a few fellows.
 
I do hope they change the name back to Essex County West.

BillV,

With this weather, they should be open.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

nandoal

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #187 on: March 09, 2002, 01:00:19 PM »
Any chance somebody could list Pennsylvania's golfweek public course rankings?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Rokke

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #188 on: March 09, 2002, 03:01:14 PM »
GW -- PA Top 10 Public

1. Olde Stonewall
2. Wyncote
3. Glen Mills
4. Mystic Rock
5. Hershey (Old)
6. Hartfeld
7. Links at Gettysburg
8. Great Bear
9. Penn Nat'l (Iron forge)
10 Toftrees
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #189 on: March 09, 2002, 03:29:55 PM »
Jeff Stettner:

Thanks for the update on the courses at the top your public listing. Next time out I'm going to see with my own two eyes.
Have you played The Dragon at Gold Mtn? Impressions? If you didn't like Coyote Moon I'm guessing you must have really disliked The Dragon. Your thoughts?

Also, do you have any slope and CR from Steveson and Saddle Creek from the tips?

Shooter:

I played Desert Canyon a number of years ago and my first impression was I really liked it. Playing from the tips at #16 and seeing the whole vista as you play the long par-5 is really something. I'll admit the routing isn't the best of the best but the course does have a good variety of holes and the location just adds to the round. I'd like to see it again and see if it confirms to what I originall thought. Is there something deificient from what you see?

Steve Johnson:

The best thing I can say about Barona Creek is that it makes you play golf shots of all different types. Too many courses today are one-way oriented ... you fly the ball to point "X" and it stops there and you hit to another point "X" and on it goes. The net effect --- B-O-R-I-N-G Big time !!!

You will not be bored with Barona Creek. You must use imagination because if controlling the flight of the ball is only part of the equation. You must antcipate what will happen AFTER the ball lands.

There is enough pitch in the property without making so excessive that walking would be impossible. The middle holes of the round are somewhat of a letdown (they are not bad) from #8 through #13 because the requirements are not as demanding. However, from #14 until the final you must step it up.

The green sites are also well done. You must shape your approaches. The holes do not surrender just because you've hit a big tee shot. There are plenty of holes to mention and I think the par-3 16th is an absolute gem. Try to get close when the wind is with you and the pin is deep right and you're last name will be Houdini. Just shows a good par-3 doesn't have to be long -- although Barona's 3rd hole is solid as well and it's over 250 yards. I also like the 4th hole because of the elements of chocie at the tee. If you want to have the best angle to the flag you need to go down the tight left side. Miss and the penalities will be there. I nailed a tee shot and had nothing more than a soft SW into the hole since the pin was cut tight right to the front bunker. Barona gives players options -- the player had better make the right ones consistently. In my mind, that's what makes for a solid course and one you want to play time after time.

Steve, like yourself, I'm a low handicap player and I hit the ball a decent ways off the tee, however, at Barona you must coordinate all aspects of your game together. I would not elevate the course as high as GW's state public rankings did, but a top ten finish isn't too high in my opinion. You mention your fast start but how did you finish the round? What Barona will give it can take away too. ;)

What I mean by fairway lines is that the cuts vary. You don't get the straight razor approach you see at so many golf courses today. Courses that overly use a straight look appear as if the maintenance was rushing to a hot date.  ;D

Do yourself a big favor -- trek to Lompoc and see LaPurisima. The course isn't named "the pure" for nothing. In my mind, it's a top ten public layout that often gets lost from all the hype that usually goes to Sandpiper in Goleta.

Paging George Pazin / Craig Rokke / any other Pennsy guys?

How do you guys view the Pennsy list? Can't believe Quick Silver isn't in the top ten -- heck, in my mind, it's better than Olde Stonewall. I agree with Shooter that too many new courses leaped way ahead of a number of solid old time courses. Many of them will fade fast.

Also believe Mystic Rock, always controversial to many, is a major league candidate for the top spot. I'm sure others will disagree. Wyncote is also good but I have not played it in the last 3-4 years. I also think Great Bear should be listed higher.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Anthony_Nysse

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings New
« Reply #190 on: March 09, 2002, 03:35:19 PM »
Darrin,
   If you're going to be up playing Tullymore and have some extra time, try to sneak out at Jerry Matthew's newest course, BUCK'S RUN. It's right there with Hawk Hallow. It also has a neat putting course surrounded by water. As for Thoroughbred and Grand View-I've played both and would prefer Grand View. Thoroughbred has some really terrible holes like #2-Huge, I mean, HUGE mound directly in the middle of the fairway that directs balls into the marsh. #12 is a 90*dogleg left with trees guarding the entire left side. All the par 3's look the same also. The 18th saves a little grace. The conditioning has been poor there the last couple years also. Grand View is all bluegrass fairways cut through an old apple orchard. A lot of bang for the buck. Let me also recommend Banona Shores. It's a par 60 designed in the 70's that looks like it was designed in the 90's. It's on the other side of the highway from GV. Bentgrass greens and the course is all cut through the orchards. Very well maintained and you will used every shot in the bag. Par 3's range from 120 yards to 245. #1 is a 400 yard par 4 that has a blind tee shot, but you will have nothing more that a PW into the green....awesome hole. For the money, Play Banona and Grand View each to Thoroughbred once.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2023, 07:07:17 AM by Anthony_Nysse »
Anthony J. Nysse
Director of Golf Courses & Grounds
Apogee Club
Hobe Sound, FL

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #191 on: March 09, 2002, 03:43:04 PM »
Matt -
I think you, Mike C. (if I remember correctly), and I all share a similar opinion of Great Bear. I think it is one of Jack's best, and gets virtually no press (maybe because of its Pocono location).

Strangely, I think the routing that was used before the the clubhouse was built (starting on 4, and finishing on 3) is superior (i don't really care about returning nines).

At any rate, there is some superior topo at the course and the design  moves across it really well (ex. of ridges at play on the tee shot at 3, 4, 8, 10, 14).

I really like this course, and I am not a normal fan of Jack's designs.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #192 on: March 09, 2002, 04:03:33 PM »
SPDB:

Amen to your comments / re: Great Bear -- wonderful course but located ina region of generally mediocre and poor layouts. Hard to believe for many people outside the region, but Poconos golf is really Myrtle Beach lite. I used to think Myrtle Beach was the home of fast food golf -- plenty of places but few of real lasting quality. The Poconos tries to "brand" its golf courses with some sort of "theme" (aka Mount Airy Lodge comes quickly to mind) and the results are generally a joke. :-[

If there was ever a location that cried for beefed up golf results besides Sullivan County in New York State (home of The Monster, et al) it's the Poconos.

And, what's really going to hurt the Poconos is the race for more quality golf courses being developed in NJ in the counties of Sussex, Warrem and Hunterdon. Now people realize they don't have to trek on I-80 or I-78 across the Delaware. How the Pennsy area responds could determine if the area falls even further behind or makes a come back. We shall see. ;)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #193 on: March 09, 2002, 08:13:25 PM »

Shooter,

         I do enjoy the Desert Canyon course, I have played it about 4 times over the years. One of things I like about it is that it is so different from your typical Washington course. If your not into desert style target golf it definately won't be your cup of tee.

        Washington has a lot of public courses that I would rate in the 5 - 7 range on the Doak scale but few if any higher than that. Be that as it may, it does have lots of good public golf at affordable prices and has really added some fine courses in the last 6 years or so.

        I have only played a few of the private courses in the state so I really can't comment on the level of quality although TPC at Snoqualmie is quite good at least a 7.  I hope to play the Alderra course someday, I hear it is a stiff test of ones golf game.

        
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Will E

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #194 on: March 10, 2002, 05:42:21 AM »
Craig,
I like desert golf and also target golf. I didn't find either at Desert Canyon. What I found was a spectacular setting, worth the trip in itself. Jack did create a few very nice holes on what had to be a challenging property to build on. For the most part Desert Canyon IMHO is way over the top. Also, with wind it probably is not playable. I tried my best to like it, you're right it's not my cup of tea.
I grew up in the Evergreen State and need to get back to see the new courses.
From my time in Wa. I'd agree that there are a lot of 5s and 6s  (Kayak, Sudden Valley, Avalon).
What courses do you give 7s to ? ( besides Indian Canyon, Semiahmoo)
Stay dry!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Rokke

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #195 on: March 10, 2002, 06:07:41 AM »
It's good to hear some positives about Great Bear. I'm hoping to play it this year.

I'd agree that the Pocono region has a lot of room for golf improvement. There are some good courses that have been
compromised by modern alterations (Buck Hill, and possibly Shawnee, although I haven't played it) and there are plenty of
other courses that drop because of very spotty conditioning.
Still others are of poor to mediocre design, or, as Matt
mentioned, they tend towards gimmicky, golf-lite.

It's not exactly a booming golf region. Aside from Great Bear
and a Blaukovitch design or two, little has been built in the last twenty to thirty years. I'm not sure why that is, although virtually every resort, and I use that term loosely in some cases, has experienced financial difficulties (Mt Airy Lodge just closed, golf still open.) Property is certainly available, and not all that expensive. Rumour has it that Pocono Manor is looking to add a third.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom Doak

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #196 on: March 10, 2002, 06:21:44 AM »
I, too, would like to hear the list of public courses in Washington which would get a 7 on the Doak scale.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Rokke

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #197 on: March 10, 2002, 06:39:32 AM »
Matt had asked about the PA public list. Though I've played
about 80 courses in the state, I've only played 3 on the list:
Glen Mills, Hartfeld, and Wyncote. Wyncote is a good course,
but I find Ault Clarke's Springwood near York to be more interesting. I also enjoy Hurdzan and Fry's Pilgrim's Oak, though it's a bit more manufactured. I'm sure it would compare favorably to  a couple on the list. Glen Mills' front nine has to be as good as any front or back nine on this list.

Did anyone else notice that 8 of the 10 have been built since
1993, the only exception being Toftrees (1968) and Hershey.
There's got to be some older courses worth consideration.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

redanman

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #198 on: March 10, 2002, 07:08:07 AM »
Craig

I, too like Mike Cirba like Great Bear a lot. (We also formed our opinions independently!).  I always tend to forget that Great Bear is public access, it really is worth playing, so go do it.  If you're a Nicklaus fan you'll go ga-ga.  It's really decent and fun to play. As for the rest of the Poconos, the (lack of) respect shown for Tillie at Pocono Shawnee is pretty representative of what is up there.  I've taken a quick look at and not gone back to play several on my lunch our when I worked a day a week in an office up there.

An older public access track worth seeing is in Cooperburg, Locust Valley, Wm and David Gordon.  Several interesting holes and a better set of greens than the Grace course at Saucon, for contours.  As to condition?  Who knows.  It is still nice to see the quality of the work.  Most else around the Lehigh Valley immediate is pretty forgettable and ranges from uninspired to quite dangerous (KC-how about Whitetail? ? ? You have to come back to play elsewhere, Ken)  ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Rokke

Re: Golf Week's new rankings
« Reply #199 on: March 10, 2002, 07:44:01 AM »
Redanman-

I actually got out to Locust Valley last summer, thanks to a positive comment you had made. Very enjoyable golf. They were in the midst of re-bunkering the course, and by that I mean adding new ones, and improving some of the existing.
I think it will be a better course as a result.  My
only complaint would be a number of mid to long straight
holes lined with pines. The greens are interesting, I'd agree,
and some of the holes demand a thought-out ground game. LV is worth seeking out.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »