Cog Hill #4-Dubsdread

[Mike H]

I am planning a trip to the Chicago area in late September and am considering playing Cog Hill #4-Dubsdread.  Is this course fun to play and would people recommend this while in Chicago? 

[JR Potts]

Playing there tomorrow morning.  I'll let you know.

[PThomas]

its very difficult...but if you can get on any of the good privates you should play one of them, no doubt

[Bill_McBride]

It's the best public in Chicago, right?

[Andy Troeger]

Agree with Paul--its a very difficult championship course. My Dad and I played it a couple weeks ago--he has knee issues and I essentially had to fish balls out of the bunkers for him because they were tough to get in and out. The couple he could enter actually weren't that tough to play from.

It's probably worth playing for the last seven holes, which are pretty cool to see in person if you've watched tournaments there in the past. Its not something I'd want a steady diet of, however, due to the difficulty.

[Jason Topp]

I have played it 4 or 5 times and enjoyed it  (I am not sure whether I have played it after Rees Jones' work several years ago).  It is generally a big golf course in the sense that the greens are gigantic.  There is not a ton of strategic interest - you generally hit it down the middle and hit it on the large greens which have a number of sections.  

The par 3's are the strength of the course.  2 is a short par 3 ringed by bunkers (there are actually 2 number 2's that they alternate), 6 is a terrific hole of about 200 yards with the green sloping left to right with the slope of the hill on which it sits.  11 is a mid to long iron to a very shallow green and 14 is a downhill hole with a green that slopes severely right to left with the hill on which it sits.

I also like the par fives.  5 is short with an awkward green (I assume it is still a 5 for regular play),  9 is long and tight but presents an interesting 2nd shot.  11 is awkward but again presents an interesting choice of line for the 2nd and 15 is a good short uphill par five easily reachable with 3 conservative shots but very difficult to hit in 2 because of the slopes off the tee and the bunkering around the green.    

Of the par fours, I liked 4 which is a medium length downhill hole to a tightly bunkered green, 7 is a good dogleg right around a bunker that requires you to know how far you will hit your tee shot and choose the correct line to leave an approach to a big green with a number of different tightly bunkered lobes, 16 is a terrific hole on the short side that wraps around a sideslope and has a redan like green and 18 is a tough finisher with a green sloping towards a pond on the left.  

I would guess it would rate a 5 or maybe a 6 on the Doak Scale.

[Andy Troeger]

Jason,
Pretty sure you haven't seen it post-renovation. #5 is now a par four, about 450/470 range even from the regular tees and slightly uphill. It might as well be a par five with a big bunker in front of the green.

#7 now goes around a pond instead of a bunker.

#16 is a really good hole, and I think #13 (which I believe is the one you referred to as #14) is also very good.

[Adam Clayman]

Actually, 12 is the par 3, (or was) and 14 is also a par 3.

[Jason Topp]

Actually, 12 is the par 3, (or was) and 14 is also a par 3.

I guess I had two 11's in my description. 

[Rob_Waldron]

I played COg Hill #4 in July and thought the course was awesome. The renovations to the greens complexes are very good. The greens appear to be elevated while the greenside bunkers have be recessed into the terrain making them very difficult. The course was in wonderful condition in July. I would highly recommend Dubsdread to anyone visiting Chicago. It is not cheap but well worth playing. I would also recommend #2 as a means of lowering your average price per round. The long overdue clubhouse renovations provided an excellent respite post round. 

[Jeff Tang]

If you like elevated greens with deep fronting bunkers this place is for you. Too repetitive in my mind as far as this goes.

Overall though I always enjoy playing there. Agree on the difficulty.  I also felt there were few holes where strategy comes into play but it's a good ball striking test.

[Adam Clayman]

Back before the PGA Tour got their selfish mitts on this course, there was plenty of strategy, mostly due to the nature of the sand in the bunkers. Also, I can cite at least on hole where I learned about strategy, the 15th.

One use to need to drive the ball to the right, so that their second, could find the left side for their approach to this 3 shotter.

Since moving away from Chicago and seeing quality designs elsewhere, the statement that Cog Hill #4 is one of Chicago's bests, may very well be true, but, is a sad reality.

[PCCraig]

Of the "high end" publics in Chicago, Cog Hill is probably your best option with The Glen Club coming in second. This is assuming the $125+ green fee isn't a big deal to you.

I don't mind Cog Hill, but since the renovation it is a VERY hard golf course. I think the front nine is just so-so but the back nine is really very good with some strong holes.

Another fun public option is Ravisloe on the South Side, that time of year it might cost you ~$50 but during the week the course is empty and you can play what used to be a private "Ross"/Esler course.

[Mark Smolens]

If you haven't been there before, particularly post-renovation, then Dubs is definitely worth the trip, even at $155. Super Ken Lapp has figured out how not to kill the greens during the tournament (this was definitely an issue during the first years of the Western Open in July, as the permanent tee time players were stuck on patches of dirt for the rest of the season when they first came over from Butler), and you'll be there several weeks after the BMW. Hopefully the rough will be cut by the time you show up because, as noted above, the course is very difficult even without tournament conditioned rough around the greens.

If you're looking for company, post a thread a week before you know when you want to play -- you'll probably find some dg members willing to tag along. . .

[Jud_T]

Mike,

Worth playing, particularly if you're a strong player.  IMHO the renovation is a mixed bag.  Better in the sense that they did some much needed tree clearing on a few holes (i.e. #8), maybe not so much in the sense that there's a bit too much similarity now in terms of greens and bunkering.  Definitely a good test.  On the public side I'd second the Ravisloe recommendation and you could add Pine Meadow and Shepherd's Crook depending on how much time you have.  Also the Glen Club's worth a look if you're a Fazio fan and not too price sensitive...

[Mike H]

Since the renovations, how much of the original Dick Wilson design still remains?

[Bill_McBride]

Since the renovations, how much of the original Dick Wilson design still remains?

During my one play 20 years ago, I thought the dominant Dick Wilson style was in the large, slightly elevated greens that looked like four leaf clovers with deep bunkers cut into the openings between green sections.

In effect, those large greens were divided into several smaller areas that played very small.

It made for a demanding shotmaker's course regardless of which tees you played, and your sand game had to be good as well.

I have no idea what Rees might have done since then.

[Sven Nilsen]

Since the renovations, how much of the original Dick Wilson design still remains?

The layout is essentially the same.  As mentioned, the major changes were around the greens with some changes to the fairway bunkering.  With respect to the greens, see Jeff Tang's comment above.  Rees basically raised the greens, resulting in much deeper fronting bunkers and smaller putting surfaces (think of a mountain being chopped off halfway up as opposed to a quarter of the way up).  The large greens described in Jason Topp's post are no longer as large as they once were.

The course in its current iteration demands length and accuracy off of the tee and the ability to hit high, long shots into the greens.  There are very few holes where the ground game is an option (and where it is the player is only given a narrow chute to bounce the ball through).   The par threes are fairly repetitive (I have played the same club on 3 of the 4 in a round).  There are two weak par fives (5 and 15), one par five that is a tree hallway (9) and one that is a great three shot hole but an almost impossible two shotter (11).  The par 4's are generally very strong holes, with the closing stretch of 16-18 being close to as good as it gets.  Its a strong test of golf and worth playing, but the grind can get a little cumbersome.

[JR Potts]

It's a slog. 

Plus, it needs to start growing some grass ASAP to be PGA Tour ready in three weeks.   The horirble summer we've had has certainly taken its toll on Dubsdread.

I found it to be long, hard and boring...the same way I found it to be before the renovations.

Regarding the renovations, I think it's a better golf course today.  That said, some of the fairway bunkering is just terrible.

Will I go back?  Yes.  Do I reccomend it for visitors due to the immedate and present history of it?  Yes.  Is it fun?  No.

[Mike H]

Ryan

So have they lost fairways and greens?

[Sven Nilsen]

As of a week ago, no.  During my last round on Dubs I was shocked at how many drives were plugging or checking up in the fairways, while approach shots would leave a inch deep ball mark yet somehow find a way to run out on the greens.

[JR Potts]

The fairways are generally good.  Some of the green run offs are nearly dead - likely due to standing water.

3-4 greens are teetering on the brink - but all still have grass for now.

Looks like the weather is going to be good in the near term...hopefully it gets some grass growing.

[Ronnie Martin]

It's a slog. 

Plus, it needs to start growing some grass ASAP to be PGA Tour ready in three weeks.   The horirble summer we've had has certainly taken its toll on Dubsdread.

I found it to be long, hard and boring...the same way I found it to be before the renovations.

Regarding the renovations, I think it's a better golf course today.  That said, some of the fairway bunkering is just terrible.

Will I go back?  Yes.  Do I reccomend it for visitors due to the immedate and present history of it?  Yes.  Is it fun?  No.

Overkill IMO. Boring makes sense. I'm not a long hitter so I have no business past 6,700 this thing is designed for a US Open. Period. It's not even enjoyable from 6,700. The fairway bunkers for the most part are " wedge out's" Seriously, they are so deep the average player has zero chance of advancing the ball more that 30 or 40 yards. I 'm a professional and I might have been in 3 or 4 fairway bunkers and at best I think I hit an 8 iron about 120 just to advance the ball.

The biggest dissapointment is that the greens have already turned into the same old spongy trampolines with waaaay too much grass on them. The supt. out there has never been able to buiild the base up through top dressing to get the speed and and trueness to tour level. It's time he was put out to pasture. He's been with the Jemseks for 30 years and he's a fixture that has the job as long as he wants it.

The course is a ghost town. It's too expensive anymore for even corporate types to even want tom gom there. Especially with how difficult it is in addition to the terrible greens. All you have to do is go up to Pine Meadow and check out their greens. Night and day. I hate it too because Mr. Jemsek and the old man have always taken care of PGA members.

[PCCraig]

It's a slog. 

Plus, it needs to start growing some grass ASAP to be PGA Tour ready in three weeks.   The horirble summer we've had has certainly taken its toll on Dubsdread.

I found it to be long, hard and boring...the same way I found it to be before the renovations.

Regarding the renovations, I think it's a better golf course today.  That said, some of the fairway bunkering is just terrible.

Will I go back?  Yes.  Do I reccomend it for visitors due to the immedate and present history of it?  Yes.  Is it fun?  No.

Overkill IMO. Boring makes sense. I'm not a long hitter so I have no business past 6,700 this thing is designed for a US Open. Period. It's not even enjoyable from 6,700. The fairway bunkers for the most part are " wedge out's" Seriously, they are so deep the average player has zero chance of advancing the ball more that 30 or 40 yards. I 'm a professional and I might have been in 3 or 4 fairway bunkers and at best I think I hit an 8 iron about 120 just to advance the ball.

The biggest dissapointment is that the greens have already turned into the same old spongy trampolines with waaaay too much grass on them. The supt. out there has never been able to buiild the base up through top dressing to get the speed and and trueness to tour level. It's time he was put out to pasture. He's been with the Jemseks for 30 years and he's a fixture that has the job as long as he wants it.

The course is a ghost town. It's too expensive anymore for even corporate types to even want tom gom there. Especially with how difficult it is in addition to the terrible greens. All you have to do is go up to Pine Meadow and check out their greens. Night and day. I hate it too because Mr. Jemsek and the old man have always taken care of PGA members.

Ryan and Ronnie:

Interesting comments.

I remember playing it last year when the entire course was soaked from a May rain yet the greens were rock hard...apparently due to their new sub-air system. If I remember correctly the big reason why Cog didn't get the 2003 Open was that during the 1997 US Am they got a ton of rain and the greens didn't drain at all, turning them into mush. I figured the sub-air was a drastic measure to please the USGA. However, I felt it played a bit goofy because to me the entire course is "aerial" yet approach shots needed to hit on the front or middle of the green in order to have a putt on the next shot.

Like I said before other than maybe #1, #6, and #8 the back nine is very so-so for me, lots of back and forth holes, same downhill tee shot to an uphill greensite. The back nine IMO is pretty fun and uses the better half of the property pretty darn well. #11-14 are all solid, and #16 is probably the best hole on the course if #13 isn't. #18 is just goofy hard now if you think of playing it as a 500 yard par-4 with a sharp dogleg as I thought it was hard enough before!

Ronnie, interesting that you said you thought the course was a ghost town. I suppose their problem may be that at $150+ they have alienated the core Chicago golfer looking for more of the high end/corporate/tourist set, but at the same time the facilities there are a bit outdated, the course isn't always in perfect shape, and Lemont is in the middle of nowhere and takes forever to get to from the Loop.

[Adam Clayman]

It's really sad to hear all of this. While I never met the younger Jemsek's, I admired and respect Old Joe. He loved Dubbs and rightfully so, back before the tour made it theirs.

From all the negative comments, assuming they translate to the bottom line....
Will this be the last course Rees gets to "spruce up" for powers that be?