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.


Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #25 on: January 23, 2011, 12:04:23 PM »
Ivan:

You stole my thundere slightly - I will do an OR listing shortly -- don't want to insert couses of different states into others.
Hope you're OK with that.

Jonathan:

Martis Camp is a stellar TF course. Proves the man is fully capable in doing layout of top tier holes and not just eye-candy creations. Play it when you can.

Jim E:

Thanks for your comments. I played Oakmont in Glendale a number of years ago and while there are spots that are quite fun and compelling - cracking a top 25 listing for the entire State of California is a tougher bar to make. Let me point out that I wanted to create a listing that would be a bit more elastic in terms of styles and presentations. Clearly, the Nicklaus Private at PGA West has a totally different feel than say a place like Rustic Canyon. People who are enamored with a Rustic Canyon or Barona Creek may find the likes of a Nicklaus Private at PGA West as being somewhat weird and even offensive to their own taste in course design. I like the edgy quality it provides and it's far more compelling than the over-the-top death and destruction type of layout one gets with the Stadium Course at PGA West.

Be curious to your take on Winchester -- the RTJ and RTJ Jr collaborative works well there -- just a great site and as I said earlier, gets far too little attention although a few of the mags do have it among their best.

Jon S:

There's no doubt that being from Jersey puts me at a somewhat disadvantage on having seen a few of the courses in the most recent of times. Likely a more up-to-date connection would mean a spike upwards for certain courses and for others a slight pull down. So yes, playing the likes of Meadow and Valley may do what you suggest. On the same line of thinking -- it's also possible I may not see them being any better than where I have them now.

Wilshire and Hacienda are fine layouts -- but again I don't see them making an elite 25. I have to play a few of the more recently touched up works such as Lake at Olympic, Cal Club and even the restored Pasatiempo. No doubt a more recent visit could make things change.

Ryan:

Thanks for your comments -- I don't have an issue with your take on RC and BC being better than LaPurisima based on what you see as the greater emphasis points -- but if you serious see the contest between the courses as being lopsided than you and I are on different streets with that. I like Barona Creek but frankly it succeeds in so many way because the immediate area in and around is so lacking for anything of really fun and compelling design.

LaPurisima is seen by so few people who take the time to trek to Lompoc. You are likely enamored with a certain design style tyhat RC and even BC provide. Clearly, opinions are exactly that opinions -- let's just say I have all of them within my top 25 -- you see LaPurisima as the odd-course out. So be it -- for you.

Joel S:

Help me understand why Mayacama is so vastly overrated ? I only played the course once but frankly given the range of total Nicklaus courses I have played (75+) I see the style and nature of what Jack did there to be refreshingly different and successful. In your own top CA listing would you not have it among the 25 best ?

Andy:

Sherwood was one of those that missed out by a nose. Somewhere along the line one has to end the listing -- I like what Sherwood does but there are holes there that are quite challenging that would likely impede those with higher handicaps -- I'm speaking about the forced aerial game shots -- often these will not impede the likes of the world's top players but would be issues for others.

Jim Eder

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #26 on: January 23, 2011, 12:36:38 PM »
Matt,

Thanks, I think you did a very good job of including newer with classic courses, well done, I think you achieved your objective. I sadly tend to have a bit of a bias which causes me to be less flexible (but I am working on it - I defined the problem and am now trying to find the solution). Oakmont finished doing some work on the course a year or so ago.  Would be interesting to get your take on the work etc. Your point on Nicklaus Private is spot on. I am looking forward to seeing Winchester and the others I mentioned. Thanks for the ideas!!

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #27 on: January 23, 2011, 04:31:39 PM »
Someone asked me to create a top 25 public list and I need to give that some thought. Frankly, the tough part about CA golf is that the price points for some of the more noted public courses (e.g. Pebble, Spyglass, etc, etc) are way beyond the means of just only a few.

Once you get past the usual listees such as Rustic Canyon, Barona Creek, LaPurisima -- it does become rather interesting.

Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #28 on: January 23, 2011, 06:27:32 PM »
A few years ago Kings Putter was held at Stevenson Ranch.  It got rave reviews from the participants.  I was not a participant.  Now no one mentions it now which confirms my decision not to attend.  What happened?

10 plays in the La Purisima area for me;  Marshallia Ranch 10 plays La Purisima 0
                                                        Alisal Ranch 9 plays, La Purisima 1
                                                        Sandpiper 10, La Purisima 0
                                                        Glen Annie 5, La Purisima 5
If golf is supposed to be fun, tell me the fun of playing La Purisima?
                             
It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #29 on: January 23, 2011, 08:27:58 PM »
Lynn:

Under your rationale the same can be said of Spyglass, Olympic / Lake, etc, etc. No "fun" in playing those layouts. Ditto for Martis Camp for that matter as well.

If you really think Sandpiper is a 10-0 win over LaPurisima then you must enjoy mediocre holes which Sandpiper has a number of them.

No problem - different emphasis for different folks.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #30 on: January 23, 2011, 10:35:50 PM »

I've only seen about 1/2 the courses you listed. My only major objections are to the inclusion of Winchester and La Purisima.

No way the are within the state's best 25, IMHO
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #31 on: January 23, 2011, 11:05:59 PM »
A few years ago Kings Putter was held at Stevenson Ranch.  It got rave reviews from the participants.  I was not a participant.  Now no one mentions it now which confirms my decision not to attend.  What happened?

10 plays in the La Purisima area for me;  Marshallia Ranch 10 plays La Purisima 0
                                                        Alisal Ranch 9 plays, La Purisima 1
                                                        Sandpiper 10, La Purisima 0
                                                        Glen Annie 5, La Purisima 5
If golf is supposed to be fun, tell me the fun of playing La Purisima?
                             

You missed my hole in one at Stevinson and therefore a free drink from me.

I despise Glen Annie.  Luckily I only play the privates in SB.  But I would play Santa Barbara Golf Club (the old Muni) 10-0 over
Glen Annie.

I liked Rancho San Marcos except for the two unwalkable treks on the back nine..........

Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #32 on: January 23, 2011, 11:58:29 PM »
Bill
Sorry I missed the hole in one.  Yes, Glen Annie was mentioned a bit in jest.

Matt

Yes Spyglass is not fun and highly overrated.  Olympic is tough a bit overrated due to it's beauty and history.  Sandpiper looks simple but needs to be designed that way due to occasionally strong ocean winds.  The large greens actually adds to it's character.  Not a great course but better than La Purisima, especially when you throw in the ocean.
It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2011, 01:11:47 AM »
I don't know about 10 to zero Sandpiper over La Purisma, but I agree that Sandpiper is probably the better of the two.  Sandpiper plays better in the wind, and the wind blows on both sites quite often.   La Purisma has more pure goofy holes where there is no place to go.  I agree with Matt that La Purisma's setting is terrific, but many of the holes don't make much sense as golf holes.   

I don't give bonus points for insane difficulty in the wind.
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2011, 09:33:16 AM »
Jonny Boy - I really liked Victoria and have always been a little less enamoured by Valley Club.  I have a friend who is a newer member at Valley and am lucky enough to play it on occasion so I'm not basing this on a one-time visit.  J

I agree with the less enamored part on Valley Club, but do not understand such a high score on Victoria. I would put it as a weak 6, behind "new" Wilshire and "new" Hacienda.

You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2011, 09:46:41 AM »

Wilshire and Hacienda are fine layouts -- but again I don't see them making an elite 25. I have to play a few of the more recently touched up works such as Lake at Olympic, Cal Club and even the restored Pasatiempo. No doubt a more recent visit could make things change.


Matt, both Wilshire and Hacienda have undergone some major surgery in the last few years. The former has a strange aesthetic, yet plays better. The latter is just very good and a great test of shotmaking.

They are near the bottom of my personal 25 at the moment, and could drop out with exposure to a couple of the places on your list.

I would be curious as to your opinion of Fort Washington when the time comes. It's a Watson course in Fresno with great contours, co-hosted the Mid-Am, a very solid test, yet flies well under the GCA nerd radar. Must be the lack of ornate bunkering.
You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2011, 10:03:43 AM »
Jon:

Step out on a limb for your picks -- are you saying that Willshire and Hacienda are top 25 in the state for you ?

No doubt people have different emphasis points and preferences which is fine with me. I learn by the comments
people have and clearly since you live in the state you have more daily exposure. My last round at Willshire was
well over a decade ago -- ditto for Hacienda.

Thanks for the note on Port Washington. Have not played it -- but I have played other Watson courses -- namely his
successful effort at Reunion in the Orlando area.

Gents:

For all you guys who rave about Sandpiper -- the ocean is more of scenic wonder -- it has little to do with the design. The greens are also, with few exceptions, mostly vanilla and the bunker is more cosmetic than strategic. The par-3 18th is also duddsville to end the round. Like I said give the stretch of holes from say #10 thru #13 -- especially the marvelous 10th hole. LaPurisima is a ball buster course and for those who lack the wherewithal / will, call it what one may. I like what the course provides and Doak captured a good sense of the course with his comments in CG -- no doubt, the low handicap types may feel more of a connection to the course than others. So be it. Differences will happen.

Kyle:

I can understand how certain people feel about LaPurisima. But Winchester is a wondreful layout with a first rate site and a number of fine holes which compliment each other nicely. You'll have to do much more than say it doesn't belong. A bit more meat to your rationale would be a fine place to start.

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2011, 10:10:43 AM »
Jon - would be interested in your top 25.  J

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2011, 02:42:50 PM »
Jon:

Step out on a limb for your picks -- are you saying that Willshire and Hacienda are top 25 in the state for you ?

No doubt people have different emphasis points and preferences which is fine with me. I learn by the comments
people have and clearly since you live in the state you have more daily exposure. My last round at Willshire was
well over a decade ago -- ditto for Hacienda.

Thanks for the note on Port Washington. Have not played it -- but I have played other Watson courses -- namely his
successful effort at Reunion in the Orlando area.


Matt:

Fort Washington = Willie Watson

Hacienda is also a Watson, redone by Harbottle. I think you would be pleasantly surprised, if not shocked by the new version.

Yes, I put Wilshire and Hacienda in my 20-25 range of courses played.

The "new" Annandale should be on your short list, Silva's work there was solid.

Note that I have not played a number of newer courses.
You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2011, 02:45:41 PM »
Jon - would be interested in your top 25.  J

Said list may be viewed in person at a watering hole in Laguna.......keep me posted on your travels......

Surprised that "new" Lake Merced has not been mentioned.

You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #40 on: January 24, 2011, 03:31:07 PM »
Jon:

Thanks for the update and correction to my mistatement.

My listing was really a composite of different styles. Some people may opt for a complete listing of just the classic type courses -- could be because they don't have a representative sampling of the newer courses that have opened.

I tried to have a combo listing which would include a good slew of different styles, architects, locations, etc, etc.

CA is indeed a big place and a top 25 can be hard to have for the reasons I mentioned above.

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #41 on: January 25, 2011, 11:02:06 AM »
Hard to say for sure definitively -- but CA is likely the strongest state for total depth when private and public golf options are merged together. NY has the edge if only private are considered but CA has the better roster of quality public offerings too. I'm in the process in putting together a total public listing which will feature the standard candidates like PB, SH, and no doubt RC and BC. Be cuirous to the comments of others and what other public courses they really think are first rate.

I mentioned my liking of LaPurisima previously -- one other strong public course I really like is in Palm Desert -- Firecliff at Desert Willow. Gives more of a AZ type golf layout than your usual Palm Springs area layout.

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #42 on: January 25, 2011, 11:14:12 AM »
Firecliff is good and I agree that it has a AZ feel.

However I'd probably say that I preferred the North at Terra Lago (Landmark). Too bad the Skins Game composite there isn't counted, because I'd call that one of the top publics in the area.



Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #43 on: January 25, 2011, 11:54:00 AM »
Ryan:

Interesting choice you made -- but I'd still opt for Firecliff.

One other course I liked from a number of years ago is Red Hawk in Temecula -- be curious to know how people feel about that one.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #44 on: January 25, 2011, 12:46:44 PM »
Jon:

Step out on a limb for your picks -- are you saying that Willshire and Hacienda are top 25 in the state for you ?

No doubt people have different emphasis points and preferences which is fine with me. I learn by the comments
people have and clearly since you live in the state you have more daily exposure. My last round at Willshire was
well over a decade ago -- ditto for Hacienda.

Thanks for the note on Port Washington. Have not played it -- but I have played other Watson courses -- namely his
successful effort at Reunion in the Orlando area.

Kyle:

I can understand how certain people feel about LaPurisima. But Winchester is a wondreful layout with a first rate site and a number of fine holes which compliment each other nicely. You'll have to do much more than say it doesn't belong. A bit more meat to your rationale would be a fine place to start.


Sir Ward,

IMHO, while it occupies a lovely part of the state and certainly has some merits, Winchester CC also possesses a number of flaws that prevent it from reaching the top echelon of California’s golf courses.

Shaping issues:
-The predominantly rectangular runway-style tees clash with the rounded look of the bunkers, fairways and green shapes.
-A handful of ovular tee boxes were shaped amongst the rectangular offerings, destroying continuity.
-Too many tee boxes are built up forcefully against the existing grade using exposed artificial piles of mined rocks.
-Fairway bunkers are frequently out of scale (too broad compared with fairways).
-Disproportionately narrow fairways cut with wide swaths of rough on either side.
-Greenside bunkering set too far from greens, thus capturing wildly errant shots instead of protecting pin locations.
-Cart path built to be more of an eyesore than need be.
-Creeks and artificial ponds completely rock-lined
-Little in the way of subtle humps and swales in and around greens to encourage thoughtful recovery shots.

Strategic Issues
- Often, the shorter tees provide the worst approach angles (e.g. back tees require less of a forced carry over bunkering or play down the long axis of the greens when the forwards tees do not.
-Fairway bunkers placed to extract penalty rather than to suggest strategy in many cases.
-Only centerline hazards are trees, or the occasional (sometimes blind) creek bed.
-The challenges posed by the straightforward, flat par 4s holes (3, 6, 8, 10, 12, 17) are a bit repetitive.

Routing
-Terribly long walks between holes.

Course Tour
http://www.winchestercountryclub.com/winchestercountryclub/content/view_c.php?s_id=1804112
 
 
Dark Horse shares a couple of these flaws (greens built up with rocks next to unnatural water features on 6, 7 and 18 for instance, tough walk, some cart path issues, etc.), but offers more variety in its holes and more artful putting contours on a similar property just a few miles away. The shaping is far superior, tying into the native grades with much greater subtlety. Bunkers are much more naturalistic, better proportioned and filled with sand that matches native soils.
 
While the 10th and 12th (and maybe one or two of the par 3s) could be considered connector holes, 1,2,3,4,9,11,14,15 and 17 are genuine standouts.
 
Course Tour
http://www.darkhorsegolf.com/page.php?page_id=2235&name=Spectacular_DarkHorse
 

La Purisima enjoys a nice setting, but the awkward placement of manmade ponds (especially on the 2nd hole) detracts from the experience, as does the overabundance of steeply pitched false fronts and heavy-handed green shapes.

The steeper holes, mostly occupying the back nine, are all too frequently lacking in playability when the ever-present winds dry them out. This is due to the overly narrow, side-sloping, and sometimes blind fairways with penal native areas on either side.

 Again, it is a pretty property, but no the course is no world-beater
 
 I prefer Monarch Dunes up the road, among many other throughout the state.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 12:50:11 PM by Kyle Henderson »
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

R_Paulis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #45 on: January 25, 2011, 01:27:40 PM »
Bashing Glenn Annie?? Next you'll be proclaiming Twin Lakes and Ocean Meadows are not great tracks. Let's not even touch Hidden Oaks - one of only two courses in Southern California that are nearby sans clothing beaches...

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #46 on: January 25, 2011, 02:00:10 PM »
Ryan:

Interesting choice you made -- but I'd still opt for Firecliff.

One other course I liked from a number of years ago is Red Hawk in Temecula -- be curious to know how people feel about that one.

Blah.

I played it in around 96 and loved it. Then I played it around 06 and wondered what I was thinking in 96. Mr. Spaulding thinks the Journey at Pechanga is the best course near the Riverside/SD County line.

Jed Peters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #47 on: January 25, 2011, 02:49:22 PM »
Spaulding:

Surprised you don't have any courses from Ted on your list.

I know you're a big fan.

Huge.

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2011, 02:59:22 PM »
Spaulding:

Surprised you don't have any courses from Ted on your list.

I know you're a big fan.

Huge.


Ted has his own list, it reads like a list of St. Mary's graduates......

Said list can be presented when you setup Del Paso.....
You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

Matt_Ward

Re: Golden State Top 25 Listed ...
« Reply #49 on: January 29, 2011, 09:30:31 AM »
Kyle:

Thanks for your detailed comments

I don't have much time now to go point-by-point but suffice to say this for the moment ...

You primary thrust is in the shaping area -- hence - the presentation dimension.
Given the course is geared towards a wider range of players -- the bunkering dimension would need
be akin toi a Winged Foot or Riviera -- where the bunkers are set tight to the target areas. In regards to
mounding and swales -- I find the course provided a sufficient amount and was not empty to the point
of non-differentiation for making players a wider range of shots.

Where Winchester places a premium is on driving the ball. Far too many GCAers don't want to be tested
in the drive zone -- they have little issue with greens which have more humps and hollows than viewing
an ocean on a stormy day. No doubt preferences play a role there.

Ditto for your mentioning the walk / cart issue aspect. I have no issue with carts being used
for a course. Others feel differently. I didn't see the course being so extended to make the
riding the central feature.

I'll opine on the other strategic dimensions of Winchester shortly. One final thing -- I never said Winchester is in the league with the superstar courses of CA -- but it is often dismissed completely -- likely tied to the RTJ and RTJ Jr fallout that many (don't know if you feel similarly) don't seem to care for. When you say bunkers need to "suggest strategy" -- you fail to highlight the rolling terrain which in and of itself causes plenty of demands. If one were to add a plethora of bunkers to clog up the remaining vistas -- the playability issue would then be mentioned by you as a likely flaw.

For a course that is trying to balance all the competing interests -- Winchester does a fine job in my mind.

In regards to LaPurisima -- it's a tough test -- no doubt about that. Much more thanyou suggest as a "nice setting" -- it' quite spectacular in that regard -- if it had the ocean view Sandpiper provides it would be rated even better. Some people will object to anything that doesn't provide the typical GCA formula --  fairway widths as wide as Kansas -- contoured greens with waves in them and then having greens / tees set up so walking is always possible and doable. LaPurisima is impacted by daily winds but I can say that for a ton of other CA or USA courses in certain places.

I can understand you quibble about the ponds at LaPurisima -- but when I see people on this site say little about other courses having such out of place water features -- see the 17th at RCD in North Ireland -- then I don't see LaPurisima being so completely out of bounds in that regard. No doubt personal opinions can vary with what each emphasizes as a crucial design ingredient.