Pat,
Would you describe Blue Mound as being a lesser effort by Raynor? Why don't the templates work as well as at other Raynor courses?
Thread on Blue Mound:
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45401.0.htmlMy own views:
What makes BM interesting is the green sites, far and away. Virtually every green there has some interest, and some are among the best in Wisconsin. But Raynor had less-than-compelling land to work with, so some of the templates hold interest mostly from the greens, and less so the land traveresed to get to the greens.
Hole #1 has a very good Redan-esque green, but it's a straightaway par 4.
The green at #2 is terrific, and the drive has some interest because its outcome is blind. But it's a pretty straight-forward hole.
#3 is the Biarritz, and the fronting half is cut at close fairway height, not as green. I'm not sure it plays with the ability to use the running shot there, due to course conditioning.
#4 is the Alps, a fairly ho-hum hole, but a very good green.
#5 is a very good version of a Road Hole; #7 is a very good Short; and #8 is a terrific Punchbowl green moving over the most interesting terrain on the course.
#10 green is probably the best on the course -- but again, a fairly bland hole until one reaches a wonderful green. I think #11 is a very good Cape, in part because there is trouble surrounding the green as a Cape hole calls for.
#13 is a great Redan, in my view. But I'm not sure the Eden (#17) is a very good version of that template; solid hole, but not classicly tilted as the Eden seems to call for.