Looks like a real ball buster of an opener
George,
It’s not. It’s downwind and a drop of over 40 feet. The back tee is ridiculously long and closed since the building of the clubhouse. The other tees are pretty comfortable.
It felt like Carrick knew the course would not be walked and as a result found the best 18 holes and used them, whether or not there were tough climbs to tees or long treks around hazards.
Mark,
That’s a fairly accurate statement. This was a hard course to route because everything except the 1st fairway and 5th fairway were built on top of rock. The carts were a given because of scale and the consistent 40 foot drops throughout the site. Therefore he found a lot of elevated tees and removed almost any blindness from the design.
I really love the look of the exposed rock, and based on the pictures it looks like its very much in play. I suppose it could become a nightmare situation with balls bouncing dozens of yards offline, but the visual is still neat.
Kalen,
It’s not bad on most holes, but holes like the 3rd have rock very much in play. There was so much rock that it became a question of how much do you cover for playability. Half the rock on the course was washed to expose the last ¼ of the face that was under soil or plants.
I think MB is a VERY difficult walk, and would never do it again. Have you ever walked it before?
Mark,
I only walk when I play and that walk killed me. That’s as tough a walk as I’ve faced because your almost always going up and down all day. I think the elevated tees slowly catch up with you since there are so many.
8 also had what was probably the boldest green on the course
Mark,
The only reason that green exists was the rest of the construction crew convinced Doug to leave the green as it was built. The green mimics the rock under the green.
Hole 9: Par 4, 390 Yards.
One of the most dramatic holes you will ever see.
Mark,
Full credit to Doug !!! He saw the hole and built it despite the potential for controversy. It’s my favourite and its all him except the green contours.
I know you are probably biased since you worked on the course, but do you think that the course actually deserves its high ranking in the top courses in Canada.
It should not be in the top 10 in my opinion. While I love many holes, I also have some issues with some others. I think the newness and scenery have played a large role in the current ranking. I also think that it’s tougher than most has a bit of a pull for some too.
Just from the pictures, it looks spectacular, but it seems like there are a lot of penal shots and a lot of bunkers that are mostly eye candy.
It’s playable from the forward tees. Much of the comments made talked about distances from tees that play at 7,500 yards. I play the course at 6,500 yards and find I’m allowed options from the tees. It’s playable.
The bunkers aren’t what I wished they would be both visually and in some cases the placement doesn’t fit my own ideals either.
Is there anything you would have done differently if you had designed the course on your own?
I would have built a much shorter course to deal with the complexities of the site and add more variety in yardage. I would have used far fewer elevated tees, avoided the beaver ponds in the routing and done something completely different with the bunkering.
I think Doug did a wonderful job with the goals he had for the course. It’s a case of my design philosophy being different than his.