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.


Kevin Lynch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2011, 07:29:24 AM »
It has been a crazy few weeks for work, so I’ve been missing on this thread and Ironwood.  Hoping to finish my thoughts.

Numbers 11 and 12
Not the best holes to resume my participation.  Not too much going on in either case and are on the least interesting section of the property.  I’ve never understood why Ron thinks 12 & 16 are identical.  One is flat, with evergreens blocking your view of the valley behind it.  The other is downhill with a large view of the valley and front nine.

Number 13

I wish the course would clear out all the trees to the left of the fairway, so you could see the "notch" better and get a clearer understanding of the two optiond from the tee.  The only thought I have is that the visual clutter may be intended to discourage the aggressive route, which could bring the 16th tee deck into harm's way (in the case of a big pull or hook).

Over the years, I’ve started to look away from the “notch” and played the more traditional route.  Unless I’m able to draw the ball consistently, I’m left with a 40-50 yard uphill pitch from a slightly downhill lie (not my forte).  I pulled off the pitch this day, so maybe I’ll try again.

What I like about this hole is the use of landing area slopes to defend a very short hole.  On the traditional route, players are often left with only a wedge or 9-iron in.  However, the ball is often above their feet, and the “death miss” is a pulled approach.  As mentioned earlier, the aggressive route can leave a delicate second thanks to the lie and green setting.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 08:00:23 AM by Kevin Lynch »

Kevin Lynch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2011, 07:55:55 AM »
Number 14
Ron described as a “grand” hole.  Works for me.

Number 15
Has always been one of my favorite par fives anywhere.  I’ve always been enthralled by the second shot with the mystery of hitting towards the bottom of the dell.

Ron described the second shot as a hybrid to mid-iron, but that was my fault for moving us up a deck for that hole.  I wanted to ensure that JNC would have an opportunity to see the hero shot, but both Ron & JNC piped their drives into the 180-195 range in.  If they’d hit the same drives from the back deck, those seconds would have been in the 215-230 area.  However, this section features a slight downhill slope, which makes the decision a little more sphincter-tightening.

Again, a hole that looks like a pushover on length, but the combination of the uneven lie and completely blind dell shot defends the hole well.  I once heard through the grapevine that the owners were considering moving the green out of the dell and into the “lay-up” area (I believe with an eye on changing the 16th somewhat).  I practically begged them to leave the hole alone as it is one of the more unique offerings I’ve played.  Putting the green in the landing area would just create another sub-400 yard par 4, which are well represented throughout the rest of the course.

That begging conversation was around 7 years ago, so I hope that means the hole is safe.

Kevin Lynch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2011, 08:45:57 AM »
 
Hole 17: Par 4.5
This one is a conundrum, or at least presents one. To begin, you can't tell where to go from the tips. It then follows that you shouldn't actually go where you're supposed to go. Hit a good one straight out into the fairway belly and you run through into a pond...nice reward for excellence. There is a deck some forty yards right of the regular tees, on the far side of the pond, that makes the tee ball a straighter, more obvious affair. The apparent answer to move the tees back isn't it, as you would then have a massive downhill slope right in the resting zone of the tee ball. To wit, the proper tee ball goes over the trees on the inside (left) corner of the hole. The approach is then played uphill with anything from mid-iron to hybrid, to a nicely-sited green. This one borders on interesting, thanks to the topography.


A very strange hole arbitrarily changed from a Par 5 to a Par 4 several years ago.  As Ron said, it is the one hole on the course where I really have very little clue about the line off the tee.

I’d disagree with Ron that moving the tees back isn’t a possible answer.  I wouldn’t mind the slope in the new landing area, as it would then present the great risk/reward trade-off of going for a Par 5 in two.

In reality, the over-the-top challenges in the landing area (visual uncertainty, sloped landing area, pond only in play for “too long” a drive) were geared towards defending the original designation of a short par 5.  On top of that, the green is sited tight to out-of-bounds left.  If you wanted to get an Eagle many years ago, you had to navigate a number of risks.  But if you wanted to play conservatively, the challenges were appropriate.

This one harkens the whole debate of “does par matter?”  This hole is a bit over-the-top in the challenge department.  It’s all a mental game, but believing there is a “risk/reward” trade-off inherent in the mental concept of a Par 5 seems more acceptable than the “mandate” concept of a Par 4.  Plus, for years, I liked that this was the only Par 73 course I knew.

Hole 18

I used to think this was a “heroic” hazard, but going over the water really doesn’t open up any improved angles.  Really, it’s a penal hazard to finish your day, especially from the back tees.  However, from the White Tees, going over the water is necessary to keep you from driving through the dog-leg.

Kevin Lynch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2011, 08:51:50 AM »
Holes 3 and 10 are also of tremendous note as good par fours.  3 has a thrilling downhill tee shot where the golfer needs to stay on the high side of the fairway.  10, as Ron and Kevin outlined, is a very solid par four with wild terrain in the landing area and completely unique green.  The green has three tiers, each shaped in a V and offset from one another.  I didn't play the hole with the tree in front of the green, but I can't imagine the loss of the tree has taken away too much from this first-rate green complex.
 
I agree that 10 is still a solid hole and the green complex holds its own without the tree.  But the tree forced you to consider your tee shot placement much more than the current iteration.  I can’t tell you how many times I would play with people who were feeling good about big drive down the left side, but I’d be saying “ooh, that’s going to be a bear of a second.”  The way was tree worked in concert with the angled slope in the landing area was brilliant design (or unconscious fortune).

Like many public courses, Byrncliff has its clunker holes.  The first 8 holes are exciting, but the course is uneven from there on out.  9 and 11, 12, and 16 are vanilla bland, and 17 is a very strange long par four with a blind pond in the landing area. 

I can’t argue with you on 11 or 12, but I’m not of the impression that 9 is too bland, especially for the average golfer.  We were able to drive over and past much of the interest on #9.  However, when I’m playing #10 and look over to the right, I’d say at least 75% of the players I see are hitting blind/semi-blind  shots from the “valley” section of the landing area with sideslope lies.

These five holes greatly diminish the overall quality of the golf course, but it remains a very solid public layout  As a group, we felt Byrncliff fits into a 4-5 range on the Doak Scale, and it's definitely worth a play (especially at the price!) if you are traveling down I-90 in Western New York.
Even with the weak links, I’ve always thought the course had enough memorable holes and challenges to make it one of the better stops in Western New York.  When I have friends in from other areas of the country, I make it a point to get them to Byrncliff.  Very few walk off with the “been there, done that” impression.

If anyone is in the area and is interested, I’d be glad to host them for the day.

Frank M

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2011, 01:34:46 PM »
Can anyone tell me the approximate drive time from the Rainbow and Lewiston bridge?

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #30 on: June 25, 2011, 02:37:14 PM »
Frank, anywhere from 65 to 75 minutes from L-Q bridge, probably 10-15 minutes less from Rainbow bridge.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Frank M

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted) New
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2011, 09:42:27 PM »
Frank, anywhere from 65 to 75 minutes from L-Q bridge, probably 10-15 minutes less from Rainbow bridge.

Ronald, thanks for the reply.

Kevin: I am looking to come out in a couple weeks. Would you be interested in coming out for a round? Would love to play and get your insight.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2024, 06:52:26 PM by Frank M »

Kevin Lynch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Byrncliff Photo/Commentary Thread (All 18 holes posted)
« Reply #32 on: June 27, 2011, 08:43:50 PM »
Frank, anywhere from 65 to 75 minutes from L-Q bridge, probably 10-15 minutes less from Rainbow bridge.

Hey Ronald,

Thanks for the reply appreciated.

Kevin: I am looking to come out in a couple weeks...would you be interested in coming out for a round? Would love to play and get your insight.
Frank,

Ron gave you the safe travel times.  Once you’re able to get past the Lewiston Bridge, the trip is almost all expressway.  Google pegs it at 58 minutes, and you can usually shed some time vs. their estimates.

I’ll send you a PM to see if we can coordinate something.  I’d love to meet another GCAer.