[Matt_Cohn]

I'm not sure how relevant this is, but that is a hell of an arrangement of teeing grounds! I've never seen something like that before.

[Tony Ristola]

An English Rose blooms on Dubsdread
By Golf In Chicago

Writing from Lemont, Illinois
Thursday, September 15, 2011

Consider Justin Rose one guy who likes Dubsdread with all its bumps and rolls and humps and hollows.

Funny how positive one’s opinion can be after an 8-under-par 63, isn’t it?

Rose slapped that number on the Cog Hill scoreboard during Thursday’s opening round of the 108th Western Open, a.k.a. the BMW Championship. He did so by making 10 threes, six of them on Dubsdread’s front nine, hitting every fairway and 16 of 18 greens in regulation in the process.

“There’s no faking it out there,” Rose said. “You’ve got to go out and play good golf. You can’t really get away with too much on this golf course.”

This reminds me a little of the story of Harbour Town and who was it... Jim Colbert breaking par in the first round and saving Pete Dye's bacon, except this time Rose didn't have quite the effect of overcoming the mini-mob mentality.

The course was designed with hosting a US Open in mind; by the description Rose gave, it seems the architect filled the bill for hosting one.

I asked on another thread for someone who has been to Oakmont and Dubs to give a comparison of the difficulty of the greens. Anyone...

Jeff,
In central Europe building a course of 5,00 yards will have many members heads spinning; that translates to 4,500 meters, and architects here have been following something called the 12% rule. That means the ladies tees are 88% of the mens,and when there are only two sets of tees (which is fairly common), you get loooong courses. Where they came up with that bit of idiocy I'll never know. In Germany the courses for women are about 5,600 meters (6,100 yards) on average, which used to be US Open length 15-years ago!!! It's nuts and prompted me to write a couple articles about it in national magazines so I could more easily defend the choices made.

When I recently built some new holes for a club, a couple of par-3's had forward tees not much over 100-meters, and you should have heard the bitching from a smattering of male members. I explained the facts about women's overall length, the fact they hit it lower with less spin, that a fair bit of their distance comes from roll, and when they got that pill, they seemed to come around.  My bet is most ladies will still be hitting woods from the tee, and bouncing it into the green. If any members would take the bet, it would produce a nice stream of revenue. I'd give them 2 to 1 odds to boot!

[Tony Ristola]

"A great golf course is a course that's challenging for the good player but playable for the average player," Mickelson said. "This is the exact opposite. It's playable, fine for us. We don't have any problems with it. But the average guy just can't play it."

What part of this statement, precisely, does anybody here disagree with?  

Not all great courses are playable by the average player.

The course isn't there to serve the duffers and never was, hence the name.
It is playable, as noted by some who've posted about the course, that decent guys can get around it.

I wonder, how many guys can really get around let's say The Ocean Course at Kiawah with a moderate wind more easily than at Dubs?

Are the greens (and surrounds) at Dubs more difficult than say Pinehurst No. 2, or Oakmont for the average guy? OK... Oakmont is private, but I wouldn't say it's the most playable for the average golfer, would you?

[Mark Pearce]

I know why he isn't mentioning me ... because I didn't want Phil and Rick Smith as co-designers on something a few years back [which never got built anyway].  Hopefully someday I'll get to build a course he hates. 

Couldn't possibly be because he has played Coore/Crenshaw courses and enjoyed them, could it?

This post reminds me of a Carly Simon song.....

[Jason Topp]

I wonder, how many guys can really get around let's say The Ocean Course at Kiawah with a moderate wind more easily than at Dubs?

I haven't played the new version of Dubs but do have experience playing with a wide range of abilities at the Ocean Course.  My visit was with a group of 16 with handicaps ranging from 0 to 30 with half of the group 15 and up and 4 or 5 guys 22 or higher.  With winds in the 10-15 MPH range, no one had a problem getting around the course and everyone loved the place after 3 rounds.  My partner in one round had played 15 rounds of golf in his life and with the help of a good caddie that calmed him down and gave him good advice on where to aim his shots, broke 90 easily.  We won our match without me contributing on a single hole on the back nine.

This group was more intimidated by Black Mesa than it was by the Ocean Course.

We played from somewhere around 6300 yards.  (we played 17 from a very short yardage - maybe 130).

[Jud_T]

"A great golf course is a course that's challenging for the good player but playable for the average player," Mickelson said. "This is the exact opposite. It's playable, fine for us. We don't have any problems with it. But the average guy just can't play it."

What part of this statement, precisely, does anybody here disagree with?  

Are the greens (and surrounds) at Dubs more difficult than say Pinehurst No. 2

Tony,

No the greens are not more difficult than Pinehurst.  They're also not nearly as good.  The point is the average player at least can play his ball at Pinehurst.  If he walks away with a 6 from a chip and 3 putts that's a lot more palatable than slashing out of deep rough or taking penalties all day.  Doak has made a career out of this realization. 

[Adam Clayman]

Paul. Tom, etal, I feel that the decisions were inexcusable because; 1) It was $4.5 million. 2) Joe's likely turning over in his grave because that guy was one frugal owner. This is a typical 2nd gen not understanding the importance of building a business, not throwing mass sums of $ at it and expecting it to work.
3) There's Joe's namesake grandson who is an architect and would've done a better job and for less money.

I still can't hel[ but feel that the ground is so good out in Lemont, a total re-design of the entire property would've made things better for everyone concerned. It could've opened up ground for future real estate sales, and built 2-3 better, more interesting courses.

[SL_Solow]

Adam;  I am no fan of the redesign but your shot at Frank Jemsek who worked closely with his Dad and has maintained the same customer service mentality while expanding the scope of charitable activities is dead wrong and terribly unfair to a good man and a sucessful businessman.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Adam,

The funny thing is that the choice of Rees Jones might have been made precisely to avoid criticism, given his chops.  Hiring their relative in the biz would have been criticized as nepotism.  Rees was glowing in the Bethpage credit, and they were trying to jump on the USGA bandwagon, and what better way than a Chicago verion of the BP Open, which was a huge success?  Given the time frame, it was a perfectly logical decision.  Who could see that Phil would go on a Rees rampage for reasons of his own?

The other critiques are quite muted and not much out of the ordinary for tour pros.

The real issue to me is that Phil is so blunt.  Most times, PGA Tour pros are diplomatic in their critiques, because they know they hurt sponsors, hosts, etc.  Phil seems to have lost that concept for reasons of his own that we do not know.

I have met Frank J on many occaisons, and also think that any criticism of him from afar is not fair.  Class guy.

[Mike_Young]

Don't jump on the Jemseks.  And don't ever think these guys are the typical 2nd generation or third generation deal.  IMHO Frank Jemsek went about the changes at Cog Hill in a very diligent manner, always trying to do what he felt his father would wish done.  And he should have been given a US Open before Bethpage.  That family did as much for public golf as any.  I sense they had always been extremely loyal to Joe Lee and Rocky Roquemore after him.  I think they went the RJ route strictly to enhance chances for an Open.  Frank Jemsek and Joe Jemsek know more about golf design than PM ever will.
Considerations of the PM slams:
Each place has other attached courses that may be more user friendly than their championship layout.
Phil is trying to implement the same type of golf in Phoenix presently.
Word is PM has signed a 12 course deal in China.  You think there might have been some hard selling going on with several different firms?
Everything he slams has narrow fairways.
IMHO his comments are probably scripted and think about it.  Without knowing a thing he has used the media to position his golf design philosophies with those of the Hanse, Coore (notice he always mentions Crenshaw before Coore).  The other pros slam the place and the few people in the worldwide market say WOW..PM is one of the few big names that builds like the old guys.  MY bet...he's after the Coore Crenshaw client.  The whole deal is staged marketing...

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Mike

You said, "Phil is trying to implement the same type of golf in Phoenix presently."

Where in Phoenix? Is he building a new course  there?

If my memory serves me, his Whisper Rock course was tweaked after it opened to somewhat lessen the difficulty. That was years ago.

[Jud_T]

Frank is one of the nicer guys I've ever met.  I was playing #2 out there as a single on a winter weekday and he went out of his way to chat me up and we had a long conversation about the business and how they'd lost some regular tee time players but were offsetting those with guys who were giving up their clubs.  Of course you know what Leo Durocher said about nice guys...

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Some interesting comments @ geoffshackelford's site including one from Joe J:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2011/9/15/jemsek-wants-to-talk-to-phil-about-his-hatchet-job-on-rees.html#comments

[Mike_Young]

Some interesting comments @ geoffshackelford's site including one from Joe J:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2011/9/15/jemsek-wants-to-talk-to-phil-about-his-hatchet-job-on-rees.html#comments

Steve,
PM is in a group trying to buy a few course around Phoenix and put hem together with a common membership etc.  Good idea so the more crap he can stir up the more he becomes known as an "expert".  He's using the press to jump
start his golf business..that's all this is.
Whether you like RJ or dislike RJ work think about this:
He's been practicing his trade as long or longer than PM has been hitting golf balls.
The Jemseks have been operating courses longer than PM has been alive.
Do you think because PM can hit a golf ball as well as anyone that he can just step in to the buisnesses of the two guys above?  You probably don't and I probably don't BUT the majority of the golf world would think he could. And that is the problem.

BTW Joe Jemsek had a good response on the Shackelford site.

[Adam Clayman]

Shel Jeff, My comments were not about the man. They were about his decision to do what he did, when he did it. I meant no offense to the man.

I apologize if that's how they were received.

Perhaps my myopic opinion is such because I have been on this site too long?
I disagreed with the decision, when it was announced, and now that the results are in, I see no reason to sugar coat, or revise the history.

[Jason Topp]

For this website, the appropriate question for me is whether or not the criticisms of Mickelson, Stricker and others are on the mark. 

I do not really care whether or not the messengers have another agenda (they probably do), whether the owners of Cog Hill are great people (they clearly are) or whether the decision to make the changes seemed appropriate at the time they were made (I probably would have hired Rees Jones at the time had I wanted a US Open). 

On the question of whether or not the changes improved the course, I cannot tell from television. 

I played the course four or five times before the modifications and enjoyed it.  I would have considered the place a Doak 6 or so.  I really liked the par threes, the 16th hole and the variety in the par fives.  From limited television viewing, I have a hard time deciphering how much it has changed.  The routing looks the same, the greens appear to be similar to what they were before and the bunkers look deeper.  The pond on 7 is the obvious change to my eye but that may have predated the recent work.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Mike,

I forgot about PM buying Sanctuary GC in Scottsdale. I've never played there but I understand the fairways are somewhat narrow. I don't know if he has plans to renovate the course.
www.sanctuarygolf.com

I do know that PM mentioned Gil Hanse. His redo of Palmer's Florida course at TPC Boston has been praised by the PGAT pros.

As far as Rees is concerned, I know he has 4 newer courses in Eastern PA- one public and three private. I've played three of them. Rees has one course in AZ- a formerly private. I've played there. Generally speaking, my impression is that these courses all have very similar looks on very different terrain.Is that a result of being in business too long?

[Jud_T]

Hey don't dis the weasel...

[PCCraig]

Oh, I get it, because you dump a bunch of money into your course and use a designer that you feel gives you the best chance at getting a US Open, MAKES YOU WORTHY of having a US Open on name value alone...

Obviously the Jemsek's have lost sight of what was most important.
09.15.2011 | Unregistered CommenterTommy Naccarato

Joe Jemsek's response:

Dear Tommy,

I know it has all been lost on the media and the PGA tour, but my father always believed he was doing what is best for his customers and improving the infrastuture of the course and reviving the 45 year old course made the facility better. Adding subair and drainage was to ensure tournament conditions, not only for tournament, but for the other 30 weeks of the season. We have all gone to Pebble and dropped a mortage payment to play on conditions that are sub-par. Since he charges a premium price, he wanted to provide consistant premium conditions.

As for design integirty, Dick Wilson's design demands players hit different shots on holes. Off the tee player are requiered hit 5 draws, 4 fades, and 5 straight balls. Into the greens the course has always demanded an aerial approach and the course has always favored ball strikers. The reason it's an US Open worthy site, like Oakmont, the player is requiered to certian types of shots into the greens and misplayed shot are difficult to recover from. The Masters is all about risk and reward, but the US Open is about control. Guys like Phil with his talent should be always be in the hunt on a course like Cog.

As for "losing site of what's important" my family has gone out of it's way to foster and grow the game of golf. From the 18 plus high schools that call our facilities home(free of charge), to the decades old "no embarressment" golf schools which introduce the golf to hundreds of player every year, oh and lets not forget hosting the tournament for free since 1991 which has put over $5,000,000 back into the evans scholars program.

Bash Rees all you want, but gets your facts straight before coming after my family.
09.16.2011 | Unregistered CommenterJoe Jemsek

Well said Joe, a very valid response to a blindly stupid original post. Tommy hasn't bothered to respond.

[Tim_Cronin]

For this website, the appropriate question for me is whether or not the criticisms of Mickelson, Stricker and others are on the mark. 

I do not really care whether or not the messengers have another agenda (they probably do), whether the owners of Cog Hill are great people (they clearly are) or whether the decision to make the changes seemed appropriate at the time they were made (I probably would have hired Rees Jones at the time had I wanted a US Open). 

On the question of whether or not the changes improved the course, I cannot tell from television. 

I played the course four or five times before the modifications and enjoyed it.  I would have considered the place a Doak 6 or so.  I really liked the par threes, the 16th hole and the variety in the par fives.  From limited television viewing, I have a hard time deciphering how much it has changed.  The routing looks the same, the greens appear to be similar to what they were before and the bunkers look deeper.  The pond on 7 is the obvious change to my eye but that may have predated the recent work.

Jason, the pond on 7 is all Rees. The greens are more segmented, though not more severely sloped – if anything, they're generally flatter to allow faster green speeds. The bunkers are deeper, including the fairway bunkers. The only one that looks out of place is on the right side of the 15th, but then, you and I can't reach it. Those who hate the greens hate them because of the segmenting that makes a two-putt difficult from one side to the other. Better they should hit a more precise approach then.

[Mark Smolens]

Tim, the pond on 7 is certainly all Rees, but wouldn't you agree that the bunker previously there was meaningless to the pros? I can't tell you how many times I watched guys flying it over the willow (short and right) and and bunker leaving shots of 100 yards. At least now they must respect the pond and take their tee shots out to the left, leaving shots from (on yesterday's telecast) of 170 to 140 yards to a pin tucked into one of Mr. Wilson's "fingers".

[PCCraig]

Tim, the pond on 7 is certainly all Rees, but wouldn't you agree that the bunker previously there was meaningless to the pros? I can't tell you how many times I watched guys flying it over the willow (short and right) and and bunker leaving shots of 100 yards. At least now they must respect the pond and take their tee shots out to the left, leaving shots from (on yesterday's telecast) of 170 to 140 yards to a pin tucked into one of Mr. Wilson's "fingers".

Mark:

Well said. I would say that pre-Rees #7 wasn't much of a hole, especially for the pros. It's still not my favorite on the course by a long shot, but it's not bad. Rees did something similar during his recent work at Bellerive CC on the 2nd hole.

[Mark Smolens]

Pat, I'd concur that it's not my favorite hole on the course (pre or post renovation), but if the architect's charge was to make the course tougher for the big kids in light of technological advancements, the new 7th hole certainly did/does that. Moreover, the hole now drains much better as does the area short and left of the par-5 on Course #2 (can't recall what number that hole is since they've placed the two new holes on that course in the regular rotation). I had tons of drives on the old #7 plug in the soft ground short of the bunker -- now I generally play the hole from the trees on the left  since I'm "smart" enough to recognize that misses to the right are playable only for those whose balls float. . .

[Tim_Cronin]

Tim, the pond on 7 is certainly all Rees, but wouldn't you agree that the bunker previously there was meaningless to the pros? I can't tell you how many times I watched guys flying it over the willow (short and right) and and bunker leaving shots of 100 yards. At least now they must respect the pond and take their tee shots out to the left, leaving shots from (on yesterday's telecast) of 170 to 140 yards to a pin tucked into one of Mr. Wilson's "fingers".

Absolutely. I'm not sure I ever saw anyone in the bunker. Except me.

[Matt_Cohn]

Question...am I the only one suspicious of whether the actual Joe Jemsek would use the comments section of Geoffshackelford.com to reply to his critics? I mean...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()