Golf Digest's Best New Courses / 2001 Results

[D. Kelly]

Matt --

Just curious:

How do the editors of Golf Digest feel about being scooped on their own lists?

Be careful out there.

Dan

PS: Got the issue of Jersey Golfer (thanks) -- but haven't found time to read it and comment. Will do so. Please don't let me let it get lost in the shuffle.

[Matt Ward]

Gentlemen:

The discussion between Pine Hill and Blue Heron Pines / East is clearly one that will be batted back and forth. I tend to think a bit of anti-Tom Fazio is at work with Pine Hill to at least a small degree although I am sure those opposed will quickly and loudly disagree.

Pine Hill has as BillV describes a few holes that are weak -- a case can be made that all of the par-3's, with the exception of the 16th, are formulistic and quite ordinary. Ditto the long par-4 15th which is a bit of a stretch in terms of its overall presentation and demands.

Let's just keep in mind the land Pine Hill has is clearly first rate and any one with any experience in seeing golf in South Jersey will have to admit it is quite piece of topography. In my mind, land is very much a major element to be considered. The routing of holes is also quite unique as the architect attempted to use the rolling nature of the back nine property -- I really like the par-4 10th as a wonderful long par-4, although some claim it is too tough?

Mike Cirba mentions other Jersey courses as Twisted Dune (not eligible for GD's rating for 01) and Ballyowen as better courses and I concur you can make a strong case. Next year Jersey Golfer will update our biennial assessment of courses and I'm sure it will prove most interesting given the always improving competition. P.S. -- I also like Blue Heron Pines / East very much and to Hidden Gem I also agree that Scotland Run is very good although the front nine, minus one or two holes (i.e. the 2nd) is a bit bland. When you hit the 10th tee the game begins big time!

RJ Daley:

Your points are good ones no doubt, however, I still can't believe people who play Arcadia Bluffs and who also played KC could have numbers that are that spread that far apart. A GD panelist in the midwest who I respect greatly believes the "sensory" element you mentioned has to do with the pre-course publicity boost that AB received versus that of KC and others. Sometimes, the hype becomes the focus point and there are people who then just roll with it.

Yes, AB and KC were in two different categories but anyone lacking the wherewithal to see the supreme quality of KC must truly be lacking something. Whether KC had all its facilities in place is completely irrelevant. I just think people elevated AB because of the close proximity to Lake Michigan. Before closing, let me say that I really like AB and my comments in support of KC are in no way meant to disparage the wonderful nature of holes and the experience you receive while at AB. AB is great credit to the design duo of Henderson and Smith.

I think it's time for some sort of overhaul in the process GD uses and as a panelist for 17 years I will be forwarding my comments to the appropriate people in the next few weeks. Listing how many people play a course is a good suggestion but I have to wonder how courses rated completely separate through different individual visits are then merged into some sort of final rankings. I'm not a mathematician but I just wonder how that can be fairly done.

Michigan is a top quality golf state and I just hope the oversight of KC this time around is more of an aberation.

We shall see ...  

[RJ_Daley]

Matt,

I agree with all that you say about AB compared to KC.  I'd like to also make it clear that I am not disparaging AB in my disappointment about KC not making it on the list.  I happened to like AB so much, that I would take it over Whistling Straits, and would even tackle the chore of walking AB if they let you.  But, if given the choice of AB or KC for one time play, I'd take KC.

In the realm of pre-course publicity, maybe the AB situation reinforces some of the PR guru's that claim that even negative publicity is good if it gets your name out front often.  I am thinking of the pre-opening of AB and all the environmental hoopla about the unusual storm that washed much of the 10th hole down into the lake.  Maybe Mike should have poached some deer or done some eco-violating to attract attention  

Yours truly,
Dick  <----    which is no worse than Peter or Randy!

[Hidden_Gem]

Mike Cirba & Matt -

Thankyou for your response....  I am looking forward to playing Blue Heron East again
next season, now that it has had 1 1/2 years to mature. I have not played Ballyowen or  
Twisted Dunes as of yet.  A friend played it right after it opened, and replied that it
was a great layout, yet opened to soon.  Have either of you played "Architects Club",
yet? I heard many good things, here.....

I am not the biggest fan of Bergstol ventures due to my impression that if he only forked
out some more $$$ on his projects, that he could have taken some good courses and
made them very good. For example, NJ National.  I have only played it once, in the
Spring, and was really disappointed in the lack of proper drainage, and appeared lack of
topsoil that would facilitate a deeper root system for the grass to flourish. The tee boxes
were beat to hell.  I will refuse to play Pine Barrens again. Those 5-6 hour rounds can
kill anyones game. Plus I heard that the conditions were less than acceptable this year.

I have had the chance to play with him once, and my impression is that he is in it for the
$$$ more so than to produce the best product within reason. "Hey, they come out
whether or not I put another $2 mil in or not."  Give him credit, he has come a long way
from his days at Minisceongo which was another financial problem.

He just opened Branton Woods up in NY, and is reportedly collaborating with the Fazio
Team on another project in Connecticut.

Matt, I think the par 3's at Pine Hill are very good. I especially like #2. What criteria do
you use in categorizing a 3 par as "ordinary?"  I think #5 and #13 are not very unique, but
are still very good holes. A "greenie" does not insure par.  If you miss the green you can
recover, but still have to "make the shot" to get up and down. If you play a Fazio course
over and over again, you begin to appreciate some of the subtleties of various holes that
can grow on you. The greens are very good on these two holes. If I am interpreting your
comments correctly here, it appears that the WOW factor has to be part of the equation
(somewhat), in making a 3 par something other than ordinary.  An ordinary hole to me is
one where you can make a "bad pass" and still recover on a regular basis, without being
too creative to get up and down to make par....

Peace,

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Kiawah in September it is!!  Look Forward to visiting again.  David you have any really good ideas for wifely gifts?  I am going to have to butter mine up as well.  

1) I think those who haven't had the opportunity to play Yeamans will love that adventure while visiting the lowlands.

2) Members Club at Aldarra is #3 eh?  Aldarra is a very nice new club out here in the Seattle area and was a joy to play, however #3?  It would seem to me that Fazio's reputation may have swayed some votes.  The front nine is very good.  They could have cut a few more trees and planted a few less.  The back nine finishes strong but is marred by back to back par fives; one going straight up a mountain, the next coming straight down.  Very strong par threes at Aldarra... But #3?

Time always tells on these new listings.  Most disappear into oblivion anyway.

[Jeff_Lewis]

Very happy to see Murphy Creek recognized. It is a very good layout. Once the housing around the course is completed, well, all bets are off. But all of you who get to the Denver area next summer should definitely try to play this one.

[Mike_DeVries]

Once again, thanks for the support of The Kingsley Club by those here.  I sincerely hope that more of you will have the chance to visit northern MI to play it and the many other fine courses here.

Congratulations to Tom Doak and the Renaissance crew on a fantastic job at Pacific Dunes -- definitely some of the most fun I had playing golf in 2001!  Keep up the great work!    

Congratulations also to Warren Henderson and Rick Smith on Arcadia Bluffs -- the only other course on the lists that I have seen or played.  

Tim Liddy, good to see you on there, too!  

Has anyone played Cassique?  I hear good things about it from a member (father of an old college buddy).

[John_Conley]

Matt:

You seem to be doing it again.  ARE YOU SURE Kingsley was eligible?  Your last thread on same generated a lot of response, but I don't remember reading anywhere that it was confirmed eligible.

Cassique and Dakotah Ridge had play in 2000, but didn't show up until 2001.  The Wilds had a similar lag when it opened.  Kingsley had a little play this year (I'm told), which means its first full season will be 2002.  WHAT IS THE CRITERIA?  You have to keep in mind that you see courses in "soft" opening periods that may not technically be open in the owners' eyes.

If this course is 1/2 as good as you and others say, I cannot believe it will be left out.

If you did confirm its eligibility, I apologize for missing it.  But the other thread got long and most expressed furor at the omission.  A few of us asked for certainty that it was eligible before we joined in.

THANKS!

[Hidden_Gem]

Matt:

You seem to be doing it again.  ARE YOU SURE Kingsley was eligible?  Your last thread on same generated a lot of response, but I don't remember reading anywhere that it was confirmed eligible.

Cassique and Dakotah Ridge had play in 2000, but didn't show up until 2001.  The Wilds had a similar lag when it opened.  Kingsley had a little play this year (I'm told), which means its first full season will be 2002.  WHAT IS THE CRITERIA?  You have to keep in mind that you see courses in "soft" opening periods that may not technically be open in the owners' eyes.


John -  

I am definitely not sure, but I do believe that the course must be up and running 100% by
the end of May of that year, to qualify for that year's consideration.  When KC opened, I
do not know?
If this course is 1/2 as good as you and others say, I cannot believe it will be left out.

If you did confirm its eligibility, I apologize for missing it.  But the other thread got long and most expressed furor at the omission.  A few of us asked for certainty that it was eligible before we joined in.

THANKS!

[BillV]

Just to reply to Matt Ward's comments about my comments on Pine Hill.  

The routing of the back nine of Pine Hill is terrible, convoluted and ugly.  It was routed to maximize the views of Philadelphia's skyline period.

My biggest complaint for this course is that the greens are very uninspired.  THe par 5 first is the only green that Mike and I could find with any interesting contours and that may make the general public think that the rest are more like the first because of where you see  it in the round.  A nice bit of psychology.

The golf course will remain for a short time in the top 5 public courses in New Jersey because New Jersey is notorious for having no public courses (A fact that is very fortunately rapidly changing.

I'll bet at $150 they get very little repeat business.

[Matt_Ward]

John Conley:

To the best of my knowledge and the sources I have TKC was eligible for consideration for 01.

Nothing that I have found either before or since has changed that. Unfortunately, I wish I was wrong so that the course would get its just due. The same can be said for Carnegie Abbey (RI) and to a lesser degree Hamilton Farm (NJ). I have played half of the listing for "best new" private and cam away a good bit disappointed on the results.

BillV:

I don't share your thoughts on Pine Hill. You see the routing on the back nine as "convoluted and ugly." Bill -- really? I can name plenty of holes on the back nine where the challenge was clearly spelled out -- how about the 10th? -- how about the 11th? -- how about the conclusion with the last three holes? I'llk concede a few of the holes are drab (13th, 14th, and possibly the 15th)  but, -- hey, I'm not making Pine Hill in being a Holy Grail type visit!

Will it drop out of Jersey's top five -- could be given the intensity of the competition -- especially Twisted Dune and The Architect's Club are both good and I think TD can even be better in 02 with a little TLC.

Bill, you are right about Jersey's lack of good public courses but let's be honest I believe the Garden State's is better than the Keystone's -- at least the eastern half when compared to my home state.

Hidden Gem:

The par-3's at Pine Hill are strictly vanilla -- although I will concede that the 5th hole is good when the pin is deep left and the bunker becomes more of a real challenge. You need to see the others public courses mentioned -- I will say The Architect's Club is definitely different and not just a replica course like so many around the country today. Well worth a visit.

I would also put The Knoll and High Bridge Hills on your list to play. I agree w your assessment on NJ National. The course has some clear issues -- turf being one of them and the conditons on the tees is not good given the rates charged. As far as Eric Bergstol is concerned I think it's important not to confuse and lump slow play at his courses (the condition is at epidemic levels at all public golf in the Garden State) with their strategic sense. I had the opportunity to play Brandon Woods, his newest just outside Poughkeepsie and it's a fine test with maturity will be a fine offering to the public. I also like Pine Barrens but believe the competition is so intense that other courses will be pushing hard to move up.

If you could list for me your top public courses in NJ I would be most appreciated. You can either list it on GCA or send it to me at mattwardgolf@hotmail.com

Thanks ...

[Mike_Cirba]

Hidden_Gem,

The Architects Club is certainly worth a visit, and there is enough of interest for the golf architecture afficianado to ensure a stimulating day.  

As a golf course, as you might imagine, it's more of a "collection of holes" than a cohesive hole, although there is enough of a balance that it's not particularly annoying or totally incongruous.  

Most of the holes do indeed capture the intended "look" of the architects, although I had to agree with BillV's assessment, who termed it "Architects Lite".

By that, he means that everything is just a little softer, a little rounder, a little more modern than the actual work of the Golden Age architects who are represented, particularly around the greens.  Given that the green area is where so much of the wonderful work of the past was done, this is generally a disappointment.  With the exception of the 9th green (Ross), most are a bit too tame.

Worse yet, the par threes that are supposed to represent the work of Macdonald, Raynor, and Banks (a GREAT idea!) are poorly conceived and executed.  More surprisingly on the positive side, the best holes are by more of the modern architects...Maxwell, Wilson, Thompson...

Sadly, it's also the only place where Merion style bunkers with love grass still exist on the 3rd, which is sort of a mirror image of the actual 2nd hole on Merion East.  

On another topic, I really found Pine Hill to be a mixed bag, and agree with BillV and Matt on the mundane par threes and awkward routing (how would you like to WALK that course?...hell, the one par three you actually have to go backwards back up the same hill you just came all the way down, just to incorporate another view of the Philly skyline!), and was really hoping to find something as good as World Woods Pine Barrens on actual rolling land.  Instead, I'm not sure if it's as good as World Woods Rolling Oaks, and I can't imagine that Empire Golf is really very thrilled over not even finishing in Golf Digests' Top 10, given the investment, hype, and attempt to draw play at $130 or so.  

And, Matt's correct about the number of new courses that will draw play away...by my count, there are Ten new public courses opening in NJ next year, not to mention Coore & Crenshaw's Hidden Creek and Tom Fazio's Ridge at Back Brook on the private side.  This is a very good thing, but will be ultimately injurious to those courses that offer my style than substance if they are not $$$ competitive.  

[jim_lewis]

Here is my two-cents worth regarding the Golf Digest Best-new awards:

I have played three of the private courses (Kinloch, Eagle Point, and Cassique) and I have no problem with their rankings or #1,7,& 10.  Brad Klein posted a comprehensive description of Kinloch a few weeks ago. Its most outstanding feature is the incredible number of strategic decisions that need to be made on the tee, almost too many.  The property is very dramatic and is walkable except for a cart shuttle from #9 to #10. In my view, the only negative is a couple of trees that detract more than they add.  This course should put architect Lester George on the map. This is the second consecutive year that a Virginia course was named Best New Private. (Olde Farm by Bobby Weed last year).

Eagle Point is a high rent, low key, all golf, Fazio course near Wilmington, NC. Fazio moved a lot of dirt on a fairly flat site, but the finished product has contours and elevation changes that look very natural. It is very compact, and walking is easy and preferred.

Cassique was a very pleasant surprise. Tom Watson set out to create a Scottish looking course in the South Carolina low country. It looks very artificial, and it is, as you drive up to the property. However, once you get into the course and down among the dunes, it has a very natural feel. It is actually alot of fun and if you can get past the obvious manufactured look, it is pretty darn good.

The best new Fazio course I saw this year was Berkeley Hall-North. I suppose it opened too late to be considered, but I expect it to show up next year.  Also, Davis Love III has a new course about 1 hour from Pinehurst named Anderson Creek which will deserve some consideration next year.

One other point.  In the past five years the GD Best New affordable, upscale and private awards have gone to 14 different architects. They are Lafoy, Strantz, Engh, Palmer group, Dye, Rees, Jim Fazio, Kidd, Tom Fazio, Ken Dye, Hills, Weed, Doak, and George. The only one to be honored twice is Jim Engh. Who says they show favoritism to the big names?

[Hidden_Gem]

Matt -

I think that the par 3's at PH may have had a few chocolate chips added to that "vanilla,"
but hey, you have played more than your share, and are entitled.......

I am not confusing "slow play" with strategy at Empire Golf courses. My comment was
that I feel that he cut back in the funding on some of the courses that affected decisions
with agronomy, (NJ National), as well as routing and design to a degree. With all the land
at Pine Barrens, why do you have to drive your cart 1/2 mile between #10 and #11 and
cross the road for one hole and then cross back again to play #12?  The slow play may
bring (just cause?) to find additional room for improvement.

It has been 15 years since I have played The Knoll, and it was customer golf later in the
Fall, so I can't comment farily. I believe the late Dave Marr, had it on his personal Top 10
favorites?  Now, High Bridge Hills......  WHOOAH!  I only played 9 holes, (frost delay)
and needed to attend to day job, but I felt that the delay did me a favor. This has to go
down as one of the biggest disappointments. Based on your reply, I am assuming it was
a noteworthy track?  

Mike C - I will end my comments about Pine Hill, by saying that no, it is not as good as
the Rolling Oaks course at World Woods. ( I know of a number of single digit players
including a couple of club pros that had expressed favoritism to this course over Pine
Barrens). NO, walking is not an option for many. You are right, I am sure all is not "bliss"
in the Empire Golf camp right now over the "slight."

[Hidden_Gem]

Mike Cirba -

In addition to the 10 or so public courses in New Jersey that are scheduled to open in
2002 per your previous post, there are also another 14 daily fee and muni's on the
drawing boards per Sept. 30 of this year.  Will they all survive?

[SPDB (Guest)]

Matt -

I thought that Carnegie Abbey opened in 2000. I played it Oct. 2000, and it was fully operational with a large portion of the membership accounted for.

If that's the case, then it was left off 2000 lists as well, so the problem still remains.

[Mike Vegis @ Kiawah]

David Wigler--

With the "M Go Blue!" on your message, I hesitate to give you the dates we're planning for the Fall 2002 Rater's Cup as I bleed Green and White!  Go Spartans!  (We beat Michigan this year, didn't we...?)

I believe we're scheduling hosting y'all Thursday, September 5th through Sunday, September 8th, 2002...

[John_D._Bernhardt]

I agree that Shepard's Hollow does not seem to be a top ten course. However, when compare to many other new courses lasat year the thing that struck me about it was the extrodinary beauty of the land as well as very good greens. I feel this made what seemed to be pretty good holes better than they were. I felt the clubhouse was nice for an upscale daily feee but realy too big from a practical view. However the owner whose name escapes me now told Art and I he had major outing and banquet needs because of its lacation near Detroit. I am really comfused by the hole rating process frankly. Very little of what we discuss even exists on most of these courses.

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm really curious how GD's "Best New" process works.  Specifically, I wonder how many rater's have to see/play a course to be considered for inclusion.  The math seems somewhat daunting.

Roughly 400 courses opened in that time period.  Let's say that only half of them were even considered on the face of it, simply because of superior marketing, and then let's say that 5 raters was the minimum for consideration.  When you factor in things like regional differences (what might be a 10 in Dubuque, IA might be something else in Monterey, for instance), I'm not even sure how one could come up with a reasonable list.  

Anyone in the know care to share the methodology that's employed?

[David Wigler]

Mike Vegis,

Clearly, from my previous trips to Kiawah, I had little doubt you knew how to grow great grass, now that I know you are from that little agricultural college up north, I am quite certain that you also know how to smoke it   (Did the smiley face work?).  Cannot wait to see you down in Kiawah.

John,

The rating system has been defined many times here.  I could not agree more that Shepard’s Hollow had a tremendous piece of land.  I actually felt that it hurt them from a rating standpoint.  Why didn't Hills do more with it?  Why do so many holes feel the same?  The consistent criticism on this site of Golf Digest Raters (Matt Ward and many others excluded) is that Clubhouses, Food, service levels, et al., wow them and they are not experienced enough to separate the fluff from the architecture.  By contrast, the criticism of Golfweek's panel is that it is too enamored by classical architecture and modern architects who design in the classic style (Tom Doak, Crenshaw/Coore, etc.) get favored over less traditional architects.  I do not plan to argue that either criticism is fair or justified and do not want to generalize.  It does seem though, that in the specific case of Shepard’s Hollow, Digest's raters were overwhelmed by the fluff associated with the course because the architectural features of the course just are not at the level of one of the best 10 new courses in America!

[John_D._Bernhardt]

I am agreement Shepard Hollow may not be a top ten course. However, it is on a incredibly beautiful piece of land that in 2nd to none within 30 miles of a major metro area. Art did a great job on the greens but I am agreement the routing and holes are just better than average. the clubhouse is nice but appears way too large to me. The owner indicated he anticipated significant banquet business and corporate outings to justify triple the normal clubhouse one would normally have. Still compared to most new courses i played it is an incredible golfing experience. Maybe that influences the gd guys. I find very little we discuss here in most of the courses that golf digest or golf magzine rates a good new courses each year though.

[cardyin]

I ranked 40 of the roughly 250 courses nominated for 2001 Best New Courses during travels to more than a dozen states.  Of nominated courses, about 50 were private and about 200 were public.  The odds of a course finishing among the winners were 20% for private and 10% for public (not taking into account the split between upscale and affordable.)
Of those I ranked, only six were among the winners.  I have no quarrel with any of them being ranked highly, and, of course, I have no way to compare those I didn't rank with those I did.
There were a handful of courses I ranked highly which were not among the winners:  Porcupine Creek in Rancho Mirage, the private residence of Tim Blixseth, a bit short from the back tees but I hit every club in my bag;
Barona Creek, the only course I ranked all year in which my notes reflect not a single criticism; the Pate course at Rancho LaQuinita, with its bold greens complexes (Pate has a new course in Arizona, and it appears he is rightfully going to join the select few whose operate nationally); Purgatory, a long jigsaw puzzle in an Indiana field; Whisper Creek north of Chicago,
and the Irish course at Whistling Straits, flawed but still a great golfing experience.
Except for some serious routing problems, the R&S Sharf course at Oakland University (a Rick Smith/Warren Henderson course) was hole-for-hole superior to Shepherd's Hollow, in my opinion.
Ironically, another Smith/Henderson, or Henderson/Smith, or whatever),
Arcadia Bluffs finished very high.  It is ironic in that the owner of Arcadia Bluffs declined to enter the course into the competition, stating that he preferred instead that it be "discovered."  Perhaps the recipe for success is to be a pill.
Finally, bulking up the panel seems to have helped.  A course needs a minimum of 10 evaluations to be considered, and add that to 250 courses, and a minimum of 2,500 evaluations are needed.  GolfDigest years ago began assigning courses for panelists to rank in their general area to try to spread out play.  In the past it seemed many courses still were not receiving the minimum play required.  This year when I asked how many panelists had visited, usually I was told between 20 and 30.  The GolfDigest system may not be perfect, but at least it has enough rankings being made to build a body of opinion about a course, which should smooth out significant error.  

[Paul Richards]

Murphy Creek as #10 Best New Affordable?

As I've written on previous posts, this is a very fine course
(especially at $32 to walk during the week!).  If this is #10,
the other 9 must be really something!

[Jim_Kennedy]

AClayman,
Yot forgot the federal and state taxes, they'd eat up 35/40% of the 750k. Then there is the staff, at least ten that will cost around 2/300k. There are many unseen costs when looking at course ownership. The model is $10 gr fee for every 1mil spent. So the $50 course spent 5 mil to build and already we are close to showing no real profit. $5mil in a 5% bank account returns 250k pre tax dollars, WORK FREE ,  while you sip pina coladas and look out over the course of your choice.

[Mike_Cirba]

cardyin,

Thanks for weighing in with details as to how the process works.  I'm still somewhat perplexed as to the results, yet it's encouraging to hear that an extensive effort is being made to identify the best new courses.  

Still, I can imagine that it's tough to get 10 rater visits to some of the courses, just due to distance and logistics.  

BTW, were Pine Hill and Carnegie Abbey nominated courses for the current listing?