Why is Yale so unjustly overlooked? (pictures/discussion)

[Scott Warren]

So Paul (and Joel):

Do you believe Yale is celebrated and discussed sufficiently for its quality?

Do you think #71 in the USA (Golf Mag) and #41 Classic (Golf Week) are a correct representation of Yale's quality compared to the rest of those samples?

[Ronald Montesano]

Although membership mentions 16 as something of a weak hole (in comparison to the others), I found it to be a strong par 4.5.  Are there any weak holes or weak shots at Yale, once you get past the nature of the course? I couldn't even begin to compare it to Fox Chapel, even though similar holes abound. The ones at FC are intimate in nature, whereas Yale's template holes seem to stretch to infinity (perhaps that's the "brawny" reference from an earlier post.) Is that unique for a template course? How do green sizes at Yale compare with those at NGLA and other template tours?

[Tim Martin]

Although membership mentions 16 as something of a weak hole (in comparison to the others), I found it to be a strong par 4.5.  Are there any weak holes or weak shots at Yale, once you get past the nature of the course? I couldn't even begin to compare it to Fox Chapel, even though similar holes abound. The ones at FC are intimate in nature, whereas Yale's template holes seem to stretch to infinity (perhaps that's the "brawny" reference from an earlier post.) Is that unique for a template course? How do green sizes at Yale compare with those at NGLA and other template tours?

Ron- 16 is a half par hole from the members tees but when played back it is 553 on the card and the tee will be set back by 5 tee. It is rarely back there for member play just like 18 is rarely set up from the 621 top tee. As far as the scale of the golf course it would be grande in your parlance.

[Robert Thompson]

Is it blind if you know exactly where to hit it? Seems to me what you're saying for the most part is that you don't see the ball land.

There were no places at Yale where I didn't know where to hit the ball, unlike, say Prestwick or Lahinch overseas, where you're not entirely sure what direction to hit it on occasion. On the 10th at Yale, the tee shot is clear and the approach is simply so uphill that you don't see the ball land. But you know exactly where you need to hit it. I'd say the same at almost all the holes you have listed.

Interestingly, I haven't weighed into this discussion, but after having played the course with a well-traveled golf architect and Tom Dunne, we had a long discussion of the quality of Yale. The architect and I both thought it well within the Top 50 in the world, and better than much of what was there.

I don't understand the conditioning issue. It wasn't of the quality say of Winged Foot, but it was certainly fine and not a distraction to the design. I'd say Yale was one of the best I've ever played (and I've had the good fortune to see a great number -- 50 or so of the Toip 100). It is one of the courses I most want to return to play.

#2 - Blind shots - Yale has a dozen fully or semi-blind field shots.
 

I've got to open my eyes more on my next round at Yale. . . I don't remember a dozen. 

Come on Professor

3-Drive and approach
8-Drive and approach
10-Drive and approach
11-Drive
12-Drive and approach
17-Drive
18-Drive and 2nd and possibly 3rd

[Tim Martin]

Is it blind if you know exactly where to hit it? Seems to me what you're saying for the most part is that you don't see the ball land.

There were no places at Yale where I didn't know where to hit the ball, unlike, say Prestwick or Lahinch overseas, where you're not entirely sure what direction to hit it on occasion. On the 10th at Yale, the tee shot is clear and the approach is simply so uphill that you don't see the ball land. But you know exactly where you need to hit it. I'd say the same at almost all the holes you have listed.

Interestingly, I haven't weighed into this discussion, but after having played the course with a well-traveled golf architect and Tom Dunne, we had a long discussion of the quality of Yale. The architect and I both thought it well within the Top 50 in the world, and better than much of what was there.

I don't understand the conditioning issue. It wasn't of the quality say of Winged Foot, but it was certainly fine and not a distraction to the design. I'd say Yale was one of the best I've ever played (and I've had the good fortune to see a great number -- 50 or so of the Toip 100). It is one of the courses I most want to return to play.

#2 - Blind shots - Yale has a dozen fully or semi-blind field shots.
 

I've got to open my eyes more on my next round at Yale. . . I don't remember a dozen. 

Come on Professor

3-Drive and approach
8-Drive and approach
10-Drive and approach
11-Drive
12-Drive and approach
17-Drive
18-Drive and 2nd and possibly 3rd

Robert-I don`t know when you played but the knock on conditioning goes back a while. Since Scott Ramsay has come on board and especially in the last 5 years the conditions are very good and continue to get even better.

[Mark Pearce]

The conditioning was absolutely fine when I played there last year. 

[Robert Thompson]

I played there last year and met Scott when we were out on the course.
Conditions that day were solid.

Is it blind if you know exactly where to hit it? Seems to me what you're saying for the most part is that you don't see the ball land.

There were no places at Yale where I didn't know where to hit the ball, unlike, say Prestwick or Lahinch overseas, where you're not entirely sure what direction to hit it on occasion. On the 10th at Yale, the tee shot is clear and the approach is simply so uphill that you don't see the ball land. But you know exactly where you need to hit it. I'd say the same at almost all the holes you have listed.

Interestingly, I haven't weighed into this discussion, but after having played the course with a well-traveled golf architect and Tom Dunne, we had a long discussion of the quality of Yale. The architect and I both thought it well within the Top 50 in the world, and better than much of what was there.

I don't understand the conditioning issue. It wasn't of the quality say of Winged Foot, but it was certainly fine and not a distraction to the design. I'd say Yale was one of the best I've ever played (and I've had the good fortune to see a great number -- 50 or so of the Toip 100). It is one of the courses I most want to return to play.

#2 - Blind shots - Yale has a dozen fully or semi-blind field shots.
 

I've got to open my eyes more on my next round at Yale. . . I don't remember a dozen. 

Come on Professor

3-Drive and approach
8-Drive and approach
10-Drive and approach
11-Drive
12-Drive and approach
17-Drive
18-Drive and 2nd and possibly 3rd

Robert-I don`t know when you played but the knock on conditioning goes back a while. Since Scott Ramsay has come on board and especially in the last 5 years the conditions are very good and continue to get even better.

[Mike Sweeney]

Scott/Yale is 5 years away from the finish line:

http://www.golfcourseindustry.com/gci1111-course-maintenance-drainage.aspx


"We get an occasional complaint," he says of his golfers, but nothing too bad. "Mostly we have informed everyone ahead of time so they understand. It is a huge difference once the drainage is completed."

Last summer when the course bounced from the NCAA's where the course had fantastic/best ever conditioning in May to record drought conditions in the summer with the State of Connecticut threatening the water supply, Scott stayed in front of the issues.

[PThomas]

So Paul (and Joel):

Do you believe Yale is celebrated and discussed sufficiently for its quality?

Do you think #71 in the USA (Golf Mag) and #41 Classic (Golf Week) are a correct representation of Yale's quality compared to the rest of those samples?

it could be a little higher imho Scott

[Tom_Doak]

I think the answer is still conditioning.  That's not a knock on Scott Ramsey; he does fine work under difficult operating conditions, and the course played just fine for my visit -- in fact, the golf was a blast.  But I know some raters who would vote harshly on a course with bare patches in the fairways and greens at 8 on the Stimpmeter.  I'm not saying they are right, but I think that's why the course is underrated.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Interestingly or coincidently, two fellows who invited me to play their course, began apologizing for it's condition a week before my scheduled round.

When I eventually played there, I saw the "condition", but, that in no way detracted from the quality of the course/architecture.

However, many, to most golfers, especially members of clubs, seem transfixed on conditions, with conditions being at their optimal level, during the entire golfing season.

While I believe that nearly everyone applauds Scott's efforts, conditioning at Yale has been an issue for decades.

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I don't think conditioning should be overlooked when judging a golf course.  The important thing was, as I described earlier, I thought the golf course played just fine, in spite of a lot of rough spots.  

I just think it's a shame when people judge conditioning, INDEPENDENT OF HOW THE COURSE ACTUALLY PLAYS.  We're not out there to award blue ribbons for beautiful grass.  We're out there to play the game.

[Scott Warren]

I don't think conditioning should be overlooked when judging a golf course.  The important thing was, as I described earlier, I thought the golf course played just fine, in spite of a lot of rough spots.  

I just think it's a shame when people judge conditioning, INDEPENDENT OF HOW THE COURSE ACTUALLY PLAYS.  We're not out there to award blue ribbons for beautiful grass.  We're out there to play the game.

One of my favourite posts in all my years on this site. Thanks, Tom.

Morfontaine summed this up for me a couple of weeks ago when I was there. Much of it was yellow and brown, rough was rough (like you see in Australia, which for me is how rough should be), but the course was firm, the greens were smooth and a sensible speed and it was set up perfectly for playing golf.

Conditioning matters - and more courses should be conditioned the way the likes of Yale and Morfy are.

Yale is a golf course I reminisce about regularly. I am sure I have begun to forget (22 months since I played it) how overwhelming the scale is, but I still vividly remember being overwhelmed from the 1st tee to the 18th green, and how many times during the round I saw something I'd never seen before - and haven't seen since.