News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Craig Disher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #50 on: September 05, 2013, 12:03:14 PM »
For some reason, the site isn't letting me quote prior posts.  Craig, in your last post, are you talking about Manor (which I haven't seen) or Chevy (which I have)?  

I was referring to Manor and segued to Chevy Chase/Columbia to make a point that some of the older designs fit their sites better than the renovations.

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #51 on: September 05, 2013, 12:50:20 PM »
I have played 3 Arthur Hills courses (Stonewall, Chicago Highlands and Colliers Reserve) and one Arthur Hills renovation (Ivanhoe).  Each course is fine.  I wouldn't necessarily turn down a chance to play.  However, in each case, the thing that struck me was the bunkering.  The bunkering is awful.  I don't understanding the shaping (no consistency or natural shaping), the locations (set way back off greens, in blind spots in fairways) and aesthetics (strange looking masses in weird places).  Quite candidly, his bunkering is the worst I've ever seen - ever.

Why/how Chicago Highlands selected Arthur Hills is a story I would love to hear.

J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #52 on: September 05, 2013, 12:58:59 PM »
I have played 3 Arthur Hills courses (Stonewall, Chicago Highlands and Colliers Reserve) and one Arthur Hills renovation (Ivanhoe).  Each course is fine.  I wouldn't necessarily turn down a chance to play.  However, in each case, the thing that struck me was the bunkering.  The bunkering is awful.  I don't understanding the shaping (no consistency or natural shaping), the locations (set way back off greens, in blind spots in fairways) and aesthetics (strange looking masses in weird places).  Quite candidly, his bunkering is the worst I've ever seen - ever.

Why/how Chicago Highlands selected Arthur Hills is a story I would love to hear.

Ryan,   It would be interesting to hear why Arthur Hills was given the nod. I played CH last Summer with an architect  pal who went over the property several years ago and produced 6 different routings. His firm was not chosen. Too bad because the 2 designs he was lead archie on are both top 100 Moderns- one will be hosting a US Open. I really enjoy the Highlands but sometimes wonder if they could have gotten more out of the property? It was truly a blank canvas.

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #53 on: September 05, 2013, 01:05:23 PM »
A blank canvas with views of 17 Water Towers.  

J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #54 on: September 05, 2013, 01:08:49 PM »
A blank canvas with views of 17 Water Towers.  
True, but lets try to be nice! ;D Beverly has some distracting sounds so I can't throw too many stones.

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #55 on: September 05, 2013, 01:18:17 PM »
I'm told that Arthur Hills' son is one of the partners in the development of Chicago Highlands, aka Hinsdale Harborside.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #56 on: September 05, 2013, 01:27:02 PM »
There appears to be very little Ross left at Chevy.  I don't know how CCC looked before Hills' work or what his brief was there, but it's disappointing that Chevy lacks classic-era character.  It could be so much better.

Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #57 on: September 05, 2013, 02:58:15 PM »
The Donald Ross Society lists Chevy Chase as a 1910 redesign by Ross.  Any idea how much Ross was ever there?  Agree that it doesn't have the character of some other Ross designs.

Jim Colton

Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #58 on: September 05, 2013, 03:12:29 PM »
I have played 3 Arthur Hills courses (Stonewall, Chicago Highlands and Colliers Reserve) and one Arthur Hills renovation (Ivanhoe).  Each course is fine.  I wouldn't necessarily turn down a chance to play.  However, in each case, the thing that struck me was the bunkering.  The bunkering is awful.  I don't understanding the shaping (no consistency or natural shaping), the locations (set way back off greens, in blind spots in fairways) and aesthetics (strange looking masses in weird places).  Quite candidly, his bunkering is the worst I've ever seen - ever.

Why/how Chicago Highlands selected Arthur Hills is a story I would love to hear.


Ryan,

  There is a strange cross bunker at Stonewall on one of the par 5's...I thought it was odd because the left side of the bunker sits above ground level in comparison with the surrounding area. There was no attempt to get it to blend into the surrounding area naturally. I wish I had taken a picture of it.

  Nobody has mentioned Bolingbrook, Art's first course in Illinois. The holes with bunkers left and water right are mixed up with holes with bunkers right and water left. Great design variety!

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #59 on: September 05, 2013, 03:13:55 PM »
The Donald Ross Society lists Chevy Chase as a 1910 redesign by Ross.  Any idea how much Ross was ever there?  Agree that it doesn't have the character of some other Ross designs.

I've read that Ross was the original designer and Alison renovated--I'm not sure if that's accurate.  Here's what an associate of Hills says about the course--http://www.jdrewrogers.com/58/chevy-chase-club.  If it was worked on by Alison, RTJ and Clark, then perhaps not much Ross was left by the time Hills got to it.  

Howard Riefs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #60 on: September 05, 2013, 03:18:50 PM »
I'm told that Arthur Hills' son is one of the partners in the development of Chicago Highlands, aka Hinsdale Harborside.

There's the answer.  Thanks, Terry. And confirmed in the club's own language in a FAQ dated February 2011:

Q: Who owns the Club Facilities’?
A: The Chicago Highlands Club, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and or its successors or assigns (the “Company”), owns and operates the Club Facilities. The Company is owned and operated by John F. Baxter, Thomas J. Healy and Joseph Q. Hills. Mr. Baxter is a partner in Hamilton Partners of Itasca, Il (www.hamiltonpartners.com). Mr. Hills and Mr. Healy are seasoned golf course developers who own and operate two highly successful golf courses in the Washington DC/Baltimore area (www.waverlywoods.com and www.bluemash.com ). These award winning designs are known for outstanding conditioning and management - each course has been named Maryland Golf Course of the Year by the National Golf Course Owners Association. Mr. Hills is the son of famed architect Arthur Hills – the designer of Chicago Highlands. Mr. Healy is a Chicago native.


http://www.chicagohighlands.com/~hills/images/stories/downloads/faq_2_15_11.pdf
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke

Bryan Lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #61 on: September 05, 2013, 03:26:37 PM »
For the most part I am not a fan of Arthur Hills courses.  The only one I like (thankfully) is my home course, Hawkshead in South Haven.  How strange is that?!  Playable, fun, has a variety of lengths and types of holes.

Edward Moody

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #62 on: September 05, 2013, 04:11:21 PM »
I have only played Wolfdancer .  Played it numerous times and really enjoy it but I enjoy the flow of the land the most. The topography on the property leads to a variety of good looks on the course. Most in my golf circle really like it too.

My gripe is the severity of some of the greens, especially during the first several holes. Not a great way to start the round and because it is a resort course that leads to very slow play. The approach shots and short game shots require great precision, sometimes in a very unfair manner.

Bob Jenkins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #63 on: September 06, 2013, 12:10:20 AM »
About 5 years ago, I arranged for a group of friends to play at the Arthur Hills course at Halfmoon Bay, Ca., on our way to Monterey. That course, known as the Ocean Course, was one of the biggest dissapointments I have encountered over several years. The layout had little imagination, the bunkers seemed to be dropped in locations that had little relationship to the approach shots or the green and generally left me with little to praise. There was little of interest in the greens. Very disappointing. I am not one to complain but the Ocean course at Halfmoon Bay, Ca. left me wondering about whether I would ever seek out an Arthur Hills design.

Kirk Gill

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #64 on: September 06, 2013, 01:49:30 AM »
I've played two of Hills' Colorado courses - Walking Stick in Pueblo, and Legacy Ridge in Westminster. LR is a housing tract course, and nothing special, to my mind. I played it several times years ago, and only remember a sweeping downhill par four (#13 maybe?) that had a great angled tee shot with a tree placed in such a  way that it forced a decision on going right or left of it that I always enjoyed. Walking stick is a far superior course to my mind, that benefits both from being a "core" golf course and from some really cool looking arroyos that bisect the course and serve as harsh hazards on a number of holes. I wouldn't consider either of them to be architectural gems, but Walking Stick is a good course that i'd play again.
"After all, we're not communists."
                             -Don Barzini

Mike Schott

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #65 on: September 06, 2013, 10:48:58 AM »
I never realized how many of Art's courses I have played. That being said, most of them strike me as just pretty decent golf courses (many near houses unfortunately) that are of pretty fair design. There are a few that didn't do much for me and a few I actually really enjoyed. Art is based in Toledo so he gets a lot of work in my area so it's safe to assume I will play a few more.

Arthur Hills Course at Boyne Highlands (MI)
Coosaw Creek (SC)
Eagle Ridge (KY)
Fieldstone (MI)
Fox Hills (MI)
Fox Run (KY)
Hawkshead Links (MI)
Weatherwax GC (36 holes) (OH)
Kinsale CC (OH)
Lakes of Taylor (MI)
Legnedary Run (OH)
Longaberger (OH)
Leslie Park (MI) redesign
Bay Harbor (MI)
Pheasant Run (MI)
Pipestone (OH)
Red Hawk (MI)
Red Hawk Run (OH)
Shepherd's Hollow (MI)
Glenview (OH)
Taylor Meadows (MI)
Forest Akers West (MI)
Turnberry (OH)
Wetherington CC (OH)
Winding Hollow (OH)
Shaker Run (OH)

I really liked Forest Akers West, Red Hawk, The Hills Course at Boyne, the front 9 at Legendary Run (a great 9 to walk, the back 9 is strictly cart golf), and Leslie Park as well. I felt Bay Harbor was way overhyped as was Shaker Run.

Forest Akers West was originally designed by Bruce Matthews. I'm not sure what Hills did but the course did not change much after his work was completed.

Philip Caccamise

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #66 on: September 06, 2013, 08:58:40 PM »
Palmetto Hall Hills course (SC): Worst golf course I've ever played. Patently unfair and not enjoyable. Scale of 1-10 I give it a -1.
Palmetto Dunes Hills course (SC): Some very good holes, some forgettable holes, and the abomination that is the 17th. 3.5
Champion Trace (KY): Excellent golf course. Very playable but also challenging. Good mix of all types of holes. Well thought out, excellent greens, good shot values for a moderate property. Rewards good play, punishes bad play. 7
Hurstbourne (KY): Decent, but overrated by the members. Sort of forgettable. 5
Fox Run (KY): A few good holes but some absolutely terrible holes that look built on the side of a mountain. 1
Legendary Run (OH): An average public golf course. Terrible staff and mediocre conditioning. 2
LPGA International (FL): Decent. Played there a bunch when my aunt lived in Daytona. Nothing memorable but nothing egregious either. 5
Persimmon Ridge (KY): Absolutely hate it. Most ridiculous greens ever. 0
TPC Eagle Trace (FL): Boring FL TPC golf. Played it many times, my aunt used to live on the course before moving to Daytona.
University Club- Big Blue (KY): Love it. Other than the long walk/ride from 6 to 7 the holes really flow well, no bad holes (although the island green #8 from the black tees is kind of stupid), and some very very good holes like #2, #4, #5, #7, #9, #13, #16. 7
Shaker Run (OH): Very overrated, but a lot of that is the horrific conditioning for the price they charge. The layout is just OK. 3

I don't hate Arthur Hills, and a lot of people rate Olde Stone as the #1 course in KY, but there's a couple of his courses that I'd rather spend the time watching infomercials.

Andy Troeger

Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #67 on: September 07, 2013, 12:48:35 PM »
I can understand why people get so down on Art Hills courses. I've found one thing in common--they tend to have about 2-4 holes per round that are somewhere between odd and awful. Much of the rest of each course is generally fine.

Of the 7 courses I've played:
Longaberger (OH): best of the bunch--quite a few good holes on a nice property. The 4th hole is silly IMO, and the routing is certainly not designed with walking in mind. Good enough course, but the property does this more than the design.
Ironbridge (CO): fun course to play, but not an architectural gem. Really odd routing with some massive walks from green-to-tee (about 1 mile on a few occasions). Spectacular scenery and good enough golf.
Glacier Club (CO): The 3rd nine designed by someone else is the best of the bunch. Average design in a beautiful setting. A couple weird holes with oddly placed ponds/trees.
Coral Oaks (FL): Good muni in Cape Coral, FL. No special holes, but I don't remember any odd ones on this course.
Honeywell (IN): Back-nine by Hills has a few odd holes--#13 was awful before the tree in front of the green fell down. Still not a very good nine--and very different from the original nine.
Rose Creek (OK): Generally forgettable, but not awful.
Hawthorns (IN): Generally forgettable, I put my camera in my bag after the first hole and never found reason to pull it back out. Housing course with lots of water--really bad.

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #68 on: September 07, 2013, 01:26:09 PM »
To me the Hills renovations all took whatever character the hole had and brought it to his style - flat bunkers and sectioned greens.  Manor's fairways were always soft as it appeared that they wanted everything bright green so it was just hit the ball as hard as you can and then do it again.  Columbia has so much more character than any of those courses and it is my understanding that they only worked on drainage but left everything else as it was.  

Charlie Gallagher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #69 on: September 08, 2013, 10:27:36 AM »
I think I have played two Arthur Hill's courses that I can remember, Miromar Lakes north of Naples  FL and Treviso Bay in Naples. Miromar has become a housing development course. It was not walkable and had a number of decent holes. Treviso Bay I liked quite a bit. While I agree that Hills overly segments his greens on some holes, I found Treviso had several oustanding shorter par 4's and a couple of very good par 5's. His bunkering could be more visually attractive, but it is strategically effective. I'd be pleased to become more familiar with his work.

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #70 on: September 09, 2013, 06:53:24 PM »
I've played a handful, that generally range from pretty good to awful and many of them do that within the course of a few holes.

Walking Stick (Pueblo, CO). Easily the best of what I've played. A good desert-style layout that nicely uses a desert arroyo for a few holes. The integration of the irrigation pond on the back nine is out of place and rather annoying.

Legacy Ridge (Westminster, CO). I only played it a few times when it was brand new and not yet beset by homes as it now apparently is. Also the first place I broke 80, so I may be biased. The front nine offers some very bland holes and some downright dreadful offerings (#6 is among the goofiest par 5s I've ever played). But the back nine I always thought was quite nice, with an interesting tempting tee shot at 10, and some nice us of natural wetlands on a few other holes. Someone previously mention #13 which is sort of a downhill cape hole over the wetlands.

Heritage Eagle Bend (Aurora, CO). I played here maybe twice and over a decade ago ... still there are plenty of such courses I remember very well, and I'm not sure I remember a single hole on this course. Even looking at a yardage book and map brings up nothing from the memory banks. I have a vague memory of not liking the 18th hole here, but to be honest I may be thinking of another course in the area.

The Legacy (Las Vegas, NV). Housing tract golf at its most bland. No glaringly bland holes, no interesting ones, either. You've seen pictures of this course, no doubt, because one of the par 3s has its tee boxes in the shape of card suits. This adds nothing from ground level, of course, but makes for a nice promo shot in Vegas. Yawn.

Palm Valley (Palms) [Litchfield Park, AZ]. Pretty bad, but I don't recall any outright disaster holes. A lot of crowned fairways where everything runs off down into the "desert." I wouldn't drive to the west valley to play this again and wouldn't wat to move to the west side for fear it'd become an easy option.

Quail Creek (Green Valley, AZ). A lot like Heritage, I remember almost no individual holes. Green Valley is essentially a retirement community south of Tucson. This course is probably more attractive than most (or was, when I played it), with less intrusive homes and nicer views.

Heritage Highlands (Marana, AZ). Played this course once because a friend of my dad's had a place there. It had several WTF holes. I asked the guy who lived there if they were, "once you play it a few times, it makes sense" kind of WTF holes. He said, "Not really," and moved shortly thereafter.

Stonecreek (Paradise Valley, AZ). I don't know much about this course, but I don't think it's a Hills original, though he's usually given credit. Think the original course in this spot might have been by the Dye group, and had a different name. A very weird course for the Phoenix area with a lot of water. Lots of homes, too, but at least they're kept to just one side, generally. A couple goofy holes, but some nice ones, as well. There's a good short par 4 on the front (#8) and a good pair of par 5s on the back (#13 snakes around grass hollows and is often reachable, no bunkers and the creek is mostly out of play), then #16 is a beast, very long, into the wind, and with the 3rd shot over water unless you really challenge the hole with your first two shots. Nothing great, but it's memorable.

Camelback (Padre) [Scottsdale, AZ]. Again I believe this is a renovation, but the resulting course is pretty decent given the site. The front has a good par 5 (#5) followed by a good short par 4. A couple clever holes on the back, too. Mostly it's flat and uses water to create strategy far too much (especially for a course in Arizona), but I'd rather play a round here than either of the Muirhead courses at McCormick Ranch across the street.

Paul Carey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #71 on: September 09, 2013, 08:39:57 PM »
I think this is getting confusing.  Hills renovated Manor, Chevy Chase, Congressional Gold and Belle Haven.  The renovation of Columbia was by Rob Walton and was all new bunkers and tree removal but no changing of the greens.  I don't know of Hills ever doing work there and it certainly wasn't major work if he did.

I think his new designs I have played are blah and his redesigns are better because someone else has already routed the course better than he would have done.  I think Tom Doak had it right.  Little strategy at all in the design and he normally gives you one way to play the approach....high.  If you miiss the green the recovery shots seem to be a bunker shot or a chunk out of green side rough.  I am not a fan.

To me the Hills renovations all took whatever character the hole had and brought it to his style - flat bunkers and sectioned greens.  Manor's fairways were always soft as it appeared that they wanted everything bright green so it was just hit the ball as hard as you can and then do it again.  Columbia has so much more character than any of those courses and it is my understanding that they only worked on drainage but left everything else as it was.  
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 08:50:37 PM by Paul Carey »

Sean Remington (SBR)

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #72 on: September 09, 2013, 10:36:26 PM »
The Donald Ross Society lists Chevy Chase as a 1910 redesign by Ross.  Any idea how much Ross was ever there?  Agree that it doesn't have the character of some other Ross designs.

I've read that Ross was the original designer and Alison renovated--I'm not sure if that's accurate.  Here's what an associate of Hills says about the course--http://www.jdrewrogers.com/58/chevy-chase-club.  If it was worked on by Alison, RTJ and Clark, then perhaps not much Ross was left by the time Hills got to it.  

Ross was at Chevy for one day and made some changes to an existing 18 hole layout.  The Alison work, 1921-24, was a completely new 18 hole course.  The bones of the current Chevy is Alison. R. White was at Chevy in the late 40's. I do not believe he made any changes but was hired to produce several routing suggestions if the Club sold all the road frontage on Wisconsin Ave.  They didn't do that.   RTJ made alterations on 2 or 3 holes in 70's I believe.  Clark didn't touch anything but the practice tee in the late 80's.  Hills did his work from 96-98.  He had fairly clear instructions of what to do and what not to do. I think he did a good job of that and left the course looking much like it did prior but improved in many ways.  There was a routing change as the old tenth hole, par 3, was removed to build a large indoor tennis facility.  In my opinion the single largest influence on Chevy prior to Hills was the Superintendent from 1932-1964.  D Jackson who had come the US from Scottland to build courses for D. Ross.  I believe he made many changes and helped to promote the idea that Chevy was a Ross course.

Sean Remington (SBR)

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #73 on: September 10, 2013, 06:59:33 AM »
The Donald Ross Society lists Chevy Chase as a 1910 redesign by Ross.  Any idea how much Ross was ever there?  Agree that it doesn't have the character of some other Ross designs.

I've read that Ross was the original designer and Alison renovated--I'm not sure if that's accurate.  Here's what an associate of Hills says about the course--http://www.jdrewrogers.com/58/chevy-chase-club.  If it was worked on by Alison, RTJ and Clark, then perhaps not much Ross was left by the time Hills got to it.  

Ross was at Chevy for one day and made some changes to an existing 18 hole layout.  The Alison work, 1921-24, was a completely new 18 hole course.  The bones of the current Chevy is Alison. R. White was at Chevy in the late 40's. I do not believe he made any changes but was hired to produce several routing suggestions if the Club sold all the road frontage on Wisconsin Ave.  They didn't do that.   RTJ made alterations on 2 or 3 holes in 70's I believe.  Clark didn't touch anything but the practice tee in the late 80's.  Hills did his work from 96-98.  He had fairly clear instructions of what to do and what not to do. I think he did a good job of that and left the course looking much like it did prior but improved in many ways.  There was a routing change as the old tenth hole, par 3, was removed to build a large indoor tennis facility.  In my opinion the single largest influence on Chevy prior to Hills was the Superintendent from 1932-1964.  D Jackson who had come the US from Scottland to build courses for D. Ross.  I believe he made many changes and helped to promote the idea that Chevy was a Ross course.


Sorry it was Dick Watson who was the Supt at Chevy from 1932 - 1964.  It was late  :'(    But anyway, everything I ever heard or read about Mr. Watson was complimentary of his skills as course builder and Superintendent.  He was a unique individual and as I understand it was at one time the Superintendent / Consultants for Chevy Chase, Columbia and Burning Tree all at the same time.  This was probably during the 30's when the job of Superintendent was becoming more recognized.  I believe Mr. Watson came to this not by choice but by circumstance as the Depression all but ended new course construction.   All of that as background for my belief that Dick did much undocumented work at Chevy Chase.  Course construction was his main field and he worked and learned from one of the best ever in Ross.  I could never find enough evidence from the 30's and early 40's to determine what all was done to the course.  One thing for sure is that by the end of his time at Chevy people thought of it as being a Ross design.

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where do you stand on the Arthur Hills courses you have played and why?
« Reply #74 on: September 10, 2013, 07:29:45 AM »
The difference in feel between Columbia and Chevy Chase was striking to me and I wondered how the members felt about the difference between an original versus a renovated course.  I don't know how to exactly say it but Columbia feels old (which to me is a good thing) with a very natural and simple routing, nothing too striking or visually exciting and challenging Poa greens.  Once you see that perfect bent grass green and those bunkers you get a totally different feeling at CC.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back