[Jason Topp]

Generally people have ripped Arthur Hills designs on this site.  I have only played four I can think of (Chaska Town Course, Canoa Ranch, Heron Creek, Hill Country Resort, ) but have enjoyed each course.  

He has designed some par fives that I really like, particularly at Chaska Town Course where the 7th is a downhill reachable par five with a wide fairway over an angled stream.  The ninth is a longer par five with a wide fairway but proper positioning important, the 15th is a short par five that makes great use of a stream and slopes to provide options from a very conservative three shot hole, to attacking it straight on to some in between options.  

He breaks the mold on par four distances having some that are driveable and others that require driver/3 wood from me.  His greens are a bit bland but usually reward placement off the tee by providing a distinct advantage for approaching from a particular side.  His fairways tend to be wide if the site allows.  

The look of his courses is pretty clean which is fine by me and I have found his practice facilities to be the best I have encountered.

So - I am not sure what is wrong with his work.  Where do you stand on Hills' work and why?

[Jason Thurman]

I've played quite a few, most over the last two years.

His Champions Trace near Lexington, KY is really a very good course. It's a stout test on an interesting property with some nice risk/reward holes and a few that simply require you to hit a good shot or two. Kentucky is admittedly a bit golf-starved, but I rate it as the third best course in the state that I've played and just a bit behind places like Valhalla.

Shepherd's Hollow near Detroit is similar. A good course and very scenic. Nothing especially exciting and maybe a clunker hole here and there, but pretty good overall.

Fox Run in Northern Kentucky has about 12 good holes and six awful ones. The last two holes are probably the worst closing holes I've seen. What really makes them amazing is the 700 yard cart ride between them. It's hard to believe that there wasn't a better hole or two lurking somewhere along that drive. The course routing is heinous. Still though, it's got to be a Top 10 Kentucky public.

Then there's Eagle Ridge in Eastern Kentucky, which is by far my least favorite course ever and the only course I've played that could potentially be labeled a "0" on a 1-10 scale. Some like it more than I do. It's probably the most polarizing course I've played, and that includes places like Tobacco Road and all the courses at Kohler.

I've played a few others too: University Club of Kentucky, Weatherwax, and probably a couple more that I'm forgetting. I think his green complexes are underrated. Some are quite good. His courses are generally quite challenging, and usually among the better or more notable courses in their geographic area. I always feel like his courses leave a little bit out there, though - that they could've been better given the property and apparent budget. There's often an awkward hiccup in the routing or one really horrendous hole. I also generally find them a bit repetitious. There are often holes that feel very similar within a single course, and it often feels like he uses "templates" between courses. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but some of his templates aren't very good. He's usually good for at least one par 3 over a ravine to an angled green with bunkers fronting and no run-up option, for instance (he has that hole 3 times at Fox Run).

Overall, I think Art Hills does a fine job of building affordable courses with some relatively interesting greens that are usually in good condition. He's in the Arnold Palmer tier of architects for me as someone whose courses usually have one or two surprisingly good moments, but maybe a few surprisingly bad ones too.

[Sam Morrow]

Hills courses I've played,

Bay Oaks- Typical housing development course with tons of water, it has some decent holes though but nothing groundbreaking.
Ironbridge- Kind of cool as I recall but it was my first mountain golf experience so I was easily swayed. Seems to remember a few spots between holes that felt like they 10 miles apart.
Rose Creek- It was okay, fun but again nothing out of this world.
Southern Trace- Same, it was ok.
Sienna Plantation- Okay but the 18th is one of the silliest par 5's I've ever played. You lay-up on every shot.
Stonebridge Ranch- I actually really likes this despite being a housing development course. Fun greens. I don't remember much other than having a blast.

There is nothing wrong with his stuff but on GCA it's cool to crap on someone who isn't in the clique.

[Bill Seitz]

If I have something booked at an Art Hills course, I know that it's generally going to be a decent, but not great layout, something I'd like to see once but won't want to play very often.  I know it will be a relatively new course (last 20 years or so) and probably not overtreed since the course isn't overly mature.  I usually figure there will be a number of good holes, and a couple pretty nonsensical holes.  The 18th hole at Stonewall Orchard in the northwest suburbs of Chicago is arguably the worst hole I've ever played.  The ninth (volcano) hole at Chicago Highlands is probably the weirdest.  I won't call it good, but at least it's unique, and made me want to play it again.  

[JLahrman]

Only two that I can really comment on, both in the Dayton Ohio area.

Weatherwax, in Middletown, is a 36-hole public facility that I really like. There are a lot of really solid holes there, and only a couple of bad ones. When I lived in the area I played there nearly every week.

Pipestone, in Miamisburg, is a course that has only a couple of decent holes and a lot of dogs (#2, #6, #9, #12, #18).

I've played a few others, such as his course as Palmetto Dunes on Hilton Head and Maumee Bay State Park outside Toledo, but it's been so long that I remember very little about those courses.

Having recently moved to Austin, TX I will likely be trying Wolfdancer in the near future which has received endorsement from several on this site.

[Sam Morrow]

Only two that I can really comment on, both in the Dayton Ohio area.

Weatherwax, in Middletown, is a 36-hole public facility that I really like. There are a lot of really solid holes there, and only a few bad ones. When I lived in the area I played there nearly every week.

Pipestone, in Miamisburg, is a course that has only a couple of decent holes and a lot of dogs (#2, #6, #9, #12, #18).

I've played a few others, such as his course as Palmetto Dunes on Hilton Head and Maumee Bay State Park outside Toledo, but it's been so long that I remember very little about those courses.

Having recently moved to Austin, TX I will likely be trying Wolfdancer in the near future which has received endorsement from several on this site.

I haven't been to Wolfdancer yet but heard good things, now that Colo Vista is reopened Bastrop has a solid 36 hole day.

[Mark McKeever]

I nearly ruined my friendship with Brian Colbert early on by saying that i didnt think that some of his stuff was all that bad.  He wrote me a legitimate and moving essay that probably isnt safe for public sharing.

That said, maybe he will chime in...

Mark

[Andrew Buck]

I enjoyed Persimmon Ridge in Louisville.  It's been a while but there were a couple risk reward holes and it was "plush firm" when I played it.

Stoneybrook in Sarasota was a Florida golf course.  I'd play it again if on a long vacation in the area because it's affordable and just like most of the other courses, but I wouldn't choose it over most other courses either, basically pick on price, location and availability.  If I lived in the area it wouldn't be on any list of courses I'd look at to make my home.

Stonewall Orchard, I've only played once and most holes were decent, imo, but not worth the money given other options.  If I recall, about 3 or 4 objectionable holes that would keep me from seeking it out again.  

[Carl Nichols]

I think all of his redesigns/renovations in the DC area that I've played are solid, and certainly better than what was there.  I'm thinking of Chevy Chase, Burning Tree, Bethesda, Congressional (Gold), and Belle Haven.  None of them is spectactular, however, although I think there are several great holes on the clubhouse side of Persimmon Tree at Congressional (Gold)--just don't know how many of those Hills touched.  At a minimum, he had the sense to leave them alone. My sense from what people say is that Hills gave each membership pretty much exactly what it was looking for.

As for the original designs I've played, three of them--Blue Mash, Links at Lighthouse Sound, and Waverly Woods--are public.  The latter two are pretty solid, while I am not a fan of the former.  Each, however, has a few bad holes and/or weird routing decisions.  

The other original design I've played--Trump National (River)--is private and, in my view, not very good.  But to my inexperienced eye, i'm not sure he had that much to work with; the entire course sits on a very flat piece of land next to the Potomac River.  

[Mark Smolens]

I really enjoyed Chicago Highlands, though I played in an outing/scramble. Can't wait to get back there and play my own ball. I thought the volcano hole was a lot of fun. Hard to imagine getting it close there on a windy day.

Bill, you need to get back to Stonewall. They have lowered the mound on the right of 18, to the point where you can actually miss right and not go into the pond by bouncing off the stupid mound.

I think I played another Hills course at Hilton Head. Don't recall much about it, even the name, but that trip involved a great deal of alcohol.

[Howard Riefs]

If I have something booked at an Art Hills course, I know that it's generally going to be a decent, but not great layout, something I'd like to see once but won't want to play very often.  I know it will be a relatively new course (last 20 years or so) and probably not overtreed since the course isn't overly mature.  I usually figure there will be a number of good holes, and a couple pretty nonsensical holes.  The 18th hole at Stonewall Orchard in the northwest suburbs of Chicago is arguably the worst hole I've ever played.  The ninth (volcano) hole at Chicago Highlands is probably the weirdest.  I won't call it good, but at least it's unique, and made me want to play it again.  

You beat me to it in mentioning Stonewall Orchard's #18th hole (http://www.stonewallorchard.com/holeview.asp?id=18).  I rather simply play 17 holes and head straight to the parking lot.

[Jason Topp]

Interesting that most comments identify a couple of very bad holes on many courses.  Many people have the same reaction to the 18th at Chaska Town Course. It is a par five that can be a series of layups or one can get close to the green in two by carrying the water and getting past some bunkers that pinch a narrow fairway for the second shot.  This picture from its website shows the hole looking back but does not show the various bunkers very well.



I like the hole but would prefer the landing area for an agressive second be a bit wider to provide more of a temptation.  I often lay up to 160 yards rather than try and carry the pinch point, which would leave me 100 because the 2nd needs to be perfectly threaded between the water and thick rough on the right.

(picture from course website)
The 3rd also gets some criticism.  It plays a downhill 280 yards from the back tees or 260 from the tees I play.  There is a big tree in the middle of the fairway.  If you thread the drive left of the tree it can feed down to the green.  If you bail out right you face this pitch to a green sloping away with water behind.  

 

I find it a unique and creative hole.  My only criticism is that the tree essentially takes a pure layup out of play because the tree (not in picture but located near where ithis one was taken) is big enough it is diffficult to hit the ball over unless you leave yourself in excess of 160 yards.

[Jason Topp]

I do not generally concern myself with feature shaping very much.  Is that part of the concern with Hills courses?

[Sean_A]

I have seen many of Hills Michigan courses.  I think my favourite to date is Shepherds Hollow.  Its probably a Doak 4/5.  Decent cart course on very rolling terrain.  None of the holes really stand out as very special, just solid golf.  The course he worked extensively on that I played a ton is Leslie Park in Ann Arbor.  Hills had good bones to work with and didn't really improve the course.  Some things were better and others not so.  All in all, the city probably shouldn't have had the work done.  Of course, the other course I played a ton which Hills worked on was UofM.  Again, other than the obvious of taking out trees, I am not really sure what he did to improve the course.  Overall, I think his courses are not the sort I would seek out as a visitor, but I would as a nearby resident because they tend to be affordable and pleasant.  

http://michigan.twoguyswhogolf.com/reviews/lesliepark.html


Ciao

[Ben Kodadek]

I find Miromar Lakes in FL to be a very fun AH course.  Lots of options on the par 4's, a couple of blind landing areas and back to back par 5's coming home.

[Eric Smith]

If you were to poll the 30-40 guys on staff when I was at Palmetto Dunes, I'm certain they would overwhelmingly choose playing the Hills Course over the Jones or Fazio courses. There's no denying it is one of the most fun to play on the island. Wonder if Jeff Warne would agree?

Marketing schtick aside, there actually is a bit of "Scottish links style" found on the Hills Course.

[Mark Smolens]

Eric, that's the one. Thanks for the photo.

Howard, again I'll note that the 18th hole is no longer an abortion. Hit a good drive and you can actually give it a go with a 3 wood and have a chance of getting home without going into the water.

[Jason Topp]

This thread has some good pointed criticism beyond the first page:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46339.0.html

[Cory Lewis]

Of all the golf courses I've played in the GW Top 100 lists, the course that made me question the validity of the list the most was Olde Stone in Kentucky.  It had some really strange holes.  I lost a lot of respect for the list when I played that course.  

[Jason Topp]

Quote from the other thread:

Arthur Hills is the prototypical modern architect: lots of style, very little substance.  On the surface, his courses might like good for the undiscerning eye. However, when you look closer you realize that the courses are very manufactured, with tons of containment mounds, contrived bunkers, and un-natural greens. He also relies on water for defense on a lot of courses.

I've played two of his courses: Olde Atlanta and Fiddler's Creek (in Naples, FL).  Both courses share a few characteristics.  The first is the heavy use of containment mounding, which he uses to line both sides of every fairway.  This gives the course a very artificial feel.  It's as if you're experiencing a postmodern sculpture rather than a golf course. 

The second characteristic is that both courses are filled with vapid, unmemorable golf holes.  I can't recall more than five holes at Fiddler's Creek.  I can vaguely remember most of the holes at Olde Atlanta, but only because I've played it three times.  However, I could not describe specific features of any one of the 36 greensites on the two courses.  I can only remember that were generally very artificial. 

Third, each course features two or three holes that pretty much unplayable for most golfers.  These holes usually involve unreasonable carries over water.  These holes include the 11th and 18th at Olde Atlanta, and the 1st and 17th at Fiddler's Creek.

I'm guessing that Hills has done better courses than these two (or at least I would hope so).  However, which of his courses even match up to the work of architects like Doak, C & C, Lester George, George, Strantz, Mike Young, Mike Strantz, Brian Silva, or countless others? Hell, Fazio and RTJ II build much more interesting courses than Hills.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

The Hills Course at Palmetto Dunes in Hilton Head is a very good course.

I recently played Longaberger in Ohio and can understand why it's #1 Public in Ohio according to GW.

On the other hand, Palm Valley here in the Phoenix area is a disaster.

[Jason Topp]

I found two more that I have played:

Bighorn Mountain (Palm Springs) - I remember it as a cool place more than a great golf course.  Not enough memory of the course to really comment.  I remember there were a lot of flowers planted there and the terrain was extremely steep.

Heritage Highlands (Tucson) - fits with the description of a decent course with a couple of horrible holes.  I recall one par five where one crosses desert to a fairway that slopes away to desert on the other side and a short par four over a steep sidehill that made no sense whatsoever.  

[Carl Nichols]

Quote from the other thread:

Arthur Hills is the prototypical modern architect: lots of style, very little substance.  On the surface, his courses might like good for the undiscerning eye. However, when you look closer you realize that the courses are very manufactured, with tons of containment mounds, contrived bunkers, and un-natural greens. He also relies on water for defense on a lot of courses.

I've played two of his courses: Olde Atlanta and Fiddler's Creek (in Naples, FL).  Both courses share a few characteristics.  The first is the heavy use of containment mounding, which he uses to line both sides of every fairway.  This gives the course a very artificial feel.  It's as if you're experiencing a postmodern sculpture rather than a golf course. 

The second characteristic is that both courses are filled with vapid, unmemorable golf holes.  I can't recall more than five holes at Fiddler's Creek.  I can vaguely remember most of the holes at Olde Atlanta, but only because I've played it three times.  However, I could not describe specific features of any one of the 36 greensites on the two courses.  I can only remember that were generally very artificial. 

Third, each course features two or three holes that pretty much unplayable for most golfers.  These holes usually involve unreasonable carries over water.  These holes include the 11th and 18th at Olde Atlanta, and the 1st and 17th at Fiddler's Creek.

I'm guessing that Hills has done better courses than these two (or at least I would hope so).  However, which of his courses even match up to the work of architects like Doak, C & C, Lester George, George, Strantz, Mike Young, Mike Strantz, Brian Silva, or countless others? Hell, Fazio and RTJ II build much more interesting courses than Hills.

Those are some pretty strong generalizations to draw from just two courses.  Even if they may be correct. 

[Steve Kline]

The Arthur Hills courses that I've remember that I've played and played enough to comment on are Legendary Run, Shaker Run, Weatherwax, Terrace Park CC (renovation work by Hills and my home course) all in the Cincinnati/Dayton area and Olde Stone.

Legendary Run has a decent front nine. The back nine is an abomination, mostly likely because of what the real estate developer demanded. But, surely something better could have been done. This is an instance where some better earth movement could have made the course more playable.

I enjoy the original 18 at Shaker Run. There is nothing transcendent but it is a fun round of golf with some interesting features. Unfortunately, the conditioning has been horrible (from what I've been told) since the recession.

I played a lot of high school golf at Weatherwax. It's a good deal for the price but is relatively featureless golf. There's really not much exciting there.

Hills has done some renovation work at Terrace Park CC. I've been a member off and on there for the last 28 years. I can't think of anything he has done there that I liked.

I seem to remember thinking Olde Stone was a lot of fun. Certainly, there were some unusual holes but I found them intriguiging.

My problem with much of his work is that it is just there. It is not inspiring. The greens are generally flat. The shaping tends to be rolling with containment mounds. There is nothing that says bland more than the perfectly shaped rolls on his courses. And, the worst thing to me is at my home course, his renovation work looks like a complete hodge podge. Based on the stuff in the ground it is hard to imagine there is a master plan. I can't see how anything he did fits in with the still existing stuff that he didn't touch. I've been pondering what I would do to change the course and help to do a significant thread on this as a sort of winter project just for my own fun.

[Jason Thurman]

Carl, if I remember correctly, JNC Lyon got chastised pretty hard for drawing his conclusions from a two course sample in that thread. I could be thinking of another thread, but I'm pretty sure Matt Ward raked him over the coals.

Cory Lewis, can you expand a bit on what you didn't like about Olde Stone? I've heard nothing but good things about it. Admittedly the people who rave about it aren't part of the GCA cognoscenti, but I also don't think the members of this forum own a monopoly on evaluating whether a golf course is good or not. I'd just like to hear details on a different perspective. I haven't played it yet (though I'd like to if I ever get within an hour or so of it) and thus don't have my own opinion.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()