Why is your home course better than everyone thinks?

[Mark Bourgeois]

What do you know that they don't? Is there much you could teach them they don't learn from a single visit? What's an example of something you know that everyone else misses when they blow through?

[Ally Mcintosh]

OK,

A subject close to my heart. I was playing my home course last night and was again reminded that there is nowhere else I prefer to play. Certainly, I have to balance these feelings off with the understanding that I have a connection to the course exactly because I am a member there. But still, there are numerous reasons why I consider it greater than many who fly through. These are some of the things they miss:

1. The green sites: Because there are few greens with obvious and significant internal undulations, people tend to overlook them as a set. But that is doing a huge disservice. The sites themselves are a perfect mix of great links golf. Holes 8, 10, 14 & 18 could be directly plucked from Dornoch, Holes 6, 12 and 15 bench the greens in to the main dune ridge in perfect fashion, Holes 2 & 9 are subtle, shedding, inverted saucers, Holes 3, 5 and 16 use tilt and hazards as protection and the rest are supreme examples of fairway extensions at grade level. Show me a better set of sited greens… which brings me on to:

2. The greens proper: A common misconception is that the greens at Portmarnock don’t have movement. Maybe people miss this because they are enormous – the scale of the place is huge and the greens size up to fit that scale. Some greens have big undulation, most use tilt in a superior fashion, some just have small but significant movement, all are extremely elegant.

3. The deception: Pat started a thread about earth moving to create deception. The best deception can be created on flat sites, not big undulating ones. You don’t need earth movement and Portmarnock exemplifies this with brilliant use of small ridges and approach bunker placement, such as at the 3rd, 13th & 17th where 30-40 yards of dead ground is hidden by what comes before. I “always” get caught by that ridge on 17, says my playing partner who has perhaps been on the course 12 times with me.

4. The strategy: Classic style doglegs sweep in one gentle movement, they don’t turn with an obvious “turning point”. Portmarnock’s bunker placements – along with supreme conditioning that has promoted firm and fast – absolutely require approach shots to be from the correct side of the fairway which is always the protected one. It so happens that many a time that is the outside of the dog. So what says I – when the curve is gentle this matters not a jot.

5. The rough: Last 6 or 7 years has seen great rough management – Unless you are way off line, you should see your balls in the fescue here.

6. A  traditional style of golf: Ireland has some great dunes style golf but far less low-lying, traditional golf that uses grasses to frame holes and subtlety in design style rather than being big, brash and in your face. There are changes proposed at Portmarnock. I haven’t seen them. Regardless of what they are, I say why? And I say be wary of compromising what is a great course for the wrong reasons.

The above are what I think people miss. I haven’t bothered to discuss what I think people get such as the masterful routing and sense of history.

All of the above adds up to a magnificent whole. Many people do not fine it “memorable” on first visit. More fool them…. Which I guess is one of the points Mark might be making

[Jason Topp]

I don't think it is better than everyone thinks.  However, I do think one experiences it differently with repeat exposure.

Due to generally firm conditions (not this year) and exposure to the wind, my course is an entirely different course depending on the wind's strength and direction.  On 9 of the 11 par 4s I have had both a full 3 wood and a less than full wedge into the green after adequate drives.  (the other two are shorter).  It is impossible to fully appreciate the course without playing it in a variety of winds.

The greens are modern and built to be played at high speed.  I find it much more difficult to read them by eyesight because a relatively small slope can result in a very large break and the slopes do not follow the themes one would generally expect based on the surrounding terrain.  I believe the greens are better than one experiences in one round.  Their surrounds are outstanding but I think most people realize that with one play.

Some of the weaknesses are not obvious without repeat play either.  The par 4's play very similar lengths for the most part and are dependent on wind for variety.  The best line off the tee is generally away from fairway bunkers and hazards, greatly diminishing their strategic interest.  The front nine has a large number of parallel holes.  Many of the hazards punish the weaker player while not being a consideration for the stronger player.

[Tom_Doak]

Ally (and Jason):

What's your home course?


Mine is Crystal Downs, and it's pretty well regarded by most people nowadays.  The one aspect of it that's underrated is the nature of the fairways.  It isn't too hilly to walk, but there is hardly a hole where you have a level stance in the fairway, and there are many holes where the craftier members play for a particular spot instead of smashing driver as far as they can.  As a result, there are fewer fairway bunkers than most courses, and they are not missed.

[Jason Topp]

Windsong Farm

[Ben Sims]

The one aspect of it that's underrated is the nature of the fairways.  It isn't too hilly to walk, but there is hardly a hole where you have a level stance in the fairway, and there are many holes where the craftier members play for a particular spot instead of smashing driver as far as they can.  As a result, there are fewer fairway bunkers than most courses, and they are not missed.

This is also the least mentioned aspect of Fircrest GC. Most notice that it plays fairly open for a Pac NW parkland. They also notice the Macan greens and the easy walk. The bumpy fairways get overlooked.

[Adam Clayman]

Shivas, The read is not in what you see but what you know.

[Ryan Coles]

It isn't.

Other than for blinkered/biased reasons.

It is usually to do with everything other than the actual course.

The people, the traditions, the atmosphere, the competition, your personal history of triumph and disaster.

In my experience, most people fall into two categories when assessing their own course. 1. The grass is greener, everywhere else is better etc etc and they spend most of their time at their Club talking it down or 2. Irrational and illogical elevation of status to run of mill holes that most visitors forget/hate. Their featureless, uninteresting course becomes "subtle". So subtle that it doesn't exist other than as a figment of their imagination.

They play because that's where they've always played and that's where their mates play.

[Brent Hutto]

My home course is just a 60's vintage country club layout in the suburbs of a medium-sized city. The only people who have ever heard of it are local and they probably think of it as one of the better designed and better conditioned courses in the area. I think that's a fair assessment.

But i just chimed in on the thread to say my home course is probably a good example of "it's all out there in front of you". Not a local knowledge to be shared aside from the tricky contours of the green complexes. And those are tough to describe meaningfully, it's more the kind of knowledge you have to gain from playing there quite a few times.

The best feature of my home course from tee to green is a subtle one that perhaps is only evident to me. While the fairways are wide they are almost all tree lined on one or both sides. And often there is a significant side-slope making the fairways play a bit narrower in effect. But sort of like Augusta National most of our trees are pines and in many places the undergrowth is cleared out leaving just pine straw and miscellaneous duff under the tree canopy. So you can almost always find your ball and usually play it. That is a huge plus in my mind.

[Lou_Duran]

The combination of well placed fairway bunkers guarding spacious fairways and green complexes which, for most of us, put a premium on setting up the approach shot as opposed to banging away from the tee.  It is a residential course in a very upscale neighborhood with an abominable membership (which has yet to figure out the function of the abundant rakes or how to fix ball marks on the greens), yet I always look forward to my rounds there.

[Ally Mcintosh]

It isn't.

Other than for blinkered/biased reasons.

It is usually to do with everything other than the actual course.

The people, the traditions, the atmosphere, the competition, your personal history of triumph and disaster.

In my experience, most people fall into two categories when assessing their own course. 1. The grass is greener, everywhere else is better etc etc and they spend most of their time at their Club talking it down or 2. Irrational and illogical elevation of status to run of mill holes that most visitors forget/hate. Their featureless, uninteresting course becomes "subtle". So subtle that it doesn't exist other than as a figment of their imagination.

They play because that's where they've always played and that's where their mates play.

Not if you choose to join a club because you love the course... As opposed to loving the course because you are a member of the club.

This was what happened with me. I was all set to put my money down at The Island. Then the opportunity to join Portmarnock came along and that swiftly changed my mind.

[Brent Hutto]

Lou,

My home course has always seemed, if not perfect, at least better than other places I've played in terms of raking bunkers and fixing ball marks. But for some reason the old custom of raking bunkers seems to be going by the wayside this past year or so. Not sure why that would be.

Nothing like playing in about the third or fourth group of the day and when you hit in your first bunker there are already three distinctly patterned sets of unraked footprints in there. Of course that day if I had cared to find out it would have been simple to narrow down the suspects. Three sets of feet and only about ten guys had been ahead of us on the tee sheet...

[Brent Hutto]

It isn't.

Other than for blinkered/biased reasons.

It is usually to do with everything other than the actual course.

The people, the traditions, the atmosphere, the competition, your personal history of triumph and disaster.

In my experience, most people fall into two categories when assessing their own course. 1. The grass is greener, everywhere else is better etc etc and they spend most of their time at their Club talking it down or 2. Irrational and illogical elevation of status to run of mill holes that most visitors forget/hate. Their featureless, uninteresting course becomes "subtle". So subtle that it doesn't exist other than as a figment of their imagination.

They play because that's where they've always played and that's where their mates play.

Not if you choose to join a club because you love the course... As opposed to loving the course because you are a member of the club.

This was what happened with me. I was all set to put my money down at The Island. Then the opportunity to join Portmarnock came along and that swiftly changed my mind.

Ally,

From a much more prosaic set of choices I had a similar experience about a decade ago. I wanted to join a private club. The top two choices were one I'd played a couple times and considered the finest course within 50 miles (with one possible exception) but with dues that really stretched my budget and another that I had played quite a few times, liked a lot, and was more affordable.

A couple years after I joined the more affordable option, it underwent a change in ownership and attempt to move way, way upscale. They upped the dues, quit accepting new members and announced plans that involved all the existing members like myself being asked to leave in 2-3 years time. So I moved six miles down the road to my original first-choice club, bit the bullet on the cost and have just been unbelievably happy being able to play there 100+ times a year.

When I visit the other course where I used to be a member, I enjoy it as a change of pace. But those occasional away rounds just make me realize more how lucky I am to be playing my club's course. Then again, it helps that the membership is pretty much compatible with me (or I with them, however you want to view it). So I don't have to put up with people I don't like or any nonsense like that. Pretty sure even if the members were jerks I'd still stick around for the golf course though.

[PCCraig]

I think my home course, Town & Country Club ("T&C") in St. Paul, MN, is better than "everyone" thinks. I say that primarily because when I moved to the Twin Cities in 2011 and you would talk to people about the best golf courses in the area almost no one mentioned the course as even noteworthy, to me at least. Most people when they think of golf in the Twin Cities list off Hazeltine, Interlachen, Minikahda, WBYC, etc., and those are all great clubs, however as the first golf course in Minnesota, T&C has plenty working in its favor to warrant at least discussion for the following reasons:

Variety
T&C has a unique routing which features back-to-back par-3's on #2 & #3, back-to-back-to-back par-5's on #15, #16, & #17, and a par-3 finishing hole. In fact, you don't play a par-4 after the 13th hole yet the course's par is 72. There is great variety in each type of hole...par 3's play as short as 110 yards (#2) and as long as 230 yards (#14), par-4's play as short as 280 yards (#13) or as long as 470 yards (#6), and par-5's play as short as 490 yards (#4) and as long as 555 yards (#15). There are steeply uphill, downhill, and sidehill holes.

Quirk
The course sits on a high bluff above the Mississippi River and is bisected by an old ravine resulting in some wild terrain. The only wilder terrain locally that I've seen is WBYC, and even that isn't too far off. That wild terrain results in some serious quirk a la blind shots (both uphill & downhill), consistently uneven lies, and times when you need to play "break" on your tee shot toward the fairway with a driver in your hand in order to get your ball to the best spots.

Fun Greens
While largely classic back-to-front sloping greens they can be downright nasty with their "summer cut" and players putting off the green a common occurrence on #5, #17, and #18. There are built up greens with sharp angles (the green on #2 would fit right in at Lawsonia Links) on the sides and behind the hole, a green "benched" into a hillside, and greens that flow right from the fairway like on #12.

Conditioning
The condition of the golf course is consistently excellent. Due to its location, it naturally drains incredibly well resulting in truly firm & fast conditions even when the rest of the area's courses are "under water" as they were last week. The course doesn't get much play (about 17,000 rounds/year on average) which helps, but the greens & fairways are consistently fast and smooth and the turf is in very good health. The club is lucky to have a world-class head superintendent, Bill Larson, who has been with the club for over 25 years, and a state-of-the art maintenance facility (http://www.clubandresortbusiness.com/2010/12/01/designing-state-of-the-art-agronomy-centers/).

Playability
With no forced carries, the ability to run shots onto greens on approaches, and only one water hazard (a stream running down the length of the first hole) the golf course is very playable for higher handicaps while remaining difficult for low handicappers.

Easy Walk
Even while the terrain is extreme, green-to-tee walks are nearly non-existent and the course can be easily walked/played in under 3 hours.

Sorry for the "homer" post...however I find it to be a neat course and place.

[Paul Jones]

I think, based on my own experience, people join a particular club because it fits them...  I love the club that I joined, especially the golf course, but also the membership, staff, swim, tennis...

With that said, I do not expect others to think as highly of my course when they come from the near by course, which is completely different. We only have 2 private courses, the one I am a member is old Dick Wilson with no houses and majority of my friends walk. The other course is newer subdivision course that nobody walks with houses on every hole.

[Ben Hollerbach]

My home course is just a 60's vintage country club layout in the suburbs of a medium-sized city. The only people who have ever heard of it are local and they probably think of it as one of the better designed and better conditioned courses in the area. I think that's a fair assessment.

But i just chimed in on the thread to say my home course is probably a good example of "it's all out there in front of you". Not a local knowledge to be shared aside from the tricky contours of the green complexes. And those are tough to describe meaningfully, it's more the kind of knowledge you have to gain from playing there quite a few times.

The best feature of my home course from tee to green is a subtle one that perhaps is only evident to me. While the fairways are wide they are almost all tree lined on one or both sides. And often there is a significant side-slope making the fairways play a bit narrower in effect. But sort of like Augusta National most of our trees are pines and in many places the undergrowth is cleared out leaving just pine straw and miscellaneous duff under the tree canopy. So you can almost always find your ball and usually play it. That is a huge plus in my mind.

Reading this I was thinking you were writing about my home course. Really I'm not sure I could have described it any better.

[Ronald Montesano]

HALFTIME

Is the point of this thread to anonymously extol the virtues of a golf course? Seems to be the wealthier half of an exercise to me. I'd like to know the names of these courses. I plan to add mine soon (River Oaks on Grand Island, NY) as my recent playings of it have really brought out the subtleties, the nuances, the curves and the straights of Desmind Muirhead's finest course in New York state.

[Mark Bourgeois]

 The inspiration for the thread is this quote from Sean Arble. A very insightful explanation, and an intellectually valid one at that, into why we seem to have higher opinions of our home courses than do guests.

It got me thinking "homerism" might actually be worth listening to, that to close the gap in understanding between the homer and the "objective visitor" you might want to pay attention to the homer's opinion and ignore the visitor's. But not always - this thread's point is to see if we can figure out when to listen to the Homer, what things to listen for. 

 I think this thread is in a roundabout way talking about subtle features and their value simply because many will not remember the features until encountered several times.  Hence the reason that everybody's home course is "under-rated".  The issue then lies as how to view courses which are in the main quite subtle or seemingly subtle.  I don't think its a stretch to say subtle courses will struggle against the eye candy courses which have substance.  On the other hand, subtle is a very important element in architecture.  Everything can't be a visual feast because it will soon not be appreciated, seen as forced, seen as extreme etc.  

Ciao

[Mark_Fine]

I still do reviews for one of the golf magazines and for many years never turned in a review for my home club (Lehigh CC) thinking I was bias.  I was finally told one day by the head of the review panel, "Mark if there is one course where you should get the review right it is for your home course".  Very valid point 😉

[Sean_A]

The inspiration for the thread is this quote from Sean Arble. A very insightful explanation, and an intellectually valid one at that, into why we seem to have higher opinions of our home courses than do guests.

It got me thinking "homerism" might actually be worth listening to, that to close the gap in understanding between the homer and the "objective visitor" you might want to pay attention to the homer's opinion and ignore the visitor's. But not always - this thread's point is to see if we can figure out when to listen to the Homer, what things to listen for.  

I think this thread is in a roundabout way talking about subtle features and their value simply because many will not remember the features until encountered several times.  Hence the reason that everybody's home course is "under-rated".  The issue then lies as how to view courses which are in the main quite subtle or seemingly subtle.  I don't think its a stretch to say subtle courses will struggle against the eye candy courses which have substance.  On the other hand, subtle is a very important element in architecture.  Everything can't be a visual feast because it will soon not be appreciated, seen as forced, seen as extreme etc.  

Ciao

Mark

You aren't going to like this, but homerism in the form of Dealies saw me slowly upgrade my opinion of Deal.  Without Dealies hammering on me (in the most polite fashion   I would never have gone back.  There are still elements which turn me off, but its hard to fathom how anybody could say the course isn't great.  The many members would say stuff and when I would go back I looked for confirmation.  I never bought into the greatness of the 3s like the Dealies do (but give me time), but I do buy into #7.  I am still not keen on the fairway bunkering, but the green is outstanding.  I eventually asked the question why Deal isn't a top 100 world course and the answer basically came down to a lack of visuals   - heavy sigh.  Thats a great pity because for the most part, the terrain at Deal is perfect for golf and remains its best asset.  

To be sure, I think you would greatly enjoy one of your week long study trips of Deal. If I am not mistaken, you hit Ganton, Rye and Westward Ho! already.  Maybe we shall see you next year in Kent, if you can learn to tone down the Dealie rhetoric without ignoring it

Talking of my home course, I don't think many Brits miss its quallity, but most Yanks do.  Invariably, the flat holes are cited as issues while I think they are positive for the design.  Holes such as 7 & 11 are easy to forget because they are flat (but not featureless), but they are two of the best on the course. The 7th is the one hole I usually point out as outstanding in its simplicity and ease of deception.  Golf should be a game of variety and if we just want visuals all day we will end up with a ton of Ballybunion Cashen courses populating the earth.  

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Sean,

Unlike the Dealies, I'm a one man band... But likely to be every bit as vociferous....

I'm awaiting your return visit - perhaps with Muldoon - at some point... I can also take you to Corballis which would be perfect for one of your photo tours...

[Sean_A]

Ally

I would very much like a return trip to Dublin (my lot of guys don't seem keen to go back).  But let me make it clear, I think Deal and your club are great courses, but not among my favourites.  Its been many years since I saw your place, but I find myself drifting more toward the little courses these days.  Of course, the huge advantages of Deal over Dublin is I can drive down and there are a ton of friendly members I know.  If I lived more in range of Kent I would try to join Deal in a heartbeat.  Now, when is that bridge to Dublin going to be built....

Ciao

[Scott Sander]

Ours presents a stout scoring challenge to good players (74.6/141), but those players might never realize that it is a wonderful 'family' course.  The fairways are enormously wide and every green can be approached on the ground.  In fact, the only hurdle to rolling it the entire round is a creek that crosses two holes well short of each green.  
  

Edited to add:  Woodland in Carmel, Indiana.  In proximity and lineage, it's a blood brother to Crooked Stick.  But conceptually it's more like a cousin-in-law.

[archie_struthers]

 

It's harder for the expert than the average golfer!

[Scott Sander]

Double post.  Very sorry.