[Tyler Page]

I just finished a few days at Cabot. A great experience overall. Unfortunately, logistics made this a quick trip and didn't leave time for Highlands Links, and I hope to hit it next time.


As I am trying to think about where the two courses fall in my own "rankings", I thought that the old question about splitting 10 rounds might be instructive. I'm sure that most agree that they are both fantastic, but Cliffs is truly one of the most fun courses I have ever played. I think of it in line with the North Berwicks, Prestwicks and Cruden Bays of the world--it has really unique holes with a variety of ways to play them--an amazing match play course.


I think I would split 8/2 or 7/3 in favor of Cliffs, but a lot of the locals thought I was crazy.  Am I?

[Guy Nicholson]

Cliffs is so impressive. But Links has some pretty great holes too and is a bit less intense on body and soul. If the 10 rounds came one visit at a time, I would be strongly biased toward Cliffs. But if the 10 rounds were consecutive in a single visit, I might go 6-4 or even (gasp) 5-5.


Too bad you missed Highlands Links -- a person could split rounds on those three courses 4-3-3 any way they chose without raising eyebrows.

[Tim Passalacqua]

You're not crazy.  I might even do 9-1 in favor of the Cliffs.  We did 4-2 on our trip and I will change it, if I ever get back.  The Cliffs is that much fun.  It is my favorite course.  The cliffside holes are stunning and the inland holes might be better.  7 and 8 are my favorite back to back holes.  The Links is a great golf course.  I just love Cabot Cliffs that much.  It is loads of fun with a ton of strategy.  Every hole is great and the last 4 might be my favorite finish in golf!

[Tim Passalacqua]

#7 has one of my favorite tee shots in golf.  A carry over the lake, that looks much longer than it really is, to an angled fairway.  If you make the harder carry to the right side of the fairway, you get a clear view of the green to go for it in two.  If you hit the left side of the fairway, you cannot see the green.  Down the middle of the fairway, a spine was created (maybe 50-70 yards long).  It is a few feet high and creates a lot of strategy on the tee shot.  I thought it was excellent.  That is just a small example of the fun you will encounter on the inland holes......no need to tell you how great the cliff top holes are!

[Guy Nicholson]

.

[Jon Heise]

I'm going 6-4 for LINKS.  As beautiful, challenging, quirky Cliffs is, there's an added factor of it beating you up.  There's tough carries and a few areas that'll be absolutely dead when you miss.  (on Cliffs #2, the first day hit 3w to the fringe on the end of the fairway, 2nd day driver didnt even make it to the front... ehhhh) So in that sense, I'd like a bit more of a traditional layout with plenty of challenge and interest in it.


I should go back soon to re-evaluate though!

[Joe Bausch]

I lean to Links, maybe 7-3.

Photos for both from last summer:

http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/CabotLinks/index.html

http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/CabotCliffs/index.html

[Jim Tang]

Last summer I visited Cabot in July with my brother.  We split our 6 rounds 4-2 in favor of Cliffs.  That seemed about right.  For 10 rounds, I'd do 8-2 in favor of Cliffs.

I liked Links but felt the standout course was Cliffs.  Cliffs has the dramatic cliff top setting and the contours of the course and greens make for a fun round of golf.  Dramatic setting + fun.  A good combo by any means. 

Additionally, with each successive round, as I learned more about Cliffs such as lines off tees, different ways to play holes and green surrounds, I liked the course more and more.  I really enjoyed the process of "discovery" at Cliffs, maybe more so than anywhere else, other than Ballyneal.

[David Davis]

Be there in a week, I'll keep it in mind.

[Peter Pallotta]

I wonder how much of it is the golf-rating equivalent of a self fulfilling prophecy.
If you go to Cabot having already decided to split the rounds 4-Cliffs and 2-Links, or to Bandon already knowing you'll play 3-Pacific, 2-Trails, 1-Dunes and OM, is it all that surprising that "each time you play" your predetermined favourite course you'll find "so much more nuance and strategy that you can only discover on multiple plays"?
And then, afterwards, when folks come on here and say they'd split the rounds 4-1 or 4-2-1-1, the prophecy just gains more and more validity and becomes progressively/consistently more self-fulfilling.
From photos and write-ups I think the world of TD's courses and C&C's courses -- but it sure does feel like the respect they've rightly earned has set the scene for one self fulfilling prophecy after another....at Bandon and Dismal and Cabot and (sort-of) Streamsong.
Courses that "reward multiple plays" - yes, sure. But I regularly play a course that at best is s Doak-3, and it too rewards multiple plays (well, at least two or three plays) -- and if a course like that rewards multiple plays I'm absolutely certain that a Whitten and Kidd and Nicklaus course would too.
So it strikes me as a real shame that, what with these 9-1 and 8-2 splits, these poorer-cousin courses won't ever get a real and fair chance to prove their true worth.
At least not for a good many years, that is -- ie when the majority of retail golfers get so bored and tired of the conventional 8-2 wisdom that it becomes more satisfying for them to promote the hidden gem and turn the consensus opinion on its head.
Peter

[Steve Lapper]

Would go 6-4-2....


Ciiffs is dramatic and at a scale that makes it unique and awe inspiring. Links is no less unique or wonderful. It is charming, intimate and provides a perfect compliment to it's larger sibling.


I added 2 as each time I visit, I arise early to pour out my lodge door and onto Links for a swift nine-hole loop. I never feel that one course vastly outweighs the other and both are eminently enjoyable.

[James Brown]

Just booked my first trip to Cabot for next July.  Cliffs 4 rounds, Links 3.  Gonna do Links-Links, Cliffs-Cliffs, Links-Cliffs, Cliffs. 

[Frank M]

I'd split 7-3 in favour of Links. Links appeals much more to my golfing sensibilities. It's a low-lying, intimate golf course that's true to its name and sits right alongside the town and feels wholly Cape Breton. I feel there is much more to discover and that the ground contours are more interesting here. I'm not sure anyone will get what I mean by this, but Cliffs to me is cold while Links feels warm.

[Wayne_Kozun]

 I was there for ten days in July and split it 5-4 in favour of Cliffs. I am happy to keep it about 50-50 but I have been going there almost every year since it opened so on a lifetime basis I have played Links more often. 


Good to see more discussion here about Cabot at GCA, there has been hardly any in 2017.


And I wonder if and when Ran will post a full review of Cliffs?

[Matthew MacKay]

I get what you're saying, Frank. My split would be 8-2 Links. I thought it was a much more enjoyable, engaging golf experience and now my favourite in the country. Our group of four golfers was unanimous on this front. We also felt that while 16/17 on Cliffs is terrific eye candy, they were the two worst holes on property.

[Tyler Page]

I guess there seems to be plenty of opinions on both sides as to which is the stronger course (and a corresponding variety of strength of those opinions)....so it seems that Peter's concerns about the nature of self-fulfilling ratings prophecy leading to the neglect of one course is probably not a risk in the case of Cabot.


Matthew--about your opinion of 16/17 on Cliffs--I can see the eye candy argument on 16, but not 17. I thought 16, while beautiful,  was just too hard. The green is so shallow that it is impossible to hold with a tailwind (which we had), and the hill in the middle of the green is too extreme if you are on the top tier to hold the green coming down.  Three consecutive groups of decent golfers didn't have a putt for a second shot. I guess the more frequent wind is in the face and that would make it easier to hold the green.


17, on the other hand, is magnificent. There is so much excitement after a well struck drive to get over the hill and see where you ended up. It reminds me of the 2nd at National in that sense, but what is even better is that you then face a variety of possibilities with how to approach the second shot if you didn't get lucky and trickle onto the putting surface--long swooping fairway putt, bump-and-run, high soft wedge over the front bunker (if you don't have a tight lie), etc.  I would love to stand in the fairway with a bucket of balls and try each approach. There are such a variety of ways to play the second shot. It is exciting to watch all 4 players in the group play each shot. As soon as I putted out each round, I had the urge to go back to the tee and have another crack at it.

[Matthew MacKay]

Cliffs (generally) has lots of width. The one hole (17) where width is necessary, it is absent. We'd hit 4 tee shots and 2 would be in the long grass and 2 would be lost, with no correlation to the seeming quality of the tee shots. The bunkers in front seem like an unnecessary hazard on a hole that begs for a run-up shot (tee shot or second shot). I felt the same with #12. The bunker right of the green prevents a run-up shot, which is the only hope of getting on that green for most golfers.


Re 16, it's an extremely elusive target with no bailout. I was dismayed at the severity of the slope left of the green and on the green.

[John Ezekowitz]

My split would be 7-3 Cliffs in equal condition. If the greens don't improve from where they were this summer, however, that split reverses. I understand they've changed the greenskeeping staff and this year is a transition year, but the Cliffs greens were so slow as to take some of the enjoyment out of the rounds.


The reason I love the Cliffs is that the non-cliff holes are just as enjoyable. 11-13 is one of my favorite stretches of golf anywhere.



I think the Links is a much tougher course from the back, especially when it is firm. The greens repel shots more and the par of 70 is very tight (those long par 4s beat you up). With that said, my father who plays from the ~6000 yard tees finds the Links easier.


I, too, find 17 at Cliffs to be lacking width on the left. This is especially true when it plays into the left-right wind and from the back two sets of tees, you need to hit a ~230+ yard shot just to reach the narrow part of the fairway, let alone get it down the hill.

[Tyler Page]

I would counter that 17 has plenty of width--if you are trying to drive a par-4, you have to take some risk and play a more aggressive line over the cliff.  If you bail out left, you will be in trouble or dead, but that is the risk you are taking on by trying to set up an eagle putt.  You could hit an iron off the tee on a safer line--it is supposed to be a two-shotter after all. They could make the bad miss left a little friendlier (like wispy fescue that you might have a shot out of as opposed to the thick stuff there now).


As for 12, I agree with you. That is the hardest hole on the course. I don't even know how to approach it with my game. My caddy said to play it into the hill on the right and let it trickle down.  My sense is that a professional would try to play a cut from the left into the green and if they didn't cut it enough, they would have an uphill pitch into the green from the bail out area below.  Coming down the hill or even out of the front bunker to a pin in the back is nearly impossible (just don't ask me how I know).  Look back at that green from the 18th tee to get an idea of just how extreme the contours are.  The back of that green reminds me of 13 at Prestwick.

[Frank M]

I get what you're saying, Frank. My split would be 8-2 Links.

They are a really great one-two punch, I just like Links better.

[Ben Voelker]

I wonder how much of it is the golf-rating equivalent of a self fulfilling prophecy.
If you go to Cabot having already decided to split the rounds 4-Cliffs and 2-Links, or to Bandon already knowing you'll play 3-Pacific, 2-Trails, 1-Dunes and OM, is it all that surprising that "each time you play" your predetermined favourite course you'll find "so much more nuance and strategy that you can only discover on multiple plays"?
And then, afterwards, when folks come on here and say they'd split the rounds 4-1 or 4-2-1-1, the prophecy just gains more and more validity and becomes progressively/consistently more self-fulfilling.
From photos and write-ups I think the world of TD's courses and C&C's courses -- but it sure does feel like the respect they've rightly earned has set the scene for one self fulfilling prophecy after another....at Bandon and Dismal and Cabot and (sort-of) Streamsong.
Courses that "reward multiple plays" - yes, sure. But I regularly play a course that at best is s Doak-3, and it too rewards multiple plays (well, at least two or three plays) -- and if a course like that rewards multiple plays I'm absolutely certain that a Whitten and Kidd and Nicklaus course would too.
So it strikes me as a real shame that, what with these 9-1 and 8-2 splits, these poorer-cousin courses won't ever get a real and fair chance to prove their true worth.
At least not for a good many years, that is -- ie when the majority of retail golfers get so bored and tired of the conventional 8-2 wisdom that it becomes more satisfying for them to promote the hidden gem and turn the consensus opinion on its head.
Peter

Peter,


I couldn't agree with this more.  It's really hard to justify, in my mind and with two great courses, splitting anything more than 6-4 in favor or one over the other.  It's not like one course is miles ahead of the other in terms of quality and the fact that they provide a very different challenge even further suggests it is hard to justify splitting rounds 8-2 or 9-1.


From my trip there two years ago, I went for 2 at each course and would probably go 6-4 in favor of the Cliffs if I went back again.  Perhaps more importantly, I cannot stress enough that it is criminal travel any distance to get to Cape Breton and not make the trip to Highlands Links.  I prefer it to both courses at Cabot.


Ben

[Jeff Tang]

As my brother mentioned we split our six rounds 4-2 Cliffs, and over 10 rounds I would likely go 8-2 Cliffs. I didn't dislike Links, but Cliffs to me was just a more fun course to play. That said it's too bad there is just no bail out on 16. It's all or nothing. When we played it the wind was in our face each time. You obviously can't miss short, long, or right, and to the left there is vegetation there so there is nowhere to go but right at it, and if you miss you're re-teeing. I liked 5 and 17 more each time I played them.

[Mark Saltzman]

Are people really travelling to Cabot and not playing Highlands Links? That's unbelievable to me. I haven't played Cabot Cliffs yet but on a ten round split between CL and HL, I'd play HL eight times.

[Tim Passalacqua]

I know that some people think 16 is just eye candy, but I have to disagree.  It is a tough shot.  We played it into a 3 club wind everyday......always to a right pin.  I hit the green on my last try.  It was one of the most thrilling and satisfying shots I have ever hit.  Although you can't run it up and you don't have an easy bail out, the satisfaction of executing the shot is the best.  It's ok to have to pull off a shot or two like that during your round.

[Frank M]

I'm not a fan of 16, though I don't dislike it either. I understand the function it serves for the course and facility as a whole, but wouldn't place it among the best holes on either course..

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()