News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« on: June 04, 2018, 10:29:55 AM »
As there have been no threads on the subject, I assume very few out there paid much attention


Very tough to watch the telecast for very long as the pace of play is so ridiculously slow and the announcers can only say so much ... but I did watch anyway. 


A few observations:
1. Shoal Creek has no strategy what so ever off the tee, just keep it out of the trees.  Too many elevated tees.
2. The green complexes are very thematically redundant offering very limited playing options.  Either very easy pin positions or very hard pin positions.
3. The women's game can/should have a lot more emphasis on the ground game, which makes their game a the pro level unique.  Yes, a lot rain curtailed much of that, but Shoal Creek rejects the ground game, no matter how the USGA re-works the course.
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2018, 10:51:55 AM »
I only played Shoal Creek a couple times on a weekend trip some years ago. I loved the whole experience. I thought the course had a lot of interesting land movement and challenging greens. I don’t have the sort of gca memory of the course to quibble about your criticisms except to say it had the Nicklaus-on-steroids feel.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2018, 10:59:39 AM »
As there have been no threads on the subject, I assume very few out there paid much attention


Very tough to watch the telecast for very long as the pace of play is so ridiculously slow and the announcers can only say so much ... but I did watch anyway. 


A few observations:
1. Shoal Creek has no strategy what so ever off the tee, just keep it out of the trees.  Too many elevated tees.
I played there last year and found that strategy off the tee made a difference for the shot into the green. There are many angled well bunkered greens where position off the tee is important. I do not remember the course very well. I did find that many of the tree lined holes felt similar.
2. The green complexes are very thematically redundant offering very limited playing options.  Either very easy pin positions or very hard pin positions.
I don't remember this being true.
3. The women's game can/should have a lot more emphasis on the ground game, which makes their game a the pro level unique.  Yes, a lot rain curtailed much of that, but Shoal Creek rejects the ground game, no matter how the USGA re-works the course.
Agree. The course does not promote the ground game for shots into the greens. The course played pretty slow. There are a few places where it is helpful to run the ball up and those place demand the correct position on the fairway.

Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Michael Wolf

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2018, 11:59:25 AM »
Carl,


Fairways and tree corridors at Shoal have widened considerably in past decade. Virtually ever hole now has a dead side of the fairway to be on depending on position of the hole. In fact, I'd say the angled greens in relation to the fw bunkers is the strength of Shoal Creek. On most holes safer lines off the tee are left with much tougher angles on your 2nd's. Exceptions would be drives on 1,11,and 17, where you can mostly hit it anywhere on the short grass. With the course receiving 7" of rain from a tropical storm this week, what you saw on television were greens a lot more receptive to approaches from "wrong" angles than they normally are.


Greens aren't even close to being redundant, especially since the renovation a couple of years ago. The glaring exception is the 13th, which is straight out of a 80's JN playbook. Not sure if it's a Sebonak influence or what, but most of the greens today wouldn't be easily identified as typical Nicklaus if you didn't know his name was on the project. I didn't watch any of the coverage, but am curious how you'd reach that conclusion. If anything, I think Shoal greens are some of the most non-typical Nicklaus of any of the bigger name Nicklaus designs. If that makes sense.


Agree on your 3rd point. Other than 7 and 12, most approaches need to land on the green. The redesigned 12th is a great hole. Best of the changes IMO. Long iron or hybrid to for everyone into a pretty darn good redan green.


Interesting on your comments on the Women's pace of play. Watching in person, I also thought they seemed painfully slow to me in their pre-shot routines. But the times for the overall rounds were actually not bad at all considering the course conditions and national championship stakes. I'd heard there were as many as 5 groups put on the clock at the same time on the weekend. Not sure if that is factual.


Regarding fast and firm, etc. It would have been very interesting how the course condition would have been received by the players and viewing public had it not been hit by the tropical storm 48 before play began. The course was very firm pre-storm, but there were patches of winter kill still on several fairways and green run offs. There was a deliberate decision not to resod them, and many of those spots also ended up not being marked GUR. What I read on USGA white paint policy was dirt spots caused by normal slow spring growth were not GUR, only areas of severe erosion because of the storm. That seems encouraging to me. But with the PGA moving to mid May, it'll be a difficult balancing act for courses in large swaths of the country to get in firm and fast ground condition while still reaching a visually attractive (to non GCA fans) level for TV viewership. Will be interesting to see which of those goals takes priority when conditions don't allow both to be met.






MW

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2018, 12:13:40 PM »
This thread once again illustrates how difficult it is to evaluate a course just by watching the pros play it on TV. 

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2018, 11:06:00 PM »
"and etc." is incorrect in the English language. A simple "etc." is all that is required.


I agree with what W,W, and T wrote as rebuttals.


I played SC with W in April. I played with my C game, and I wish that I had my B or A games to challenge it better. I had a very good caddie on my bag, and he gave me very good advice for all shots. I was simply unable to execute. W reminded me of the trouble that Fred Couples had in 1990, when he struggled over 4 holes on the inward half, losing the PGA to Wayne Grady.


Golf on television cannot help but shoot from above, a skewed perspective if ever there was one.


It is impossible to deny that Jack Nicklaus was still in the throes of "fly it in there" when he built the course. However, it is just as important to understand the impact that Hall Thompson had on the design. While not at early Mike Keiser by any stretch, Thompson's influence helped to balance Nicklaus' pro-game instincts. Also remember that water and sand were still massive needs in 1977.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2018, 06:43:23 AM »
I can eat some "humble pie". 

[/size][size=78%]Is the USGA considering SC for other events?[/size]
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2018, 06:56:26 AM »
I saw a few minutes of the event on TV, while searching too early for the basketball game.  The course looked quite a bit more interesting than I remembered it from my one visit, ages ago.  But I didn't realize that the greens had been redesigned.

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2018, 10:37:59 AM »
Having stayed on site some 20 years ago and played a couple of rounds, I was very impressed with the changes to the greens when I attended the tournament Saturday.  The course sits in a very low area and likely stays relatively wet - it wasn't designed for the ground game but I hope you had the opportunity to witness the amateur Tavatanakit's long-iron from the left rough on the 12th hole Sunday.  It landed 40 yards short of the green and took the giant left-hand turn on the green, winding up a few inches from the cup.  Besides, why must all course embrace the ground game?  Do Pine Valley and Cypress Point Club?

The original design is not without criticism.  Nicklaus' use of water on three of the par fives - notably the 11th and 17th and two of the one-shotters, both playing significantly downhill is perhaps a little two liberal.  The 9th and 18th, also watered around the green are perhaps the weakest holes there, though give Jack some credit for requiring a big draw off the 9th tee.   Also, the landing area for the second shot / lay-up on the 17th is far too narrow - perhaps the USGA's fault.

My only negative comment is the re-bunkering of the par five 3rd which previously created somewhat of a double-dogleg if the player was satisfied with avoiding the bunkers and playing the hole as a three-shotter, but which could also be reached in two if one took a straight line and challenged the left-hand bunker from the tee and then  the long right-hand bunker near the green.

The rounded edges and occasional amoeba features of the greens have been replaced by a more squared look generally, and the 4th green, likely 10,000 sf is outstanding with four greens within a green with a false front that befuddled at least one out of every three players in the 3 hours I sat there.  The 5th is likewise improved as the green on that par three sweeps up the hill at an angle from the fronting pond and is squared off at the back and along the right.  The 18th green is a significant improvement from what I recall being a cloverleaf with a deep depression running through it.  As you saw Sunday, it protected par well and was outcome determinative.    Generally the greens were quite elastic and often angled to create an advantage for those approaching down their length. 

I thought there was plenty of strategy from the tee.  From the elevated 14th tee it is very hard to pick the right line as you saw many players missing just right.  A significant advantage was also gained at the par 5 sixth if one flirted with the trees and creek right off the tee.  That line took the centerline tree out of play on the second shot and opened the opportunity to reach the green in two (unless you're Lexi Thompson and can just blow a long iron right over the top of the tree).

I see where the course is ranked 73rd on Golfweek's Modern list.  I can't argue with that, but just to stir things up, among the courses I've played I'd be reluctant to subordinate it to the likes of Kinloch (16), Spyglass (27), Sweeten's Cove (50), Olde Farm (53), The Rim (70), Desert Forest (44) and Grandfather Mountain (71).

BTW, the play was brilliant and incredibly slow-paced.  The ladies mark absolutely everything and Danielle Kang will stand over a three-foot putt until you have a birthday. 

Mike
« Last Edit: June 05, 2018, 10:49:48 AM by Michael H »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

astavrides

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2018, 08:36:01 PM »

BTW, the play was brilliant and incredibly slow-paced.  The ladies mark absolutely everything and Danielle Kang will stand over a three-foot putt until you have a birthday. 

Mike


final round at muirfield village on sunday took the leaders 5 hrs and 40 minutes.

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2018, 08:41:24 PM »
Michael Hendren,


Thank you for a sterling, detailed analysis.


I think as a group we should do more of thst, your's truly included.
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

Nigel Islam

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2018, 10:04:56 PM »
     Shoal Creek is a very interesting piece of property. I was particularly fascinated by how much the women struggled at the sub 400 yard ninth. No it’s not going to play like The Old Course, but given the weather conditions it produced an excellent tournament. I actually found myself more captivated watching the women than I was last year at Erin Hills.
      I personally did think there was strategy off the tee. Those shots are challenging because of the fairway cuts and bunkering rather than the tree lines. It’s actually a fairly enjoyable place to play for a major championship venue.

Wade Whitehead

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2018, 09:58:52 AM »
It may be a course setup issue, but the winner didn't even carry a driver and only hit three wood a couple of times during the round.  She hit four iron off almost every tee.
Is that a true test?

WW

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Women's US Open, Shoal Creek & etc.
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2018, 10:36:31 AM »
"It may be a course setup issue, but the winner didn't even carry a driver and only hit three wood a couple of times during the round.  She hit four iron off almost every tee. Is that a true test?"

WW -

Ariya J. hits the ball a long way, plays almost every course that way and has won most of her tournaments without hitting a driver. She is very much the exception on the LPGA Tour in that regard.

DT