[Bernie Bell]

I never know what “best” means and I haven’t played many of those mentioned, but shouldn’t Rutland at least be in the conversation?  I think it’s a 2* especially if your timing includes fall color.

[Jim Nugent]

Tom, how does the CG rate Clear Creek Tahoe?

Guys, you may want to stay away from Highlands CC, NC. 

[Tom_Doak]

Tom, how does the CG rate Clear Creek Tahoe?

Guys, you may want to stay away from Highlands CC, NC.

- 8 - 6     Clear Creek  - I missed that one, will enter it above


What is up with Highlands?

[Tom_Doak]

I never know what “best” means and I haven’t played many of those mentioned, but shouldn’t Rutland at least be in the conversation?  I think it’s a 2* especially if your timing includes fall color.

I liked Rutland and gave it a 6 . . . none of my co-authors have played it.  But I can't imagine many people who have played both prefer it to Ekwanok.

[Jim Nugent]

What is up with Highlands?

One of my stupid jokes.  Check out the scores for it. 

[Dan Smoot]

This is a hard discussion to have because everyone's definition of a "mountain" course tends to be different.


I have visited a high % of the courses mentioned so far [and walked all of them] and they are all fine courses, it just depends on your definition of "mountain".


The one glaring omission in the discussion is Jasper Park.  You can argue back and forth about whether Banff Springs [in the valley and right up against the mountains] is a mountain course or not, but Jasper DEFINITELY is, and it's the equal of any course mentioned here.


I am very fond of both Stone Eagle and Rock Creek, and believe they are among my best work, or would be if they were next to an ocean.  /s

It is difficult to talk about this.  There is much variety of mountain course landscapes from flat river valley land to steeper valleys with narrow corridors.  There are certainly design challenges in the latter which lends itself to repetitious elevated tee boxes to make transitions to flattish fairways to green sites which may or may not be elevated again.  This becomes more target style golf.  This can be enjoyable but at the same time a little less interesting to me when things are repeated.  I wonder how a designer such as yourself looks at such a project on more severe land.  I would assume that you would prefer to pass.


I have driven by the Rock Creek location but not having seen the course.  The pictures on this site certainly indicates that there is good width to not be very limited by the landform and provide many design options.  This course is beautiful.


When mountain golf is discussed, there are certain features I commonly think about but there is a variety of designs given what width is available to work with.

[Dan_Callahan]

In New England, Sunday River is truly a mountain course. Ups and downs all day. And I hated it.


Sugarloaf is ok. Very tight. Great views. I wouldn't go out of my way to play it unless it's October and the foliage is rocking.


Okemo feels mountainous ... and it's not a bad course. But certainly not great.


Owl's Nest in NH is below average.


Ekwanok is great, but it is much more of a valley course with mountain views.


I would say the same about Mount Washington. Really fun course. Incredible views of Mount Washington. But it's relatively flat.

[Tom_Doak]

In New England, Sunday River is truly a mountain course. Ups and downs all day. And I hated it.

I didn't think about Sunday River.  I thought it was beautiful, but I was buzzing around in a golf cart at the end of a perfect summer's day, taking pictures.  I'm not sure I would have enjoyed playing it, and I don't remember if it was even "walkable".

[Dan_Callahan]

I didn't think about Sunday River.  I thought it was beautiful, but I was buzzing around in a golf cart at the end of a perfect summer's day, taking pictures.  I'm not sure I would have enjoyed playing it, and I don't remember if it was even "walkable".

It's not very walkable, and I walk everywhere. It is beautiful. I've only played it once, and my overall impression was way too many holes with an elevated tee box and a fairway with no width that runs perpendicular to the tee. A little bit short or a little bit long and your ball is gone. It's tough enough when you are just factoring in carry distance on a flat site. But with the elevation change, it felt like an entire day of guessing. I disliked it so much, I've never been back, despite spending a ton of time in Maine. I would choose Belgrade Lakes over Sunday River every single time.


I should add ... i am not a huge fan of fairways that are built up above the tree line, so that a ball that just misses the fairway on either side rolls off and down into the woods. And that was another impression I had of many holes at Sunday River. The fairways sat well above the base of the trees that framed it. Which essentially makes an already narrow hole even tighter.

[Kalen Braley]

I see people tossing out a lot of courses they think are pretty good, but no one has answered the question--Can any course classified as a mountain course be really great?  Can any of them be a Doak 8, 9 or (God forbid) a 10?  Can any of them even qualify as a 7?  I suspect that we are dealing with courses that are at their best just pretty good.  I think that is probably the fate of any course with a huge elevation change required in the design.  Pretty to look at, but architecturally and strategically lacking.

Jim

I already did way back in reply 12.  RCCC is in that category for sure.  A Doak 8 at worst....

[Dave McCollum]

I second Kalen's endorsement of RCCC.  I recall saying after my one play "this must be the best mountain course on the planet."  I've played hundreds of rounds above 6,000 feet elevation and this is the best I've seen.   

[Kalen Braley]

I second Kalen's endorsement of RCCC.  I recall saying after my one play "this must be the best mountain course on the planet."  I've played hundreds of rounds above 6,000 feet elevation and this is the best I've seen.

Not quite that high  , but Google earth puts its at 4960 ft at 7 tee, and 4577 ft at 17 green for ~400 feet of overall differential

[Ira Fishman]

Is Gleneagles Kings a mountain course? We are planning to play it next year.


Ira

[Tommy Williamsen]

I should add ... i am not a huge fan of fairways that are built up above the tree line, so that a ball that just misses the fairway on either side rolls off and down into the woods. And that was another impression I had of many holes at Sunday River. The fairways sat well above the base of the trees that framed it. Which essentially makes an already narrow hole even tighter.



Not sure I understand how a fairway built above the tree-line can have balls roll into the woods.

[JWinick]

Great discussion all.   I think I agree with the general consensus that it’s a hard to have a great mountain course.  But I would certainly accept 3-4 mediocre holes for 14-15 great ones.    No one seems to mention the elevation problem which often means that mountain courses have to use too much land to make them force people to hit driver.   I would consider that to be a problem.


Tom, thanx for your contributions here.   What was the Doak rating for Lookout Mountain?    I haven’t played many of the others but I loved it.  It also might be one of the only true Raynors that anyone can join.

[Dan_Callahan]

Not sure I understand how a fairway built above the tree-line can have balls roll into the woods.

Maybe I didn’t describe it accurately.


The Sunday River course is built in the woods.


Imagine chopping down trees to open up fairway corridors.


Then imagine dumping a ton of dirt to build up the fairways and to create contours and mounds and, I imagine, drainage.


The fairway which started at the same elevation as the base of the trees is now raised up so it is four or five feet higher than the base of the trees.


So a ball that rolls off the fairway continues to roll down the slope and into the woods.


Not only is it annoying, but visually (to me) it looks entirely unnatural and heavy handed. I much prefer courses where the fairway corridors are more subtly integrated into the surrounding terrain.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Not sure I understand how a fairway built above the tree-line can have balls roll into the woods.

Maybe I didn’t describe it accurately.


The Sunday River course is built in the woods.


Imagine chopping down trees to open up fairway corridors.


Then imagine dumping a ton of dirt to build up the fairways and to create contours and mounds and, I imagine, drainage.


The fairway which started at the same elevation as the base of the trees is now raised up so it is four or five feet higher than the base of the trees.


So a ball that rolls off the fairway continues to roll down the slope and into the woods.


Not only is it annoying, but visually (to me) it looks entirely unnatural and heavy handed. I much prefer courses where the fairway corridors are more subtly integrated into the surrounding terrain.

Got it thanks. I am not familiar with the course. This helps.

[mike_beene]

If the RTJ 18 holes at the Broadmoor were together like they should be then that would be a true mountain course. It would be a poor cousin to the Ross 18 in large part because the terrain makes it tougher for the average resort guest.

[Dave McCollum]

Kalen,


I know its not that high.  But I've lived in the Rockies and know about playing golf at altitude and it does make a difference about how to design a golf course.  I basically learned how to play golf at 6,000 feet.  Given my travels in the American West, I've played a lot of what I would call "mountain" courses, as I am sure you have as well.  RCCC is simply the best I have seen.  I once said here that this course sits on its landscape as well as any course I've seen.  I consider that my ultimate complement because it seems to me that building courses in the mountains is very difficult and perhaps the most challenging terrain of all.  Not only that, they have to be so good to survive their short playing season.  It's like building a course in an hostile environment unsuited for golf.  The stakes are impossibly stacked against success given the environment and remoteness from golfers.  That any course succeeds and thrives is a tribute to its quality, or in RCCC's case, the deep pockets of its owner.  That is not a knock on its quality.  It's the real deal.  A wonderful golf course for maybe a third of the year for those lucky enough to enjoy it.  In my view a masterpiece.       

[Kalen Braley]

Dave,

Couldn't agree more with all points on that last post.  RCCC really is a terrific golf course and just may be the most walk-able course with so much elevation differential I've ever seen.  And given that Butte has a regional airport, not nearly as remote as people think.

[John Kirk]

As I started reading this thread, Rock Creek CC was my first thought followed by Sun Valley and Clear Creek.  Stone Eagle is an interesting choice because I never thought of it as a mountain course given its Martian landscape.  Sun Valley (Trail Creek) started off as 9-hole Billy P. Bell creation and morphed into it's current form with the help of the RTJ clan.  It would take an army of loggers to strip away the trees and clear the views, but under all that foliage is a really good, challenging (141 slope, tips), and fun course.  Through the years the owners have always been skiers and tree huggers more than golfers, so its bones remain too hidden to be called a hidden gem.  I'm sure the owners of the trophy homes around its edges wouldn't favor this sort of restoration.

My moderate travel experience has Rock Creek Cattle Company as the best mountain course.  Perhaps its best feature is the variety of golf holes, with an amazing collection of "looks" off the tee.  Also, despite the 400 foot elevation change, the walk, though long, is quite gentle.


I see Darius Oliver gave Rock Creek a 7.  Man, Darius is a tough grader.  Based on these ratings, you might conclude he is not a fan of hilly, mountain golf courses.

One thing I don't remember experiencing at Rock Creek is the "hillside" effect to putting, where playing on a hillside causes the player to lose perspective of what is level ground.  On Stone Eagle, all of the putts break down the hillside more than it appears.  I have heard that the Broadmoor resort courses in Colorado Springs have this hillside feature.  If I were to place a further restriction on what constitutes a mountain golf course, I might add this hillside quality.  Of course, this also happens at Riviera, where the putts regularly break uphill.  I swear they do!

Does Grandfather G&CC count as a mountain course?

[Chad Anderson (Tennessee)]

I just finished playing Diamond Creek and it was phenomenal.  I'd say it has to be in the conversation.

[Wade Whitehead]

In my view - and because of context - it's the Cascades in a landslide.

As far as I can tell, there just wasn't anything else remotely like it in 1923.

It was built with horses, mules, and steam shovels.

There are courses I would rather play but many of them were made possible by a true masterpiece.

WW

[Dave McCollum]

One thing I don't remember experiencing at Rock Creek is the "hillside" effect to putting, where playing on a hillside causes the player to lose perspective of what is level ground.  On Stone Eagle, all of the putts break down the hillside more than it appears.  I have heard that the Broadmoor resort courses in Colorado Springs have this hillside feature.  If I were to place a further restriction on what constitutes a mountain golf course, I might add this hillside quality.  Of course, this also happens at Riviera, where the putts regularly break uphill.  I swear they do!

Just a few miles away from RCCC is Old Works.  The front nine climbs up the hill to the old smelter site, comes down, climbs back up, and finishes next to the river on the valley floor.  When I first started playing this course, I called them "Escher Greens" because the big sweeping contours were like optical illusions that had me completely fooled more than a few times.  I don't know if this was because of the "hillside" effect or because the course was totally manufactured and the designers were able to counter the "hillside" effect with reverse contours that seemed to defy gravity.  Gradually, over many plays, I learned the greens, but still read them more carefully from all sides than most courses.     

[Kalen Braley]

Dave,

I've always thought these kind of features are brilliant design.  There's a course here in Utah when i played the first time absolutely made me look like a fool on some greens.  Like missing a 25 footer 10+ feet wide of the cup on a couple of occasions. I also recall a couple of greens at Stone Eagle that seemed to do this as well.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()