Top U.S. Course With Least Good Site?

[Carl Nichols]

As I was watching the tournament this weekend, it seemed to me that Riviera's land is good but not amazing--it has the hill and the barranca, but it otherwise seems quite flat.  Does it have the least good site of the best/elite courses in the U.S.?  For this purpose, I'm defining best/elite as any course that received a 9 from at least one person in the Confidential Guide, so:


Cypress
Pinehurst #2
Augusta
Seminole
Pebble
Riviera
LACC (North)
San Francisco GC
Pine Valley
Sand Hills
Shinnecock
National
Merion
Oakmont
Pacific Dunes
Crystal Downs
Ballyneal
Friar's Head
Prairie Dunes
Rock Creek Cattle
Bandon Trails
Chicago
Fishers Island
Winged Foot (West)
Garden City
Oakland Hills
The Country Club


That's 27 courses, and while people can argue about whether these are the "best" 27 courses in the U.S., that's not the point here, but instead to ask whether Riviera has the least good/interesting site of the bunch.  I certainly haven't seen all of these, but my sense is the other possibilities might be Garden City, Chicago, and Winged Foot (West). 

[Brad Tufts]

I think out of those, it would be between P#2, Chicago, and WFW.  Probably the latter two would be at the bottom, although they certainly aren't "bad" sites.


Riv might be close behind for unspectacular sites after those, but it takes pretty good advantage of the features it has.  I have not played it, but I have walked much of it as a spectator.


I have not seen ANGC, Seminole, SFGC other than TV and photos, but those seem like dynamic golf sites...Seminole could be in the Riv category with a limited # of features and lots of constructed bunkers to augment what's there.

[Adam Lawrence]

I think out of those, it would be between P#2, Chicago, and WFW.  Probably the latter two would be at the bottom, although they certainly aren't "bad" sites.

Pinehurst is sandy, which imo rules it out of consideration in this context. The least good site can't just be about topography. Soil is at least as important.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Some of the courses you listed don't have the spectacular site like Cypress, but Riviera, PH#2, and WFW have wonderful terrain for a golf course. There is enough movement to design a great course. Of them all Chicago GC might be the flattest piece of ground.

[Jason Thurman]

I understand the premise and the list, but to list Rock Creek Cattle Co among the "top US courses" and not to list Sawgrass or Whistling Straits seems a little offbase to me.


My point isn't to insult Rock Creek. It's just to say it wouldn't be on the average list of Top US Courses nearly as often as places like Whistling Straits and Sawgrass that are widely known, iconic, "top" courses.



And if you expand the list a bit to include more of the courses that are actually considered when most people think about "top US courses," I think it becomes pretty clear that Riviera isn't the answer. It seems like a pretty lovely site for a golf course to me.

[JESII]

I don't know Jason...for a conversation about the elite of the elite, 8's don't quite make the list in my opinion. Great golf courses obviously and I'd expect a fair debate about the fringe courses included versus excluded but a line should be drawn and Doak scale 9's seems reasonable.


That said, Tommy, I attempted to measure the amount of elevation change and Riviera and the 18th green is almost 40 meters higher than the 5th green. Seems to be a pretty steady fall, but that's a lot. WFW has about 6 meters across the property and that's really only the drop to the creek on the 15th fairway.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Augusta is a good candidate. The property's too hilly in spots, and I presume the soils aren't ideal either.

[JESII]

I didn't know too hilly was really possible but I haven't been there.

[archie_struthers]

 


Of the ones on the list that I have seen would put Chicago Golf at the top. Extraordinary architecture on a flat site.

[Paul Rudovsky]

Strikes me that the criteria to consider would be (in order of importance):


--soil quality (1)
--topgraphy (2)
--beauty of "setting" (3)
--overall climate (4)


I would exclude from consideration "ease of access" (Sandhills, Rock Creek, and Ballyneal would get very low scores on this)


Based on the above criteria WF and Chicago would have be to last...Garden City is on very good sandy soil I believe

[Kalen Braley]

I didn't know too hilly was really possible but I haven't been there.

I hadn't realized how hilly it was until I measured it.

From 1 tee you drop 100 feet of elevation down to the low part of 6, before climbing all the way back out to ten tee at same height as 1 tee.
Then from 10 tee you drop over 150 feet to 12 green, before climbing almost all the way back out to 18 green (which is approx. 20 feet lower than 10 tee)

[Edward Glidewell]

I didn't know too hilly was really possible but I haven't been there.

There are a ton of mountain courses that are too hilly -- even just in the foothills.

[JESII]

Kalen, while you’re on, could you confirm my GE read of 96 or 97 meters elevation on 18 green at Riviera and 57 or 58 at the 5th green?


That would almost match Augusta’s differential based on your numbers there.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen, while you’re on, could you confirm my GE read of 96 or 97 meters elevation on 18 green at Riviera and 57 or 58 at the 5th green?


That would almost match Augusta’s differential based on your numbers there.

Jim, here's what I have for Riv:

- Highest point on course, 1 tee box: 356 feet
- Lowest point, in front of 6 green: 178 feet
- 18th green is: 315 feet in the middle of the green

So Riv is far from flat, even if the long gentle slopes disguise it better.  Top to bottom it actually has more elevation differential than ANGC. (Only because of the elevated 1st tee box, which is 50+ feet higher than 1 fairway)

P.S.  The rear tee on 12 to 13 green drops 70 feet, but you'd never know it by what you see on TV, or perhaps even walking it in person, which I've never been.

P.P.S.  Another interesting tid bit, the 1st green is only 5-10 feet lower than 18 green...

[Jimmy Muratt]

In my opinion, Oakmont is the correct answer.   The land is essentially heavy soiled farmland with a major highway running through it.  The architecture and conditioning create a playing experience that is hard to equal anywhere.   I think Oakmont is a "10", and that's incredible considering the land and soils that it's built on.

[Carl Nichols]

I understand the premise and the list, but to list Rock Creek Cattle Co among the "top US courses" and not to list Sawgrass or Whistling Straits seems a little offbase to me.


My point isn't to insult Rock Creek. It's just to say it wouldn't be on the average list of Top US Courses nearly as often as places like Whistling Straits and Sawgrass that are widely known, iconic, "top" courses.



And if you expand the list a bit to include more of the courses that are actually considered when most people think about "top US courses," I think it becomes pretty clear that Riviera isn't the answer. It seems like a pretty lovely site for a golf course to me.

Yes, I was just trying to avoid a debate about which courses are up for consideration, since your Whistling Straits and Sawgrass are someone else's Kiawah or Bethpage--or Somerset Hills, Old MacDonald, or Streamsong Blue [the only courses to get at least 3 8's but no 9's or 7's].  I'm happy to have you answer the question "Of the US courses that got at least one 9 in the Confidential Guide, which has the least good site?"  [size=78%]  [/size]

[Stewart Abramson]

If the nominees were  broadened to include courses that received an 8 or above in the Confi Guide, would the answer be Shadow Creek?

[Carl Nichols]

Kalen, while you’re on, could you confirm my GE read of 96 or 97 meters elevation on 18 green at Riviera and 57 or 58 at the 5th green?


That would almost match Augusta’s differential based on your numbers there.

Jim, here's what I have for Riv:

- Highest point on course, 1 tee box: 356 feet
- Lowest point, in front of 6 green: 178 feet
- 18th green is: 315 feet in the middle of the green

So Riv is far from flat, even if the long gentle slopes disguise it better.  Top to bottom it actually has more elevation differential than ANGC. (Only because of the elevated 1st tee box, which is 50+ feet higher than 1 fairway)

P.S.  The rear tee on 12 to 13 green drops 70 feet, but you'd never know it by what you see on TV, or perhaps even walking it in person, which I've never been.

P.P.S.  Another interesting tid bit, the 1st green is only 5-10 feet lower than 18 green...

Kalen:
Thanks, very interesting.  What's the approximate difference between 10 green and 18 tee?

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen, while you’re on, could you confirm my GE read of 96 or 97 meters elevation on 18 green at Riviera and 57 or 58 at the 5th green?


That would almost match Augusta’s differential based on your numbers there.

Jim, here's what I have for Riv:

- Highest point on course, 1 tee box: 356 feet
- Lowest point, in front of 6 green: 178 feet
- 18th green is: 315 feet in the middle of the green

So Riv is far from flat, even if the long gentle slopes disguise it better.  Top to bottom it actually has more elevation differential than ANGC. (Only because of the elevated 1st tee box, which is 50+ feet higher than 1 fairway)

P.S.  The rear tee on 12 to 13 green drops 70 feet, but you'd never know it by what you see on TV, or perhaps even walking it in person, which I've never been.

P.P.S.  Another interesting tid bit, the 1st green is only 5-10 feet lower than 18 green...

Kalen:
Thanks, very interesting.  What's the approximate difference between 10 green and 18 tee?

Middle of 18: 315
Middle of 10: 269

So nearly 50 feet...

P.S.  Rear tee box on 10 is 295, which makes that hole effectively play ~10 yards shorter than the yardage?  Why do the pros struggle so much with it again? 

[Carl Nichols]

Kalen, while you’re on, could you confirm my GE read of 96 or 97 meters elevation on 18 green at Riviera and 57 or 58 at the 5th green?


That would almost match Augusta’s differential based on your numbers there.

Jim, here's what I have for Riv:

- Highest point on course, 1 tee box: 356 feet
- Lowest point, in front of 6 green: 178 feet
- 18th green is: 315 feet in the middle of the green

So Riv is far from flat, even if the long gentle slopes disguise it better.  Top to bottom it actually has more elevation differential than ANGC. (Only because of the elevated 1st tee box, which is 50+ feet higher than 1 fairway)

P.S.  The rear tee on 12 to 13 green drops 70 feet, but you'd never know it by what you see on TV, or perhaps even walking it in person, which I've never been.

P.P.S.  Another interesting tid bit, the 1st green is only 5-10 feet lower than 18 green...

Kalen:
Thanks, very interesting.  What's the approximate difference between 10 green and 18 tee?

Middle of 18: 315
Middle of 10: 269

So nearly 50 feet...

P.S.  Rear tee box on 10 is 295, which makes that hole effectively play ~10 yards shorter than the yardage?  Why do the pros struggle so much with it again? 

Is 315 for 18 green or 18 tee?  I'm interested in how much elevation change there is from 10 GREEN to 18 TEE. 

[Kalen Braley]

Is 315 for 18 green or 18 tee?  I'm interested in how much elevation change there is from 10 GREEN to 18 TEE.

Ahhh, my bad.

Rear tee on 18 is 252,
Middle of green on 10 is 269.

So roughly 15 feet lower...

[Adam G]

Having grown up near Riviera and been to the tournament many times, it's in quite a steep-walled canyon that drains towards the sea. So there is a gentle slope the entire way. It's not flat -- there just wasn't much in the canyon to make it interesting land. My understanding is that a lot of the features Thomas created (hill at 2 green, 3 tee, 10 tee, 18 green amphitheater and hill, side hill on 4, hill on 5, etc.) were essentially cut and fill tie ins to the steep canyon edge, in particular to get golfers up and down to the clubhouse. So prior to the work there, the canyon was essentially a very steep wall and a pretty flat bottom that flooded occasionally and had a few barancas that would flood more frequently. Would be interesting if anyone had more detail on what it looked like before Thomas showed up (I assume its in one of Shackelford's books).

[JESII]

Jimmy Murrat,


Have you been to Winged Foot?


There is likely 1/10th the land movement at WF versus Oakmont.




This does tie into a conversation I'd like to have...or rather observe; would one pick topography or soil conditions as the most important in creating a great golf experience?

[David Wuthrich]

Chicago would be my choice

[Jimmy Muratt]

Jimmy Murrat,

Have you been to Winged Foot?

There is likely 1/10th the land movement at WF versus Oakmont.

This does tie into a conversation I'd like to have...or rather observe; would one pick topography or soil conditions as the most important in creating a great golf experience?

Jim,

Yes, I love Winged Foot and it certainly has less movement than Oakmont.   I just think that Oakmont is the better golf course.   The quality of the raw land is better at Oakmont (although the highway is a negative) but the overall finished product and the consistent playing characteristics are better at Oakmont.....in my opinion.

Regarding your question about topography vs soil conditions being most important...….  I would say that soil conditions are most important.   Drainage is the most important thing at a golf course and having a sandy base definitely puts you ahead from the start.   It's no coincidence that the vast majority of the top courses in the world are built on sand.   That's another reason why I'm so enamored with Oakmont.....achieving the consistently firm conditions on heavy soils in western Pennsylvania is an achievement that can't be overstated.