[David Wigler]

When you visit the area (are you visiting the Ryder Cup?), consider a look at Franklin Hills CC, Bloomfield Hills CC, Detroit Golf Club, CC of Detroit (Colt/Alison with Rees doctoring), Essex in Windsor. Maybe Meadowbrook too, though I am not intimately familiar with it. Wigler will have a cow if we don't throw in Plum Hollow, but that is another story.

Not sure if you are kidding or not.  I would play Oakland Hills before Plum, if just for the history and experience.  Franklin Hills would be next on my list.  We have debated Plum vs. CCD Ad Naseum over the summer.  I believe Plum is better.  Both are Alison.  Take your pick.  I have not played Essex since the restoration (Have you?).  Before restoration, I would have chosen Plum.  Plum is definitely better than DGC and Meadowbrook and Bloomfield Hills is not in Plum's league (Unless you like Women's executive courses).

[Brian_Gracely]

Never played Plum Hollow, but I'd put Birmingham CC above Bloomfield CC and Meadowbrook as well.  BCC hosted the 1953 PGA and it's right around the corner from OHCC.

[Steve Lapper]

Matt W:  Winged Foot West is in your top ten but Oakland Hills struggles to make your top fifty?  Other than the fact that the college kids haven't been to Winged Foot lately, can you dissect the differences between the two for us?

Head start:  both are parkland.  Both have great sets of greens.  Oakland Hills has a little more topography and a bit wider variety of holes.  Neither one has much in the way of finesse holes.  OK, continue ...

I think it's a very good parkland course, overrated a bit because of its championship heritage like all the other Open venues [except Pebble, Shinnecock, and Pinehurst #2].

As for shotmaking, the "masse" shot Chi Chi Rodriguez hit into the last green at the Senior Open was one of the most awesome shots I've seen in the last twenty years, but he didn't win so it is quickly forgotten.

Tom,

     Having played both several times, I'll take a crack at this. A few givens: OH has more elevation change and as you say, a little more topography. Both have great greens (but I'll make the case that WFW are significantly better) and are 100 percent parkland.

      I would argue that WFW does indeed have a few finesse holes. #'s 6 and 7 and 10 are all strong examples(11 & 15 lesser ones). 6 and 7 have small greens with considerable cant that force a player to make a discernable choice on every shot. The short three par 7 and it's medium cousin 10 are both susceptible to fickle winds and don't cede any easy birdies save for a lucky, or perfectly played shot. Only 17 at OH really has the same effect. The short par 4 6th at WFW is devilish, absolutely positional from the tee and unrivaled by any of the shorter 4's at OH.

      Overall, WFW has much smaller greens that OH, and plays much tighter off the tee. Granted, with both courses set up for majors, they mutally share miserable rough and blooming tree blockage of missed shots, but WFW's green size and bowled cants really serve to punish the errant tee ball with greater severity. OH's greens are no slouch, but their size just leaves more room for some slight error (not much, but maybe more pinning room as well). I like both courses closing trio's, but it remains difficult for me to find too much else about OH to love(maybe 14 & 5).

     In "open-style" set-up, WFW still plays a bit tougher. It's narrowness and fairway turns make the pro think twice about trying to cut many corners. The last group of long hitting collegiate youth didn't have to think twice much at OH. Maybe that will be the same case at WFW this summer, but I think not.

     I think OH is indeed a solid, tough test that requires the better player to have a multitude of skills with some shot-shaping abilities. Bit it is a less-than-inspiring course that doesn't earn it lofty rankings, especially realtive to the complete tests that Shinnecock, Pebble, and WFW have.

     While happy to play it if I would find myself in Detroit, I'd much rather get to the airport or a car and head north for truly better, and certainly more fun, golf.

[David Wigler]

Brian,

This is clearly a personal preference thing as I think all three courses are very close but I would put Brimingham 3rd.  Meadowbrook is the best test of golf of the three and Bloomfield is one of the prettiest and best manicured courses in the country.  Birmingham is not as tough as Meadowbrook (Although tougher than BHCC) and not as nice as Bloomfield (About the same as Meadowbrook).  That written, Birmingham and Meadowbrook are fairly easy to find a way to get onto, while BHCC is not.

[David Wigler]

Ian - so as not to be accused of thread sabotage, I believe Oakland is considered great because of its history and the comments made by Hogan after he won the Open.  OH is a very good course.  It is my 3rd favorite in Michigan (After Crystal Downs and Kingsley).  It is ahead of very solid courses like Lost Dunes, Arcadia Bluffs, TreeTops, UofM, Franklin Hills, etc.  I concur a little with Matt, that I would probably place it in the top 50 in the US but could not make an argument for top 20 placement.  For my money, I would take a 45 minute drive to arrive at Inverness and you would see a top 20 course in the US.

PS - e-mail me when you get here and it would be my pleasure to host you at Plum Hollow.

[Michael Dugger]

I always thought it was the greens.  The last U.S. Open won by Steve Jones made it look like some positions were positively not the place to be.  I.E. Above the hole.

Didn't Doak describe them as Gull WInged?  I never quite grasped what that meant but would love to hear someone explain it.

[Matt_Ward]

Tom D:

I appreciate the comments Slapper made regarding Winged Foot v Oakland Hills (South) and I think he covered a good number of them -- let me add just a few more.

Winged Foot owes it's reputation beyond simply being an Open / PGA venue. I think that's often thrown up against the course because of the severity demonstrated during the ill-prepared '74 Open -- a retaliation by the USGA to what Miller did in the final round the preceding year at Oakmont.

I believe Winged Foot / West is arguably the most demanding shot second golf course one can play. The greens are tightly pinched in a pear-shaped design on a number of holes and within a number of the greens there are multiple swing points for putts to follow. Sometimes you can play aggressive at WF / West when you reach the optimum point in the fairway -- at other times it simply pays to be extremely cautious because "pushing the pedal" too hard and too fast WILL result in some awkward locations if the shot doesn't come off exactly right. To me that's a major plus for the course.

You also have to be a solid driver of the ball at WF / West -- getting to the correct location in the fairway is an absolute must because the approaches are that much more discerning than what you find at OH / South.

I don't doubt for a NY minute the vexing nature of a number of greens at Oakland Hills / South. Hats off to Ross for a fine job. I give WF / West the slightest of edges here but for argument sake I'll say they are a push.

However, the bunkering pattern in the fairway at OH / South most especially is really quite redundant. It's very predictable with bunkers on both sides at the same distance to provide some sort of "choke point" for the player to decide. Guess what? That "choke point" was really immaterial to the top players at last year's Amateur.

Winged Foot does provide the better opening stretch of holes with #1 through #4. It simply requires the player to play first rate golf right from the very beginning. OH / South does have a fine opening hole but the next few holes are really filler IMHO.

The par-3's cumulatively are the better test at WF / West -- although I believe the 17th at OH / South gets little mention as a great hole. Ditto for the par-3 7th at WF/ West -- it's often lost in the sauce but I admire how the green sits up above the fairway and doesn't provide the "clean view" from the tee that can make players a bit more unsure on gauging the approach.

On the par-5 front I believe both courses are a wash. Clearly, both courses have had "weak" par-5's turned into long par-4's. At WF / West you get the 9th and 16th -- and if memory serves, the same thing happened at OH / South with the uphill 8th and finishing hole. If anything the remaining holes -- the 5th and 12th at WF / West and the 2nd and 12th at OH / South are a wash.

On the par-4 front I belive the edge goes to WF / West. They are a bit more varied and clearly the closing stretch of holes at WF / West is simply the more demanding. I will concede having five consecutive par-4's to close the round at WF / West can be a bit one dimensional from an architectural standpoint but they are varied in many ways too.

WF / West does have finesse holes -- how bout the 6th -- the 11th? Try to remember the marching orders from the founders was to have a man's sized layout -- Tillinghast respected those wishes but made it a point to add a few holes of different character as well.

On the recovery argument it's hard to say how OH / South moves ahead of WF / West. At the West you simply must avoid at all times getting short-sided. In fact -- the player does have a better time in recovery if they end up in the bunker. OH / South is also quite testing aroudn the greens but I believe it's just a notch or two below the West in illuminating the shtocomings of those with weaker approaches.

In the area of working the ball -- I don't see how OH / South overcomes WF / West. For the most part the tee game at OH / South is simply bust it straight and long. There are few holes which require a deft touch in working the ball from one side to the other. At WF / West you have a wider variety of such holes from right-to-left (1st, 4th, 16th, 18th) and left-to-right (2nd, 8th, 17th).

From a straight architectural aspect -- I concur with your comments in "Confidential Guide" about WF / West. The course doesn't have the "wow" factor of other gems that are legitimate members of the elite top 10 (e.g. Oakmont, Merion, Shinnecock, etc, etc) but you NEVER get a free pass at WF / West and the course has gone through a lesser amount of "updates" since it first came on the scene many years ago. I believe the West has stood up to the test of time quite well with all the equipment advances and the like.

I also credit WF / West in eliminating so many trees that wrongly intruded upon the layout. Removing the trees has returned to the course to more of its original character from its earlier days.

In sum -- OH / South is a solid course as David Wigler states. In many ways it kind of dovetails with what one finds with Baltusrol / Lower. They are well done in many ways but just don't have architecturally compelling points to merit such an inclusion among the very elite IMHO. I would have both of them in my personal top 100 but its doubtful either would break into my top 50.

I thoroughly enjoy WF / West but I can understand how others would much prefer a "lesser" version of the same course and many would point to a nearby neighbor Fenway or even Quaker Ridge. The rigors of WF / West are often used against it when assessing its character but I will leave you with the comments you closed with about County Down in "Confidential Guide" -- just when you think you have conquered the game one needs to play there to show how far one has to go (please forgive me for the paraphasing).

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()