[John Morrissett]

Just returned from a most enjoyable afternoon at The Creek Club.  Even though we caught the course at close to its worst (slowish, somewhat soft greens and fairways [no doubt due to the drought and then last night's rain] and an overcast day with gusts of wind reaching 5mph), the course still ranks right up with the most enjoyable courses one could imagine.  Tell me I could only play The Creek for the rest of my life and I would say "Thank you very much."Some comments (I won't go into too much detail as the course will be featured on GCA in a month or two):(1) Why does Doak try to claim his as a solo Raynor design in his book (the Gourmet Choice section) when everything else makes it seem predominatly Macdonald with Raynor as his right-hand man?(2) The first is a wonderfull opener.(3) The 5th grows on me each time.  It is the hole where the player can be first exposed to the wind, and the open horizon creates a good effect.  Plus, the angled green has respectable bunkers on both sides.  A sleeper.(6) The 6th is the best 6th hole in the world.  Dramatic drive from one of golf's great spots followed by a sensational aproach to an original version of the Punchbowl.(7) I bet the 10th would be a lot of fun to play regularly.  Every now and then you would take a crack at the green with a driver, only to hit it into the lateral water hazard on the right, make 6 and then promise yourself that you will hit 4-iron the next time.  Then the cycle would start all over again . . .( From the back tee (195 yards to the center), the 11th is increibly intimidating.  It features an island green that has a toned down Biarrtiz swale running through it.  The green is about 70 yards long and at a bit of an angle.  When the hole is in the back (making the hole about 220 yards), playing a long-iron or wood with the right-to-left wind is more than most have.  More fearsome than the 9th at Yale.  (9) 13 and 14 provide necessary muscle at a crucial stage in the round.(10) The 18th is a fine hole.  Don't get caught up with par and just look at it as a strong two-shotter.

[Ran Morrissett]

It makes me sick how many great courses you get to play. Get cracking on a write-up because if ever a course should be featured, it is The Creek. I still claim it is the 4th best on Long Island, ahead of Garden City, Bethpage, Deepdale, etc. - anywhere else in the country and it would be the center of massive attention.Is there no club history book that would help sort through the Raynor/Macdonald puzzle?

[Clark]

I agree that the Creek is great fun to play and would say it is among the 6 or so best on the island (Piping Rock is awfully good as well).  However, I can't help but think that you overrate the course.  I know this is a silly thing to say, but if you were to take away the great views of the Sound, would you still like the course as much?  At Fishers Island, the answer would be yes.I am bothered by what seems to be a disproportionately large number of average or dull holes -- 2-5, 12, 17 - 18.  I agree that the rest is world-class, but that leaves an awful lot of humdrum golf to be endured.  Other Raynor and Macdonald courses don't have so many holes like that -- NGLA, Fishers Island, Yeamans Hall, Yale, etc.  Shorecares does have its share of average holes, mainly on the front.  At least they were wise enough to get those holes out of the way early.The more I think about it, I prefer YHC to the Creek, mainly because YHC has only one so-so hole (the 9th).  A revisit since Doak's work conforms this view.

[John Morrissett]

I understand what you are saying.  Yeamans Hall is the most solid of the Raynor I've played, and I like the course very, very much.  (Also, I should admit that the one time I played there was this past January on an overcast with the fairways not overseeded.  Visually the course was not as striking as I'm sure it is in April, so I might be underestimating YHC.)This gets to the atgument of whether it is better to have several all-universe holes and a few average ones or to have 18 good but not great holes.  I subscribe to the former philosophy (e.g., I would happily play the 3rd at the Creek in order to have the spectacular 6th).  The Creek falls into the former and YHC to the latter.  YHC just doesn't quite have any holes you would consider for your dream 18 course (although it has a good number that are darn close), but it has only one hole that does not instantly appeal (the 9th, as you state).The other reason I would favor The Crek is the wind.  As you know, its location makes for not only a pretty setting but also leads to exposed golf in the wind, an element that can add immeasurable to both the challenge and enjoyment of a course.  

[Bob Ellington]

I agree with John - I would rather play a course that hits incredible highs (but has a few soft spots) than a course that is consistently good but not "great". The best example is Pebble Beach. The most important holes to play well aren't the cliff holes (they will kill you regardless) but the inland holes. If you mess them up, you are in deep trouble. The golfer is keep off balance from the variety of playing spectacular holes and then having to re-focus and play holes like 13 and 14 well. That kind of ebb and flow is a big plus to a course, or at least I think so.

[Ted_Sturges]

To Ran and John,George Bhato could probably clear up your questions of the roles Macdonald and Raynor had at The Creek.  He is the gentleman writing the book on Raynor.  In fact, as I've told Ran, he'd be a good candidate for a future GCA interview.  I have his email address if you need it.John,How come you and I seem to disagree so often on other architecture (TPC Sawgrass etc.) when we both appreciate Seth J. Raynor so much?

[T. Doak]

Yes, Macdonald should get credit for The Creek, since he founded it and got the money guys together.  He may even have gotten there a couple of times during construction, but I'm pretty sure that by that point he was leaving nearly all of the details to Raynor.I just got carried away in making my point that The Creek was the equal of Camargo and Shoreacres, which were both in the Top 100, while The Creek was completely ignored.  I had no idea it would get voted in!  And Piping Rock and Yeamans,too!  That's embarrassing -- there are other architects out there who deserve a mention, too.All of them would fall down a notch if GOLF had a few more strong players on its panel who'd deduct a point or two for a 6400 yard course.  But John's right, on that basis, The Creek would move up because of the wind factor.

[Ran Morrissett]

Tom,I do not understand "...deduct a point or two for a 6400 yard course." I can't think of five 7,000 yard courses anywhere with more variety and charm than Swinley Forest, West Sussex, The Addington, Pennard, and St. Enodoc.  And I know you agree - so what gives? No way David Eger would tear up The Addington and on a windy day, those little links courses would have him at full stretch too.

[Ben DeLow]

Mr. Doak, are you saying that the yardage and difficulty of a course are that paramount in how it is ranked? Don't you think your hero Dr. MacKenzie would take exception to that? Have you been reading a few too many Golf Digest Places to Play descriptions lately?

[Tom_Doak]

A truly great golf course must be challenging enough to make the best players grind on a couple of holes, and a bunch of 400-yard par-4's don't accomplish that, unless the undulation of fairways and greens is tremendous.Crystal Downs and Merion are 6500 yards but repeatedly make good players sweat.  Yeamans Hall is the same length, but the only thing that makes me sweat there is the humidity.  The Creek has enough strong holes [5, 6, 9 with the new tee, 13, 14, and 16] to stand on its own.  Yes, Ran, Swinley Forest and The Addington do, too, with a very unusual distribution of holes.It's not the total length -- it's how it's distributed.  Mackenzie was a genius at this.  Pete Dye taught me about it.

[John Morrissett]

Tom:You appear to be saying that basically the long irons shouldn't be ignored -- that they are part of the challenge and should be tested.  I agree.  As you point out with Forest Highlands, don't you think it's OK to test them on par threes as well (i.e., a course's length isn't solely dependenton its two-shotters)?I have to say that I did not look at Yeamans Hall as short.  Granted my one round there was in January, but I remember hitting a mid-iron or more into a number of greens -- 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17. I'm sure that might be different in the summer, but that's a lot of holes.  The only question mark in mind about its length and difficulty came from a score my brother allegedly had in the afternoon after my departure.

[Ran Morrissett]

Another classic GCA thread.PS As a foot note, I no longer think of The Creek ahead of Garden City.

[Gib_Papazian]

Ran,It's a breezy summer afternoon on Long Island. It is 3 O'Clock, the sun is out and the course is empty except for you and a friend.Garden City or Creek?At the risk of offending Patrick, The Creek.Under less than idyllic conditions, you're probably right . . . but not by much.

[Patrick_Mucci]

John,I don't think a golf course has to have 18 great holes to be a great golf course.  I also don't think that a course has to be able to stand up to the best players in the world to be a great golf course.  If you look carefully, most of those courses have been specifically modified for that specific purpose, and who is to say that the same thing couldn't be done to many courses, thus elevating their stature.  But.... many clubs would rather remain as they are for their MEMBERS.  On many of these courses the potential to stand up to the best players in the world exists, it's only the desire to change them that's missing.The Creek is an outstanding golf course on a unique piece of land.  A plateau provides the terrain for the first 5 holes.  #1 is the closest thing to a redan green that you'll find on a par 4.  # 5 as Ran describes it is a terrific par 4. The course then descends to Long Island Sound, plays around an Island green which is shaped like a football, about 80 yards from tip to tip.The course then begins it's gradual ascent back to the plateau.Many of the holes are great, the view is great, the wind is great, the experience is great, so I'm going to go out on a limb and call it a great golf course.But, that's just my opinion.Ran,If you had to play GCGC or The Creek for the rest of your life, you couldn't go wrong, they're both great.

[Ran Morrissett]

Gib,Despite the site's considerable romance, almost a third of the course consists of nothing holes (3,4,5,12(!),17,18). No way it holds up under the on-slaught of Garden City, which is bullet-proof in that regard.There must surely be a way to breathe some more life into those limp holes??? More green contours, more fairway bunkering, etc.?Especially given that Macdonald was hovering around, I would have thought that we would have seen bolder green contours. Doak alludes to the fact that the Short hole did have such at one time - well, without bringing it back, the course suffers.Having said all that, I still vote for it in the world top 100, so this is a very relative conversation.Cheers,

[Tom_Doak]

Ran,The one time Ben Crenshaw came out to tour The Creek, he picked number 12(!) as his favorite hole.

[TEPaul]

Interesting stuff on this thread!Patrick:I'm glad you refrained from picking the better of GCGC and The Creek and just went with both are great to play. That's the way I like to look at it too!What interested me most on this thread is some speculation above about which kind of course is more desirable; one with 18 good holes or one with some world class holes combined with some others that are somewhat weak. It's the kind of speculation I've never been much good at.To me good courses and really good courses have an overall "feeling" about them and the more interesting and the more UNIQUE that overall "feeling" is might be how I would view the course insofar as greatness. It is really hard for me to start to break the course down into just 18 components.I also think courses really shine the most in stroke play/tournament play. Bobby Jones's beautiful remark about the differences of tournament golf and recreational golf is one of the best overall descriptions of the game of my awareness (making all the more maddening the quote's misuse and abuse by Callaway & Co.)I'm from Philadephia and the courses around here that I consider the good and great ones are also the ones that I consider the most interesting in an overall sense, in the "feeling" I have about them. They also happen to be the most famous in this area: I don't think that special "feeling" I have about them has much or anything to do either with the fact I know they are famous. It has more to do with the feeling I have when I wake up in the morning knowing I have to go out and play them in a stroke play tournament. The three I rate highest for this "feeling" are Pine Valley, Merion and Huntingdon Valley. On these three courses I'm more on edge from when I wake up in the morning until the round is done than any of the others in this town. There is an "intensity level" about these three courses that is higher than any of the others. On these three courses, when playing them I'm sort of "on edge" all the time. Here are my overall "feelings" about some of the well known courses in my area.Pine Valley: On edge all the time and more aware throughout the entire round (Huntingdon Valley is close) that you can suddenly lose the whole round almost anywhere with a stupid mistake. Huntingdon Valley: Same as Pine Valley in intensity and I concentrate on playing #1 (this little mindbender) conservatively and if I can get through the first three even and the front even or one over I can hang on enough through the harder back to maybe have a decent day. If I have a good round going I don't mind "accepting" a bogie on #18 at all (this hole, like Merion's #18 has always put too much pressure on my lack of tee shot length).Merion: Also high intensity but three separate courses; 1-6, 7-13 and 14-18.Aronomink: A slog-too much sameness of just trying to hit it hard all day.Philly Country: I've played this course a hundred times and I can't get much of an overall feeling except to say if I have a good round going when I get to #15 I try to play it sort of conservatively and see if I can't walk off with a par. #16, don't fall asleep on the approach and on #17 try to make not worse than five and on #18 again don't fall asleep as so many do-particularly the approach.Lehigh: I really like this course and all its holes but despite three stroke play tournaments over the years I don't yet understand its ebbs and flows.Moselem Springs: I always feel off balance with this course (particularly trying to understand its overall balance) and it's a hard one to do well on.Stonewall: So far on this course I feel I should get through the first five even or maybe even one under; and then the game begins! If the round has been good and you catch a good drive, accurately placed the approach to #18 is surely one of the prettiest and one of the best in all of golf. Don't fall asleep on this approach; really study the green, its surrounds and particularly the design of the rightside bunkering. And if you can do all that make sure you factor in the pin position.LuLu and Torresdale: I love these two short courses. On Torresdale, make a par on #3, get past #7 & #8 just one over, hit the green on #11, somehow make par on #14 and you will have a good day. Lulu-Play #10 with an iron off the tee, play for five don't do anything stupid on that hole and the day should be OK.Gulph Mills: This is my home course and I feel if you can play the first three in even the rest of the course is a slide! Funny how that feeling is and it really isn't that way but it's always been the way I've felt about my course.I should mention some others like Philly Cricket and Lancaster and Manufacturers, maybe later.Of all these courses and their different overall "feelings" the most interesting to me and by far and away is actually Merion. It's three separate stretches or "courses" are fascinating to me in an overall sense. Hang on as best you can through the first six, make up as best you can what you've lost or what you think you need for the last five and hang on for dear life through the last stretch. I've always been interested in this "feeling" about Merion and this year as I posted earlier I got to watch a world class Tour pro, who is one of the best managers ever, play the place and just as I would have thought he shot even and he lost a little and gained a little on each one of the three "stretches" in interesting but predictable ways. It was perfect balance and variety and whether or not it was the individual holes or the overall, this is a course that is great.  

[Ran Morrissett]

Tom D.,No chance he meant the 11th or 13th??Even our caddie prefaced the hole as we headed for the tee by saying, "Sorry for this one guys but you'll love the next four."Tom P.,We're saying the same thing that Tillie said long ago - every hole should have some character knocked in to it. There is no better example than Merion (in the good sense) and The Creek (in the bad sense).

[jim_lewis]

Clark and Ran:I don't understand your beef with #5 and #12 at the Creek. It is really quite a compliment to the rest of the course if you think those are two of its weak holes. I am with John M. regarding #5 and Crenshaw regarding #12, except that I don't see how Ben liked #12 more than #6 and #11.#11 is the most exciting biarritz I've played, including Yale #9. By the way John, I stepped it off and that green is 88 yards long!John M.#6 could be the best #6 in the world if it were not for Carnoustie.

[NAF]

Bringing this classic thread to the top as the Creek outing is coming up in 20 days.. makes the mouth water.. this was a great thread--reminiscent of what made this site great..  We need more like them.

[SPDB]

It makes you grateful that TE Paul finally figured out what that key labelled "enter" does. wow.

[grandwazo]

I wonder if those of that live on Long Island realize how truly blessed we are to be able to experience on a regular basis the merits of this thread.  Personally I am fortunate to participate each year in the "LICADD" outing in September and each year I "have" to choose between playing either the Creek or Piping Rock, each course taking 25 foursomes for the day.  This year the choice for me is Piping.  To top the day off, at this outing we get to bid on foursomes at Maidstone, Shinnecock, National Golf Club, Friars Head, etc.  My recent 36 hole day at National was the result of a succesful bid in the name of a great charity.

On top of that I am blessed to have a good friend as a member at GCMC who manages to get me out there at least once a year, sometimes at the member guest which is truly one of the great experiences in golf as you end your day eating lobster off a cardboard tray watching the sun go down over a truly great golf course.

From my perspective, each course, The Creek, Piping and GCMC are distinct and each offer a different playing experience.  Which course is the "best", i.e. the "hardest" 1 through 18?, GCMC, no doubt, not a "weak" hole on the golf course, except of course if the wind is blowing off the Sound then it's the Creek, the wind making even the most uninspiring hole a challenge, especially if the greens are rolling.  But then again, the wind can blow pretty hard across the Hempstead Plain in Garden City and if that's the case, then the score won't matter much, just whether or not you come out on top in your match.

Piping is "elegance" defined in my opinion, what the "Gold Coast" of Long Island represents, bordered by mansions and beautiful gardens which you can only see if you peak through a fence during your round.  From the grass tennis courts and the driving range that was once polo fields, you know the members here are a very select group.  The course reminds me so much of NGLA but without the views of the Peconic, it's fun personified, letting you play every shot in the bag under generally perfect conditions.  

Why do we have to choose?  Believing that there are a select few who probably enjoy membership at all 3 clubs is enough for me to believe there is a God.

I think there are still openings for the LICADD event, if interested visit the link below:

http://www.licadd.org/golf.htm

[SPDB]

BTW - As a long overdue correction. I believe it was the 13th hole that Crenshaw designated his favorite.

Also, Ran's wrong about some of these holes lacking character. The flat holes in the marsh are filled with character, especially when you consider the contrast to the many other holes on the course. The most amazing thing about the course is the three separate identities it possesses.

Holes 1-5 on the higher part of the property play with a parkland feel. When you transition from 6 to the middle part of the property (and what a transition it is), the course takes on more of a heath feel (holes 6-8, 15-18), and 8-14 that play up against the water, and through the tidal area are exposed more to the wind giving a more seaside feel.

The 12th hole in the flat tidal area, therefore, while somewhat unremarkable, is nonetheless a spectacular example of the incredible variety that exists at The Creek, particularly when you think to yourself that it exists on the same circuit of 18 as the 1st hole, to choose one other.

[TEPaul]

It was the 12th hole Crenshaw liked so much. One probably has to get to know Ben better to understand why he'd say that about #12. Ben has an artist's eye and he probably wasn't talking about the demand of the hole. In this way Ben Crenshaw is certainly not a one dimensional golf architecture analyst like Matt Ward is who'd obviously deem this hole a pathetic weak little link on the course because you have such a short iron in or can practically drive this hole!  

I suspect Ben Crenshaw liked this hole because he simply liked the way in its entirety it just sits in its position so naturally and beautifully. Matt Ward, on the other hand, has said many times he doesn't care what the architecture looks like, that's not important---the hole just has to be Demaaaaanding! That's why he's Matt Ward and nothing like Ben Crenshaw!  

[TEPaul]

If every club had a George Holland---every club would be miles better for it! George Holland should be considered The Creek's new historian. He's also the most ebullient and optimistic and energetic man and he's recently uncovered reams of historic material about The Creek (perhaps even in the basement behind the proverbial boiler!). George is now on a zealous mission to compile and preserve this material and he's like a kid in a candy shop with it. It's infectious to be around him, and it's impressive what he's launching into.

And thank God. The history of The Creek is pretty special--as much for the people who created it as anything else.  William Quirin has also recently done a very fine history book for The Creek.

I tend to agree with Tom Doak about Macdonald's specific architectural input at The Creek. I think at that point (1923) Macdonald had pretty much given up on other than what he considered special projects. But Macdonald was a big deal in the founding of The Creek but it wasn't long before he ran afoul of some of the other big-wigs there.

Probably the primary reason was the problems they had on the so-called "water holes" that had to be fixed to the tune of over $100,000 in the late 1920s. I guess Macdonald was saying, "It wasn't Raynor's fault" but some of the other principles were probably saying, "Oh yeah, then whose fault was it?"

Anyway, eventually Macdonald resigned. We got involved because Flynn submitted a plan to fix those "water holes". Flynn's plan was not accepted and frankly, I say thank God or The Creek may have lost #10 and #11 (one of the most special Biarritzes in the world)! It appears the club may have just hired a hydrology engineer to fix those water holes, and so architecturally they remain today basically as they were originally designed.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()