Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Matt_Ward on September 26, 2008, 01:25:20 AM
-
Someone asked me the other day to list top quality designs that didn't require extensive collateral or your first born to play. The person asking wanted to have a listing of courses unique from a design perspective and at the same time sensitive to one's wallet.
Candidly, affordability needs to be a major element because so few people have the personal network or resources to play many of the exclusive private clubs or even the high-prived CCFAD types.
The benchmark would be less than $100 during peak season time -- and the cart fee would also be included within the calculations if it was mandated in order to play. I've IDed my top ten with a few others that just missed but were included as honorable mention types. No doubt there will be dissent and I look forward to hearing back from those who strongly disagree. I might even add a few more but the ones listed were courses I thoroughly enjoyed.
Again --
The stipulations are as follows ...
1). Bonafide Public Courses
2). Opened in the last ten years (1998-2008)
3). No more than $99 green fees charged during peak times and includes cart fee if mandated.
In no specific order ...
* The Trophy Club
Lebanon, IN
Green Fee Max = $65
Cart Included in Fee
Architect: Tim Liddy
Gets little ink nationally - some even think Purgatory in Noblesville should be thought of as the better layout. I don't. Purgatory is fine in many spots but it's overkill with bunkers to the max. Liddy did so well on a nearly flat piece of property. The challenges are there -- but never do you get the hard edge look that his mentor Pete Dye was famous for.
The par-4 13th is one of the best two-shot public holes in the USA and that's only one example of what's there. Why The Trophy Club doesn't flay higher baffles me.
* Mines Golf Course
Grand Rapids, MI
Green Fee Max = $36
Cart fee (optional) = $13 per person
Architect: Mike DeVries
What Mike DeVries did for private golf with The Kingsley Club -- also in MI -- he has followed-up with a winning effort for the public side with Mines. So much of MI public golf is repetitive ho-hum layouts -- some of them are bigger ticket costs but likely most of them could not hold a candle to what you get with Mines. Any trek to MI to sample public golf there must include a visit here.
* The Harvester
Rhodes, IA
Green Fee Max = $89
Cart Included w GF
Architect: Keith Foster
Never really understood why Harvester doesn't receive even more attention. I guess the location in Iowa has really flown below most golf radar screens. Very demanding course but at no time is it a "sink or swim" type ultimatum type course. Foster did really solid work with The Quarry in San Antonio and Haymaker in Steamboat Springs but each of those two courses does have some weak holes in the mix. I didn't really see many holes there that one could classify as being miscast.
* Wild Horse
Gothenburg, NE
Green Fee Max = $38
Cart (optional) = $13 per person
Architect: Dave Axland & Dan Proctor
The layout has been hailed by many people and rightly so. Not overly produced with so many extras thrown haphazardly into the mixture. Wild Horse is the quintessential example of how minimalism can work wonders at a very reasonable fee. Why there aren't more such courses astounds me. Maybe a few architects should trek to Gothenburg with their pads and pencils to take some long overdue notes on what golf really needs.
* Black Mesa
La Mesilla, NM
Green Fee Max = $67
Cart (optional) = $20
Architect: Baxter Spann
As many on GCA likely know, one of my personal favorite courses. Spann was blessed with a tremendous site and he skillfully routed the course so that at no time does mediocrity set in with a smattering of so-so holes. The short par-4's -- the 7th and 14th are simply delicious items to overcome. The blind tee shot at #10 is one of the more demanding shots you can play from any public golf hole in the USA. The scenery is breathtaking both on and off the course. Spann also crafted green sites that can be quite finicky but at no time do they border on miniature golf fiascos -- although some might see #16 as one such example. I don't.
Black Mesa requires solid driving of the ball -- powering the ball alone means nothing there. High desert golf that matches the powerful appeal of Santa Fe -- 20 miles to the southeast. Now another reason to visit there.
* The Rawls Course at Texas Tech
Lubbock, TX
Green Fee Max = $50
Cart (optional) = $14 per person
Architect: Tom Doak
Doak didn't bring inexpensive public golf to life in Texas -- I really liked what Ken Dye did years before that with Painted Dunes Desert GC in El Paso, but that layout was allowed to fall a few notches because of a lack of real care. A pity indeed.
The Rawls Course provided a much needed shot in the arm for The Lone Star State. Too much of the golf in Texas is solely focused on the private side and those tied to various gated communities. The Rawls Course clearly shows how Doak could take such a God foresaken piece of land and transform it into a real gem.
Being located in Lubbock can be a tough visit for many -- place the course in the Dallas, Houston or San Antonio areas and it would have garnered even more attention.
I liked plenty of holes there but the short par-3 at 158 yards is one peach of a hole. Plays generally into the wind and when the stick is cut tight to the left you'll need to know how to really hit a fine shot that stays under the breeze and is capable in coming to a quick stop in such a demanding hole position.
* GC at Red Rock
Rapid City, SD
Green Fee Max = $49
Cart (optional) = $15
Architect: Ron Farris
Plenty of talk about Dakota golf falls to Links of ND, Hawktree and Bully Pulpit, to name the three main contenders. Red Rock exceeds them all. Architect Ron Farris worked magic on a rolling terrain site and the combination of holes and shot requirements is a good bit better in terms of challenge and range than the other aforementioned courses. Red Rock gets little fanfare but anyone going to see Mount Rushmore -- it's about 10-15 minutes away from the course -- would be wise to stop by and play the layout.
* Four Mile Ranch
Canon City, CO
Green Fee Max = $59
Cart (optional) = $15 per person
Architect: Jim Engh
Played the course for the first time this year and was struck by how Engh retained his sense of boldness but this time without the clear repetition of inserting his hands so clearly into the overall picture. Four Mile Ranch is blessed with a site that has enough roll but no so much as to require man's hand to be so clearly seen. Engh has tempered the desire to shape things to such a heavy hand. Does he still do it? Sure. But's it not so over-the-top as some, myself included, have mentioned at various times witgh different projects. At Four Mile Ranch you get a layout that rewards shotmaking to a high degree. The green contours are so refreshing with the likes of the par-3 12th with its reverse Biaritz green, to name just one example. The par-4 5th with its ocean wave green is also well done. Engh learned from his past works and his improvements -- while not sacrificing his core creativitity - arein full bloom at Four Mile Ranch.
* Lederach
Harleysville, PA
Green Fee Max = $75
Cart (included w green fee)
Architect: Kelly Blake Moran
The major contribution of Lederach by Moran is how it changed the bleak and rather sad level of Pennsy public golf. To be fair, Moran added a good bit to the rather empty canvass of Keystone available golf when he brought forward Morgan Hill - located just 45-60 minutes away a few years before Lederach. Unfortunately, Morgan Hill is more a testament to the ability of an architect to overcome a very demanding and difficult site but the true capacity of Moran to deliver came with a site not as overall severe, but one that would require a clever routing and a plentitude of holes to keep you guessing. Lederach is a bold and clear departure from the dreadful public golf that inhabits a state where the private side if light years beyond. Pennsy public golf still has miles and miles to go but I credit Moran for bringing forward two layouts -- most notably Lederach -- with a blue print that will start the climb for public golf there.
* Rustic Canyon
Moorpark, CA
Green Fee Max = $60
Cart (optional) = $13 per person
Architect: Gil Hanse w Geoff S and Jim W
A winning oasis in a graveyard area filled with over-priced and over-shaped and over-hyped public course options. Plenty of details are faced when playing Rustic Canyon and the site was used to great success. The aspect at Rustic that fascinates me is the constant desire to switch the pacing of the course as you play each hole. Has much changed since Rustic Canyon entered the scene. Not much from my visits to SoCal land -- although Barona Creek is one real plus in the greater SD area. The big time difference between them -- Barona on a weekend / holiday time frame costs roughly three times more.
Honorable Mention ...
Lakota Canyon Ranch
New Castle, CO
Green Fee Max = $95
Cart (included w green fee)
Architect: Jim Engh
I've played the course a few times and still enjoy what it offers. Fortunately, Engh was able to get a site that was not as severe as his previous effort at Sanctuary but he crafted a design that was a bit more complex than what he did with Redlands Mesa.
I really love the closing stretch of holes at Lakota -- the par-4 16th is one of Engh's best par-4's that I have played - ditto his work with the closing hole -- a superb risk and reward type hole. The only issue is the overshaping at the par-3 17th -- which sports a predictable Engh heavy hand with the terrain to get a certain finished look. Lakota personifies fun to the max. The uphill par-5 4th is one of the best three-shot holes (for most humans) you will play anywhere. Lakota Canyon sent a clear statement that Engh could deliver the goods -- the issue would be if he could tone down the clear fingerprints he leaves on courses. Four Mile Ranch demonstrates that clear evolution in my mind.
Old Works
Anaconda, MT
Green Fee Max = $50
Cart (optional) = $14 per player
Architect: Jack Nicklaus
Have to give credit to Nicklaus and his team credit for taking on a project that usually would fall to some other person / group. ARCO made the right move from a PR perspective in getting a golf course built on a former superfund site, if memory serves. The layout by Nicklaus lacks a number of details one would see with other Jack layouts -- e.g., the bunkering is quite ordinary and a number of the greens are extremely subtle to say the least. Yet, despite the limitations of a few bells and whistles elements, Old Works is still challenging and it did something Jack had previously avoided with many of his other designs - doing a quality public project in which the green fees would be very modest. Old Works is not a home run from the design side of things but it still impresses me with what was done there and how Nicklaus went outside his usual box of design choices to provide something of quality for the masses.
Paa-Ko-Ridge
Sandia, NM
Green Fee Max = $79
Cart fee = $20 per person
Architect: Ken Dye
Spring Creek
Gord Le, VA
Green Fee Max = $75
Cart fee = $20 per person
Architect: Ed Carton
Rochelle Ranch
Rawlins, WY
Green Fee Max = $28
Cart fee (optional) = $25
Architect: Ken Kavanaugh
Devil's Thumb Golf Course
Delta, CO
Green Fee Max = $35
Cart (optional) = $12 for 18 holes
Architect: Rick Phelps
I might add a few more as well ...
-
Matt
It would seem you have a wonderful mix of styles listed. I have only seem one of the courses listed, Lederach, and I came away very impressed. Could you talk about a few features which give Lederach that extra something? I know for me, the bunkering was incredible. I don't think I have ever come across with so few bunkers that seemed like so many more. Each and every bunker must be accounted for and Kelly did this wonderfully at Lederach.
I would also be curious as to why The Road didn't make the list.
Ciao
-
Matt-
It's terrific to see someone praise Trophy Club so highly. It's so far out of the spotlight that it's easy to overlook in Indiana, let alone in the national scene. (If you love 13, then perhaps you have managed to divine the right line off the tee. In a dozen rounds there, I may have lucked into it once. What a visual trick Liddy accomplishes there. And what a green!) For my money the strength of the course is the par 5's. Or maybe the backside par 3's. Or... ?
In the same vein, I'd nominate Murphy Creek in Aurora, Colorado. I'm hopelessly biased on the matter, but the course requires so much thought that it's a delight. There is ONE tee shot (#16) that is tee it up and whale away. The rest -including the par 3's- offer choices and demand decisions.
Glad you mentioned Engh - he has been a stalwart in the affordable arena. I'd include Redlands Mesa, which still checks in under $100. I'm not as enamored of Fossil Trace, but some are - and it's very inexpensive realitive to the quality.
TPC at Deere Run is a stunning piece of property and a very good layout - especially the closing stretch. A pucker par 3, a reachable par 5, a thinking-man's 4 - great stuff. And as TPC courses go it's ridiculously cheap.
My experiences are limited - so many more may trump these. But for their areas these are all top notch affordable offerings.
-
Pinnacle Point
Mossel Bay, WC
$86 peak, includes cart plus hamburger, chips or candy bar and drink at the turn
Architect: Peter Matkovich
A cartball affair owing in part to the severity of the terrain but given the designer's apparent attempt to offer as many "great" holes as possible at the expense of routing integrity, Matkovich in his defense got the execution right and delivered on the promise / tradeoff. And it doesn't feel like a random collection of shots.
Perhaps the world's greatest collection of fun and thrilling shots, the question is whether the chance to hit those shots again is strong enough to entice a return, to outweigh the cartball / routing issues.
To wit:
1 shot akin to Dell hole, or at least Cruden 7th
1 Pebble 7th
1 Rye 4th (but w second shot to infinity green, with ocean behind)
2 Kapalua 18 tee shots
1 Cypress Point 16 shot (complete with bailout option)
and 2 Biarritz(!!)
And more downhill approach shots from wedge to long iron distance than I care to count.
Note: course proper does not qualify as "great," but so many will be blinded to the architecture - three plays minimum to see past the setting and individual shots - but this is beside the point, as the ocean, whales, dolphins, prehistoric caves (150,000 years old), and rich diversity of songbirds and plant life should for all but the dead of heart more than make up for the sacrifice of architectural integrity.
In sum, a Kauri type course that exceeds in the execution and may well be the archetype for its kinds, the course that at last proves the exception to the rules of architectural integrity. We'll see...
Mark
-
I'm not sure of peak season rates, but Vista Verde in AZ is a contender.
-
Somewhere, somehow Mike Young's Longshadow ought to be mentioned in this thread.
Keith.
-
Matt - I agree with all on your list that I have played (Harvester, Wild Horse, Rustic Canyon). I suggest you consider adding one or both of Brauer's Minnesota courses:
Quarry at Giant's Ridge - peak $89
Wilderness - Fortune Bay - Peak $90
I would defintely rank both courses ahead of Paa Ko Ridge and Old Works and probably ahead of Rustic Canyon (although the courses are so different it is like comparing apples and oranges).
I would also consider Big Fish in Hayward, Wisconsin. Again, I would put the course well ahead of Old Works and slightly ahead of Paa Ko Ridge. I'm not sure I would knock out any of the three I am familiar with on your list for it.
-
Steve:
I'd have included Vista Verde because I really liked what Ken Kavanaugh did there. In so many ways, it is a good bit more detailed and intricate in its design than Saguaro by C&C at We-Ko-Pa.
However ...
I believe the peak rates will be over $100 during the main season. For that reason I placed Rochelle Ranch in Wyoming as an alternative although the Rawlins layout doesn't have all the elements you see with the AZ-based course.
Keith Williams:
I've not played Long Shadow so I will keep that in mind -- I plan on visiting my alma mater at South Carolina later this Fall and will make a special side trip to see it. Others have said positive things about it.
Jason:
Thanks. I have not been to either of the two courses and you mentioned but others have opined on them and feel the way you do. Likely, either or even both of them would make such a listing because of the acclaim they have received.
Hard to say which courses would get bumped but I would say of the tn I listed there are a few that are a bit less than the other others. Paa-Ko Ridge and Old Works would likely be the first ones that come to mind although as I mentioned -- Ken Dye and Jack Nicklaus did solid work with both and they each have a unique story and contribution to quality design and affordbaility.
My leaving out of Minnesota golf is more about not having been to have played the two courses you mentioned. It's my goal to rectify that situation sometime in '09.
In regards to Big Fish -- I walked the property when it was being constructed during a separate visit I made to play Whistling Straits. I liked what I saw but the level for competition to make a final top ten would seem from what I saw only -- I always like to play to confirm my thoughts - to be just on the outside. At minimum it would be an honorable mention.
Scott S:
I've played TPC at Deere Run and while it's good it comes in behind -- by a decent margin -- to the likes of Harvester and Trophy Club.
In regards to Redands Mesa -- it's a fine course and deserves ink but Engh's evolution of as an architect of quality and affordable layouts really accelerated with the likes of Lakota Canyon Ranch and now with Four Mile Ranch.
Sean:
I really have enjoyed seeing the evolution of what Moran has done. Many in my neck of the woods were ga-ga over his work at Hawk Pointe in NJ -- a public course initially that has since become private. There are holes at HP in which the greens were rather unique -- a common element of what Moran is capable in producing -- but the tee-to-green dynamics of many of the holes were rather similar in terms of style and challenge. That has since changed with him getting future projects. His work at Morgan Hill demonstrated an uncanny ability - similar in way to Engh -- to handle a demanding site and still get good and fun golf out of it. Morgan Hill has a few flaws -- I'm not a fan of the dropshot par-3 on the inner half but all in all, it's a wild Indiana Jones adventure and for what the bar for public golf had been in Pennsy it is Moran who really has shaken the dull and uneventful glass of public golf and provided two designs there that hopefully will be impetus for others to follow.
Lederach is clearly miles and miles beyond the junkfood public golf levels I have previously encountered when coming to Pennsy.
You hit the nail squarely on the head with Moran's ability to get the most out of solitary bunkers which are uniquely positioned. The par-5 3rd is a great example - the split fairway must be negotiated -- either to the left or right side. The hole that precedes it is even grander because it uses far less -- you need to shape a tee shot from right-to-left but you can't go too far left or some serious issues will arise. The green contours are once again brought to life in such a fine fashion by Moran. When I look at the listing of other Pennsy public courses I have played the surfaces usually encountered are nothing more than big flat circular discs that have as much life as five-day old Pepsi.
Sean, keep in mind the overall routing at Lederach -- you are CONSTANTLY FACING different angles and wind directions. This isn't simply one hole following another in a straight line. If anything, I have been amazed at the complexity in how Moran has done this -- his work at Morgan Hill was about conquering the demands of Mother Nature -- here at Lederach the story goes one step beyond that because the overall routing and change of pace holes you face with each new situation is really enthralling for me.
The finishing holes on both sides are also well done. The 9th -- although quite short at just under 380 yards-- and the 18th at just under 330 yards are both well done although each comes from different angles from nearby teeing areas.
You also have a bit of controversy with the 11th hole. I know some people are not fans of it but I like the edginess to it and how it commands your attention and respect when you step up to the tee box. No doubt the 11th was really shaped to a final product and some may make the fair point that it's really overdone. I can see the point but I disagree only because you are left with a myriad of options that make playing the hole so much fun.
One last thing -- Moran did a fine job with adding a demanding par-4 -- not as the closer but with the 17th. Think how demanding that one bunker is that needs to be cleared when standing on the tee box. If the wind is in one's face the challenge is as demanding as any you can find when playing there. The final hole, on the other hand, is a short one but the green makes three-putting a reality unless you are quite close with the approach.
Moran designed Lederach to reflect so much of classic golf concepts. It isn't your basic Pennsy muni or lame CCFAD course that is more hype than real heroics. I'm looking forward to his next project in the public domain -- clearly Pennsy public golf will never be the same for me.
-
Matt, Since you've recently made it clear that a course with maintenance issues should not be rated I'd remove Rochelle Ranch from your lists.
Yes, the architecture there is good stuff, but without grass on the fairways, people might not appreciate the recommendation. ;)
-
I would second Murphy Creek as an honorable mention.
As well as Circling Raven in Worley, ID
-
I can't honestly say where I think it should rate, but Brauer's Colbert Hills gets a lot of attention around here, and it has a peak rate of $79.
And there are often deals to be had.
K
-
Not surprising—but definitely depressing—that not a single course in New England shows up on your list.
-
Wintonbury Hills? About $85 maximum.
-
Matt
Vista Verde peak rates will be $90. However, the big news is that they are offering a season pass for $2500 that buys 50 rounds including a cart! The pass is not limited to the owner so that guests can play for the same rate. A temporary clubhouse will be open in early December. The infrastructure is still under construction and the housing construction has not started.
-
I believe a strong contender for this list would be Pine Dunes in Frankston, TX. The course opened in 2001 and has a peak green fee with cart of $79. Can be played during the week for $49, and is just a great golf experience.
Since Matt mentioned Foster, 2 other of his Texas offerings would just miss qualification. Texas Star and The Bandit both opened I believe in '97 and both have peak rates of under $100. Both are very good values.
-
No love for Strantz? :-[
-
Steve:
I'd have included Vista Verde because I really liked what Ken Kavanaugh did there. In so many ways, it is a good bit more detailed and intricate in its design than Saguaro by C&C at We-Ko-Pa.
However ...
I believe the peak rates will be over $100 during the main season. For that reason I placed Rochelle Ranch in Wyoming as an alternative although the Rawlins layout doesn't have all the elements you see with the AZ-based course.
Keith Williams:
I've not played Long Shadow so I will keep that in mind -- I plan on visiting my alma mater at South Carolina later this Fall and will make a special side trip to see it. Others have said positive things about it.
Jason:
Thanks. I have not been to either of the two courses and you mentioned but others have opined on them and feel the way you do. Likely, either or even both of them would make such a listing because of the acclaim they have received.
Hard to say which courses would get bumped but I would say of the tn I listed there are a few that are a bit less than the other others. Paa-Ko Ridge and Old Works would likely be the first ones that come to mind although as I mentioned -- Ken Dye and Jack Nicklaus did solid work with both and they each have a unique story and contribution to quality design and affordbaility.
My leaving out of Minnesota golf is more about not having been to have played the two courses you mentioned. It's my goal to rectify that situation sometime in '09.
In regards to Big Fish -- I walked the property when it was being constructed during a separate visit I made to play Whistling Straits. I liked what I saw but the level for competition to make a final top ten would seem from what I saw only -- I always like to play to confirm my thoughts - to be just on the outside. At minimum it would be an honorable mention.
Scott S:
I've played TPC at Deere Run and while it's good it comes in behind -- by a decent margin -- to the likes of Harvester and Trophy Club.
In regards to Redands Mesa -- it's a fine course and deserves ink but Engh's evolution of as an architect of quality and affordable layouts really accelerated with the likes of Lakota Canyon Ranch and now with Four Mile Ranch.
Sean:
I really have enjoyed seeing the evolution of what Moran has done. Many in my neck of the woods were ga-ga over his work at Hawk Pointe in NJ -- a public course initially that has since become private. There are holes at HP in which the greens were rather unique -- a common element of what Moran is capable in producing -- but the tee-to-green dynamics of many of the holes were rather similar in terms of style and challenge. That has since changed with him getting future projects. His work at Morgan Hill demonstrated an uncanny ability - similar in way to Engh -- to handle a demanding site and still get good and fun golf out of it. Morgan Hill has a few flaws -- I'm not a fan of the dropshot par-3 on the inner half but all in all, it's a wild Indiana Jones adventure and for what the bar for public golf had been in Pennsy it is Moran who really has shaken the dull and uneventful glass of public golf and provided two designs there that hopefully will be impetus for others to follow.
Lederach is clearly miles and miles beyond the junkfood public golf levels I have previously encountered when coming to Pennsy.
You hit the nail squarely on the head with Moran's ability to get the most out of solitary bunkers which are uniquely positioned. The par-5 3rd is a great example - the split fairway must be negotiated -- either to the left or right side. The hole that precedes it is even grander because it uses far less -- you need to shape a tee shot from right-to-left but you can't go too far left or some serious issues will arise. The green contours are once again brought to life in such a fine fashion by Moran. When I look at the listing of other Pennsy public courses I have played the surfaces usually encountered are nothing more than big flat circular discs that have as much life as five-day old Pepsi.
Sean, keep in mind the overall routing at Lederach -- you are CONSTANTLY FACING different angles and wind directions. This isn't simply one hole following another in a straight line. If anything, I have been amazed at the complexity in how Moran has done this -- his work at Morgan Hill was about conquering the demands of Mother Nature -- here at Lederach the story goes one step beyond that because the overall routing and change of pace holes you face with each new situation is really enthralling for me.
The finishing holes on both sides are also well done. The 9th -- although quite short at just under 380 yards-- and the 18th at just under 330 yards are both well done although each comes from different angles from nearby teeing areas.
You also have a bit of controversy with the 11th hole. I know some people are not fans of it but I like the edginess to it and how it commands your attention and respect when you step up to the tee box. No doubt the 11th was really shaped to a final product and some may make the fair point that it's really overdone. I can see the point but I disagree only because you are left with a myriad of options that make playing the hole so much fun.
One last thing -- Moran did a fine job with adding a demanding par-4 -- not as the closer but with the 17th. Think how demanding that one bunker is that needs to be cleared when standing on the tee box. If the wind is in one's face the challenge is as demanding as any you can find when playing there. The final hole, on the other hand, is a short one but the green makes three-putting a reality unless you are quite close with the approach.
Moran designed Lederach to reflect so much of classic golf concepts. It isn't your basic Pennsy muni or lame CCFAD course that is more hype than real heroics. I'm looking forward to his next project in the public domain -- clearly Pennsy public golf will never be the same for me.
Thanks for the reply Matt. I have no idea how Lederach fits into the big scheme of sub $100 public golf, but I like it a awful lot. I especially like the variety of the front 9. The back is probably just as varied, though I think it is a bit more sketchy. I am not keen on 10-12 & 16, though I think #12 is a tee issue - its better to move up tee and make the hole much shorter. I don't like the confided aspect of the drive on 10 nor the tree by the green. #11 is just far too narrow and the bailout leaves an impossible approach to that green. #16 is wierd in that I believe there should be a collar leading to the front of the green. There is no way to bounce one in when the pin is up front. I think the green runs away from the tee so a kick should be an option. Having said that, 13, 14, 15, 17 & 18 are very good.
I see that The Road charges over $100. Its funny, I don't recall ever paying that much.
One course that folks seem to like a load and hasn't yet been mentioned is Angels Landing. Where does this course place?
Ciao
-
Greg:
What public course has had more impact with changing the landscape of the Lone Star State in regards to stand alone public courses -- The Rawls Course or Pine Dunes ? Be curious to your comments. Or is my assumption on the Doak layout more about the limitations of what I have personally played that has happened there in the last ten years?
AHughes:
In regards to Strantz you can't add Tobacco Road because it does exceed $100 in peak times during the season. The only other solid alternatives I would think are Royal New Kent and the Stonehouse layouts -- both in VA. Are there others worth considering?
Steve:
I stand corrected -- I'd add Vista Verde to my top tier listings -- make that a total of eleven courses. Rochelle Ranch is a fine layout but what Kavanaugh did there in the desert is exceptional and the rate offered, given the plethora of overpriced alternatives, is a big time bargain to boot.
Dan:
My listing is not some sort of politcal document -- I don't just give away spots because of geographical necessity or political correctness. Keep in mind, since I'm from the northeast I've traveled to the area in question many times over and while there are a few candidates for consideration -- Wintonbury is one of them but in order for a course to make the top ten something else has to fall off.
The candidates from Minnesota that Jason mentioned previously are well known and have a big time following. New England golf is quite seasonal in nature and the public side has been slow to develop because of a short season and the proliferation of top tier private clubs.
kmoum:
Good point on Colbert Hills but have to ask anyone who has played the layout in Manhattan how it stacks up against the two Jeff has done in Minnesota?
Kalen:
Circling Raven is a fine choice but the work John Harbottle did at Palouse Ridge is even better and even more affordable. If you have not played it you should. I'd have to really think twice about an honorable mention for the ID layout.
Adam:
Beg to differ with you - I was just there on my recent visit to the west -- roughly two weeks ago and the place had made some real strides forward on the conditioning front. Adam, let me straighten out any misconceptions you have in my placement of conditioning as an element of evaluation -- it is a secondary consideration -- yes, it does play a role but more of a support function.
-
I'll second the vote for Longshadow to be included.
-
Matt,
I think your inclusion of Trophy Club is warranted. There are about 5 courses in the state that could fall into that group that I think are the equal to TC. I find it funny that you mention the number of bunkers at Purgatory. Do you know that there are only 4 more bunkers at Purgatory than at Trophy Club? ;D Liddy just puts a lot of his on the periphery of the hole instead of using them directly in the strategic path of play like Kern did at Purgatory. But I agree holes like 13 and 16 at PGC do have too many bunkers for my taste. Also, for Indiana, TC is not flat. Maybe in other locales, but it is blessed with that ridge in the middle of the property that Liddy ran several holes off of (2, 3, 4 and 11 and 10 to a degree). Purgatory was not blessed with even that much move land movement.
I agree with you on 13, but I think 11 might be among the top 5 par fives I have ever seen, public or not. As for why it doesn't get any national love that is easy... It's freaking Indiana. Nobody with any cache ever comes here to play golf. If they do, their focus is on getting to Crooked Stick or Victoria or schmoozing with Tony George at the Brickyard or only playing Pete Dye courses. Going to Lebanon, Cicero or Jasper is not on anyone's radar...
-
I'd look into Keith Foster's Dark Horse in Auburn, CA as well.
VERY good layout, and quite the bargain with the economy the way it is right now.
Peak rates are $79.....including cart.
-
Chris:
I hear what you say -- unfortunately, there are way too many people who don't know how GOOD Indiana public golf is on so many levels. For a state with flat land for the most part the quality designs really do shine. Indiana would kick the butt out of any combo of top tier NJ public layouts -- ditto for sure NY and Pennsy COMBINED.
For all the fanfare that MI public golf gets -- the sheer array of top tier public layouts in the Hoosier State would give them a good run for their money. Ditto the Buckeye State.
The issue I have w Purgatory is that the inane looooooooooooooong par-5 13th (?) is just stupid. My God -- planes landing at Indy that overshoot could use the area for a back-up runway. It's overkill for the sake of overkill. Bring the hole down to a 600 yard figure and it works much better.
You are so right on the par-5 11th -- solid hole. I just see the 13th at Trophy as a supreme hole that never lets you easily. I stand corrected on the terrain elements you mentioned for Trophy but in real terms it's still more flat than elevated in just about a number of spots.
Indiana is a fine place for people to visit and play golf. I look forward to playing The Trophy Club again because Liddy gets little attention for such a solid and very affordable layout.
-
A few I have played this year;
Pine Meadow
Mundelein, IL
Green Fee Max = $85
Architect: Flynn / Joe Lee
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN
Green Fee Max = $60
Architect: Pete Dye
Brown Deer Park
Milwaukee, WI
Green Fee Max = $90
Architect: Packard / Andy North redesign?
-
Pat:
Keep in mind the thread started with the premise of public courses OPENING between 1998-2008.
Both Pine Meadow and Brown Deer Park opened well before then.
-
Those are all great courses, but very few of them are "really" $100 because of their location. The difference between paying $100 and $200 for a round is not much if it is already a "destination" place, and so few of those are in metropolitan areas.
For me, a great $100 or less course is one that you can pick up and play on a Saturday after seeing the kids. And so, to some degree, it's pretty location specific. I live in the DC area, and for me the best $100 or less public courses built in the last 10 or so years should include metropolitan choices like Laurel Hill in Lorton, VA.
Also, regardless of location, Mattaponi Springs deserves an honorable mention, at least.
(Note: Royal New Kent and Greystone were built in 1997, but otherwise deserves a mention).
-
Matt,
The 13th plays around the 600 yard mark from all the tees, except the insane marketing driven Purgatory tee. I play from the blues or the whites when I am out there, so that never comes into my mind to step back on that tee. But I get what you are saying. From 150 in though the hole is really pretty nice with a great green. It is just the first 450 that is pretty bland.
-
Dan:
My listing is not some sort of politcal document -- I don't just give away spots because of geographical necessity or political correctness. Keep in mind, since I'm from the northeast I've traveled to the area in question many times over and while there are a few candidates for consideration -- Wintonbury is one of them but in order for a course to make the top ten something else has to fall off.
The candidates from Minnesota that Jason mentioned previously are well known and have a big time following. New England golf is quite seasonal in nature and the public side has been slow to develop because of a short season and the proliferation of top tier private clubs.
Hey Matt,
I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying it is depressing. I wouldn't put any New England courses in a listing of top 10 publics for under $100 either. Wintonbury, while fun to play, doesn't come close to the courses you have listed. Public golf in the Northeast has come a long way over the last 10 years, but the best courses are brutally expensive and they pale in comparison to the quality of the privates.
-
Opps!
-
Matt,
I'm beginning to think your views on public golf in Pennsylvania are incredibly off base.
Just which courses here have you played?
-
Hey Matt,
I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying it is depressing. I wouldn't put any New England courses in a listing of top 10 publics for under $100 either. Wintonbury, while fun to play, doesn't come close to the courses you have listed. Public golf in the Northeast has come a long way over the last 10 years, but the best courses are brutally expensive and they pale in comparison to the quality of the privates.
Do you think that a list like this needs a geographic price compensation scale?
After all, a $100 course here in Kansas is on the exteme high end of green fees. But then you even before the bubble burst, you could shop for houses under $125,000 where I live and actually find something people would be willing to live in.
I'm sure that's not the case in the NE, or Calif.
By the way, did we some how forget Cottonwood Hills in Hutchinson in this list?
Ken
-
I can think of one that ought to get a nod, but America's guest hasn't been my guest yet ;)
-
Chris:
I'd like to see Purgatory get more ink but the ownership there should completely rethink the nature of what the 13th hole is about. Feasting the attributes of a hole that stretches like a runway at O'Hair isn't really design of the first order.
I still do like the course because there are a number of fun holes to play. The real shock for most people is after playing the first hole they think they are set to play some lackluster layout. When they arrive at the 2nd tee the ball game changes BIG TIME.
Indiana has a few more layouts of note as you are certainly aware. The sad reality is that many people here on GCA who set their golf travel plans likely go to the same places over and over again. Indiana is looked upon as just a place between X and Y. The reality is that the foundation of public golf there is more solid from a design standpoint than many might even realize.
Dan:
The sad part is that a few New England courses are starting to make a conscious effort to improve themselves. I returned just a few weeks ago from the newly renovated Mount Washington Resort course by Donald Ross. Brian Silva did a solid job there but the price point will likely not be at the $-100 figure I mentioned.
I like plenty of courses on the Cape but frankly they are low level designs for the most part -- save for a mere handful -- but even those can't really compete at the national level and what is coming from the other parts of the country.
New England is impacted greatly by a short season and little desire by golf conscious developers to create a product that can handle the serious down time when winter finally envelopes the region.
The private side in New England follows the same pattern seen in Pennsy and The Empire State. Those with the serious dough were not really interested in the masses playing -- they simply made sure they could feast on the quality private layouts produced by the top tier architects of their time.
kmoum:
Why the need for some sort of compensation scale? Don't know if you realize this but Rustic Canyon is in the LA area -- one of the more expensive public places to play golf in the USA.
I don't know what you know or don't know about New England but the public golf side of the equation there is quite thin and from those that are quality the price point is a bit overboard for what you get back.
If you checked the price points of the courses I listed they are all quite affordable even when held against the local market place they reside.
Since you mentioned Cottonwoods -- can you tell me if you see that layout being beyond Colbert Hills in terms of what it provides from an architectural side of things?
Justin:
Rustic Canyon is in the LA area.
Four Mile Ranch is just outside Colorado Springs.
It's incredibly demanding for an architect to deliver a quality layout when faced with limited budgets and for a course of high caliber to be on top of a major metro area would be even more demanding since the initial price point to play would have to be much higher to get back what's been spent. Check out the cost of the new Pound Ridge layout in Westchester County, NY that Pete Dye designed with his son.
Kyle:
My understanding of Pennsy public golf is extremely thorough and if a course has even received one iota / fraction of a mention I've been there to play it. I stand by what I said -- Pennsy public golf for years -- until the arrival of a few layouts in recent times -- was a disaster. You had to play the private side because that's where anything resembling quality was at.
Please knock yourself out and list for me any public course that you think can remotely sniff the tails of the top ten I mentioned. With all due respect, I'll be waiting a long time for that answer.
Moran deserves plenty of credit for taking on the most vexing of challenges with the construction of Morgan Hill. The final routing and shot diversity encountered there is miles beyond the bland farm-land in and back layouts that have made up the Pennsy portfolio of lame public courses.
Moran's subsequent follow-up work with Lederah proved to me he has evolved a good bit since the opening salvo of success with the likes of Hawk Pointe in Washington Township, NJ. Lederach is edgy and it encompasses so many of the unique classic golf tenets with contoured greens that mandate stragtegic thinking immediately at any tee box.
Kyle, if you think of a Pennsy public course beyond the ones I've mentioned that are also less thsan $100 to play and you think they can compete against the likes of Morgan Hill and Lederach please feel free to throw the names forward. I'll be happy to correct myself -- provided you do likewise when you finally grasp my original point that Pennsy public golf is so below the level of what you see from the private side of things.
-
I know you've never played Jeffersonville, the Donald Ross/McGovern muni in Norristown.
Paxon Hollow is, yard for yard, the most fun I've ever had on a golf course and it essentially the public version of Merion West.
Lederach and Morgan Hill, of course.
Now that it's public, Reading Country Club deserves mention in the list of public golf courses in PA worth playing.
My issue is not with your list or your selections, nor should you consider my additions for your list (that wasn't my point anyway), but that the general view of public golf in Pennsylvania may be more stereotype than absolute substance. I once shared your view.
I don't anymore.
-
I think Glen Mills (Bobby Weed) could easily be considered in the list.
-
Just beat me to it. Glen Mills is a better choice for the list than Lederach. It opened in 2000, and the highest fee is $95 on weekend mornings, cart included.
-
Kyle:
Please -- c'mon, let's get serious OK.
My thinking on the subject of Penny public golf is not stereotyped -- it's based on my playing such a sheer array of courses stretching frm west to east to north to south in the Keystone State for well over 40 years.
You name how many courses -- a total of three -- and then shout from the roof tops I'm so misplaced on my initial thoughts.
Yes, I've played Reading County Club and it's a decent course but to somehow think it elevates itself to something of national consideration is way beyond a big time stretch. Even on a state level Reading is fairly ordinary even though it's now exclusively public.
Paxon Hollow is a quaint and sporty course to play. But, to somehow think it rises to the level of being in the same league with Morgan Hill and Lderach is beyond a reach on your part. I played it a few years back and it's OK for what it provides but to somehow think it is noteworthy on a state wide level is again a stretch. I don't doubt you and maybe others really like it. That's great -- but let's place that enthusiasm in some sort of context shall we?
I've not played Jeffersonville and will try to play it before the year concludes. However, even if the course is as good as you believe the issue is one of overall depth throughout the state. Be curious to know why Jeffersonville has not been rated among the top public courses in the state by Golfweek -- to name just one definitive source that doesn't equate difficulty or length as a prime design criteria.
That is the point you're missing. Pennsy golf has been and continues to be one of the USA"s best states for PRIVATE GOLF. Moran, more than any other architect I have seen, has tried to include designs for the public realm that are not formulaic and at the same time provide the kind of missing challenge and fun that for years has been only seen with the private side of the aisle. Morgan Hill and Lederach as a combo are certainly taking Pennsy public golf to a whole different level of respect and notice.
Kyle, my "substance" has come from over 40 years in playing golf in the Keystone State -- from the dreadful layouts that mostly occupy the Poconos to those which are mainly farmlands converted into non-descript public layouts. Progress has been extremely slow in coming and as I said from the get-go those with the money and connections made sure they had private golf to rival any courses anywhere. You can see that with the likes of Merion / East, Oakmont, Lancaster, Fox Chapel, etc, etc, etc.
The conclusions I reached are there for those willing to admit the past and see what the present is about now. There has been improvements but that improvement has only started within the time frame I mentioned in this thread's title.
We will likely agree to disagree -- so be it.
Bob / Joe:
If you believe Glen Mills is better from a strictly architectural standpoint then so be it. Lederach by Moran has it beat in so many ways IMHO.
Heck, I thought either of you would have mentioned Wyncote before Glen Mills.
-
Matt,
40 years? Just how old are you?!
Anyway, I think my point may be better suited to a separate thread. You're adding criteria that are a part of this thread that were not meant to be included in my own point.
-
I was about to mention Darkhorse and Apache Stronghold as two that would have made it, but on both accounts ... conditions as I recall were pretty rough. Interesting layouts on both with more challenging greens at Darkhorse, but in such sad shape when I visited that I just won't be returning.
I'd look into Keith Foster's Dark Horse in Auburn, CA as well.
VERY good layout, and quite the bargain with the economy the way it is right now.
Peak rates are $79.....including cart.
-
Kyle:
I'm 51 years old and my dad used to take me to different places when I first started the game when I was 10 years old -- among those places were the Poconos to name just one location outside of Jersey.
Kyle, your own point was that somehow my understanding of Pennsy public golf is flawed or out of step with what you see. I responded to that in good faith and challenged you to come up with a counterpoint -- you did -- you based your viewpoint on three (3) particular courses. I opined that I didn't see much with Reading CC and with Paxon Hollow. I also mentioned that Jeffersonville was a layout I had not played but that I used Golfweek's state public ratings to show the course was not even listed. I don't doubt you may like all three of the courses you mentioned but I further stated that when you look much, much deeper at what the state has produced from the public side of the aisle - the awakening to really solid public golf options is now only starting to bloom and I frankly salute Moran for being a major catalyst in that ascension.
-
Bob / Joe:
If you believe Glen Mills is better from a strictly architectural standpoint then so be it. Lederach by Moran has it beat in so many ways IMHO.
Heck, I thought either of you would have mentioned Wyncote before Glen Mills.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm not a fan of Lederach. I didn't mention Wyncote because it didn't meet your criterion of being built after 1998.
-
Bob:
You really like Glen Mills -- can you tell me what aspects make it more unique in your mind to Lederach? Also, how many rounds have you played at each?
Have you played any of the other candidates I listed?
Thanks ...
-
Matt,
No, I haven't had the opportunity to play the others on your list.
I never said that I like GM, I just prefer it to Lederach. When it first opened, I played Glen Mills 3 or 4 times a year, but I haven't been back in a few years. I played Lederach 3 times in the last 2 months and was there for the course rating.
I do think that the course has much potential and would be interested to know, after seeing how it plays after 2 years, if Kelly intends to make some modifications to the course.
-
Bob:
Specifically, what are "some modifications" in your mind ?
-
Matt and Bob,
Re: Lederach changes
The former 9th hole is now the 18th. The green was expanded by about one third to create more pin positions. I think it was done without KBM's consent. It is still a very difficult green and created a lot of negative comments. The reason for the change in the original routing was to get the golfers closer to the clubhouse for F&B.
I don't know if any other changes are planned by Casper Golf or if KBM will be consulted.
-
Matt,
From my perspective (my skill level and as a course rater) I have 4 issues that I would like to see addressed:
first green is too severe for a 450 yard hole
11th hole: the landing area
12th hole: at 654 yards, straight uphill and into the prevailing wind, the hole is hard enough. Does it really need the 50 yard wide waste area that crosses the fairway at 425 yards? If you have to layup, you're left with a blind third shot of 235 yards.
15th hole: the hole is a difficult 470 yard par 4. Does it need a 10 foot deep bunker that extends the entire width of the green?
Just my opinion.
Bob
-
Bob:
I hear what you say -- but consider this -- the folks playing the back tees should handle the added demands that come from playing from such markers.
In the specific instances you mentioned -- the 1st hole is demanding. I don't doubt that. But if someone is going to the tips and can't really hit the ball beyond 250 yards then frankly they are wasting their time because they don't have enough game to handle that type of challenge. It's not the fault of the architect -- it's the fault of the player.
It would be no less the same that a person who can only handle bunny slopes would then make the big time leap to the double diamond hills and then after nearly killing themselves make the statement that the double diamond hills are completely ouf of place.
In regards to the 11th hole -- you simply stated "landing area." I don't know what you mean by that. I think there are several options for the player to decide upon when standing on the tee. If a player takes the conservative route to the far left they still have plenty of room to land the shot and get to the green in regulation. Those who opt for the more aggressive line of play get a much smaller landing area. Again, I would need to know more about your stated comments.
Let me address the 12th hole -- it's played from an extremely elevated tee to start with. The tee boxes at 654 yards are only for the highly skilled player. Not the wannabee players who don't bring game to the table. You mention the prevailing wind -- my answer is so what. There are other long holes I have played where wind can be in the players face from time to time. The cross bunker you mentioned is entirely fair game. If a player of sufficient skill level can't cross the 425 yard cross bunker then a simple suggestion is in order -- play the next tee boxes further up. No doubt those who can't fly the bunker in question will face a very demanding third. Nothing wrong with that in my mind. If you did the same thing at Baltusrol Lower's 17th hole -- 650 yards now -- the same thing would happen (minus the blind shot at Lederach).
If memory serves the 15th hole has a bunker that is not immediately next to the green. It does need to be carried but I'll say this again -- only players of sufficient skill level should be playing the hole at 469 yards. There are other tees at 445 and 396 yards respectively.
Bob, just my counter-opinion. I think you would admit that Lederach is not in the same form or substance of other Pennsy public courses. No doubt a number of people who have overdosed on the formulaic / junkfood layouts that dominate the landscape may see Lederach as being beyond what golf should be about. It would be akin to someone only eating McDonald's all their life and then finally placing some real beef in their mouth.
Steve:
Sad to hear about the changes -- I liked where the former 9th was located. The finishing hole was also good. As an FYI -- I even suggested that the original holes be played in a somewhat different fashion. My idea would be to play from the 9th tee and head to the 18th green and do the same in reverse with you starting on the 18th tee and finishing on the 9th green. Sort of like an TOC situation in Pennsy.
The 9th if it was altered to some significant way is clearly treading on what Moran did so well there. Quick question -- do you see the course being radically altered from what Moran originally intended?
-
Things got sidetrackled with the discussion of a few Pennsy public layouts but I can only hope there will be more sharing of info regarding affordable courses that sport unique and fun designs.
Too much of GCA is spent talking about the courses few will actually ever play. They are no doubt grand experiences but are akin to viewing a Playboy centerfold -- you can look but you'll never touch.
So much of golf design today is happening through the talented works of a number of different architects who have done some incredible things with shoestring budgets and sites that are often less than ideal.
I can only hope more info on this front will take place.
-
kmoum:
Why the need for some sort of compensation scale? Don't know if you realize this but Rustic Canyon is in the LA area -- one of the more expensive public places to play golf in the USA.
I don't know what you know or don't know about New England but the public golf side of the equation there is quite thin and from those that are quality the price point is a bit overboard for what you get back.
If you checked the price points of the courses I listed they are all quite affordable even when held against the local market place they reside.
Fair enough. As you suggest, except for Fla. and Ariz., I know less than squat about golf prices outside the middle of the country. That question was purely for my education.
Since you mentioned Cottonwoods -- can you tell me if you see that layout being beyond Colbert Hills in terms of what it provides from an architectural side of things?
Well, despite being only about 50 miles away, I have only played Colbert once. And at the time I hadn't started really paying much attention to architecture. And I hadn't seen much in the way of quality architecture either. That's changed a lot in the last 5 or 6 years.
I did play Cottonwood twice last fall, and had the fortune to see it in both south and north winds. From that and my memory of Colbert, I have a feeling that most of the GCA buffs would rank Cottonwood slightly higher.
I'm planninig to plan Colbert again in a couple of weeks, so I'll have a followup.
Ken
-
Does the 450 tee exist for the first hole at Lederach yet?
-
Ken:
Thanks -- I look forward to your follow-up comments on Colbert Hills.
As an FYI -- the price points will vary from one section to another but clearly there are superior courses that are not triple digit fees -- some of them are even closer to $50 than $100.
-
Jeffersonville GC has to be the absolute best value-proposition in Pennsylvania.
I think we should also add Berkleigh GC (formerly private, as well) into the discussion/mix of the best public under $100 courses in PA.
-
Does the 450 tee exist for the first hole at Lederach yet?
Unless it has been added in the last month or so, then no.
I really wonder if it is ever going to be added.
-
Gents:
For those from Pennsy try to keep in mind a few of the layouts that are public NOW -- started with the genesis as a private club. That means my poiint about specifically creating public courses from the get-go was not really happening to any large degree within the Keystone State - until most recent times. The quality ones I mentioned -- Lederach and Morgan Hill clearly have made a statement, at least in my mind, that is beyond the cookie cutter public courses that dominate the landscape.
Frankly, if just about any state took some of their top private courses and then slapped a public label on them it would not change the fact that their beginnings were rooted in a private emphasis.
That doesn't mean to say that in today's golf there are no quality public courses to play but the level of such golf -- given a national perspective -- is still very low given the range of private courses within the state and the role golf has played in the state's overall positioning. Things are changing for the Keystone State but that movement has been very slow to come and is only now starting to see a crack of light filtering into a room that has been for too long quite dark.
-
Matt,
I think that cuts both ways...Just as many quality courses that were originally public have now gone private...witness Great Bear and Hartefeld National as two examples that come to mind.
On the other hand, Inninscrone went public from original private plans, as did whatever they're calling Hurdzan/Fry's course in Hershey these days.
Keep dissing PA courses and I'm going to buy you a lifetime membership to Country Club of the Poconos at Big Ridge. ;)
-
KBM,
I said "I think..." I Don't think that qualifies as a fact.Perhaps I should have said something like "I'm not sure,,," If I remember correctly, you told me that this project was not needed in your opinion but Casper wanted it done or something like that.
-
Kelly:
What's the issue preventing getting the back tee completed ?
If the others could get done - I don't see why it's taken so long.
In regard to the switch of the 9th and 18th holes -- do you see the changing
in their overall positioning to be a net positive for what you originally envisioned or
was it done solely for the purposes in selling more food and drinks because of its
close proximity to the clubhouse?
Mike:
The issue doesn't really cut both ways -- the ones designed to be private (e.g. Reading, Jeffersonville, etc, etc) were created by a number of first rate designers, e.g, Donald Ross, etc, etc. They are created to handle specific shot situations that far beyond their public counterparts of that time -- and frankly until very recently.
On the public side -- the ones you listed recently were meant for public with the possibility of changing their status later on down the pike. Mike, when you mention Hartefeld National and Great Bear -- do you really think they are equal to the likes of Lederach and Morgan Hill? I don't and I have a good amount of respect for Great Bear but I don't see either of those two courses competing with what Moran did with the aforementioned two courses.
You also mentioned Inniscrone -- again -- it's a layout designed by Hanse for private play. It was not conceived as a public course.
When most architects create courses for private play -- the thought process and end result is a good bit different than if it's one for 100% public play. The reverse doesn't have the same impact as if a course goes from private to public.
By the way Mike -- I will tread lightly on the subject -- the thought of having a lifetime membership at your favorite place in the Poconos might make me return to bowling ! ;D
-
What's interesting for me is seeing how the western half of the USA (minus large areas of California near a number of the metro areas - with the Rustic Canyon exception duly noted) seems to be the place where affordable and quite solid designs are happening with much more frequency - no doubt there are some unique layouts in the southeast too as well as the Texas / OK / KS areas. The expense of building a public course in the Northeast is well documented and the return for such a narrow window for a playing season does impact the botton line -- so does, until very recently, the cost of the land itself and all the accompanying permits / paperwork tied to it.
What I have seen in the Northeast especially is top tier public layouts, while a number of them are grandioise for all the amenities they often offer -- the sheer complexity and unique elements of quality golf design is often dumbed down or fairly low level stuff.
With the last remaining open spaces out west I think it will be most interesting how the shakeout of the economy impacts the already tortoise like growth golf has experienced over the last number of years.
As I said before -- I can only hope more time and discussion is spent on affordable and quality designs because few people really do have the access to get on the other courses often cited on GCA.
-
What's interesting for me is seeing how the western half of the USA (minus large areas of California near a number of the metro areas - with the Rustic Canyon exception duly noted) seems to be the place where affordable and quite solid designs are happening with much more frequency - no doubt there are some unique layouts in the southeast too as well as the Texas / OK / KS areas. The expense of building a public course in the Northeast is well documented and the return for such a narrow window for a playing season does impact the botton line -- so does, until very recently, the cost of the land itself and all the accompanying permits / paperwork tied to it.
What I have seen in the Northeast especially is top tier public layouts, while a number of them are grandioise for all the amenities they often offer -- the sheer complexity and unique elements of quality golf design is often dumbed down or fairly low level stuff.
With the last remaining open spaces out west I think it will be most interesting how the shakeout of the economy impacts the already tortoise like growth golf has experienced over the last number of years.
As I said before -- I can only hope more time and discussion is spent on affordable and quality designs because few people really do have the access to get on the other courses often cited on GCA.
Matt
If its affordable and accessible you are looking for, I would humbly suggest that $100 green fee doesn't match that premise. Seems to me we should be looking at $50 tops. It isn't too often I would be happy to fork out $100 for a public course. Sure, more than the architecture is being evaluated, but then architecture isn't the only factor in a day of enjoyable golf.
Ciao
Ciao
-
Sean:
C'mon -- that's a bit unrealistic given the nature of how costs have escalated in the last 15-20 years.
If you took the time to notice -- most of the layouts I mentioned fell somewhere between $50-$75 to play. I mentioned the high benchmark of $100 but that's nothing more than a ceiling figure.
To find courses at or under $50 would likely be a self-defeating exercise. In my travels only a very, very few could remotely be inserted -- I did mention Devil's Thumb in Delta, CO as one example. But, you need to keep in mind, that the benchmark you are suggesting is simply not realistic.
I am placing an EQUAL EMPHASIS - on both price and quality architecture that rises to the level of national consideration.
For those enamored with just price the net result will likely be 99% of the time either disappointed or facing at best so-so layouts. Again, that may be satisfactory for those folks who are quite concerned with forking over bucks to play.
-
Sean:
C'mon -- that's a bit unrealistic given the nature of how costs have escalated in the last 15-20 years.
If you took the time to notice -- most of the layouts I mentioned fell somewhere between $50-$75 to play. I mentioned the high benchmark of $100 but that's nothing more than a ceiling figure.
To find courses at or under $50 would likely be a self-defeating exercise. In my travels only a very, very few could remotely be inserted -- I did mention Devil's Thumb in Delta, CO as one example. But, you need to keep in mind, that the benchmark you are suggesting is simply not realistic.
I am placing an EQUAL EMPHASIS - on both price and quality architecture that rises to the level of national consideration.
For those enamored with just price the net result will likely be 99% of the time either disappointed or facing at best so-so layouts. Again, that may be satisfactory for those folks who are quite concerned with forking over bucks to play.
Matt
Perhaps that is the problem. You are trying to find national prominent courses. Its near impossible to find a course of national merit that is affordable. The two ideas really don't go hand in hand, because as a hard core golfer I wouldn't consider $100 affordable - meaning a price I would pay 52 weeks a year.
Ciao
-
Sean:
Beg to differ partner.
There are national prominent courses -- I listed no less than a number of them and others opined about a few others as well. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive but do require a bit of field work.
Too many people here on GCA are simply interested in the private courses of elite status. Nothing wrong with that but I like to go out into the hinterlands and see is out there. Again, you have people on this site who think quality golf design can only be had by those with certain first and last names. That's not the case either as you likely may know.
You keep on harping on $100 -- look at the LIST I provided and bother to see what the actual price points are. One other thing -- if one were to be a regular at any number of the places mentioned there are various discount plans available that would further reduce the cost to play 18 holes on a steady basis as hard core golfer.
-
Sean,
I echo Matt on this. On the Trophy Club, I know that it has several options to get rates below $50 dollars, especially during the week. They have a summer twilight rate after 3pm (I believe that is the cutoff time) that you get a cart and round of golf for $25. Not bad for what many consider the best public in the state.
There are loads of other course like that in Indiana. He just used the $100 as a benchmark. Aside from the resort type courses like French Lick, Belterra or Brickyard, the top public courses in the state can be played for $50 or less in many instances.
-
Matt, this is a good thread. I'd like to see you do a list of Top Public Golf Whenever Opened Under $50. To me, that says more about the way a club has run its business -- perhaps to be emulated by others.
-
Here are GD's Best New Affordable since 2002:
2002 (appeared in the Jan., 2003 issue)
Best New Affordable Public Courses
1. Rustic Canyon G. Cse., Moorpark, Calif., Gil Hanse, Jim Wagner and Geoff Shackelford
2. Devil's Thumb G.C., Delta, Colo., Rick Phelps
3. Hunting Hawk G.C., Glen Allen, Va., Bill Love
4. Wasioto Winds G. Cse. Pineville, Ky., Michael Hurdzan and Dana Fry
5. The G.C. at Fleming Island, Orange Park, Fla., Bobby Weed
6. Grande G.C., Jackson, Mich., Ray Hearn
7. Iron Horse G.C., Ashland, Neb., Gene Bates
8. The Summit G.C., Cannon Falls, Minn., William Whitworth, Marty Benson Jr. and Greg Wencl
9. Cherry Blossom G. & C.C., Georgetown, Ky. Clyde Johnston
10. Prairie Highlands G. Cse., Olathe, Kan., Craig Schreiner
2003 (appeared in the Jan. 2004 issue)
Best New Affordable Public Courses
1. Black Mesa G.C., La Mesilla, N.M., Baxter Spann.
2. Fossil Trace G.C., Golden, Colo., Jim Engh.
3. DarkHorse G.C., Auburn, Calif., Keith Foster.
4. Texarkana G. Ranch, Texarkana, Tex., Jim Fazio Jr. and Hank Haney.
5. Packsaddle Ridge G.C., Keezletown, Va., Russell Breeden and Jeff Forbes.
6. Hemlock G.C., Ludington, Mich., Raymond Hearn.
7. ArborLinks G. Cse., Nebraska City, Neb., Arnold Palmer, Ed Seay, Erik Larsen.
8. Point Roberts G. Cse., Point Roberts, Wash., Graham Cooke and Wayne Carleton.
9. The Links at Firestone Farms, Columbiana, Ohio., Brian Huntley.
10. The Legacy G.C., Norwalk, Iowa., Jeffrey D. Brauer.
2004 (appeared in Jan. 2005 issue)
Best New Affordable Public
1. Copper Mill G.C., Zachary, La., Max Maxwell and Nathan Crace.
2. The Rawls Cse., Lubbock, Tex., Tom Doak.
3. Cannon Ridge G.C. (The Beman Cse.) Fredericksburg, Va., Bobby Weed and Deane Beman.
4. Hidden Cove G. Cse. at Grayson Lake State Park, Olive Hill, Ky., Brian Ault.
5. The Oaks G. Cse., Cottage Grove, Wis., Greg Martin.
6. Dale Hollow Lake State Resort Park G. Cse., Burkesville, Ky., Brian Ault.
7. Indian Creek G.C. (The Creek Cse.) Carrollton, Tex., Jeff Brauer.
8. Sleepy Hole G. Cse., Suffolk, Va., Tom Clark.
9. Twin Bridges G.C., Gadsden, Ala., Gene Bates.
10. ShadowGlen G.C., Manor, Tex., Roy Bechtol and Randy Russell.
2005 (appeared in Jan. 2006 issue)
Best New Affordable Public
1. Bully Pulpit G. Cse., Medora, N.D., Michael Hurdzan.
2. Arrowhead Pointe at Richard B. Russell, Elberton, Ga., Bob Walker.
3. Eagle Ridge G. Cse. at Yatesville Lake State Park, Louisa, Ky., Arthur Hills and Steve Walker
4. The Shoals G.C. (Fighting Joe Cse.) Muscle Shoals, Ala., Roger Rulewich and Bobby Vaughan
5. Highland Meadows G. Cse., Windsor, Colo., Art Schaupeter.
6. Angels Crossing G.C., Vicksburg, Mich., W. Bruce Matthews III.
T-7. The G.C. at Stonelick Hills, Batavia, Ohio, Jeff Osterfeld.
T-7. Big Fish G.C., Hayward, Wis., Pete Dye and Tim Liddy.
9. Soldier Hollow G. Cse. (Gold Cse.) Midway, Utah, Gene Bates.
10. Grey Hawk G.C., Lagrange, Ohio, Robert von Hagge and Mike Smelek.
2006 (appeared in Jan. 2007 issue)
Best New Public Course Under $75 of 2006
1. King Carter G.C., Irvington, Va.,Joel Weiman.
2. Blue Heron G.C. (Highland/Lakes), Medina, Ohio, John Robinson.
3. Sundance at A-Ga-Ming Resort, Kewadin, Mich., Jerry Matthews
4. The Shoals (Schoolmaster), Muscle Shoals, Ala., Roger Rulewich & Bobby Vaughan.
5. The Atchafalaya G.Cse., Patterson, La., Robert von Hagge and Rick Baril.
6. Juniper G. Cse., Redmond, Ore., John Harbottle.
7. Bergamont G.C., Oregon, Wis., Andy North.
8. The Jewel G.C., Lake City, Minn., Hale Irwin and Stan Gentry.
9. Callippe Preserve G. Cse., Pleasanton, Calif., Brian Costello.
10. Mines G. Cse., Grand Rapids, Mich., Mike DeVries.
2007
BEST NEW PUBLIC: UNDER $75
1. SPRING CREEK G.C. • Gord Le, Va. • Yards 7,172 • Par 72 • Fee: $70 • Designer: Ed Carton • 540-832-0744 • springcreekgolfclub.com
2. JUG MTN. RANCH G. CSE. • McCall, Idaho • Yards 7,287 • Par 72 • Fee $60: Don Knott • 208-634-5072 • jugmountainranch.com
3. MONARCH DUNES G.C. • Nipomo, Calif. • Yards 6,810 • Par 71 • Fee $73 • Damian Pascuzzo and Steve Pate • 805-343-9459 • monarchdunesgolf.com
4. THE MANOR RESORT G.C. • Farmville, Va. • Yards 7,214 • Par 72 • Fee: $49 • Rick Robbins • 434-392-2244 • themanorresort.com
5. THE DOGWOODS AT HUGH WHITE STATE PARK • Grenada, Miss. • Yards 7,015 • Par 72 • Fee: $39 • Gary Roger Baird • 662-226-4123 • dogwoodsgolf.com
6. BLUE RIDGE SHADOWS G.C. • Front Royal, Va. • Yards 7,302 • Par 72 • Fee: $72 • Tom Clark • 540-631-9661 • blueridgeshadows.com
7. BLACK BEAR G.C. • Delhi, La. • Yards 7,276 • Par 72 • Fee: $49 • Roy Bechtol and Randy Russell • 318-878-2162 • blackbear-golf.com
8. WHITE HORSE G.C. • Kingston, Wash. • Yards 7,093 • Par 72 • Fee: $63 • Cynthia Dye McGarey • 360-297-4468 • whitehorsegolf.com
9. CANYON RIVER G.C. • East Missoula, Mont. • Yards 6,966 • Par 72 • Fee: $48 • Lee Schmidt and Brian Curley • 406-721-0222 • canyonrivergolfcommunity.com
10. SAND CREEK STATION • Newton, Kan. • Yards 7,359 • Par 72 • Fee: $49 • Jeff Brauer • 316-284-6161 • sandcreekgolfclub.com
-
If there is a metro area with better layouts under $50 than what I've found here in the Salt Lake City area, then I'd like to see it.
Nothing spectacular, just oodles of good, solid, interesting layouts....and I should add, most of these can be had for under $40.
-
Steve, et al:
Please keep in mind that some of the Digest "best new affordable" use the category (believe Digest uses the threshold of $75 max) as way to get some sort of national attention but then shortly after the first year or so decide to bump up the rates.
To the credit of Digest the listing of affordable courses is something that's quite good.
Liek I said before -- so much of GCA time is spent discussing minutia of the same elite and very private places. Nothing wrong with them - but there's so much more than bandying it back and forth on such very small target grouping of courses.
JMorgan:
Thanks -- but I don't see the $50 target number as being realistic - that's why I inserted the $100 ceiling. No doubt there are various discount plans at such courses for those who will opt for repeat play.
I can certainly try to do what you have asked but that listing will be a small one because thetqo qualifiers -- price and architectural excellence do meet up with certain iron walls of basic realities.
Keep this in mind, the ones I listed on this thread are all interesting layouts and some of them are simply outstanding in so many ways.
The key is getting out in the country and seeking out such courses and not erroneously belieivng that only big ticket / big name designers are the ones to search out and play.
-
Awesome list!
-
I thought the GD list was interesting in that no courses were listed in New England or PA,NY.DE,MD or NJ,probably because it's hard to build one with a projected fee less than $100 given the land costs. Lederach was a glaring omission but was listed in GW and GolfMag.
As I mentioned above about Vista Verde, the discounted rate in peak season is $90 although the rack rate was listed previously at $160. I don't think too many courses have bumped their rates up given the recent and future economy.
-
Sean:
Beg to differ partner.
There are national prominent courses -- I listed no less than a number of them and others opined about a few others as well. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive but do require a bit of field work.
Too many people here on GCA are simply interested in the private courses of elite status. Nothing wrong with that but I like to go out into the hinterlands and see is out there. Again, you have people on this site who think quality golf design can only be had by those with certain first and last names. That's not the case either as you likely may know.
You keep on harping on $100 -- look at the LIST I provided and bother to see what the actual price points are. One other thing -- if one were to be a regular at any number of the places mentioned there are various discount plans available that would further reduce the cost to play 18 holes on a steady basis as hard core golfer.
Matt
Maybe I am a harsh critic, but when I talk about nationally prominent courses they are ones I would take a days detour to see. I would for Tobacco Road and Lakewood Shores. One is more than $100 and one is considerably less. I wouldn't for Lederach and I think it is well under $100, though I would consider playing it if in the area even though there are so many great courses about.
I never said "mutually exclusive". I said nearly impossible. I don't see many affordable courses I would consider nationally prominent. It doesn't mean many don't exist, but in the big scheme of things - how many really do exist even at $100, $200, or $300? I think not very many. To take it to another level, how many public courses out there would I plan a trip around to see? I wouldn't even put Pinehurst in that category and its a load more than $100.
I guess I am probably looking for something a bit different from you when I travel nor am I often moved to call something nationally prominent because these terms are chucked about too much. For cryin out loud, Doak handed out 12 10s in the world (probably too many imo) and you are talking about nationally prominent public courses under $100 like they are a dime a dozen.
Chris
Loads of good golf exists for $50. Whether or not I am going to make much of an effort to see it is another matter. I would like a good list of these courses for when I happen to be in town and want a game. I wouldn't treat it as a must see list, just as I wouldn't treat $100 coruses as a must see list, but I am much more inclined to pay $50 rather than $100 for an unknown quantity. Underpinning this belief is the idea that architecture doesn't really vary nearly as much as the green fees do. Many, many times I have walked away from what I thought was an expensive round and wondered why.
Ciao
-
Sean:
Help me out with something because I don't know if your issue is being a "harsh critic" or someone who really has not played a number of the courses listed on this thread that are at or beyond the level of Lakewood Shores.
Candidly, any of the ten I listed at the initial outset of this thread is equal or beyond the three courses that make up that facility.
You mention the virtues of the facility but keep in mind that peak rates for The Gailes (most believe this is the top course there) is $62 and that doesn't include a power cart for those who want one when playing. If you bother to check out the courses I listed you will find a fair number are equal to or right in the same vicinity with what the MI course charges.
You also downplayed Lederach but you never really provided any real details besides a simple opinion. Frankly, you need to provide more chicken to your personal bone against the PA facility.
Again, I take issue with your erroneous assertion -- stated a second time as being now "nearly impossible" to find such significant courses.
Sean, allow me to clue you in -- I've spent a good amount of my personal time traveling the USA and have been able to find out, scout and play such an array of different courses. Some of that info has come from sources here on GCA and elsewhere. The sad part is that too much info comes from resorts and other CCFAD layouts that have budgets for promotions and the like. The top tier privates are already known and therefore have their own unique followings.
If you care not to travel to see the kind of courses I have played and rated in this thread that's your prerogative. But, if you have followed the comments of others who have made their voices known here -- there are clear choices which can match affordability / reasonable pricing and high quality design. If you have not seen or played many -- it might just be because your search pattern or available time frames to play have been rather limited.
Sean, please don't insert words into my mouth by paraphrasing that I said such national prominent courses able to mix affordability with architectural quality are akin to being a "dime a dozen." Far from it -- I never suggested or implied they were. It does take some searching and some verification by personal experiences. But they do exist.
Let me point out that if you and others are hung up on only spending $50 or less for a one time visit -- then by all means knock yourself out and enjoy yourself. The facility you mentioned in MI is above that threshold but there are courses that can meet that benchmark.
Sean, I believe I can say the words "nationally prominent" because my extensive travels over many years through any number of nook and cranny communities throughout the USA has given me some real insight into where quality can be had without taking out a second mortgage to do it. People can embrace or discard my comments and go whatever direction they wish. The $100 celing is a ceiling point given the escalation of costs on any number of items from movie tickets, to the cost for going out to dinner at a mid-level restaurant, etc, etc, I believe, and as I mentioned previously there are various discount plans for those players who seek to play such places on a regular basis and not just a one time thing.
Sean, you might surprise yourself -- the "unknown quantity" you keep mentioning is out there. The list this thread has started confirms that. Of course, what you do and where you spend your $$ is your business.
-
Chris:
I'd like to see Purgatory get more ink but the ownership there should completely rethink the nature of what the 13th hole is about. Feasting the attributes of a hole that stretches like a runway at O'Hair isn't really design of the first order.
I still do like the course because there are a number of fun holes to play. The real shock for most people is after playing the first hole they think they are set to play some lackluster layout. When they arrive at the 2nd tee the ball game changes BIG TIME.
Indiana has a few more layouts of note as you are certainly aware. The sad reality is that many people here on GCA who set their golf travel plans likely go to the same places over and over again. Indiana is looked upon as just a place between X and Y. The reality is that the foundation of public golf there is more solid from a design standpoint than many might even realize.
Indiana even does it to themselves! "The Crossroads of America" aka "A great place to drive through on your way somewhere else". I got to play several of the courses around the state while in grad school at Bloomington and Purgatory was one of my favorites. 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11, and especially the stretch of 14, 15, and 16 I remember as being very solid holes. Unfortunately I didn't make it up to the Trophy Club.
-
Sean:
Help me out with something because I don't know if your issue is being a "harsh critic" or someone who really has not played a number of the courses listed on this thread that are at or beyond the level of Lakewood Shores.
Candidly, any of the ten I listed at the initial outset of this thread is equal or beyond the three courses that make up that facility.
You mention the virtues of the facility but keep in mind that peak rates for The Gailes (most believe this is the top course there) is $62 and that doesn't include a power cart for those who want one when playing. If you bother to check out the courses I listed you will find a fair number are equal to or right in the same vicinity with what the MI course charges.
You also downplayed Lederach but you never really provided any real details besides a simple opinion. Frankly, you need to provide more chicken to your personal bone against the PA facility.
Again, I take issue with your erroneous assertion -- stated a second time as being now "nearly impossible" to find such significant courses.
Sean, allow me to clue you in -- I've spent a good amount of my personal time traveling the USA and have been able to find out, scout and play such an array of different courses. Some of that info has come from sources here on GCA and elsewhere. The sad part is that too much info comes from resorts and other CCFAD layouts that have budgets for promotions and the like. The top tier privates are already known and therefore have their own unique followings.
If you care not to travel to see the kind of courses I have played and rated in this thread that's your prerogative. But, if you have followed the comments of others who have made their voices known here -- there are clear choices which can match affordability / reasonable pricing and high quality design. If you have not seen or played many -- it might just be because your search pattern or available time frames to play have been rather limited.
Sean, please don't insert words into my mouth by paraphrasing that I said such national prominent courses able to mix affordability with architectural quality are akin to being a "dime a dozen." Far from it -- I never suggested or implied they were. It does take some searching and some verification by personal experiences. But they do exist.
Let me point out that if you and others are hung up on only spending $50 or less for a one time visit -- then by all means knock yourself out and enjoy yourself. The facility you mentioned in MI is above that threshold but there are courses that can meet that benchmark.
Sean, I believe I can say the words "nationally prominent" because my extensive travels over many years through any number of nook and cranny communities throughout the USA has given me some real insight into where quality can be had without taking out a second mortgage to do it. People can embrace or discard my comments and go whatever direction they wish. The $100 celing is a ceiling point given the escalation of costs on any number of items from movie tickets, to the cost for going out to dinner at a mid-level restaurant, etc, etc, I believe, and as I mentioned previously there are various discount plans for those players who seek to play such places on a regular basis and not just a one time thing.
Sean, you might surprise yourself -- the "unknown quantity" you keep mentioning is out there. The list this thread has started confirms that. Of course, what you do and where you spend your $$ is your business.
Matt
Thats all fair enough. We definitely have a very different idea of what nationally prominent/significant is. I usually use a rating system in terms of how much effort is it worth to see - not unlike Doak's system, but more broad because I don't think there are massive differences in architecturally quality once we are talking about the top whatever percentage of courses.
So far as Lederach goes, I didn't downplay it. I only stated that I don't think it is good enough to add a day to an itinerary or plan a trip around. There is no doubt in mind that it is a good course and if I was in town I would consider another look and I could change my mind on a second visit and think it is better than I previously thought. Its one of those courses I recommend people see at least once because the bunkering is outstanding and a model of what I believe bunkering is about.
To be very candid, I don't see many profiles on here which make me want to travel to see a course. That shouldn't be surprising because I have probably only seen 40 courses that I would praise more than just recommend and many big name courses I wouldn't place on that list. Often times the courses profiled on here look good, but not the sort of places I feel I need to make a big effort to see. They look more the sort of courses that if I am in town then possibly I should have a go. Granted, that is based on photos and it is one of the reasons why I like this site - people going through the effort of posting pix. Its not perfect, but taking in all considerations, its as good as it will get.
Ciao
-
Sean:
I read what you said-- but keep this in mind some people, possibly you, don't have a desire to take the opportunity / chance, call it what one will, to visit different areas and see if the unknown courses that are mentioned in this thread reach a level of national prominence.
I define national prominence in this particular category (those less than a $100 fee to play in peak times) as courses that architecturally offer an array of unique and fun holes, that are located on a quality piece of land, that is routed to include all the key features that such land offers, that requires a high level of attention to different shotmaking situations encountered throughout the round and provides a conditioning standard that allows for the enjoyment of the round to take place without constant distractions because of poor or inconsistent turf.
I don't know what your definition of national prominent is -- you can provide one or not -- that's up to you.
You say you "don't think there are massive differences in architecturally quality once we are talking about the top whatever percentage of courses."
Sean, you missed my previous point again.
The issue is that courses with fee limitations -- in order to qualify for selection -- have to demonstrate that despite that self-imposed limitation they do offer such a unique and exciting playing experience.
So much of the discussion here on GCA generally falls upon the same courses -- usually those that are either exclusively private, high end resort or CCFAD types. For the average Joe and Jane that doesn't leave much for them to play unless they have very deep pockets or a very extensive rolodex of contacts.
You mentioned Lakewood Shores and I simply asked if you had played any of the courses on the list I initially provided. The only one I can remember you saying is Lederach. In your last post to me you again only vaguely indicated what you think is deficient with the course. I was hoping for a bit more detail than just the "I believe" opinion.
You never delved into anything specific. That doesn't help me understand your thoughts. My point on Lederach was NOT that you plan an itinerary solely on that golf course but that should people plan an itinerary around quality golf courses that offer a very fair price to play then Lederach can be considered for such visits.
Sean, I don't know what you know or don't know about Pennsy public golf. Candidly, it's in the doghouse compared to what the private side provides. Moran's work with Lederach and Morgan Hill has greatly accelerated the base floor of what previously called itself public golf in the Keystone State in my opinion. The bunkering dimension, which you stated, is only one item of note with the course -- I think you missed a few others such as the green shapes, contours and the manner by which Moran used the entire property to get the best usage out of it. No matter.
I do agree with you that there are few profiles on GCA to cause me, you or likely others to travel to play such course(s). However, the key ingredient is that for the special category I have created there is little source guide info to weed out those places that require a second mortgage to play and usually such visits are contained to a one time visit for nearly most people.
However, there are architects who have hit the jackpot with superstar designs and a matching price structure that can expose that kind of work to people who have been forced to overpay for nothing more than bells and whistles formulaic courses. Clearly, I don't know how you travel and how many different courses you have personally sampled in a lifetime to make those judgments.
That's an individual's discretionary call and each person has to decide how to spend their leisure time and in what manner they wish to pursue it.
Interesting, you say there are only "40 courses" that you would praise and "more than just recommend." Be very interested to see if any of those courses have low costs to play them
I would just caution you and others not to make the assumption that the top tier courses under $100 are not some sort of B league listing of courses when compared to the top ones. Please don't misunderstand my last statement to mean that I see a total parity between the likes of a Oakmont and a Black Mesa, per se. But, I do believe that people who would be traveling and not have the necessary contacts to play an Oakmont would not be disappointed in one least bit if they had to play that gem of a course in the greater Santa Fe area.
One final comment on pictures -- they are like the trailer to a movie. Some give you a really good idea of what lies ahead and there are others where the sum total of the movie experience is only the trailer itself.
I can only hope this thread will spur the discussion of other such courses.
-
Sean:
I read what you said-- but keep this in mind some people, possibly you, don't have a desire to take the opportunity / chance, call it what one will, to visit different areas and see if the unknown courses that are mentioned in this thread reach a level of national prominence.
I define national prominence in this particular category (those less than a $100 fee to play in peak times) as courses that architecturally offer an array of unique and fun holes, that are located on a quality piece of land, that is routed to include all the key features that such land offers, that requires a high level of attention to different shotmaking situations encountered throughout the round and provides a conditioning standard that allows for the enjoyment of the round to take place without constant distractions because of poor or inconsistent turf.
I don't know what your definition of national prominent is -- you can provide one or not -- that's up to you.
You say you "don't think there are massive differences in architecturally quality once we are talking about the top whatever percentage of courses."
Sean, you missed my previous point again.
The issue is that courses with fee limitations -- in order to qualify for selection -- have to demonstrate that despite that self-imposed limitation they do offer such a unique and exciting playing experience.
So much of the discussion here on GCA generally falls upon the same courses -- usually those that are either exclusively private, high end resort or CCFAD types. For the average Joe and Jane that doesn't leave much for them to play unless they have very deep pockets or a very extensive rolodex of contacts.
You mentioned Lakewood Shores and I simply asked if you had played any of the courses on the list I initially provided. The only one I can remember you saying is Lederach. In your last post to me you again only vaguely indicated what you think is deficient with the course. I was hoping for a bit more detail than just the "I believe" opinion.
You never delved into anything specific. That doesn't help me understand your thoughts. My point on Lederach was NOT that you plan an itinerary solely on that golf course but that should people plan an itinerary around quality golf courses that offer a very fair price to play then Lederach can be considered for such visits.
Sean, I don't know what you know or don't know about Pennsy public golf. Candidly, it's in the doghouse compared to what the private side provides. Moran's work with Lederach and Morgan Hill has greatly accelerated the base floor of what previously called itself public golf in the Keystone State in my opinion. The bunkering dimension, which you stated, is only one item of note with the course -- I think you missed a few others such as the green shapes, contours and the manner by which Moran used the entire property to get the best usage out of it. No matter.
I do agree with you that there are few profiles on GCA to cause me, you or likely others to travel to play such course(s). However, the key ingredient is that for the special category I have created there is little source guide info to weed out those places that require a second mortgage to play and usually such visits are contained to a one time visit for nearly most people.
However, there are architects who have hit the jackpot with superstar designs and a matching price structure that can expose that kind of work to people who have been forced to overpay for nothing more than bells and whistles formulaic courses. Clearly, I don't know how you travel and how many different courses you have personally sampled in a lifetime to make those judgments.
That's an individual's discretionary call and each person has to decide how to spend their leisure time and in what manner they wish to pursue it.
Interesting, you say there are only "40 courses" that you would praise and "more than just recommend." Be very interested to see if any of those courses have low costs to play them
I would just caution you and others not to make the assumption that the top tier courses under $100 are not some sort of B league listing of courses when compared to the top ones. Please don't misunderstand my last statement to mean that I see a total parity between the likes of a Oakmont and a Black Mesa, per se. But, I do believe that people who would be traveling and not have the necessary contacts to play an Oakmont would not be disappointed in one least bit if they had to play that gem of a course in the greater Santa Fe area.
One final comment on pictures -- they are like the trailer to a movie. Some give you a really good idea of what lies ahead and there are others where the sum total of the movie experience is only the trailer itself.
I can only hope this thread will spur the discussion of other such courses.
Matt
I take and appreciate your point concerning spreading discussion time amongst newer public courses. But it will always be the case the big guns are the big draw and for good reason(s). I don't have a system whereby I classify nationally prominent courses in price ranges. Either a course is significant or it ain't. Price is not at issue for this, however, it is important for me and I appreciate being "toured" around courses that don't carry a Pinehurst/Pebble price tag.
Yes, I would say a fair few of the courses I really rate highly are not too expensive though I can't think of one I would call cheap as chips, but to be fair, all of the courses I really rate highly are good value (in the sense that sometimes good value ain't cheap) in my book or I wouldn't think so well of them. As I said before, I don't think the architecture of the top courses is really all that varying in quality. Most of the time its down to personal tastes and we try to find ways to "objectify" these tastes rather than just accept the subjective nature of gca.
You could be right about superstar designs - I don't know because I haven't played most of the courses you mention. I think Tobacco Road and Lakewood are both excellent - the sort of course I think is worth a days detour. TR has a chance to be considered one of the significant designs of its time because of its bold combination of the heroic/strategic/penal styles. I don't think Lakewood has a shot at this sort of thing, but it is an excellent example of good strategic golf. For me, at the moment, Lederach falls a bit short of this despite what I think is brilliant use of bunkers. As I always say, can a course be truly great if bunkering is its primary asset? However, in Ledrach's case it is on a good rolling piece of land even if the turf isn't brilliant, but the housing and poor walk go a ways to offsetting this advantage. If this course were a better walk without housing intrusion I would think that much more of it.
Ciao
-
Sean:
The "big guns" you refer to is a bit more wider than just simply the Oakmonts, TOC, Augusta's, PV's, etc, etc.
Appreciation for architecture can take many different routes and the notion that courses under a certain dollar threshold are junior league alternatives is not the case. I know you didn't say junior league alternatives but your response that either a course is "significant or it ain't" gives me reason to believe that you view such courses as more of a sideshow than a main event.
Sean, the issue of price may be completely irrelevant for your personal golf visits. For many others it's critical because the idea that they will be teeing it up at Sand Hills or Oakmont anytime soon is likely not going to happen.
No doubt personal tastes play a major role in how people accept or reject different courses. My comments were not meant to "objectify" those tastes but to highlight the importance in saluting courses that don't require a second mortgage to play them and at the same time have high architectural qualities worthy of notice and special consideration when visiting such areas.
I don't disagree with you take on TR -- but the price point there is beyond what I mentioned here. That should not prevent those so inclined from playing there if their personal wallet can handle the costs. Ditto on Lakewood - your point on The Gailes does make for another course for consideration on what's provided there design wise. I just don't see it being as unique and noteworthy as the likes of Black Mesa, Wild Horse, Rustic Canyon, etc, etc.
Last item on Lederach -- when you speak about the turf I have to ask how soon after the course opened did you play it. I've been to the place twice and the second time was far better.
You also mention "poor walk" -- I don't see what's so poor about it. There are more hillier courses than Lederach -- heck, I dare say an 18-hole stroll over Bethpage Black is a good bit more strenuous.
Sean, too often people lower assessments on courses because housing is nearby -- the issue is whether the housing really impacts the actual architecture. In a similar vein I've heard people badmouth Rustic Canyon because they see the driving range net when you walk up on the 18th hole. No doubt it's a personal and subjective consideration but I would not elevate such items to the more core areas which I outlined previously.
-
Matt...you've gotten some undeserved criticism on this site. I want to compliment you for responding to all posts. I don't believe there is another poster that takes the time and effort to acknowledge every post. From my perspective it is appreciated.
-
Sean:
The "big guns" you refer to is a bit more wider than just simply the Oakmonts, TOC, Augusta's, PV's, etc, etc.
Appreciation for architecture can take many different routes and the notion that courses under a certain dollar threshold are junior league alternatives is not the case. I know you didn't say junior league alternatives but your response that either a course is "significant or it ain't" gives me reason to believe that you view such courses as more of a sideshow than a main event.
Sean, the issue of price may be completely irrelevant for your personal golf visits. For many others it's critical because the idea that they will be teeing it up at Sand Hills or Oakmont anytime soon is likely not going to happen.
No doubt personal tastes play a major role in how people accept or reject different courses. My comments were not meant to "objectify" those tastes but to highlight the importance in saluting courses that don't require a second mortgage to play them and at the same time have high architectural qualities worthy of notice and special consideration when visiting such areas.
I don't disagree with you take on TR -- but the price point there is beyond what I mentioned here. That should not prevent those so inclined from playing there if their personal wallet can handle the costs. Ditto on Lakewood - your point on The Gailes does make for another course for consideration on what's provided there design wise. I just don't see it being as unique and noteworthy as the likes of Black Mesa, Wild Horse, Rustic Canyon, etc, etc.
Last item on Lederach -- when you speak about the turf I have to ask how soon after the course opened did you play it. I've been to the place twice and the second time was far better.
You also mention "poor walk" -- I don't see what's so poor about it. There are more hillier courses than Lederach -- heck, I dare say an 18-hole stroll over Bethpage Black is a good bit more strenuous.
Sean, too often people lower assessments on courses because housing is nearby -- the issue is whether the housing really impacts the actual architecture. In a similar vein I've heard people badmouth Rustic Canyon because they see the driving range net when you walk up on the 18th hole. No doubt it's a personal and subjective consideration but I would not elevate such items to the more core areas which I outlined previously.
Matt
I probably haven't explained myself very well. There is no question I appreciate quality golf for relatively less money. I am only saying that there are bones to pick through when it comes to trying to find significant courses (like how we consider the big guns significant) under $100. You seem to have a different idea of prominent/significant depending on a price range - I don't. The course either is or isn't significant - price has no bearing on this determination. Now for me, because I don't believe the quality of architecture is greatly different for say the top 10% of courses with the few obvious standouts, other issues become important - including price. I would also add, beauty, what sort of walk do I have, history, the club and maybe a few other issues - these are all aspects which effect my day from a tourista PoV. We are afterall holiday makers - no? Besides, I have always said that if it was architecture and architecture alone that I am worried about, I don't need to play the courses. I am better off walking them and observing others play for free.
I don't believe Lederach is a good walking course because there are some very long walks. Jeepers, its a hike to the 1st tee. The routing isn't intimate and that is likely due to the housing - which also compromises the beauty of the course. Of course this is a matter of opinion, but remember, I have gotten well used to British courses which are generally wonderful walks in which the course can usually be played in 3.5 hours comfortably and there are rarely houses surrounding the courses. Perhaps this makes my standards higher - I don't know.
I was at Lederach last spring. The condition of the course wasn't great, but it was plenty good enough to enjoy golf. There are still areas of the course which are stoney - I have a chipped 6 iron as proof. I was only commenting that the turf isn't of the best quality - which is another issue I look at in terms of deciding how good the course is. It all adds up!
Ciao
-
Sean:
With all due respect you still don't seem to grasp it -- I have a huge appreciation for the top tier giants in golf architecture -- the Oakmonts, Pine Valley's, Shinnecock Hill's, Dunluce / Portrush, etc, etc. My love for playing such courses is no less than anyone else's.
I have said that far too often the singular focus is only on the .00001 percent of those courses on this site and elsewhere - that was the point in creating this thread -- to open up eyes and provide some helpful info. For those with the means and connections the wherewithal to play the .0001 courses comes about because such a lifestyle in experiencing such courses is not an issue -- it's an assumption. That's not the case with the vast preponderance of people who play the game and quite frankly are needed in order to grow the game to others.
I started my golf life on a place where grass grew by accident -- not by design. I have a healthy appreciation for what people play there and for the willful ignorance that exists -- no doubt many of these same people could care less about architecture in the same manner that sheep could are less where they eat grass -- so long as they eat some.
Sean, in the discussion of the courses of outstanding architecture below $100 is not some sort of "B" league team of layouts. As a parallel I give Tom Doak plenty of credit for exposing the nature of many second and thir tier layouts in "Confidential Guide" that are located in the UK and Ireland. Many people only knew about the very top tier because of the wherewithal to host Open Championships and the like. The courses under $100 are rather unique and well worth the time and effort to play them. To paraphrase your words -- they are "significant" and worthy of the time to play them. No doubt some people are simply fixated on chery-picking the courses with the greatest name value -- so be it. I just see other courses throughout the USA, and the lesser known architects, as being fully able and competent to deliver high quality golf.
You and I part company to some degree on the linkage of other items (e.g. the housing component, the degree of what walking should be about, how fast the pace of play is, etc, etc). I would not dare go so far as to say such items are esoteric but I do believe such items are further down the food chain of what constitutes the primary emphasis -- the overall grandeur of the architecture. My opinion v your opinion. That's fine. As I stated before that, for me at least, would rest on the items I mentioned previously -- to wit, the overall quality of the land itself, the complexity of the routing and the sheer array of different shotmaking challenges from drives to recovery options, green contours, the nature of the bunkering, etc, etc.
Sean, if you think Lederach is a demanding walk -- then some advice to give -- skip Bethpage Black because it's even more so a situation. Lederach is not that demanding from the sheer array of different courses I have had the opportunity to walk. I can name a number of other courses here in the USA that are walkable but may appear to be more demanding than many of the UK courses you have been accustomed to playing.
Keep in mind, you are throwing forward the British experiences you have had and that's fine -- the level of what constitutes golf in the UK and Ireland is a bit different than here in the States. I have had the pleasure in playing a good many courses across the pond and no doubt the style / temperament and overall golf experiences (those that you value) are clearly front and center. I personally believe a number of key items from the UK and Ireland should be included for many more golf courses here in the States than what we do now -- e.g., speeding up the game being the first and foremost lesson we can learn here.
Sean, just a bit of advice -- skip the pretension with the belief that "my standards higher" than anyone else's -- OK. My standards for quality golf are present in my mind and frankly I see my total listing of courses as being quite pragmatic and not fixed on a singular one best way only.
Last item on turf -- I see it as a complimentary item - not as a primary one. Sorry to hear about your chipped 6-iron but early spring in Pennsy is not prime golf time. The turf from my visit earlier this summer was much better -- no doubt it will need time to mature.
Just one last point -- the American economy is likely going to go throush some major mega adjustments -- golf will need to restructure itself to continue to be an interesting game to the masses here. The cost to play is going to be more and more of a sticking point for those to either continue or start their involvement. I said it before, and will say it again, that more focus should be on affordable options and not just a singular fixation on such a very, very small number of courses that like the Playboy centerfold analogy I mentioned on a different thread -- you can look at her but you 'll likely never touch her. ;)
* * *
I was at Lederach last spring. The condition of the course wasn't great, but it was plenty good enough to enjoy golf. There are still areas of the course which are stoney - I have a chipped 6 iron as proof. I was only commenting that the turf isn't of the best quality - which is another issue I look at in terms of deciding how good the course is. It all adds up!
-
It will be most interesting to see with the uncertainty of the economy if any courses that are slightly above the $100 figure during peak times will drop their prices for the '09 golf season.
Although they could not quality for inclusion now -- there are quite a few courses of outstanding nature that fall somewhere between $100-$125 - among them being Twisted Dune in New Jersey and Greywalls / Marquette GC in Michigan, to name just two solid layouts.
-
It will be most interesting to see with the uncertainty of the economy if any courses that are slightly above the $100 figure during peak times will drop their prices for the '09 golf season.
Although they could not quality for inclusion now -- there are quite a few courses of outstanding nature that fall somewhere between $100-$125 - among them being Twisted Dune in New Jersey and Greywalls / Marquette GC in Michigan, to name just two solid layouts.
Not going off-topic here but just stating a great deal at Twisted Dune this fall on Sundays after 1 PM: 49 bucks with a hot dog and soda on top of it.
-
Joe:
You are 10000000% correct about TD.
Plenty of people will sing the praises of GN, HC and ACCC but TD is quite fun to play and the discount program they offer will likely be replicated by many courses as the full impact of what is happening in the financial markets works itself through the system.
-
Just curious but sean what publics would you list as being significant and worth planning a trip around ?
Good topic and worth the discussion. Did not know about a few of the courses listed here. Will have to check them out.
-
Matt,
Something I'm curious about is what in Kentucky could possibly be on this list if you have seen any? Doug Ralston is constantly tellying me how good the top 5 or so courses in KY are and there were a few on that GD list that was posted earlier in the thread.
Chris
-
Chris:
I've been to KY a few times and the public courses there a mixed bag with some of the better stuff nearest to either Cincinnati or in the greater Louisville area.
One of the more interesting courses I played turned out to be an Art Hills layout called Fox Run - part of the Kenton County system of county-owned facilities. The terrain is quite rolling and sports a 143 slope and 74.8 rating from the tips which comes out to just over 7,000+ yards. For some reason when the top public courses in KY are mentioned this layout often gets little fanfare. Maybe others who are more in the know can enlighten me.
The level of the design details is not at the same level as the top ten I mentioned previously but the fees are very reasonable and the proximity to greater Cincinnati is a big time help for players.
I've also played Kearney Hills in Lexington -- but that was a number of years ago. The layout was designed by Pete & P.B. Dye and formerly hosted a Senior Tour event. Liked the course but frankly I think much of the hype for the place has come from the previous tour event being there.
The other layout I've played is Lassing Pointe in Union and it's quite good - the finishing hole is quite demanding and a real eyeful with water in play and a green that hugs the H20 so closely that the slightest hiccup and it's Elvis land for your ball -- as in history. The 1st hole is also a good a starter as a par-5 with a number of options to consider. But again I would not make a special visit to play any of these places when held against the top tier ones I previously named.
Kentucky deserves credit because the fees charged at just about any of the public courses within the state are very competitive and certainly reasonable when compared to its neighbors and other states.
I also need to mention a Brian Silva layout I played during my last visit to the state -- Crooked Creek in London, KY. Fine layout for what it provides -- the creek does wind through the property on a few holes if my memory is still accurate. Plays right at 7,000 yards and was quite good. The fees, as with other KY public courses, is very reasonable.
The other layout I liked but others can comment on what's happened to the place since my last visit about ten years ago is Gibson Bay in Richmond, KY. Fairly enjoyable layout and not easy, again, if memory serves. Not many trees on the property so wind can blow at times. Designed by Dr. Michael Hurdzan -- I would not make a special trip to play it but it has its moments. Again, the fees are quite reasonable.
But when you hold KY up against the likes of Indiana there's no real contest from my vantage point. Indiana can match the price points threshold and still provide a wide smattering of solid courses that have plenty of architectural elements of quality. Again, let me say my knowledge and understanding of KY public golf will likely not be at the level of a Doug or someone else who's played a wider sampling. However, from the ones I've played KY does get high marks for keeping the golf options open so that the masses don't need a second mortgage to play there.
-
For those familiar with NE Red Tail deserves consideration. Brian Silva design that has been mentioned frequently here. Haven't played the courses that Matt listed so can't compare but Red Tail is a public must play.
-
Barnbougle Dunes at $A98.
-
Hard to beat a weekend at Black Mesa and Paa-Ko Ridge for excellent public golf for under $100 each. It won't be any sacrifice for me to go play both of them this weekend ;D
I certainly agree with the selections of 4 Mile Ranch and Lakota Canyon from Matt's original post, and would add Cougar Canyon and Redlands Mesa as good choices from Colorado.
Sultan's Run, Rock Hollow, The Fort, and Warren are all nice courses in Indiana, not sure if they've been mentioned as I haven't read the whole thread. They aren't at the level of Black Mesa or Paa-Ko in my book, but they aren't that close to $100 either.
-
The tough part for any listing is that much of California and likely Nevada and Arizona will not have many contenders for inclusion because the costs of creating golf in those settings is quite high and naturally the owners wish to recoupe their investments -- seeing a place like Rustic Canyon proves otherwise but it's the very rare exeption.
The same applies to the Northeast -- NJ is now the 5th most expensive place to play golf and for quite some time the public side of the aisle was quite reasonable. That changed in the eraly 90's with the explosion of CCFAD courses in the greater AC area and then at the same time with the growth of golf in the northern area -- led by the Crystal Springs Resort.
Unfortunately, so much of high end golf in the Northeast is similar to the kind found in many places in California -- it's extremely expensive for the so-called "name" places and often times you get little back for your $$ because all the hype is tied to non-golf big ticket costs such as the clubhouse and all the other bells and whistles.
Andy:
Concur with much of your comments but I don't see Cougar Canyon as being especially noteworthy. Yes, the par-3 16th is a gem of a hole but it's more about mindless length with very little design detail. Compare it to Four Mile Ranch and the gap between the two shoudl be self evident.
I do agree with a few other people who mentioned that Paa-Ko Ridge could be replaced among the initial selections I made. Ken Dye deserves credit but the bunkers look out of place on many holes and frankly the par-3's could stand to be a bit more varied in terms of overall length. Still, I like the course a lot -- especially the original 18.
In regards to the courses you mentioned in IN -- I've played them all and they are very good. I just don't see any of them beingthe equivalent of what Tim Liddy did at The Trophy Club for all the reasons I mentioned previously.
I'd be curious to see what comments come from the new Sand Hollow layout in Hurricane, UT and if it falls within the price stipulations I mentioned initially on this thread.
-
Matt,
As we've discussed many times, I see the original 18 at Paa-Ko as almost equal to Black Mesa. The 3rd nine is where the variety issue comes in, many of the holes seem similar to holes on the original 18. Take that 3rd nine out (and its by no means a bad nine in its own right) and I think you've got quite a strong course. I'm significantly less interested in the look of the bunkers than how they play, and Ken Dye used them to create many interesting holes--the first and the last don't do much for me but its a heck of a stretch in between, especially the back nine. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if it had fewer bunkers and more grass cut at fairway length, but its very strong in its current state. If you or others disagree so be it--I don't intend to change my mind. Its certainly not minimalistic or natural looking for those who care about such things. Its high on the fun factor. Black Mesa ratchets the fun meter up from the start as well. I've actually not played them back-to-back yet, so I'm looking forward to that experience.
I haven't played the Trophy Club, would like to but its not particularly close to home these days. I'm sure its a strong course, I just wanted to add that its hardly the only one in the area. One could play reasonably priced public golf courses in Indiana for a week without getting bored.
-
Sean:
With all due respect you still don't seem to grasp it -- I have a huge appreciation for the top tier giants in golf architecture -- the Oakmonts, Pine Valley's, Shinnecock Hill's, Dunluce / Portrush, etc, etc. My love for playing such courses is no less than anyone else's.
I have said that far too often the singular focus is only on the .00001 percent of those courses on this site and elsewhere - that was the point in creating this thread -- to open up eyes and provide some helpful info. For those with the means and connections the wherewithal to play the .0001 courses comes about because such a lifestyle in experiencing such courses is not an issue -- it's an assumption. That's not the case with the vast preponderance of people who play the game and quite frankly are needed in order to grow the game to others.
I started my golf life on a place where grass grew by accident -- not by design. I have a healthy appreciation for what people play there and for the willful ignorance that exists -- no doubt many of these same people could care less about architecture in the same manner that sheep could are less where they eat grass -- so long as they eat some.
Sean, in the discussion of the courses of outstanding architecture below $100 is not some sort of "B" league team of layouts. As a parallel I give Tom Doak plenty of credit for exposing the nature of many second and thir tier layouts in "Confidential Guide" that are located in the UK and Ireland. Many people only knew about the very top tier because of the wherewithal to host Open Championships and the like. The courses under $100 are rather unique and well worth the time and effort to play them. To paraphrase your words -- they are "significant" and worthy of the time to play them. No doubt some people are simply fixated on chery-picking the courses with the greatest name value -- so be it. I just see other courses throughout the USA, and the lesser known architects, as being fully able and competent to deliver high quality golf.
You and I part company to some degree on the linkage of other items (e.g. the housing component, the degree of what walking should be about, how fast the pace of play is, etc, etc). I would not dare go so far as to say such items are esoteric but I do believe such items are further down the food chain of what constitutes the primary emphasis -- the overall grandeur of the architecture. My opinion v your opinion. That's fine. As I stated before that, for me at least, would rest on the items I mentioned previously -- to wit, the overall quality of the land itself, the complexity of the routing and the sheer array of different shotmaking challenges from drives to recovery options, green contours, the nature of the bunkering, etc, etc.
Sean, if you think Lederach is a demanding walk -- then some advice to give -- skip Bethpage Black because it's even more so a situation. Lederach is not that demanding from the sheer array of different courses I have had the opportunity to walk. I can name a number of other courses here in the USA that are walkable but may appear to be more demanding than many of the UK courses you have been accustomed to playing.
Keep in mind, you are throwing forward the British experiences you have had and that's fine -- the level of what constitutes golf in the UK and Ireland is a bit different than here in the States. I have had the pleasure in playing a good many courses across the pond and no doubt the style / temperament and overall golf experiences (those that you value) are clearly front and center. I personally believe a number of key items from the UK and Ireland should be included for many more golf courses here in the States than what we do now -- e.g., speeding up the game being the first and foremost lesson we can learn here.
Sean, just a bit of advice -- skip the pretension with the belief that "my standards higher" than anyone else's -- OK. My standards for quality golf are present in my mind and frankly I see my total listing of courses as being quite pragmatic and not fixed on a singular one best way only.
Last item on turf -- I see it as a complimentary item - not as a primary one. Sorry to hear about your chipped 6-iron but early spring in Pennsy is not prime golf time. The turf from my visit earlier this summer was much better -- no doubt it will need time to mature.
Just one last point -- the American economy is likely going to go throush some major mega adjustments -- golf will need to restructure itself to continue to be an interesting game to the masses here. The cost to play is going to be more and more of a sticking point for those to either continue or start their involvement. I said it before, and will say it again, that more focus should be on affordable options and not just a singular fixation on such a very, very small number of courses that like the Playboy centerfold analogy I mentioned on a different thread -- you can look at her but you 'll likely never touch her. ;)
* * *
I was at Lederach last spring. The condition of the course wasn't great, but it was plenty good enough to enjoy golf. There are still areas of the course which are stoney - I have a chipped 6 iron as proof. I was only commenting that the turf isn't of the best quality - which is another issue I look at in terms of deciding how good the course is. It all adds up!
Matt
It is clear you don't know me. I don't have any pretensions and I am ALWAYS looking for good value golf regardless of the reputation a course has.
I don't think we are really disagreeing all that much other than I don't believe there are more than possibly a small group of public courses in the US which are significant in terms of architecture. That doesn't mean the the 2nd or 3rd tier aren't worth playing - many of these are my favourite places to play and they sometimes turn out to be just as good as many courses with better reps.
Brad
I haven't seen a public course in the States worth planning a specific trip just to see it. However, of the really big guns I have only played Pinehurst & Pine Needles, many people do believe Pinehurst is worth that sort of effort and they could be right. I would like to see it again, but its too pricey. From pix, the one obvious course I would like to see is Pacific Dunes - it looks like it could be very special. Pix of Pebble don't entice me to make the effort or pay the dosh. There are probably a few others which have garnered more of my attention. Kiawah, Lawsonia & Chambers Bay. Longshadow looks very good, but that may be private - I am not sure. To be honest, I would like a look at three Canadian courses as much as any public in the States: Highland Links, Banff & the other mountain joint (whats it called?). In general though, there are loads more private courses I would rather see.
Ciao
-
Sean:
I never said "I know you" - I only opined off what you said -- or what you tried to communicate insofar as this thread is concerned.
Since you raised the issue of clarity let me point out -- for the upteeeenth time -- how you completely missed the point of this thread. I have taken considerable time and patience to try to explain it to you. Since you see it differently for whatever reasons that's fine.
Sean, be sure to check what you wrote previously -- you did mention how your standards are quite high -- my God man, do you think others are simply interested in playing junkfood golf?
When you say you don't see "more than possibly a small group of public courses in the US which are significant in terms of architecture" I have to ask what size is your portfolio of courses that you have played in order to back that statement up? It's possible you draw that conclusion from the ones you have only played to date and that such a listing of courses could be quite limited?
Beyond Lederach I have no idea on what other courses -- less than $100 at peak times in the USA -- that you have personally played and not just gleaned info from second hand sources or from photos alone.
I know what I have done to see the various courses in question and the ones I listed are, as I have stated time after time, not some sort of B league version of quality golf simply because the price is lower. They are outstanding and quite "significant" -- keep in mind, I defined significant in a post sometime ago -- I have no idea on what your definition is although you keep on raising the term.
Sean, you have this differentiation scheme in defining courses that are 2nd and 3rd tier -- how is it that such courses are not first tier? I mean a place like Wild Horse in Nebraska or Black Mesa in New Mexico is not some sort of lesser course -- it's not Oakmont or Pine Valley -- but my first tier is a bit more elastic -- if your spread for the 1st tier is only the elite of elites then so be it.
p.s. For what it's worth -- I 100% agree w you on the cost to play at Pinehurst -- most notably #2.
Andy:
You have to help me out -- how does the clear manufactured "look" of Paa-Ko Ridge equate itself to more natural flowing and work-with-the-land approach seen at Black Mesa? You say they are close -- really?
The bunkers at Paa-Ko Ridge are clearly the creation of man's hand and truthfully they stand apart rather then work in concert with the spectacular site. Take also the greens -- the goofy three-level department store type one found at the par-3 4th at Paa-Ko's original front nine is just out of character -- it only needs a few clowns and loop-to-loops for an ideal putt-putt hole. The short par-4 6th is a nice hole -- but it's not anywhere near the level of the two great short par-4's at BM with the likes of the 7th and 14th holes. I can name other situations as well.
The same can be said for the quartet of par-3's that are at both courses. Again, BM has the greater range, diversity and demand.
One further point-- compare / contrast the role that the 17th and 18th at Paa-Ko Ridge's original 18 stack up against same number holes at Black Mesa. No comparison in my mind.
One other thing -- if your mind cannot be changed then what's the point of a discussion that might prove the opposite point? I've changed my mind on more than a few occasions from what people have written. If you see things as a dead end street then so be it.
Andy, before highlighting other IN public courses -- and I do agree with you on the quality of quality affordable public golf there -- you need to see firsthand how The Trophy Club separates itself from the others. It is that significant and it's a testament to what Tim Liddy did there. In my travels to Indiana and elsewhere The Trophy Club merits considerably more attention than it has received.
ourses in the US which are significant in terms of architecture. That doesn't mean the the 2nd or 3rd tier aren't worth playing - many of these are my favourite places to play and they sometimes turn out to be just as good as many courses with better reps.
-
Cliff,
NE or MA?
I'm only seeing a Red Tail in Devens, MA.
http://www.redtailgolf.net/
For those familiar with NE Red Tail deserves consideration. Brian Silva design that has been mentioned frequently here. Haven't played the courses that Matt listed so can't compare but Red Tail is a public must play.
-
Andy:
You have to help me out -- how does the clear manufactured "look" of Paa-Ko Ridge equate itself to more natural flowing and work-with-the-land approach seen at Black Mesa? You say they are close -- really?
The bunkers at Paa-Ko Ridge are clearly the creation of man's hand and truthfully they stand apart rather then work in concert with the spectacular site. Take also the greens -- the goofy three-level department store type one found at the par-3 4th at Paa-Ko's original front nine is just out of character -- it only needs a few clowns and loop-to-loops for an ideal putt-putt hole. The short par-4 6th is a nice hole -- but it's not anywhere near the level of the two great short par-4's at BM with the likes of the 7th and 14th holes. I can name other situations as well.
The same can be said for the quartet of par-3's that are at both courses. Again, BM has the greater range, diversity and demand.
One further point-- compare / contrast the role that the 17th and 18th at Paa-Ko Ridge's original 18 stack up against same number holes at Black Mesa. No comparison in my mind.
One other thing -- if your mind cannot be changed then what's the point of a discussion that might prove the opposite point? I've changed my mind on more than a few occasions from what people have written. If you see things as a dead end street then so be it.
Matt,
My point is that you and I discussing this for the 5th time is not going to change my mind. I too have changed my mind on other courses and in fact by playing these two courses more have agreed with you that BM is slightly better (when I used to slightly favor Paa-Ko). That said, I disagree with just about every point you made above. The 4th hole creates wonderful variety--many folks would echo your comments except about the 16th at Black Mesa. I think both greens are unique and add to the experience. The 17th at Black Mesa is better than Paa-Ko, but not by that much in my mind. The 18th at Paa-Ko is probably my least favorite on the course, so I agree with you there. The par threes are advantage Black Mesa, but the par fives are advantage Paa-Ko, especially the last three. That's not a knock on the quartet at Black Mesa, just praise for those at Paa-Ko. I especially like the speed slot opportunities at the 5th and 15th that allow those holes to be potentially reached in two.
By the way, all three publications rate Paa-Ko AHEAD of Black Mesa, and they generally get pretty similar scores, so saying they are similar in quality is no reach in most folks opinions.
As I said before, I don't care that Paa-Ko has a manufactured look while Black Mesa is more natural. Both are excellent at what they are trying to be. You clearly care about a course being natural. I don't, I prioritize if it has interesting strategy and is fun to play.
-
Patrick...The one in Massachusetts is what I was referring to. Mentioned NE because I couldn't think of another course in this part of the country, not just Ma., built in the last ten years, under $100 that would be ranked so highly. Belgrade Lakes came to mind but over $100. Newport National is under $100 if from RI but while highly recommended not convinced it belongs close to the top 10. Red Tail on the other hand, I believe can hold its own, altho I have not had the pleasure of playing Matt's choices.
-
Orchard Creek Golf Club
Altamont, NY
Green Fee Max: $32/$59 weekends & holidays
Cart: $15 pp
Architect: Paul Cowley (fmr. greens keeper at Pebble Beach; has worked on a number or Davis Love projects)
Routed through an apple orchard near Albany, NY, Orchard Creek is draped over a hilly site and is a strenuous walk. It plays rather wide, with large greens that, while generally well-defended (although mostly open in front and there are a couple of downhill approaches that invite the run-up), are easily reached because of their size. OC has a nice variety of holes, and in quite a departure for a modern course features several blind or semi-blind shots including the approach to the par four second where you play a short or medium iron from a valley to a green perched on a hilltop and the par three 11th. Two of the par fives are reachable and there is a good go-for-it short par four where a crooked shot will find real trouble. Fun to walk, fun to play, very good greens – and at $32 Monday through Friday a tremendous value. Beautiful setting and in the fall you can ogle the fall colors and eat apples while you play.
-
Andy, I'm not pilling on, just providing other thoughts on the comparison and I agree completely on your defense of the 4th, however, Paa-Ko is more repetitive in look, and shot demands due to it's manufactured nature. It's extremely repetitive in it's green side bunker schemes, too. Whereas Black Mesa is more varied because of the use of the natural.
Also, while there are strategic choices to made at Paa ko, how frequently do those decisions really change, either due to the pin position, or natural elements? At BM, the strategic choices change with a greater frequency based on many factors. That type of elasticity is what separates. Also, at BM the desert surrounds do not prohibit recovery the way the surrounds do at PKR. No better image sticks out than watching Baxter Spann playing his ball some 60 yards left of a fairway, way up on the ridge line.
Lastly, I also believe that much more fun can be had at Black Mesa due to the architecture and it's maintenance meld. I usually recognize fun from repeated howls of incredulity after someone's ball takes either a wild ride or a perfectly predicted hard to envision line.
-
Cliff:
Check out Shaker Hills in Harvard, MA
Adam:
We are in agreement -- now if only the House of Reps would vote for a bailout plan and we will have truly a remarkable sets of circumstances on agreement ! ;D
Andy:
You mention what the publications say -- that's nice but frankly I disagree because I have had the opportunity to play nearly all the top candidates and I see Black Mesa being far closer to the very top of the best modern courses than where it is placed now. The Digest assessment and Golf Mag listings are also far too low in my mind.
Now on to your points ...
The 17th at Black Mesa is way better than the drop-shot tee shot you see with the 17th at Paa-Ko Ridge.
You have to place the ball far better at BM's 17th and the approach is much more challenging. If you see the edge as being "not by that much" than you must be seeing things at Paa-Ko that are completely lost to me. You must have forgotten the unique spine at BM's 17th and how tee shot placement is essential there. That the playing angles to the green are dictated on where you land the tee shot. At PKR's 17th it's simply blast the tee shot as far as you can and hit a pro-forma wedge to the green. It's night and day for me.
Ditto the 18th which we agree. You also concede the par-3 side. Let me point out the par-5's you argued on behalf. BM's 3rd and 7th holes are well done -- ditto the 13th and 16th holes. Each allows for the possibility in reaching them in two if conditions and execution permit but know of them is a throw away hole or one that is low level design.
The only real solid par-5 hole I like at PKR from the original 18 is the 15th hole. Dynamite tee shot hole and the second needs to be executed to a high degree if one wants to get home in two blows. The bailout area is also well defended. The others are simply Ok and nothing more.
In regards to the 4th at PKR v the 16th at BM -- it's again no contest. The 16th at BM has plenty of different contours and sections -- the 4th at PKR is simply a three-story department store green. The sheer imagination of 16 at BM is there for people to see.
Andy, the manufactured look that you dismiss out of hand is part and parcel of what architecture should aspire to be. If man's hand can be seen as completely overpowering the naturalness of a site then that's a detriment in my mind. Paa-Ko Ridge has a spectacular site -- the key is trying to link a golf course to that site without the intrusion being so obvious and out of character.
You made a good point about the bunkering -- Dye would have been better served if less bunkers were part of the mix -- using the same theory that Engh applied to at Four Mile Ranch -- although I do see some bunkers at PKR being a plus.
Adam makes an excellent point -- what are the strategic choices you need to make at Paa-Ko Ridge if tees and pin are placed in one area or the other? The elasticity element is clearly a major edge to Black Mesa and I say that with respect for your view but if you were to really analyze each and every hole you'd likely see what is being said by both Adam and myself.
-
I don't do rankings; nor have I done sufficient heavy lifting to do so.
But I have a hunch, having played them, that two of Jeff Brauer's courses in northern Minnesota -- The Quarry at Giants Ridge and The Wilderness at Fortune Bay -- deserve serious consideration in this category.
-
Andy, I'm not pilling on, just providing other thoughts on the comparison and I agree completely on your defense of the 4th, however, Paa-Ko is more repetitive in look, and shot demands due to it's manufactured nature. It's extremely repetitive in it's green side bunker schemes, too. Whereas Black Mesa is more varied because of the use of the natural.
Also, while there are strategic choices to made at Paa ko, how frequently do those decisions really change, either due to the pin position, or natural elements? At BM, the strategic choices change with a greater frequency based on many factors. That type of elasticity is what separates. Also, at BM the desert surrounds do not prohibit recovery the way the surrounds do at PKR. No better image sticks out than watching Baxter Spann playing his ball some 60 yards left of a fairway, way up on the ridge line.
Lastly, I also believe that much more fun can be had at Black Mesa due to the architecture and it's maintenance meld. I usually recognize fun from repeated howls of incredulity after someone's ball takes either a wild ride or a perfectly predicted hard to envision line.
Adam (and Matt),
I agree with some of this, especially your comments about the playability of the desert at Black Mesa vs Paa-Ko. The recovery opportunities are certainly there at BM whereas Paa-Ko it takes quite a bit of fortune to find the ball and play it. The firm conditions at Black Mesa are another plus, but in my experience I haven't found PK to play soft in its own right, just not as firm as Black Mesa--few places are.
I do think the elasticity at PK is better than you or Matt give it credit for. Many of the greens there have significant internal contour in their own right and just hitting the green is not always sufficient. The wind can blow at either course, although that brings the recovery issue (or lack there-of) into play more especially at Paa-Ko. Paa-Ko uses a variety of yardages and elevation changes to its advantage to create variety (as does BM)--while the par threes may be downhill, other holes such as #3, 11, and 12 have uphill approaches. #6 is a tempting hole that to me is more drivable than the two at Black Mesa, even if the options at BM are more varied. Even though I think #14 at BM is wonderful, I pretty much play it the same way every time now. For a longer hitter such as yourself, Matt, I can see #7 and #14 being more interesting than for myself because driving the green is an option.
I do agree that Black Mesa is underrated by the magazines, but other than in GW I think Paa-Ko is as well.
-
Sean,
Is the golf that much better over the pond ??? NOT ONE YOU WOULD PLAN A TRIP AROUND ??? Nothing personal at all but I have a very hard time grasping that. You might need a few more trips !! ;D I agree with your staement of "In general though, there are loads more private courses I would rather see" Well ok I can knock out ten right of the bat from my tongue that are private that I would like to see to but that was not the thread's point. I also know chances are I'm never going to see them either :(. However like others on this thread have mentioned there IS good public golf to be had if your willing to search for it.
I can not agree with you more on Pinehurst. I do like pine needles and the price is a little better. I love the area and the history but won't be playing #2 anytime soon.
The canadian courses you mentioned also have my intrest. Are you refering to Jasper Park ?? There is also a course named humber valley that is getting lot's of press and I have heard good things. Hmmm new thread , canadas best under a 100??? :)
-
Andy:
The point I made -- and likely Adam as well though he can speak for himself -- is not that Paa-Ko Ridge is not a fine layout but that the totality of Black Mesa is a good bit better than the layout located in Sandia. You keep on saying the Santa Fe area layout is just ahead and from the sheer number of points that have been pushed forward it's clear to me the edge between the two courses is no where near as close.
Andy, you completely lose me on the internal dynamics / contour of the greens discussion. Baxter Spann did a helluva job there and I see Black Mesa being in the same league with what you see at a noteworthy place like Ballyneal on that front. Paa-Ko Ridge is primarily tame and fairly easy to decipher. In clear terms, the need for precise approaches is not called upon atthe same level of intensity as you see with Black Mesa.
Adam's point, which I think you overlooked, is that placement off the tee at BM does matter a great deal. There's far less of that at Paa-Ko Ridge.
Andy, really c'mon -- if you think the 6th at Paa-Ko is better than either the 7th or 14th holes at BM then we are really in different time frames. The 6th at Paa-Ko is a decent short par04 but where are the different playing angles. Where does it matter what side of the fairway you land? The two at BM can be played in a far different number of ways for different type players. You also have greens at both of them that are far more complex and require pin point control with the approach. The driveable nature of the two at BM is possible but the factor of DBing any of the two is more likely if you fail.
Keep in mind Andy, the issue I am basing this on is the greatest range of options for the greatest range of players. The 7th and 14th at BM have that in spades. Frankly, as many people who wax poetically about the greatness of the 16th at Pac Dunes, and it's a fine hole, seem to forget just how good the two at BM truly are.
One final point -- BM is NEVER soft or mush-like unless the heavens open up and it would take a mega storm to slow the place down. I have played Paa-Ko Ridge when balls did strike the ground and didn't move more than a very few yards. Hats off to Pat Brockwell for an outstanding job on keeping the course firm and fast unimformly.
Andy - I know we can agree on this - both NM courses do provide a good bit for what they charge.
Dan K:
The issue of what Jeff B did in Minnesota has been mentioned previously on this thread and they are two layouts I have not played to date but I respect the people who have weighed in with such favorable comments.
* * *
-
I don't do rankings; nor have I done sufficient heavy lifting to do so.
But I have a hunch, having played them, that two of Jeff Brauer's courses in northern Minnesota -- The Quarry at Giants Ridge and The Wilderness at Fortune Bay -- deserve serious consideration in this category.
Dan -
I have not played Black Mesa or Paa-ko Ridge, but have played The Quarry at Giants Ridge and it is one of the best courses I have seen anywhere. It is most certainly top 10 public for my money. It was a fun course from start to finish with some very exciting holes. I am sorry I do not get to Minnesota that often (ha, once in 47 years), but I was thrilled to be able to play The Quarry. I played all of the top Minnesota courses that trip and dare say I liked The Quarry the best.
-
Andy - I know we can agree on this - both NM courses do provide a good bit for what they charge.
Lets just agree on that point, I think we've defended our positions and we'll leave it at that. I'm going out to both of them with a couple friends this weekend to play and will be interested to see what they both think.
By the way, #6 at Paa-Ko depends hugely on where the pin is located. Getting a ball from the left side of the fairway to a left pin from 50 yards would be difficult for most folks. When the pin is on the right there is more option to swing away because the green is significantly deeper. Missing left with that left pin is deadsville.
I've never played Paa-Ko in mush-like conditions either and I've played it at different times of the year, either I've been regularly lucky or you were not.
-
Andy:
Be sure the guys who play BM w you - play from the tee markers that they can handle. If BM is played from the tips and the wind whips up to 15-20 mph+ then things can't get really demanding and when people are slopping it around that can leave a distasteful disposition.
BM doesn't handle fools who think they can play at a higher level. I've heard criticism of BM from people of that type and it makes me laugh at their own stupidity.
I'm sure your group undestands that though.
-
Sean,
Is the golf that much better over the pond ??? NOT ONE YOU WOULD PLAN A TRIP AROUND ??? Nothing personal at all but I have a very hard time grasping that. You might need a few more trips !! ;D I agree with your staement of "In general though, there are loads more private courses I would rather see" Well ok I can knock out ten right of the bat from my tongue that are private that I would like to see to but that was not the thread's point. I also know chances are I'm never going to see them either :(. However like others on this thread have mentioned there IS good public golf to be had if your willing to search for it.
I can not agree with you more on Pinehurst. I do like pine needles and the price is a little better. I love the area and the history but won't be playing #2 anytime soon.
The canadian courses you mentioned also have my intrest. Are you refering to Jasper Park ?? There is also a course named humber valley that is getting lot's of press and I have heard good things. Hmmm new thread , canadas best under a 100??? :)
Brad
I don't think the golf here is really any better. Its just that I prefer the model to the typical American public course model.
I would plan a trip to see Pacific Dunes- some day it will probably happen, but there is also the added bonus of other courses there which makes it easy for a tourista like me . Remember, to plan a trip centered around 1 course can be quite an undertaking and not to be taken lightly. Jeepers, I hardly ever make it Sandwich which is one of a handful of "Plan a Trip Around It Courses" I have played and that is only a 3 hour drive!
There are many US publics I would like to see, but from what I can gather, they are mainly the type which you need to see a handful of to make the trip worthwhile. Its just not feasible the way these things scattered over the country. I know many push Black Mesa, but desert golf really doesn't appeal to me. For me, if I am in the area, it may be worth a go. Of Matt's list, the one that really stands out is Wild Horse, but I ain't going there unless Sand Hills is on the cards - thats just the way life is. The other course I hope to see is the Mines, but that is fairly close to where I grew up so it isn't that hard to get to. I also want to see Angels Crossing - which isn't on Matt's list. Like Black Mesa, I am not bothered about the others. That isn't to say that they aren't good courses, but in the big scheme of things, I think it highly unlikely that these are any better than regional gems. Of course, I could be wrong, but I haven't seen anything in pix which really turned my head. This isn't meant to sound harsh. Its a realistic view given limited time, money and a penchant for revisiting favourites.
In any case, despite what Matt believes, I do get what the thread is about and I do appreciate getting info on courses for when/if I am in town.
Ciao
-
Sean:
You have to help me out -- you admit ...
"That isn't to say that they aren't good courses, but in the big scheme of things, I think it highly unlikely that these are any better than regional gems."
This was your comment on the nature of such places like Black Mesa and the others that were listed at the beginning of this thread. Help me out -- I know you said right after that comment you could be wrong but why even state such a conclusion when you have never played anyone of them to say with a high degree of certainty?
I don't doubt you and others may never see the courses in question. How bout just leaving it at that before jumping off the cliff and proclaiming that they are likely not going to be anything more than a regional best type course.
You also state Black Mesa is desert golf and the reality is that the course is less than the stereotypical notion that many people erroneously have about what the course is about. There are plenty of areas for recovery and the nature of the course is far from the "sink or swim" design features that often times straightjacket players when they play bonafide desert courses that are way too penal in most instances.
Sean, you say you aren't being "harsh" but you are doing exactly what you claim you are not doing. You are drawing definitive conclusions without the personal research to back it up. I understand that circumstances of each person may not allow the time, money and / or opportunity to travel at-will. I would just hope that people who have limited situations not go to extremes to point out how limited or regionalistic such courses may be when they have not played them to truly weigh in with a much clearer assessment.
Sean, American public golf is much more dynamic than what you think or believe. If you simply scan and draw conclusions from second or third hand sources and then weigh in with a set opinion -- in actuality it makes you come off in a certain way. I leave it to you to decide whether that's flattering or not.
-
I played BOTH the Trophy Club and Purgatory this year and The Trophy Club is the better course, hands down. I enjoyed Purgatory, but it really wasn't as good as it is marketed to be.
Here are a few pics of the Trophy Club:
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0245.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0248.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0253.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0256.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0258.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0265.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0266.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0267.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0273.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0278.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0282.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0286.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0292.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0295.jpg)
(http://www.hetzelfamily.org/golf/TrophyClub/DSCF0296.jpg)
Matt,
I concur on Lakewood Shores. We spent 3 days there in July and one couldn't have been MORE DISAPPOINTED with the golf. Average at best.
The Trophy Club played as nice as it looks in the above pics...
-
Rich:
Great pics -- just for curiosity - how firm and fast did the course play. When I was there the last time it was simply a joy to behold.
Like I said before -- the State of Indiana has some really fun and unique courses and far too often Americans and likely foreigners would quickly dismiss going there for anything more than sheer ignorance.
-
Matt,
It played firm enough that you had to think about your club selection when hitting into the greens. It looked "soft" in the pics, but it did not play as such. A nice change for sure.
I didn't mean to be so harsh on Purgatory, it was fun, but I also walked 18 there in a non-stop drizzle so that may have detracted from the overall experience.
I live in Cincinnati and MUCH MUCH prefer the course offerings in Indy. They have so many NICE courses and we just have a lot of cheap golf here.
I usually drive there 2-4 times per year and play a new course. The Fort is great as well, although it does not meet your criteria of 1998-2008.
PS: I am playing Blue Heron GC Saturday which was voted as a top upscale public for 2007 or 2008, I cannot remember.
-
Matt & Sean,
I have the perfect meeting place for you two. Sean figure out when you'll be on this side of the pond and schedule it with Matt and come be my guest. I'll get Crazy Joe and we can play Angels in the morning and the Mines in the afternoon.
JT
-
Jim:
Great post !
Maybe we can make a slight detour out west and hit a few of those as well.
Don't know if I would head to Angels but I hear good words about Sand Hollow in Hurricane, UT.
-
Have to mention New England does have a solid candidate for consideration in the category -- Crumpin-Fox Golf Course in Bernardston, MA.
Designed by Roger Rulewich, the 18-hole layout is well crafted and as a good a job as Rulewich did with Ballyowen, the CCFAD layout in Northern NJ -- the work here is well done with the course working its way through the mature forest and providing a wide variety of different holes and looks.
New England may not get much love when the national stage is the benchmark but from the several different times I have played the course it does offer a model by which other public courses of equal price range can aspire to being.
p.s. The 8th hole there -- 592 yards from the tips -- is arguably one of the best long par-5 holes among the affordable public courses I have played.
Just one final aspect -- I know the course opened (1990) prior to the time line mentioned but it does provide some serious quality public golf without emptying the wallet to do it.
-
Have played Crumpin-Fox twice and can't agree totally with you on this one. Yes, it does provide quality golf for the price, but while above average there's a certain repetition with so many elevated greens. As to the 8th certainly a solid hole but looks more like Florida than western Massachusetts. As mentioned previously I would put Red Tail well above Crumpin-Fox in Massachusetts. Frankly, also prefer the soon to be gone Waverly Oaks in the same price range.
-
Cliff:
We agree to disagree - I see the 8th as being as natural as can be given what was used there and what existed prior to the hole's creation.
Red Tail no doubt should be applauded -- but I wonder if you have ever played Shaker Hills in Harvard, MA and your opinion on that Brian Silva layout.
Last point on Crumpin-Fox -- the amount of disturbance from previous times I had had the opportunity to chat w Roger Rulewich is quite minimal and may get lost in the overall analysis on just how lofty the place truly is.
-
Have not played Shaker Hills. It is on the to do list. Have heard it is rather tight. Curious if others have an opinion? ... BTW I do love the atmosphere and setting of Crumpin Fox. No CCFAD crap and the staff have always been great.The proshop reminds me more than a little of Tobacco Road.
-
Matt & Sean,
I have the perfect meeting place for you two. Sean figure out when you'll be on this side of the pond and schedule it with Matt and come be my guest. I'll get Crazy Joe and we can play Angels in the morning and the Mines in the afternoon.
JT
Jim
One day I am gonna make it to Angels. Its just when I am in Michigan it always seems harder to stray too far from Detroit as the only reason I go there is to see family.
Brad
There was one other public I forgot that could entice me as a destination trip - Pasatiempo. The redo looks intriguing. Of course its more than a $100, but what can you do.
Ciao
-
I just caught up with this thread today. From what I can tell, the course I think flew under all your radars is Bayside in Ogallala. Yeah, thre are 3 clinker holes IMHO, but I'd pay the modest price there just to play the other 15!!!
-
Cliff:
Red Tail no doubt should be applauded -- but I wonder if you have ever played Shaker Hills in Harvard, MA and your opinion on that Brian Silva layout.
Matt:
It has been several years but I recall really enjoying Shaker Hills.
-
Since people have mentioned New England public options there are a few courses in and around the general Boston area that are quite good and rather inexpensive. I mentioned Shaker Hills as one clear option. Silva did a fine job on this rolling piece of property -- there's enough width to accomodate most players but it's not simply bombs away from the tee. A very good competitor to the likes of Red Tail.
Candidly, one must also mention the 36-hole complex in Stow, MA w Stow Acres. The layout did host the USGA Pub Links a few years back -- the North is quite a layout -- one can make a very easy case that the 9th on the North -- at 478 yards -- is one of the top long par-4's among all public courses in the New England area.
RJ Daley:
I really liked Bayside and have opined previously that the downside of the course has been overblown by its critics. However, the one key layout that separates itself on the public side and within the fee structure outlined is Wild Horse.
RJ, I really do like the back nine at Bayside -- there are a number of unique holes -- the par-3 17th has got to be one of the most unique short par-3's I've ever played -- the green there rivals anything one can find at Sand Hills or any other course for that matter.
-
Matt,
I played Red Rock today. The rate after Oct. 1 is $49 for all day with a cart. You can expect less than firm and fast at this time of year as the Supt., Rick Witt gets the place wet for the winter - which could happen any minute or it could be January before any snow. Greens are as fast as the day you played a couple of years ago.
-
Ron:
No doubt actions are taken as the season winds down -- but it astounds me how Red Rock flies that low on the radar screen when compared to the gushing of other northern plains courses takes place -- most notably Links of North at Red Mike and Bully Pulpit. Red Rock, IMHO, is the better choice and the margin is more than just by a nose in either situation.
-
Matt, catch me on the right day, and I might say that the front 9 at Bayside is as good or better than either 9 at Wild Horse. It is the back side that has 3 or 4 clinker holes, 11,13,15, some say 18. 12,14,16,17 are terrific.
-
RJ:
I hear what you say -- but the long par-5 11th is meant to psyche players out with the way it falls off on both sides. I don't see anything wrong with that concept -- it's simply the reverse of containment mounding.
Yes, the hole does provoke strong feelings and if people play it from the max at 650+ yards they need to bring some healthy game with them to handle the demands presented. Played from the whites the hole is only 555 yards but there's enough width but not so much width as to tolerate indifferent play.
Although I have not played it -- the photos I have seen of one of the par-5's at Cape Kidnappers seems to use the same technique in which dropoffs to either side occur. Rj I also like the aspect that players can tackle the challenge in trying to cut the corner of the 10th depending upon wind directions and their overall taste for adventure.
You'll have to explain to me why you see it as a clinker.
Ditto your take on the 13th and 15th holes. I think we have had discussion on the 15th hole previously. There's enough room for players to get home in three shots -- but they each need to be placed in the right spot. Strong players can even get there in two blows with a big time gamble drive over the corner. No doubt the approach from the fairway if it's more than 150 yards is not easy but why should it be? I absolutely adore the solitary front bunker. Again, you comments are most welcome.
In regards to the 18th -- I am not a fan of the forcd lay-up type hole but in this situation it works quite well. There's more room to the right than many might think but like I said I have so-so feelings when holes mandate that players must club down or be forcd to face the consequences.
RJ, you've got me thinking that Bayside should be included on the list for a whole host of reasons. I'd certainly include it on any honorable mention list even with the drawbacks that you and some others likely have with it.
P.S. I would urge all people who want to see the 17th green at Bayside to check out the photo posted on their Website. It is one of the best I've seen for a hole that plays to a max of 147 yards. I only wish David M would see this since he often asks me about quality short holes I have played. The 17th at Bayside is a gem of a hole and it never could be boring in any way whatsoever.
-
[
Brad
There was one other public I forgot that could entice me as a destination trip - Pasatiempo. The redo looks intriguing. Of course its more than a $100, but what can you do.
Ciao
[/quote]
Sean,
You could def go to pasatiempo and also get a couple of other courses in to. I actually received gift cards for Pebble and still have not used them :(. I figured when I was out there I would also hit up Pasatiempo.
Did you remember the other Canadian course ?
Brad
-
Guys, not for nothing -- but the thread centers around courses under $100 during peak times. Quite frankly, there are really few top tier public courses in California that can make such a claim for national status.
I don't discounts can and do happen but such discounts generally don't occur or are accepted during peak playing times.
-
Candidly, one must also mention the 36-hole complex in Stow, MA w Stow Acres. The layout did host the USGA Pub Links a few years back -- the North is quite a layout -- one can make a very easy case that the 9th on the North -- at 478 yards -- is one of the top long par-4's among all public courses in the New England area.
Is the North course the one cut out of the forest? I played that one and thought it was one of the most unpleasant miserable golf experiences I have ever had - and I was paired with a terrific group of guys.
It was like playing down a series of curvy narrow tunnels. Talk about 6 hour rounds! I can't imagine that course is ever in good shape - there is no sunlight.
The capper was when I tried to get a beer - and everone laughed at me. Apparently they do not sell beer on Massacheusetts golf courses - or did not at that time (10 years ago).
-
Matt,
I love bargains too, but isn't the fallacy of this whole discussion (as well as the GD method of separating "Affordable" and "Exorbitant" public courses) the simple fact that it is so driven and ultimately dictated by the economics of geography?
-
Matt, if Beechtree had opened one year later, would you have put in your Top 10? Top rate there is 95 bucks.
-
Mike:
Your premise might make sense to many but I can say this in the many travels and states I have visited -- there's no doubt you won't see so many "bargain" layouts with low fees in the more densely populated areas because the price for land, permits to construct and the wherewithal to bump up the price can and does often result in plenty of hefty increases.
However ...
There are clear exceptions if one truly investigates the possibilities ...
Rustic Canyon is one of those examples in the LA area. In NJ you have the likes of The Knoll and Hominy Hill, to name just two. In New York, until most recently, you had the likes of Bethpage State Park and its assorted courses with the flagship Black leading the way. Tallgrass is also a good back-up for those inclined to visit eastern Long Island. In PA you have the likes of Lederach and Morgan Hill -- not being far from Philadelphia. In Boston, the likes of Shaker Hills and Red Tail are also main contenders.
In general terms, your proposition is true but frankly Digest and a few of the other magazines have really failed to delve deeper and find affordable layouts of outstanding design that are not either geared towards the CCFAD model or have such marketing hype that the message and frontal publicity is nothing more then veneer and not much deeper than that.
Joe B:
The short answer is yes -- but not at the highest top tier as the ones I originally listed.
Candidly, I like Beechtree in plenty of ways but if you compare what Doak did with The Rawls Course the gap between the two is self evident - to at least my mind it is.
Jason:
Based on your accounts - I think we are talking about different courses. The North went through a major upgrade prior to the US Public Links event. The course is wide enough to handle different styles -- in regards to slow play - frankly that can happen at any number of courses throughout the USA -- including private ones in certain instances.
I don't know when you played it and beyond the slow play aspect I cannot address without any real detail what you thought were the shortcoming of the design. The North is indeed a fine layout now and it's overall pricing is quite attractive for just about any pocketbook.