Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: ChipOat on October 06, 2009, 06:27:57 PM
-
I'm going to raise some hackles on this one, I'll bet. The real title I had in mind should be, "Is Fishers Island SLIGHTLY overrated?" but that wouldn't have gotten as much attention so I went with the more provocative one.
First, I think Fishers is a magnificently beautiful, and wonderfully designed golf course and I could play there every day and still love it.
But the MacDonald/Raynor thread got me thinking about Piping Rock and The Creek versus Fishers. If you compare the pure architecture (admittedly, as I view it) and strip out the gorgeous ocean views at Fishers, does Fishers really deserve all the raving it gets that puts it so far ahead of the other two in the minds of almost everybody? Not in my opinion.
It isn't easy to move a lot of earth around, dig deeper bunkers and build more creative green complexes on a small, essentially private island located 12 miles offshore - especially in 1918. Erego, I think Piping Rock and The Creek OUGHT to be at least as good as Fishers - if not better.
The best example I can think of is the Redan at each of the three (apologies to those on this site who haven't played them). It would have been, and would still be, a major undertaking to re-create the depth of the bunkers and pitch of the green at Fishers compared to Piping, Creek, National, Shinnecock, Somerset Hills (Tillinghast) and all the others that I haven't ever seen. At Fishers, if you dig down more than 3 feet, you hit salt water. To make a Redan with the same teeth and degree of difficulty as those mainland examples, the green would have had to be built UP a good five feet which then requires an elevated tee box - which would probably look stupid sitting there next to the first green.
Are there some world class holes at Fishers Island? Of course there are - it's a Raynor. Biarritz comes to mind as the best I've ever seen and the Alps/Punchbowl combo is another mega-winner.
But does Fishers deserve its elevated stature on most radar screens versus Piping Rock and The Creek? As a golf PLACE, Fishers Island is hard to beat anywhere. As a golf COURSE, I think the other two are just as good (or better) - and they should be.
Go ahead, guys - take your shots at this heretic.
-
Fishers may not be the best course in the world but its the nicest.
I played there once, a few years ago and I can't remember half the holes. With that said, I remember it being a magical day and couldn't have enjoyed myself more.
-
Chip:
I would like to bite but I won't because I've never really gone for this thing about discussing if some course is BETTER than another or others. To me it's just a matter of if a course is good or not and why. All of them are very good good courses for sure, as it Fishers. The only knock I've ever had on Fishers is that a few holes have never been very inspiring to me. That would include the 1st and the 10th for some reason and probably the 15th. On all three I've always sort of felt like you just hit the ball to get from here to the next good hole the way it is and should be.
With the redan, I hear what you're saying but I've always liked the hole and I always tried not to even thing of it as a redan, just a par 3 hole and a good and interesting one at that. I'd like to see them keep the grass up some in the hazard just to keep the overall sight of the hole from the tee a little blindish and deceptive for that reason. I like the idea on that hole of sort of knowing where you should go but not being able to clearly see the latitude of the line particularly the aggressive line a bit to the left of the safer right line.
But most all the rest of the holes have something pretty cool going for them and are wonderful to me for their unique personalities and some are awesome every time you play them. #3 is a real sleeper gem and #4 is awesome and unforgettable as is #5. It's Interesting that with a number of the old line members their favorite is actually #8 which definitely offers a tee shot, particularly in the wind, that makes one pucker and on which one can go very wrong in a heartbeat with the wrong line!
So that's my take, Chipperino, not all that much but there you have it.
I guess there's more such as the approach shot to #9 particularly in the wind. It may not be long but it's just a really cool shot anyway and particularly with the backdrop and the potential danger seems to stay in your mind right into your backswing!
Oh, the Eden! Pretty damn fine hole too and it certainly is an Eden with a river or bay or whatever behind it as an Eden should be.
Is Fishers Island over-rated? Not in my book!
-
Tom,
Do you think Fishers is THAT much better than PRC or The Creek? That's the point of my thread.
I've only played seven "MacRaynors" and several of those before I discovered GCA (e.g. Yale). For pure, on-the-ground architecture, Piping Rock is my #2 behind NGLA.
-
I think Mountain Lake gets the same reputation from a good number of people, not surprising considering their deeply rooted connections and parallel histories.
However, perhaps we must look at Fishers and Mountain Lake in the vein in which they were designed... destination, getaway golf courses. I've always called Mountain Lake Raynor's "Resort" Course. It is Raynor Lite with some pretty cool stuff regardless.
-
Chip,
The site is a HUGE factor when you analyze a course, and I can't think of too many sites in the U.S. that are better than Fishers. So it would seem wrong to take points away from the golf course because the site is so good...
-
Yes slightly. If you couldn't see the water from every tee and every green it wouldn't rate so highly, but fact is you can!
-
Bill,
To me, the site (and the high ranking) at Fishers is more about the view than what's on the ground (which is still awfully good). With the exception of Biarritz and Alps, I think Piping Rock and, to a lesser degree, The Creek are the equals of Fishers Island in terms of golf architecture because of the green complexes.
-
"Tom,
Do you think Fishers is THAT much better than PRC or The Creek? That's the point of my thread."
Chip:
No I don't. I think they are all very good courses and very good architecture and that is the point of my last post.
I don't like discussing what courses are better than other courses but if one wants to discuss with me what I think is good, moderate or not that good about any particular golf course I am more than willing to do that. I've just never really seen the point of comparative discussions of golf courses. But I have no problem at all with discussing the positves and negative of A golf course.
-
I don't think so, I would think just about right. For me the most overrated of the three is the Creek and the most underrated Piping...RHE
-
I've only played the Creek. The Biarritz green was not what I had hoped, but from what I've been told, it's because the water table there would not allow a more pronounced swale in the green. The Eden was very good and I liked the Reverse Redan. The green on 6 is un-freaking-believable and 15 is sublime. I absolutely love the place.
-
Tom Paul,
If you won't play the comparison game, how do you expect to participate in many of the pissing contests around here?
Besides, are you telling me that, if you and I split a bottle of good claret with an extra dry martini beforehand, that I couldn't get you to give me a detailed opinion of the merits of Gulph Mills versus other Donald Ross creations? If you think, "no", you're in denial.
Do you remember the Monty Python sketch about "The Argument"? If not, see YouTube.
-
David,
The Creek has great views and many excellent holes - including the best golf hole from tee-to-green that's ever been built (#6).
In my opinion, Piping Rock, which has no "eye candy", is the (slightly) better golf course because a) with over 300 acres, they had much more property than anybody ever needs for 18 holes, b) the green complexes are, on the whole, more imaginative (despite the one's you mention, The Creek still has a couple that could be better, I think) and c) building good golf holes in low lying, marsh-y areas isn't easy.
-
"Besides, are you telling me that, if you and I split a bottle of good claret with an extra dry martini beforehand, that I couldn't get you to give me a detailed opinion of the merits of Gulph Mills versus other Donald Ross creations?"
Chipperino:
I am indeed! I will give you alll the merits and drawbacks of GMGC I am aware of but not in comparison to some other course or Ross course.
"If you think, "no", you're in denial."
THAT is your opinion and not my problem. Frankly, you are beginning to sound more and more like Patrick Mucci. Is there some reason for that you might be aware of, and if so please try to get over it and hopefully in a hurry!
I am of the opinion, and always have been, that one can deal with a particular golf course----make it better, make it worse, whatever, in the context of that particular golf course but one can never do that in the context of some other golf course compared to another. Futhermore, one does not and never has played two or three golf courses at the same time----one only plays one at a time and that is all that needs to be considered in and about any golf course and what it is about quality-wise.
What you are asking me to do is not critique the specifics and particulars of any golf course (which I am willing to do); you are asking me to engage in cocktail conversation about golf courses and golf archhitecture in comparson! ;)
Why don't you just ask me where I would go if I had only one last round to play?
-
Let me begin by saying I don't believe FI is overrated, I love the golf course, but it is one of the more unusual Raynor golf courses I've seen. In comparing the highs to other Raynor courses, the highs are extremely high, but the lows are quite low, that is relative to other SR courses. The result is you have a pretty significant contrast. The other unusual contrast are the features, you have some of the wildest land forms and big scale man-made features contrasted with some of the most low profile features I've seen on a Raynor course.
From what I understand Raynor died prior to the course being completed, and it was finished by Banks. I suspect there is more than to that story because if anything Banks seemed to kick it up a notch over Raynor. The other unusual aspect of the course is the lack of fairway bunkering, I believe there is only one on the entire golf course.
-
Not to the point of the thread, but Tom is perhaps the best I've ever seen at taking a course for its merits and nothing more. He has reaffirmed my belief that every golf course has SOMETHING to it.
Comparative architecture is crap, really. Yeah, I said it.
-
Tom,
I hope that you are not implying that Fishers is less than it could be because Banks finished the course.
Raynor died while the course was under construction, but Raynor did the routing and was there for the first year of construction, Banks the second. The FI centennial book is pretty clear that Banks finished it per Raynor's plans.
-
Bill,
To me, the site (and the high ranking) at Fishers is more about the view than what's on the ground (which is still awfully good). With the exception of Biarritz and Alps, I think Piping Rock and, to a lesser degree, The Creek are the equals of Fishers Island in terms of golf architecture because of the green complexes.
Chip, are you saying that the water is not a major factor in playing the course?
-
Chip; "I'm going to raise some hackles on this one, I'll bet"
hackle hackle hackle hackle hackle hackle hackle hackle
-
"Not to the point of the thread, but Tom is perhaps the best I've ever seen at taking a course for its merits and nothing more. He has reaffirmed my belief that every golf course has SOMETHING to it.
Comparative architecture is crap, really. Yeah, I said it."
Kyle:
Tom who? There are a lot of Toms on this website.
-
"Not to the point of the thread, but Tom is perhaps the best I've ever seen at taking a course for its merits and nothing more. He has reaffirmed my belief that every golf course has SOMETHING to it.
Comparative architecture is crap, really. Yeah, I said it."
Kyle:
Tom who? There are a lot of Toms on this website.
Bunch of turkeys.... ;D
-
I only played there once, in a gale and I loved it. I would need a few more plays in varying weather.
-
"Let me begin by saying I don't believe FI is overrated, I love the golf course, but it is one of the more unusual Raynor golf courses I've seen."
Let me begin by saying I do not for a minute believe Tom MacWood has ever been to Fishers Island or ever actually seen the golf course of Fishers Island. His remark on here seems to make it sound that way but I, for one, do not believe it, any more than I believe he has ever seen Myopia, Merion or Pine Valley, some of the significant courses in America he has nevertheless expressed his opinions on the specific details on, as well as the specifics of their architectural histories and such! One needs to ask---how is that? Is it only through newspaper and magazine articles?
Personally, I do not think that is or ever will be sufficient but what the hell do I know? ;)
-
Tom,
I hope that you are not implying that Fishers is less than it could be because Banks finished the course.
Raynor died while the course was under construction, but Raynor did the routing and was there for the first year of construction, Banks the second. The FI centennial book is pretty clear that Banks finished it per Raynor's plans.
I had read Banks finished the course (I read the club history on the boat ride back to LI with Donnie Beck), and although I do see some Banks influence it has several holes that are more low profile than anything I've seen of Banks (or Raynor). I think there must be more to the story.
Banks' nickname was steamshovel. How difficult would it be to get steamshovels on to the island in 1927? Perhaps not difficult at all, but I don't know the answer.
-
Chip,
I haven't played PR or Creek so I can't compare. I have never heard anyone ever say Fishers has 18 great golf holes. I don't even know what it is ranked. I can say that Fishers is the course I daydream about the most and obviously the setting has something to do with that. Holes #3-5 and #8-12 are the significant stretch of holes architecturally to my way of thinking. None of the rest are bad holes by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm sure the exclusivity of the course, the ferry ride over that heightens the anticipation (must be somewhat akin to driving down Magnolia Lane I would think), and the stunning setting add so much to the mystique of the place that it's ranking is positively affected.
I think North Berwick would be a course that one could say is overrated in purely architectural terms like FI, but not many people rate courses that way. NB has a number of mediocre holes, but the great, funky, quirky ones more than make up for it and thus NB is on the short list of any serious golfer who crosses the pond.
So yes one could say that FI is overrated, but I won't be the one saying it. :)
-
OK, so I won't ever start a comparative thread ever again. Some of you guys are just no fun.
However, the ratings/rankings are a legitimate golf architecture topic and I, for one, am interested in dialogues/opinions about where SOME of those relative rankings are based on what's on the ground versus other attributes such as history, scenery, reputation, etc., etc.
For instance, I enjoy reviewing my own personal preferences and discussing whether it's really the just the golf course that I enjoy (or not) or are there a host of other factors that make me want to return (or not)?
Tom Paul:
I'll provide the claret and you pick the venue that makes a good martini and, also, has at least halfway decent food. Since we don't want to share any of the wine (I only have a single bottle of anything good), nobody else is to be invited. You may prove to be right but, given how we intend to find out, do you really care how this little wager turns out?
As a hopeless linear thinker, I must acknowledge that Patrick's arguments are eminently logical and, at the least, much easier to follow and digest than some others that require constant re-reading.
Bill Brightly:
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that, well......I'm saying what you quoted me as saying. I believe, for what my opinion's worth, that Fishers Island is roughly the equivalent of Piping Rock and, to a lesser degree, The Creek in terms of the merits of what's on the ground (which includes the water that comes into play at both FI and TC). Raters and magazines can rank them anyway they choose. I prefer to try and strip out the non-architecture stuff in my mind because that's what I like to do. On that basis, the meaningfully higher ranking, and general perception, of FI versus the other two is worthy of a thread in that regard on this DG.
If the question had to do with visual appeal, Fishers wins hands down (except in a dense fog) and PRC is bringing up the rear.
-
Chip:
I agree w Bill B -- the location is part and parcel of the discussion. If you were to take your point -- which I can perfectly understand -- one can apply that to those who ask where the overall beef is with other places -- like Pebble Beach -- which maximize their standing because of the proximity of the H20.
Chip, the "non-architecture stuff" you mentioned is really an element that can't be divorced from the actual holes themselves.
Location does matter.
In terms of an analysis of just the holes from say FI when held against the likes of PR and TC -- I do agree that from a consistency standpoint the latter two are quite good in plenty of ways. Clearly, FI benefits from the journey it takes most people to get there in making the effort to play there.
I will say this -- in the two times I have played the course -- the weather was simply glorious both times and it swayed me in a big time way. Is FI really a top 25 course in the USA -- for me -- it would not be but I'd have to say among all the SR courses I have played it's the best of that group.
To answer you question -- I don't see FI being that much better than the other two -- but it clearly benefits from where it's located.
-
What is it we look for in a golf course? I know nothing of Piping Rock or the Creek but I have played Fishers Island but once and consider it one of the most enjoyable experiences of my golfing life. Yes , the first hole does not take your breath away but the rest of the round is a veritable feast. Most of my golfing days have been spent on a Raynor course that was finished after he had died and Fishers seems to have followed suit.
Fishers may have some deficiencies but rather like a wrinkle in the brow of a loved one, it is gem to treasure.
Bob
-
"Not to the point of the thread, but Tom is perhaps the best I've ever seen at taking a course for its merits and nothing more. He has reaffirmed my belief that every golf course has SOMETHING to it.
Comparative architecture is crap, really. Yeah, I said it."
Kyle:
Tom who? There are a lot of Toms on this website.
Tom You
-
Chip,
One more thing: you can't just look at "what is on the ground" because the game is also played in the air!
Given that Fishers Island is on an ISLAND in the middle of the LI Sound, it has WIND! Take what might appear to be a simple hole and add 20 to 30 mph winds, and the hole's difficulty goes up exponentially. So that is why the site gives FI such a huge advantage.
-
Chipoat,
I haven't played Fisher's Island and hope to do so in the not too distant future.
I noticed that you placed Piping Rock above The Creek.
I love both courses, but, as Bill B points out, the element of the wind seems to be a catalyst to greatness or at the very least, enhancement.
It's for that reason that I tend to prefer The Creek, although, barely by a nod.
Sitting up on the bluff, the early holes enjoy a good breeze and as you descend to and then away from the beach/water, the golf course seems to thrive on the wind.
The Redan at PR is vastly superior, however, the redan par 4 1st, combined with the reverse redan 8th are a neat combination of redans. I also prefer the short at TC as it's "short". I would like it even more if the internal contouring was restored.
The Biarritz at PR is also vastly superior in terms of the purity of the structure of the putting surface, but, the 11th at TC, with the wind up, is one hell of a golf hole.
As TEPaul said, or meant to say, comparisons often fail.
If one was exiled to either course and condemned to play it every day for the rest of their life, would they not be in golfing heaven ?
-
I cannot comment on either PR OD The Creek having not played them, but I dont think that would change my answer anyway.
I cannot imagine Fishers ever bben accused of being overarted.
Such a wonderful example of early architecture, it has so many of the wonderful hole designs that we cherish, the setting is sublime, the course runs fast with sparse use of water, the green complexes brilliant and the entire aura of the place is just so special.
It is rather short by todays standards, but that is one of the things that makes it unique, nobody has come in and"modernised" what is a classic golf course.
You feel that it has remained untouched...a total throwback to design features that were cutting edge over a hundred yeras ago...I love the place!
-
Why don't you just ask me where I would go if I had only one last round to play?
Actually,I'd be curious to hear the answer since you've probably more greats than most.BTW-neither Gulph Mills nor Fernandina Beach Muni count.
-
ditto....I would be equally curious Tom....as I would to hear Patrick's answer to the same question?
-
"The Biarritz at PR is also vastly superior in terms of the purity of the structure of the putting surface, but, the 11th at TC, with the wind up, is one hell of a golf hole."
Pat:
I really don't like to compare holes course to course but how could one not be impressed by The Creek's Biarritz? The thing looks and plays like trying to hit the deck of an aircraft carrier with a golf ball from 200 yards away. The unique thing about that particular biarritz is it effectively is a total island green unlike most of the others in existence. All around it you have only about three steps of apron and beyond that you are in the water hazard. Remarkably The Creek's biarritz was originally designed with sand bunkers surrounding most of it. Not a great idea C.B. and Seth with a seriously rising tide surrounding that green! ??? ::) ;)
I can just see C.B.'s Creek Club nemesis Howard Dean screaming at him: "Charlie, what the Hell, your biarritz sand bunkers have just floated over to Piping Rock's beach club."
Charlie's wounded response was something along the lines of: "That's not my fault, obviously THAT ENGINEER messed up on that one." ;)
-
If I had just one round to play and that was the end of it there is no question at all that it would be NGLA!
And if that was the case it would complete a remarkable bookend to a life of golf because I believe the first 18 hole round of golf I ever played was at NGLA. I was just a kid and it was with my father (a really good player), James Knott (a real curmudgeon and excellent player) and Bobby Grant (another world class character and great all around athlete).
There is no way I can forget that first round at NGLA with those three-----MY GOD was I scared!! ;)
PS:
I will also never forget how Grant and Knott went into the pro shop, bought a sleeve of new golf balls each and proceeded to drive all six right into Peconic Bay from the tips. Then they turned around and were ready to go. I don't think they even allow that odd (and to me back then oddly arrogant) practice anymore!
-
Maybe they didnt have time to hit the range? ;D
-
JC:
Back in that day I don't believe NGLA even had a range. One of the reasons for that is club practice balls were not even something one saw very often. Most of those guys like my dad had their own. Back in that day, particularly with the good players, practice ball bags were very common. They are something one pretty much never sees anymore for obvious reasons. How times change, huh?
-
JC:
Back in that day I don't believe NGLA even had a range. One of the reasons for that is club practice balls were not even something one saw very often. Most of those guys like my dad had their own. Back in that day, particularly with the good players, practice ball bags were very common. They are something one pretty much never sees anymore for obvious reasons. How times change, huh?
What do you mean "back in that day"?Hell,I'm 53 and can still remember having/using shag bags.
-
"OK, so I won't ever start a comparative thread ever again. Some of you guys are just no fun.
However, the ratings/rankings are a legitimate golf architecture topic and I, for one, am interested in dialogues/opinions about where SOME of those relative rankings are based on what's on the ground versus other attributes such as history, scenery, reputation, etc., etc.
For instance, I enjoy reviewing my own personal preferences and discussing whether it's really the just the golf course that I enjoy (or not) or are there a host of other factors that make me want to return (or not)?"
Chipperino:
Don't lose heart. As far as I'm concerned you can start all the comparative threads you want; but when you do just be prepared to be lambasted for it by odd and eccentric duffuses like me. To me there should only be ONE rating and ranking list or system and that would be ONE's OWN!
And with that, I go for your last paragraph. No reason for you not to review your own personal preferences and to try to decide for YOURSELF whether it's really just the golf course you enjoy (or not) or are there a host of other factors that make you want to return (or not)? Have the courage of your own convictions in that vein, my friend. I don't see why you need someone else to confirm or deny them for you.
Frankly, I'm of the Henry VIII school of thought that one should always keep one's own council and if one's hat hears one's council then it is best to take one's hat off and cast it into the fire!!
On the other hand, if you still insist on trying to carry on DISCUSSIONS with others on here about the comparative pros and cons of golf holes or golf courses and you state your own beliefs and convictions about them and someone denies them and tries to argue with you, WELL THEN, Chipperino, you must be fully prepared to tell those people they are all a bunch of unsophisticated Know-Nothings with about as much taste as a third string guttersnipe!
-
"The Eden was very good....."
David Stamm, you unsophisticated Know-Nothing with about as much taste as a third string guttersnipe---the Eden at The Creek is the worst Eden Macdonald ever created and by a Long Island mile with the possible exception of The Eden at Piping Rock!!! (with the latter the idea of an Eden is to get some replication of the Eden River behind the green (like the Eden at Fishers Island) and not some damn tennis house, and with the former the same goes and not a bunch of completely uninspiring trees that are on Mrs Grundy's property!).
NOW, Fishers Island's Eden? THAT's an EDEN, and that overbearing putz, Charles Blair Macdonald, didn't have one damn thing to do with it!!
-
If I had just one round to play and that was the end of it there is no question at all that it would be NGLA!
And if that was the case it would complete a remarkable bookend to a life of golf because I believe the first 18 hole round of golf I ever played was at NGLA. I was just a kid and it was with my father (a really good player), James Knott (a real curmudgeon and excellent player) and Bobby Grant (another world class character and great all around athlete).
There is no way I can forget that first round at NGLA with those three-----MY GOD was I scared!! ;)
PS:
I will also never forget how Grant and Knott went into the pro shop, bought a sleeve of new golf balls each and proceeded to drive all six right into Peconic Bay from the tips. Then they turned around and were ready to go. I don't think they even allow that odd (and to me back then oddly arrogant) practice anymore!
Anyone else wondering if this Tom Paul guy is a real person? ;)
What a story for your first 18 hole round. The only downside is the venues for future rounds pretty much just go downhill from there.
-
JohnM:
You know what I'm about to say really never occured to me until this moment, but back then and actually probably up until about the mid 1990s golf course architecture hardly ever occured to me at all. It was all about playing the game and probably about the people you were playing with which made up my recollections all those years.
Do you know NGLA and if you do can you guess which two holes I remembered clearest when I went back to NGLA after not having been there for about forty years?
That's probably something of a trick question because I thought previously that the two I remembered the clearest had something to do with the architecture of them but that may not be the case at all. On some reflection, I think the hole I remember the clearest from perhaps that first round (described above) was because I hit a shot to the green on that hole which I believe might have been the first really great shot I ever hit on a golf course. THAT alone I think now may be the sole reason that particular hole was so clear to me after all those decades. Again, I doubt it had anything to do with some sense of golf architecture, it was all about the exhiliration of that one shot, and perhaps even the reaction of the people I was with.
I suppose I tend to forget perhaps the over-riding salience of that kind of thing because for the last fifteen years or so I have so fallen in love with golf course architecture, something I virtually paid no attention to before that. I wonder how many golfers out there are the way I used to be in that vein.
It gives one such as us on here some pause, don't you think? And here is another thought that may very well astound a lot of people-----do you realize that as they always said Bobby Fischer remembered clearly every single move he ever made in his remarkably august career in chess those who knew Sam Snead have all said that he could remember crystal clear every golf shot he ever hit. Think about that! If true it really is remarkable and I wonder what it really means.
-
Tom,
Has to be holes 3 and 4, Alps and Redan, right?
-
BillB:
Actually it was the 1st and the 16th. I guess the first because it really is pretty odd and memorable for that reason for a first timer there and I guess I had plenty of time on that tee with those guys waiting to go off. The 16th because that's where I hit my first great shot of my life. After about forty years I could only very vaguely remember the holes you mentioned. Can you believe it? It really does show how little I thought about architecture or noticed it but if there was a close third I guess it was the Cape Hole for reasons that should be pretty obvious for a kid who wasn't much of a golfer at the time (all that water to go over).
The only other hole that really stands out to me from way back then is The Creek's Biarritz (#11). That is the hole I hit my first golf shot on a golf course. I wasn't even playing the course at the time. The only reason that was my first shot on a golf course was because I was over at the beachclub with my neighor, Scotty Graham and his mother and apparently Scotty and I were acting like such incorrigible brats Mrs Graham took us both by the ear and led us out to her car and gave us her golf bag and told us to go over to that hole (it's right next to the beachclub) and hit all the balls in her bag and leave her the hell alone for a while.
-
Chip and BillB:
You know this particular thread about PR, FI and The Creek is really beginning to bring back some memories of things I haven't thought of in over fifty years.
For instance, when I grew up around there it was Piping Rock I knew so well because that's where all my friends were. My neighbor's family belonged to The Creek but back then Piping and The Creek had a pretty intense rivalry going (even if basically friendly). For that reason The Creek always seemed sort of like enemy territory to me. I don't think I ever even played the course until I went up there from Philly maybe in the mid 1980s to try to qualify for the US Mid Amateur because I wanted to get away from competing against all the guys I knew so well in Philly.
But now for various reasons it's The Creek and people from there I see so much more than Piping Rock. I'm more familiar now with Creek's course than I am even with Piping and it occured to me this morning I may not have played Piping Rock now for up to twenty five years.
Amazing. Where does all the time go? ???
-
JohnM:
You know what I'm about to say really never occured to me until this moment, but back then and actually probably up until about the mid 1990s golf course architecture hardly ever occured to me at all. It was all about playing the game and probably about the people you were playing with which made up my recollections all those years.
Do you know NGLA and if you do can you guess which two holes I remembered clearest when I went back to NGLA after not having been there for about forty years?
I was fortunate to play 36 at NGLA next year. Between that trip to the promised land and Bahto's book, I know the holes pretty well.
I would guess the strongest memories would come from the Alps and Punchbowl. Even if you didn't know anything about architecture when you first played those holes, they are so unique that it seems the memories would last.
-
"I was fortunate to play 36 at NGLA next year."
JohnM:
You were or you did? How cool is that? What do you have, some kind of time machine? Can I get a ride on it? I'd like to see what I played in 2013 or if I'm even still around.
-
"I was fortunate to play 36 at NGLA next year."
JohnM:
You were or you did? How cool is that? What do you have, some kind of time machine? Can I get a ride on it? I'd like to see what I played in 2013 or if I'm even still around.
Oops. Meant last year.
I'll be very, very fortunate if I get to play it again next year or any other year.
Were either of my hole guesses correct?
-
Bill Brightly:
I do count the wind as part of what's "on the ground", if you know what I mean. I still think PRC and The Creek are Fishers Island's equal in terms of pure architecture even though the wind is rarely much of a factor at Piping and, usually, less of one at TC than at FI.
RE: Practice balls at NGLA since JC asked and TEP gave a partial answer.
Until about 1982-ish, NGLA had no practice balls - you used your own or the pro used his/yours for lessons and an available caddy "shagged" for you. You can still see where the small practice tee used to be just below the flagpole in the right rough on #18.
Any warm-up shots of a quick nature were either struck off a rubber mat into a net behind the golf shop from a distance of about 15 feet and/or a player would hit a few (usually old) balls into Peconic Bay from the back of the first tee as Tom Paul described. In a tournament, the back of the first tee was officially designated as "not a part of the golf course" so that a player could bust a few drives into the bay prior to a medal play round without being in violation of the Rules of Golf.
Several things happened to change all that:
First, a guest's warm up drive into the net hit the aluminum frame that supported it and struck him in the eye on the rebound. The lawyers had the net taken down permanently the next day. Second, Shinnecock had built quite a nice range for the 1977 Walker Cup so National had already been thinking about spending the $$$ to get with the program. However, part of NGLA's charm is that change is rarely considered necessary so it took the net thing made the decision easier.
However, the practice of hitting a couple of one's own spheroids into Peconic Bay continued until about 10 years ago when it dawned on some lawyer that most of those shots either landed on the beach where people were walking (private property) or in the water where someone was swimming (public property but not a convenient place to just go take a quick dip unless you were staying at National). Perhaps somebody got clocked - or almost did. This was not new news as the beach, the bay and the back of the first tee had all been in the same location since 1912, but, nonetheless, the practice has been discontinued at all times by order of the Board of Governors.
As to the practice of buying a couple of sleeves of brand new Spalding Dot's or Dunlop Maxfli's to knock out into Peconic Bay, those guys were running in Tom Paul's heavy money crowd. My friends and I would keep a few shag balls in our bag to use for that purpose and kept our new balata Titleist's for the golf course.
-
"As to the practice of buying a couple of sleeves of brand new Spalding Dot's or Dunlop Maxfli's to knock out into Peconic Bay, those guys were running in Tom Paul's heavy money crowd. My friends and I would keep a few shag balls in our bag to use for that purpose and kept our new balata Titleist's for the golf course."
Chip:
That thing about buying a new sleeve of balls and driving them into Peconic Bay is just the way Knott and Grant were. No way my Dad would do something like that. Matter of fact, one time my dad told me he heard about some place in the middle of the Island that was selling balls for about $2.00 less per dozen and he told me we should go down there and buy about a gross. I said: "For God Sake Dad we will burn up more than the savings in gas just getting there." He said: "Good point" and that was the end of it. That's how cheap (excuse me, FRUGAL) we are. No way you would see my dad hitting a new sleeve into Peconic Bay.
-
If I had just one round to play and that was the end of it there is no question at all that it would be NGLA!
And if that was the case it would complete a remarkable bookend to a life of golf because I believe the first 18 hole round of golf I ever played was at NGLA. I was just a kid and it was with my father (a really good player), James Knott (a real curmudgeon and excellent player) and Bobby Grant (another world class character and great all around athlete).
There is no way I can forget that first round at NGLA with those three-----MY GOD was I scared!! ;)
PS:
I will also never forget how Grant and Knott went into the pro shop, bought a sleeve of new golf balls each and proceeded to drive all six right into Peconic Bay from the tips. Then they turned around and were ready to go. I don't think they even allow that odd (and to me back then oddly arrogant) practice anymore!
TEPaul,
Tom Watson did the same thing when he played there with Terry McBride not too long ago.
I've seen a few people do it.
-
ditto....I would be equally curious Tom....as I would to hear Patrick's answer to the same question?
MWP,
It's the same answer.
NGLA
-
Pat and Tom
When I lived at Half Moon Bay (CA) in the mid-late 80's, as there wasn't a nearby driving range, a lot of us playing in the early morning would warm up by driving backwards of the 1st tee, over the 10th tee and the tennis club and across the 18th towards the Pacific. Of course, we were not as affluent as the NGLAites, so we used already well-cut balatas....
rich
-
MWP:
What the hell, if I had one last round and that was it I would like not just to play it at NGLA but to play it with Pat. Golf is funny that way----we've probably only known each other for a dozen years but as these things sometimes turn out we've had a lot of experiences with the same people over the years without actually knowing each other and the additionally interesting thing is it apparently went back a generation before us. Both our dads were good national amateurs and given all the things they played in and where they played there is absolutely no way they could not have known each other and run into one another even if Pat and I never knew it. For us and probably because of and with our fathers too, golf really is more than just a game, it's kind of like a way of life for us as it was for our fathers before us. Even if I stop playing like my dad did some years before he died it will always very much be there.
-
Chip Oat said something in post #49 that some of the younger people on here might have a hard time believing and a harder time visualizing and that is that back in the day before ranges were that common and club practice balls were far less common, players warmed up on ranges with their own practice balls that they hit to their caddies who were out there on the range shagging for them. This kind of thing even went on in the early professional tournaments.
I guarantee you it would be a shock for the younger set on here to visualize a range where you had a dozen or two players hitting their own balls to their own indivudual caddies out there shagging for them. Can you imagine what that must have been like for a dozen or more caddies out on a range trying to keep track of their player's ball and avoid getting hit by somebody else's? ;)
But that's the way it was sometimes back in the day.
When I was a kid (and my older brother before me) I used to shag almost every day in the summer for my dad. We would do it on the far end of the range at Piping (because no one on the regular teeing area of the range could hit it way out there on the back of that PR range). We would actually pretty much catch everything on the fly with a first baseman's mitt (you better get it in the netting because if you caught it in the palm you could break your hand ;) ). Some of the time we did it on the place next door to our place because our neighbor had about twenty acres he turned into a turf nursery. Since I didn't really play golf myself back then it never really occured to me, I guess, how good my dad must have been because no matter what club he was hitting (from a SW to a driver) he would not only practice hitting every club up to six different ways (low fade, high fade, low draw, high draw, low straight, high straight) but it was also pretty rare when I would have to move more than 2-3 steps to field the shot!
-
or, god forbid, shagging their own balls....
-
MWP:
What the hell, if I had one last round and that was it I would like not just to play it at NGLA but to play it with Pat. Golf is funny that way----we've probably only known each other for a dozen years but as these things sometimes turn out we've had a lot of experiences with the same people over the years without actually knowing each other and the additionally interesting thing is it apparently went back a generation before us. Both our dads were good national amateurs and given all the things they played in and where they played there is absolutely no way they could not have known each other and run into one another even if Pat and I never knew it. For us and probably because of and with our fathers too, golf really is more than just a game, it's kind of like a way of life for us as it was for our fathers before us. Even if I stop playing like my dad did some years before he died it will always very much be there.
I've always thought that best thing about golf is the relationships with other golfers.Everything about the game is great but the camaraderie among guys with a shared interest/appreciation is the best part,IMO.I doubt Tiger Woods shares my opinion.
BTW-if this game happens,first dibs on caddying.For either of you.
-
TP I understand 100%....a away of life indeed.
In the past I have sometimes allowed that part to be too important, but a reality check is sometimes all that is needed to remind one of ones mistakes...
we love this game for so many reasons, and one of those is the memories that venues inspire...and the people with which those venues were shared....clearly I have to make a visit to NGLA...
AND BY THE WAY
Every monday evening, I go out to the club and shag my own balls...just like in the old days
-
"or, god forbid, shagging their own balls...."
Jud:
That's the way I'd do it when I first learned to practice on the place next door that had about 20 acres of turf nursery. I'd take my bag of 100 balls hit them out there, go collect them, bring them back, hit 'em again, go collect them, hit 'em again and over and over again!
-
"I've always thought that best thing about golf is the relationships with other golfers.Everything about the game is great but the camaraderie among guys with a shared interest/appreciation is the best part,IMO.I doubt Tiger Woods shares my opinion."
Jeff:
I've heard that Tiger is pretty much just one of the guys and it seems like that's the way he likes it. A key might be all those cute little names he has for so many players.
But you're right indeed, it can be a really special camaradarie in golf and I think tournament golf is what really brings it out particularly for the guys who play a lot together both locally, regionally and nationally year after year. For me it was GAP, Pa Golf Assoc, and the invitationals all over the place were so amazing that way, and for my dad it was Florida State Assoc., NY's Met, the USGA and all those invitationals all over the place----eg you tended to see a lot of the same guys and play with them a number of times a year no matter where you were. It sure does create life-long camaraderie.
But in the interest of full disclosure I guess one would have to say it had its risks and downsides too. My dad traveled all over the place for decades playing tournaments as much as a professional tour player did. Those guys used to hang out together and they could get pretty crazy the way they carried on and screwed around. I know it always made my mother nervous even if she never admitted it to us children. And in the end it did their marriage in. Dad met my stepmother at some fancy invitational somewhere in New England but in the end I loved her too. Interesting my own mother and my step mother never really had anything to do with golf themselves as far as really playing it----they had their own strong separate interests and both were very strong and willful women but neither of them ever tried to stop my dad from playing the way he did all over the place all those years. Obviously they knew too that it really was a way of life that even they could not stop!
-
TEP,good stuff and I agree with it all,except about Tiger Woods.My point was just that I doubt that camaraderie is at the very top of his list.
I know some guys who now "tour" as amateurs,as I'm certain you do.My sense is that they kind of understand that they're a link to a past that was balls-to-the-walls fun but not possible today.Too many family commitments,etc. for them to go completely crazy week after week.A very different world from what your dad lived in.
-
Tom,
Re buying brand new balls and dumping them in the jungle. Here is a post from 2007.
1 GolfClubAtlas.com / Golf Course Architecture / Re:OT - Arnold Palmer goes to Ndola on: August 16, 2007, 01:17:01 PM
Started by Philip Gawith, Message by Bob_HuntleyRelevance: 4.9%
Philip,
I responded to this yesterday but was interrupted and forgot to press the' Send' button.
The matches between Palmer and Player in South Africa and the Rhodesias were sponsored by the Coca Cola company. As the Hon. Sec. of the Nchanga G.C. I was hoping we could have it at our course. However, the Nkana G.C. was chosen as Kitwe was centrally located on the Copperbelt between the rail-head, Ndola, and Chingola up near the Belgian Congo border.
I was an official of the Northern Rhodesia Golf Union so had a part in greeting Palmer and Player and had a press pass from the local paper to report on the match, which Palmer won.
I remember Palmer going into the modest golf shop and BUYING two dozen Dunlop 65s. He handed them to the caddie who ripped off the black wrapping and without further ado Arnie hit some of the most vigorous and majestic irons I had ever seen played. They took off like a jet, ascended to the heavens and dropped gently to earth. He left them out there alongside the temporary range and proceeded to the first tee.
I had witnessed two things at once, an extravagance not seen before and an entirely physical way of playing the game.
Some couple of years later I was having a drink in the bar at The Valley Club of Montecito having watched Palmer and Player tee off against Bob Goalby and Paul Harney. I cannot remember the result. Arnie came in, looked over at me and said "Hello Bob, what are you doing here?" I had engaged him in conversation on another continent some ten thousand miles away but he remembered my name from a conversation that probably lasted less than five minutes.
I think that is one reason he is called 'The King.'
Bob
Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies
Pages: [1]
-
"My sense is that they kind of understand that they're a link to a past that was balls-to-the-walls fun but not possible today.Too many family commitments,etc. for them to go completely crazy week after week.A very different world from what your dad lived in."
Jeff:
I agree with you. What you touched on there I think is a huge, complex but totally fascinating subject----eg basically the way the world turns and how differently entire cultures look at and treat the same basic subjects differently and why in different eras. It's not really about golf architecture but it sure was part of some of the overall world of golf and it's a great subject for another time. Even something like the way they looked at health back then---it wasn't that they necessarily didn't care about it less than we do but the way they went about both ends of that candle---particularly smoking and drinking and partying and then attempting to cure themselves, so to speak, was about 180 degrees different than the way most of us look at it and do it today.
-
Apparently, based on the drift in this thread, Fishers Island isn't that overrated.....
-
BobH:
What a cool story of you and Palmer. I think I told one on here that was almost identical about Tiger and a guy from RCD. If not I'll tell it to you again.
-
Jud,
But the drifting and the stories that one reads from such drifting is what keeps me coming back to this site...so much wonderful experience out there, with such great stories.
Not that messr's TP and Bob are that old, but they represent a generation of this game that will never be repeated...I think og the generation og Palmer, Nicklaus, the 60's and 70's as being the golden age of the game.
It was truly evolving into the big time and the people who were involved in the game at the "elite" level were exposed to stuff that nowadays is behind a curtain.
You could actually be involved in the growth, now it just happens.
That entire enviroment of"wealthy and elite" involvemnet in tha game must have been so exciting to be around.
-
Bob H, TE - thanks much. You gents have wonderfully generous memories - you choose to remember the past with generosity, and then share those memories generously. Always a great pleasure reading.
Peter
Alas, the only good story I have involves drinking with Harry Dean Stanton in the Viper Room as he sat next to me and sang Georgia on My Mind at 3 in the morning. And I've already told it 3 times!
-
I wasn't criticising the drift in conversation, quite interesting actually, just making a comment... :-X
-
Jud,
But the drifting and the stories that one reads from such drifting is what keeps me coming back to this site...so much wonderful experience out there, with such great stories.
Not that messr's TP and Bob are that old, but they represent a generation of this game that will never be repeated...I think og the generation og Palmer, Nicklaus, the 60's and 70's as being the golden age of the game.
It was truly evolving into the big time and the people who were involved in the game at the "elite" level were exposed to stuff that nowadays is behind a curtain.
You could actually be involved in the growth, now it just happens.
That entire enviroment of"wealthy and elite" involvemnet in tha game must have been so exciting to be around.
+1000
-
sorry Jud...
I was not suggesting that you were being critical at all...just relishing the opportunity to exp[ress how the drifts entertain me so.... ;D
-
Jud,
Depending on the criteria you use, either it is or it isn't.
I like to strip out view, ambiance, history, reputation, majors held, clubhouse and other such stuff (including how much I enjoy playing the course or just being on the property). I'm looking at golf courses, not golf PLACES. It's not about my FAVORITE - it's about what the architect created and, to a lesser degree, how it's been maintained.
Thus, I only like to consider what's on the ground (which includes water that's in play and the architect's use of the prevailing wind). Nothing else matters (to me, that is).
THEN, I only consider the pure architecture in terms of what I, personally, happen to prefer - much of which I have learned from other people in addition to my own experience.
Based on my personal rating criteria as above, I consider Piping Rock and The Creek to be about as good as Fishers Island. All three of them are excellent and the question of which one I would choose to play every day is a different question and outside the context of my original thread.
Tom Paul:
Touring pro's hit their own shag balls "back in the day"? Try until the late-1970's (at least at Whitemarsh for the IVB Philadelphia Golf Classic). Back when I had time to hang around at those kinds of events, I have filled in for both Hubert Green's and John Miller's caddy during post-round practice sessions on one occasion for each. HG had a whole shag bag full of nearly-new Spalding Dots and John was on the MacGregor staff. In the event that a player hit a shot in the direction of another caddy on the range, the caddies looked out for each other although I have to say that, on both occasions, the grizzled veterans on either side of me were less concerned about that in my case than for their peers.
Golf ball companies weren't manufacturing "branded" range balls in those days and the good pro's wouldn't practice with your standard driving range marshmallows which was all that was available at the time.
Fast forward 30+ years: The last time I was at Pine Valley, I got to hit all the 90 compression Titleists (stamped, "PRACTICE") that I wanted. And that's not a new thing, there.
-
"You could actually be involved in the growth, now it just happens.
That entire enviroment of"wealthy and elite" involvemnet in tha game must have been so exciting to be around."
Michael:
Hmmm, interesting observations. I suspect like anything else there could be some extreme upsides and some extreme downsides too. But what I am sure of is it could get complicated along the way depending on who you're talking about and the way they saw it through their own eyes no matter where they came from. I'm convinced golf can very much be the great leveler if you let it and if you understand some things about it. I would love to see Pat weigh in here because clearly his dad came at golf from a very different direction than my dad did but the thing to consider most, I think, is how they both looked at it and the fact that they both got to the same place eventually in a number of ways, not the least being the level of their play. Both of them were what I might call "line crossers" in some ways I consider to be important (that they get crossed) but at least they both had the guts to do it and the sense to realize they could!
-
chipoat,
While Fisher's is the only one of the three that I've played, I agree completely with your personal rating criteria. I personally think that the scenery and views is given entirely too much weight in the rating of many of these courses. Take a slightly above average course and plop it on the ocean and everyone wets their pants while waiting in line to pony up $400 to play it. Bring in a name architect to do a "signiture" course, plant a bunch of flowers, charge a fortune, make it very exclusive with the fastest putting surfaces this side of linolium and you have another "must play"...
-
Chip:
My dad worked for Spalding ('50s and 60s) and he basically said quality control with most all the manufacturers really sucked back then compared to what we know today. He said with all the tour players on Spalding's staff, PGA and LPGA, all the balls going to them were taken out of the sleeves at Chickopee, Mass, dropped through the ring and only the ones that dropped through well were repackaged and sent out to the tour players. Dad used to keep one of those rings in his golf bag at all times. You haven't seen one of those rings in about the last three decades, have you Chipperino? ;)
-
BobH:
What a cool story of you and Palmer. I think I told one on here that was almost identical about Tiger and a guy from RCD. If not I'll tell it to you again.
Tom,
Please tell it again.
Bob
-
Based on my personal rating criteria as above, I consider Piping Rock and The Creek to be about as good as Fishers Island.
Chipcoat,
I may be a little biased here but I am going to have to disagree based on the criteria you laid out. If anything Fishers should rate higher according to your criteria. First off many will say that the reason Fishers doesn’t have many fairway bunkers is because Raynor died during construction. I couldn’t disagree with that opinion more. If you look closely at the routing you will see that Raynor used natural landforms instead of fairway bunkers on many holes at Fishers. You have forced carries off the tee on every hole at Fishers. Upon closer inspection you will find that the distance required to carry is typically the same distance you would find cross bunkering at other Raynor/Macdonald courses.
The 3rd is a perfect example if you look at placement and angles of the fairway you will find that his use of the natural landform is absolutely brilliant. This could quite possibly be the best short par 4 in the country.
The 4th another forced carry. Notice the preferred line down the right side of the fairway providing a glimpse of the punchbowl around the Alps. Any shot center or left of the fwy is completely blind.
The 7th notice the angle of the green up in the distance. The preferred line is definitely to the right side of the fairway. Notice the angle of the carry created during construction.
When I get time I will take some pictures to show you other examples.
As far as templates go the hurricane of 38’ knocked the beach club into the pond on the 1st hole. The Redan is no more than 30 yards from the beach club so it safe to say that it sustained substantial damage in the hurricane. I have been told by older members that the slope was not rebuilt to its original height. There is some talk about having Gil come in and rebuild the kicker slope.
Other than the Redan and possibly the short the other template holes are all world class.
Take the scenery away and the course holds up quite favorably to those mentioned earlier. Add the setting and scenery and is it over rated? Not a chance and quite possibly UNDER RATED!
-
The gospel according to Beck!! I'm sold. :)
-
Donnie Beck:
Now, hold on there! I never said anything negative about Fishers (unless you consider anything less than outright worship to be negative - which I don't). However, I confess that I had you in mind when I slapped that title on my thread in order to get the maximum number of responses. What fun is it to put up a thread that nobody cares about? In fact, the thread has been up for several days, now. Where the hell have you been?
I will say that I disagree on two points of your post.
First, I interpret you opening paragraph as a firm statement that you pretty plainly think my criteria for evaluating Fishers' golf course (all golf courses??) is flawed. You're entitled to your criteria just as I'm entitled to mine. Let's agree to disagree.
Second, you are basically making the case that FI is a better golf course than PRC or The Creek. Again, you're entitled to your opinion and your criteria as I am entitled to mine.
For all the reasons that are already on this thread (including yours), I happen to find FI more APPEALING to play and more FUN to play than almost any course in the world. That wasn't the point of my thread - and it still isn't.
If I had titled the thread, "Are Some Golf Courses Overrated?" and just used FI as a possible example, nobody would have noticed or cared. Also, we would never have known that the original Redan at FI sounds like a damn good one and, better yet, it may soon be restored to its former glory. Finally, I doubt that we would have had the pleasure of seeing the pictures you posted PLUS THE PICTURES YOU HAVE NOW PROMISED TO POST VERY VERY SOON!
Incidentally, since you appear to be one of the few people that have played all three courses and, better, that you've studied all three of them closely for all the right reasons, how about some brief commentary on PRC and TC?
See how well this is working out?
Tom Paul:
I still have a couple of those rings in one of my old golf bags somewhere although I haven't used it in years - not since I went from 60+ rounds/year to about 15 (max). Coincidentally, they were both given to me by the clubmaker I knew at the Spalding factory in Chicopee, MA (now closed, I think) - maybe they were extra's that your father didn't need. Since I can't hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle, anymore, what difference does it make whether my Pro V1's are round or not?
-
Fishers is one of those courses I never paid much attention to because of its exclusive nature - why get all jacked up about a course you will never see - right? However, Donnie's description of the use of landforms intrigued me because this is something I really like to see in courses. I went and looked at Ran's profile and was stunned by what I saw. The course looks absolutely marvelous.
Thanks Donnie for making me dream beyond my reality! It looks like there can be few better places to keep the green.
Ciao
-
Chipcoat,
I understand your point and it is a fair argument. Unfortunately working 60 hrs per week and being newly married has drastically cut into golfing, fishing, and posting time. Maybe in a few weeks I will have some more time to debate with you. The reason I decided to post was because I believe Fishers is misunderstood architecturally and it is definitely worthy of discussion.
-
Donnie
I take it that last photo was taken during construction. One thing that stands out in that picture are the horses being used as opposed to something larger and mechanized. Do you know if large steam shovels and such were used during construction? I would've thought they could have easily been transported to the island in 1926, but who knows, maybe not. The horse power would seem to fit with the reliance on natural landforms for hazards off the tee and the natural green locations.
-
Chip:
I can understand your take -- personally I don't see FI as being one of the 25 best courses in the USA but the issue you raised merits some serious discussion. If you see FI as being elevated too highly among the elite of the USA's best courses then I would agree with you.
However ...
Land -- is for me at least, the key ingredient that separates the very special courses from those at lower levels.
Clearly, the people responsible for siuch stellar layouts sought out unique pieces of property that would serve to ELEVATE what could possibly be done with the actual design. In sum -- the land provides for that opportunity. No doubt some courses will have quality layouts but without a land site that accentuates the design the rest can be a bit less so. I chuckle when people say how good would Pebble Beach be without the H20 or if Sand Hills were not in such an isolated area. All such talk makes for interesting 19th hole banter but one cannot divorce such matters so easily.
For me the land equation represents no less than 60% of the overall qualities tied to what makes a given site so special and meriting return play.
FI clearly has the land internally and part and parcel of quality land / sites is how such land ties into the off-course elements. Let me point out that on-course land elements -- as others have mentioned -- clearly are crucial and remain the first among equals -- but one cannot simply divorce and think of such courses from a tunnel perspective when other elements are also there.
I agree that many people simply look at the off course vistas and then proclaim that such courses are indeed spectacular. If anything I would say that on-course land /design elements constitute a healthy proportion of the discussion for me -- but I also weigh in the other elements I mentioned.
If you are saying is FI worthy of top 25 status in the USA -- I would agree with you and say no. Is it still deserving of high acclaim -- there's little doubt in my book that anyone getting the opportunity should hustle to the ferry at New London and get there pronto.
-
I'd be interested to hear from Donnie on how big a factor the wind is at FI on a day-to-day basis. I imagine that there are very few days without a significant wind, and many days when it is a HUGE factor.
I think wind is an underrated factor when people discuss courses. You can't see it or take beautiful pictures of it, but it absolutely changes the game. So I think good course architecture requires less dramatic design elements, perhaps "easier" set ups such as wider fairways, when the site is prone to high winds.
Having just played in Ireland, I am particularly sensitive to this. For example, do you really need a series of fairways bunkers to further challenge the golfer when he is driving into a prevailing 20-30 mph crosswind? So courses on really good sites may well require less man-made hazards, and thus "suffer" when people discuss "what is on the land."
Whaddya think?
-
Having just played in Ireland, I am particularly sensitive to this. For example, do you really need a series of fairways bunkers to further challenge the golfer when he is driving into a prevailing 20-30 mph crosswind? So courses on really good sites may well require less man-made hazards, and thus "suffer" when people discuss "what is on the land."
Whaddya think?
Bill,
My question with these threads is overrated where? In the US, no Fishers is not overrated due to all the factors mentioned. It is probably a Top 5 and definitely a Top 10 on my personal list.
My question is, is it overrated in the World? Or after your trip to Ireland, would it make a Top 10 list if it was in Ireland or the UK? I have not played enough overseas to really know.
After the recent Buda threads, I know I want to find out more about courses overseas.
-
Mike,
I really do not like like ranking courses, but rather, I prefer to talk about the good and bad of each hole/each course.
My personal top 5 changed twice in Ireland!
Ranking great courses is like ranking beautiful women. I'm far more interested in playing as many as I can rather than RANKING them, and the one I'm lucky enough to be with at the moment has a HUGE advantage over the ones that said good bye to me or the ones I can't ever meet! :)
Having said that, I guess my personal top 10 played is
National
Royal County Down
Merion
Oakmont
Pine Valley
Ballybunion
Ballyliffin Od
Pebble Beach
Royal Portrush
Ridgewood
I have NOT played Fishers and I hated to leave Pinehurst # 2, Garden City, Plainfield and Stone Eagle off my list.
-
I don't see FI as being one of the 25 best courses in the USA
If you were to put stock in rankings there are really only 3 that have enough panelists to give them any merit, and they all place FI in their top 25 (8th in one). You may not like it enough to do so but your credibility takes a big hit when you are so far afield of the majority view.
Sorry Matt
-
Jim:
So be it.
I've done my fair share of traveling to have a sense on how courses of different types match up to one another.
Let's not forget that major pubs have erred in their own rights over the last number of years with the inclusion of certain courses too. Where is Kingsley with Digest ? Where is Black Mesa with Golfweek -- dropping 50 positions behind Paa-Ko ?
If we are all to march to the beat of the same drummer -- then what would be there to any blog site or any 19th hole discussion.
You make it sound like a course that is rated somewhere between 25-40th position is piss poor from my perspective. Not the least -- I have a huge amount of respect for the layout but I see other courses as being more noteworthy as I define them to be.
Just my opinion -- happy to discuss with you and anyone else for that matter.
-
Chipperino:
I've read your posts with interest about what you consider to be "golf course architecture" compared to what you apparently don't. So let me ask you a question----do you consider it architecture the way a golf architect chooses to use some existing land formations without altering them at all as much as you consider it architecture what he actually makes or moves or changes with land formations?
-
Chip:
So we can know precisely where you're coming from on this thread about FI, The Creek and Piping Rock, why don't you try to identify those holes on any of them you don't think exactly measure up to snuff for some reason and perhaps also explain what type of architectural snuff could be utilized to improve them to be snuffed up to some ideal.
If you do I will do the same because God knows I sure am familiar with all those three courses.
-
The answer to your question is a resounding "NO"!
FI is one of the best. Period.
:)
-
If my memory is correct, I think Raynor did 3 routings on 3 separate parts of the island. I think the founders selected two sites with the intention of building 36 holes but never went ahead with building the second course.
This got me wondering if Raynor would have built two Redans, two Shorts, two Road Holes, etc.
Did Raynor or Macdonald ever build any 27 or 36 hole courses? I don't think so, so we may be left wondering.
-
Tom,
I have a 13 or 14 construction photos and none show any signs of a steam shovel. There are pictures of a large air compressor connected to a jackhammer chipping rocks and a large pump dredging fill for the 13,14,and 16th hole. Several of the pictures show horses being used to construct greens, grade fairways, and various other tasks.
Bill,
Wind is definitely a factor at Fishers. It is one the greatest assets of the course. You can play the course on two consecutive days and hit completely different shots. A typical summer day is about two clubs of wind. Spring and fall can get almost unplayable if you catch the wrong day. Take the 165yd Eden for example. I hit the ball longer than most and the hole for me plays anywhere from PW-3 iron depending on wind.
Chipcoat,
Some more pics as promised.
18th Tee Shot
It is hard to tell from the picture but look closely at the angle the bank fall away at. Notice the bailout to the left, which leave a safe (shorter route to the fairway). Again the picture doesn't do it justice but the preferred angle is down the right side and the carry is substantially longer. Pretty good architecture in my book.
The 17th again the same situation off the tee. Bailout to the right. Again similar distance off the tee as typical cross bunkering.
Not much of a carry to reach the fairway but notice the preferred line over the dune. Notice how the fwy runs away from the dune forcing any tee shot that doesn't challenge the dune to the left side.
Angle into the green from just over the dune. It is a much different look and shot from the left side.
A different look at #12 Reverse redan from the 15th tee.
Cool topography parts of holes 11,12,13,14
#14 although not a true cape it still quite an interesting hole. A tee ball down the right side of the fwy is close to 50 yds longer to the green compared to an equally hit ball down the left side.
-
Great Stuff Donnie, thanks for sharing.
These pictures are really starting to show me how "template" architecture does not mean the same result for every hole on every golf course. Thank you for the education.
-
Matt,
Glaring omissions of new(er) golf courses are going to happen and there may be reasons, such as too few plays, why a course gets overlooked.
I like the idea of marching to the beat of a different drum, however, I think your opinions will start to carry less weight if you're going to be the guy on the dance floor doing the cha-cha when everyone else knows its a tango.
That would not be the case if you were an ordinary citizen, but you aren't.
Just my opinion.
-
Jim:
Thanks for your comments ... I hear the dance musice really well -- but the tune being played is slightly off key.
Let me name a few that would be ahead of Fisher's Island in my opinion -- how bout for starters the likes of Ballyneal and Rock Creek? I just recently played one of the finest Jack Nicklaus courses I have ever played in Red Ledges just outside of Salt Lake City and frankly few people pay heed to Team Nicklaus and even more so if the layout is located in UT. By the way I like Muirfield Village but its reputation is geared from who Jack is and the nature of an annual tournament played there.
I understand your comments on the omission of new courses but the ratings from the key pubs needs to be ahead of the curve in a number of instances -- not behind them.
I mentioned before the likes of Kingsley Club -- which Digest is completely oblivious of the quality of that course. How it has not found a home in their top 100 ratings astounds me when you see what else is already rated ahead of it. Kingsley, in my mind, is a bonfide top 50 course in the USA and could be even higher if I really studied the pros and cons of it.
Jim, I have mega respect for Fisher's Island but it's not the 8th best layout in the USA from the totality of top tier courses I have played. If others feel that way -- it's likely they have not played such a wide assortment of courses. In New York alone -- Winged Foot / West would be ahead of it in my mind. I have not played Friar's Head to date and most people I have talked to who have played both would have the C&C layout ahead of it. Ditto my passionate support for what Doak / Nicklaus did with Sebonack.
Let me point out Rees Jones is often thrown under the bus on this site -- but he did a superlative job with a layout just outside of Albany, NY called Olde Kinderhook and it gets zippo attention from a range of people. Those who have played it are surprised at its overall qualities.
Jim, I simply weighed in that for me Fisher's Island would likely be in the neighborhood of 26-40th -- you make it sound like I tossed the place completely aside. Frankly, there are a number of really superb recently opened courses (in the last 10-15 years) that can make a serious case for either higher status or being rated among the elite groupings altogether.
One final thing -- if you want to highlight a really good comparison -- ask youself this -- how does a stellar place like Eastward Ho! rate that far behind Fisher's Island? I'd have to think that a number of raters were swayed by the ferry ride to the NY-based course and the all-too-powerful allure of the marvelous vistas you get when playing there.
Fisher's Island is no doubt a must play for any person lucky enough to secure an opportunity to play there -- but in looking at what Chip started this thread with -- I would say the current ratings position of FI is slightly higher than I would have among the courses I have played.
-
Matt,
I think that I already knew you didn't see FI in the same vein as some of the other rankings. That's the beauty of having more than one person rank courses, the only good data is consensus data.
I don't begrudge you your position, I'm only saying that I think it makes you look less credulous. You are free to dismss that observation. ;D
-
Donnie,
Thanks for sharing the pix. If you could post the other construction pix somehow that would be awesome. The one construction picture of #7 is interesting. How much has that hole changed since the course was built? Were the water hazards present left and right of the fairway when the course opened?
#12 is my favorite hole at FI, I just love that reverse redan green. #10 is another very interesting hole that at first glance doesn't seem to offer my challenge. I look forward to learning more of the subtleties of the holes.
-
I played 36 at Fishers today............ we had a typical windy for this time of the year day.... 2-2 1/2 clubs with a sprinkling of rain. The course is apparently in about the finest shape its been in for years and all I can say is that after my 3rd trip there I can't wait to get back. It is one of the true joys of golf to experience this gem of a golf course........ a wonderful architectural masterpiece weaved into a splendid piece of land. The views are fabulous and there are so many all world holes... there is plenty of challenge especially on the back nine where so many holes are directly into the wind. I've played Creek and Piping both of which I love, but you just can't put them above Fishers because you can't discount the setting and how well the golf course fits into the land forms.
It's a shame that FI is so inaccessible for so many people and still so relatively unknown. In Calif. very few people have even heard of it. But that's the way they want it. To join the club, you have to own a piece of property on the island and then it's at least a 7 year wait to get in. 250 people live there full time.
Is Fishers overrated- no way. It's in my top 5 all time.
-
Jim:
I've been called worse !
Let me put it this way -- I would not trade my experiences with many people on this site.
I don't believe in "consensus" assessments. You say "the only good data is consensus data." Rubbish. Consensus ratings from the major pubs fails because you can have a hodge-podge of different people throwing their findings together and then producing some outcome which is all lumped together. It's simplistic and easy to provide a mathematical forumla but it does little in really providing for some common cross comparisons and contrasts.
Jim, help me to understand something -- how does me placing FI somewher between 25-40 make me seem out of touch? Might it be the other way around -- that those who view it the other way -- are simply elevating the place a bit too high. I would have hoped you would have seen a few examples of different courses I have previously mentioned that were not either considered for placement by the major pubs or were simply not rated at all -- e.g. most notably Kingsley by Digest. FI is a wonderful place but if anyone seriously believes that a place like WF / West is behind it -- then the ferry ride and glorious views from the course are simply overwhelming the senses of such folks, with all due respect.
Jim, when I read that people have FI in their overall top five or top ten -- that's fine -- for them. I don't know how many other top 100 courses they have played so it's possible that their overall love for FI is based on a smaller sample size of top tier layouts.
-
Great Stuff Donnie, thanks for sharing.
These pictures are really starting to show me how "template" architecture does not mean the same result for every hole on every golf course. Thank you for the education.
This is a good observation about Raynor. Not only do his template holes vary from course to course, but the non-Template holes are often some of the best and most strategic on the golf course (7, 9 15 and 18 at Fox Chapel, 14 and 18 at Yeamans Hall).
The pictures of Fishers are great as well. When I think of Fishers Island, I think of the pictures I have seen of the cliffside holes. The pictures above show many different landscapes, textures, and architectural elements that are part of the golf course. The place looks like a golf wonderland.
-
Don't know why the pictures are cut off but oh well.. Off to work
-
Donnie Beck:
Another 20 pictures and you'll be off the hook. Also, while your description of the ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOLES IN YOUR PICTURES (not the view) is superb, you don't have to defend FI to me on an absolute basis. However, when you get time, I'd be interested in a few (polite) comments about PRC and The Creek.
By the way, based on my experience, 60 hours is a pretty short week for a head superintendent except between December-February. Do you really want your Green Chairman to know you're not putting in a full week any more? If your new wife wanted a husband who was actually going to be around, she should never have married someone in the golf business.
Tom Paul:
In thinking about it, I guess I'm more concerned with the end results. Hugh Wilson is deified for fitting the wonderful holes at Merion into the natural contours of the property. On the other hand, CBM moved a fair amount of dirt around at NGLA and you can't argue with his results, either. Your excellent question is worth its very own thread. Do you want me to start it or will you do it?
As to your question re: hole-by-hole, I'll get back on that.
Tom Macwood:
Since there don't seem to have been any steam shovels used at Fishers, it would seem fair to conclude that Charles Banks had nothing to do with the course at any time. Isn't it known for certain that he never set foot on any property without at least one steam shovel right along side? I mean, I wasn't there but, given his "nom de guerre", I'm sure my assumption about that is correct. There isn't really anything else you need to know, in my opinion.
Wayne Freeman:
Based on MY criteria, I only questioned whether FI is really that much better than Piping Rock or The Creek IN TERMS OF WHAT'S ON THE GROUND (and in the air). No other courses are mentioned (by me, that is) and exactly where FI falls (20 - 30) in the various publications is also not the question (although it is the reference point for the comparison with the other two).
However, due to the title that I (intentionally) assigned to this thread, I'm not surprised at the broader range of responses and side discussions that have ensued.
-
Matt,
What makes a consensus much more valuable than rubbish is that ...."different people throwing their findings together and then producing some outcome which is all lumped together" lessens the impact of one man's bias, like your own. Your entitled to your opinion and that's fine for you, just like it's fine for those individuals who think FI is placed correctly, but those opinions are only a small part of the overall picture. There will always be disagreement as to what's placed where, but a realistic benchmark can only be achieved by distilling a judgement out of many ingredients. Now, the benchmark that's been laid down by the 'Big 3' golf course ranking systems place FI in their top 20 (only one of them has it higher than WFW). It might be newer criteria, like firm and fast, that jumped it up into that strastophere, but nevertheless, it's there.
By the way, I didn't say you were out of touch, far afield, yes, but that's just my opinion. ;D
Great topic Chip, you're a brave man, and sorry for the sidetrack.
-
Tom Paul,
In terms of pure architecture, I just slightly prefer the green complexes at Piping Rock. Maybe the construction budget was higher at Piping Rock - they just seem to have more to them.
Also, my experience with Fishers Island is that, much like National or TOC, a brisk wind is sort of required to bring out the best in the course. Piping Rock still plays pretty tough (for me) on a windless day. I would say the same thing about Shinnecock, Merion and Pine Valley, as well - no wind required.
As for individual holes, they all have wonderful examples: 4,5 (or more) at FI, #6 at The Creek is the single best golf hole on the entire plant Earth and #13 at Piping is one of neatest short par 4's I know - almost the equal of #8 at PV and/or #10 at Riviera. All three Biarritz holes are very strong (FI, TC and PR in that order) and all three Short holes are equally disappointing relative to National, in my opinion.
Interestingly, all three finishing holes are a tad underwhelming to me.
OK - your turn.
-
"By the way, based on my experience, 60 hours is a pretty short week for a head superintendent except between December-February. Do you really want your Green Chairman to know you're not putting in a full week any more? If your new wife wanted a husband who was actually going to be around, she should never have married someone in the golf business."
Chipperino:
You may not understand that FI might tend to look at things somewhat differently than other clubs, particularly with maintenance goals. I have known for many years one of the long time former green chairmen from FI and it seems to me one of the barometers for the condition of the course was how much time Donnie went fishing in a season. In other words, the more time he was fishing was an indicator the course was in better shape (the way those members like it which is very dry and F&F) than if he was fishing less. That might've been a bit theoretical and humorous but perhaps not. It seems like at FI perhaps more than most any course Nature is a partner of Donnie and vice versa! ;)
Matter of fact, the son of that former green chairman and I were talking the other day about firm and fast at FI. He said this; "When I hit a shot off the tee and when landing the ball kicks up a bit of dust I know that summer is really here."
-
"As for individual holes, they all have wonderful examples: 4,5 (or more) at FI, #6 at The Creek is the single best golf hole on the entire plant Earth and #13 at Piping is one of neatest short par 4's I know - almost the equal of #8 at PV and/or #10 at Riviera. All three Biarritz holes are very strong (FI, TC and PR in that order) and all three Short holes are equally disappointing relative to National, in my opinion.
Interestingly, all three finishing holes are a tad underwhelming to me."
Chip:
That is a short analysis of those three courses but nonetheless a very informative one in my opinion, and I wouldn't take issue on a thing you said. #6 Creek is a truly fine and memorable hole primarily due to the fact the green is just unbelievable and pretty much unique for a bunch of reasons. There is a little bit in the way of restorative work however that I think can be done on it on either side of it fairway.
Another thing I would say about The Creek is on most all those greens if you put some pretty good speed on them (and firmness) they do tend to really pop in the strategic and imagination department. I realize that is probably true of most all golf courses but with The Creek I think it is additionally the case than most.
Did you know that Raynor considered the 6th green at The Creek as something he essentially modeled after his original 15th green at Mountain Lake and that for a couple of interesting reasons he thought Creek's 10th was a better version of a "Leven" hole than NGLA's 17th?
-
Chipperino:
You may not understand that FI might tend to look at things somewhat differently than other clubs, particularly with maintenance goals. I have known for many years one of the long time former green chairmen from FI and it seems to me one of the barometers for the condition of the course was how much time Donnie went fishing in a season. In other words, the more time he was fishing was an indicator the course was in better shape (the way those members like it which is very dry and F&F) than if he was fishing less. That might've been a bit theoretical and humorous but perhaps not. It seems like at FI perhaps more than most any course Nature is a partner of Donnie and vice versa! ;)
Tom,
There may be more truth to that than you think. For what isn't worth year to date I have caught 5 or 6 stripers. This was the wettest year in my time at Fishers. Most people would assume a wet year would lead towards an easy year but it couldn’t be further from the truth. We had an abnormally cold and wet spring which was followed by a cool and wet July.
6” of rain in 4 hours on July 1st
This actually shows the pretty good view of the diagonal carry to the 3rd fairway I was trying to describe to Chip earlier.
Followed by the hottest August I can remember including a two week stretch of 90+ temps which is rare on the island along with night time temps in the 70’s. With the cool wet spring the poa on the green never developed any roots and when the heat in August came it was a very difficult year to keep the greens firm to match the rest of the course when the fairways started to go dormant. The bents in the greens were doing just fine but the poa an inch away was wilting away. The only way possible is good ole hand watering so I spent most of my summer on the end of a hose rather than the end of a fishing pole. The one good thing is the fairways have never had more grass and after a good over seeding this fall we should be a great position starting off next year.
Chip,
Unfortunately I have never played Piping but have played the Creek and loved it. It was probably at least ten years ago so I won’t be much of an asset comparing holes.
-
Chip:
My dad worked for Spalding ('50s and 60s) and he basically said quality control with most all the manufacturers really sucked back then compared to what we know today. He said with all the tour players on Spalding's staff, PGA and LPGA, all the balls going to them were taken out of the sleeves at Chickopee, Mass, dropped through the ring and only the ones that dropped through well were repackaged and sent out to the tour players. Dad used to keep one of those rings in his golf bag at all times. You haven't seen one of those rings in about the last three decades, have you Chipperino? ;)
TEPaul,
I had a tube milled to five one thousanths of an inch (1.685) larger than a golf ball and a compression machine.
Titleists and Hogans had the best quality control, Maxfli's the worst.]
You can't believe how many brand new golf balls failed to get through that tube, and of the ones that got through the tube, how many then failed the compression test.
-
Jim:
Consensus formulas fail because you don't have enough people playing the same courses -- you have people who only play certain courses and you have others applying such numbers to a possibly far different listing of courses from the others.
Where is the cross comparison analysis? Where is the standard reference points?
Jim, you say there's bias. Really? I dont' doubt that people do have preferences -- but I also think that it would help things immensely if one had bonafide national raters -- those who really see the entire country and can really provide a national perspective -- instead of the preponderance of regional homers that can far too often dominate the findings now. Digest takes the view that if you throw enough people as raters (they are in excess of 800, if memory serves, you will get expanded coverage. It doesn't happen that way.
Please explain to me -- since you hold the national pubs as some sort of gold standard -- how Digest fails to see the qualities of Kingsley Club after so many years in now being opened? I can provide numerous other examples as well and they would include Golf Mag and Golfweek as well.
Jim, with all due respect, the ratings are nothing more than interested people who see a smattering of the top tier courses and then throw forward numbers which are crunched through some sort of numerical formula that ipso facto, in the minds of those who have created the system, will unearth the really stellar layouts that exist.
Jim, let me point out if someone has played 100 or less courses in their lifetime and plays FI it's likely they will weigh in and say the course is in THEIR top five. That's fine ... however, if you have someone who has played 1,000 courses it's very possible FI may be rated lower simply because of the sample size involved. If you follow consensus driven formulas they weigh the guy who's only played 100 courses as a complete equal to the guy who's played 1,000. The issue is not that the first person is wrong -- for what they have played their findings can be totally true -- for them. But when weighed against someone who has played far more courses and likely has played in a range of different states / locales the overall perspective is enhanced by the totality and breath of the overall experiences encountered.
Jim, just a question -- have you played Fisher's Island? Do you see it as top ten layout in the USA from what you have personally played? Have you played Winged Foot / West -- do you see the course behind FI or ahead of it? Have you played Ballyneal? Would you place it ahead of or behind FI? Ditto Sebonack -- which is sometimes weighed in by too many people as overly difficult when playability is clearly present if people play from the appropriate tee boxes.
You say I am "far afield" -- in what way? FI is still thought of by me to be an excellent course -- somewhere in the 26th to 40th position. Just try to realize there is so much on the existing golf scene -- some of the new courses and others that have been ignored -- that merit consideration. With all due respect -- the mags themselves are not as cutting edge as many might think. Why do I say that? Because the field work is lagging behind what I and others are able to see and play.
You also say "benchmark" -- really? No system will have perfect results because of the subjective nature involved. But, I think
FI benefits from its isolation and the nature of what it takes to get there. I also see the proximity of the H20 also impacting matters. No doubt the land -- both internal and external -- play a powerful role. I am a fan of FI but if people see the course as a top 20 in the USA then, with all due respect, their overall sample size is indeed much smaller than they might imagine. Just my opinion from the "far afield" seats. ;D
-
MWP:
What the hell, if I had one last round and that was it I would like not just to play it at NGLA but to play it with Pat. Golf is funny that way----we've probably only known each other for a dozen years but as these things sometimes turn out we've had a lot of experiences with the same people over the years without actually knowing each other and the additionally interesting thing is it apparently went back a generation before us. Both our dads were good national amateurs and given all the things they played in and where they played there is absolutely no way they could not have known each other and run into one another even if Pat and I never knew it. For us and probably because of and with our fathers too, golf really is more than just a game, it's kind of like a way of life for us as it was for our fathers before us. Even if I stop playing like my dad did some years before he died it will always very much be there.
TEPaul,
That's very well said.
Why don't we schedule our last round of golf at NGLA for September 10th, 2029, I'll see if I can get Terry McBride to join us ;D
-
Donnie:
What you said there about probably your wettest year being one of the hardest for you in many ways really does make sense to me given what FI has always been in the F&F department in the summer months, how and why (no fairway irrigation).
You should go play Piping Rock and even pick Chip Oat's mind more about what he specifically means about some of its "architecture." Some tend to pass by a hole like Piping's #13 (Knoll) but not Chip. It is a very good call on his part. The hole is a very short one (where of course you really can't be missing its fairway by much) but that green is totally remarkable no matter how you try to approach it and from what distance. The thing that additionally fascinates me about the 13th is recently I found out Macdonald originally had a steep fairway ramp approach on the front of it which is now fronting bunkers placed in its very steep rise. The back shelf on that green which is so shallow is something to behold particularly when considering what happens if you go right, left or long.
And Piping's redan is a spectacular golf hole, particularly "shot-value-wise" and one I don't even think it is fair to compare it to NGLA's (they don't need to be compared to one another as both have so much going for them in somewhat different ways. The thing I've always appreciated a bit more about Piping's is it is a bit higher than NGLA's and consequently the fairly necessary fairway kicker on the right produces a lot "hotter" bounce and filter). If I happen to go to Piping with you we can spend a lot of time analyzing just how Macdonald made that green and how much he made it by quite easily analyzing what its natural landform looked like before golf. It really does show an extraordinary architectural imagination on his part as well as a lot of guts. It took a massive amount of fill to create that thing but the interesting thing about it he made it look like most of it might've been there anyway somehow. I did not appreciate that enough until the last time I saw it and noticed where he apparently got all his fill for it. I never noticed that before and I grew up there.
-
Matt,
Yes, I've played Fishers, walked WFW the day after Love won, and played WFE . My personal view is just that, I don't rank courses.
I think that the distilled impressions of hundreds of raters carry much more weight that your lone voice. Your bias has always been toward length and difficulty, therefore you aren't the best person to look to for a well rounded opinion, which is what a large group provides. Not only that, you seem to always be promoting new courses, so I'd say that you are skewed toward that product. That doesn't mean I think you aren't capable, just not as well rounded as a group can be.
Now, you aren't going to change my opinion of you as the lone wolf of raters, nor are you going to change my opinion of what constitutes the most relevant set of opinions, so we might as well leave this thread so it can continue with its original questions.
-
Donnie Beck:
What are odds that Gil Hanse will, in fact, be called in to restore the pre-1938 Redan? Also, does the club have anything else in mind in addition to that? Are there any pre WWII aerials around for reference?
Since I'm a behind the times, could you also give us a three sentence summary of the work that Gil Hanse has already done? Was Bill Kittleman involved with that? Fishers Island has always been his idea of what a good golf course should be (i.e. great holes and unwatered rough).
-
Jim:
With all due respect -- you don't rate courses?
C'mon -- that's a copout.
Your telling me that the mags are right on FI but then you have no personal opinion on the matter at-hand.
OK. ::)
Jim, the idea length and difficulty are my cat's meow is really an old party line repeated here over and over again. I have made strong cases for plenty of courses far from that situation -- however, those who tow the party line for the short and quirky ones don't take too kindly when I throw forward courses of a different sort that have plenty of qualities to offer -- beyond just length and demands but are a bit more than just the narrow beam of courses they always favor.
Maybe you have seen my comments on places likes Morris County? Forsgate / Banks? Eastward Ho! I can go on and on with various other examples.
Jim, I provided for you a detailed response and you either didn't read it carefully enough or simply ignored it. Sample size does matter and when you have mags apply a standard of 'one man / one vote' you mix and match perspectives of people who are often rather limited and likely skewed towards those layouts nearest to where they live. Let me also poiint out -- again -- that cross comparisons from a personal standpoint are critical -- what you get instead is some sort of mathematical hodge podge of numbers that create some sort of final number product which really does little of anything. That's what makes a book like CG by Doak so interesting. I know what his personal preferences are but it doesn't take away what he provided.
Jim, another fallacy -- I mention new courses because they happen to be really great stuff. Help me out with the likes of Ballyneal and Roclk Creek, to name just two. I also mentioned the clear bias here on gca to most Nicklaus courses -- his recent opening at Red Ledges in UT which is often thought of as a ski state and not a golf one. I also championed the likes of Kingsley Club which a preponderance of the 800 raters from Digest has amnesia with and is not even rated among their top 100.
In the event you likely don't know -- I have also highlighted plenty of old style courses in and around the nyc metro area that get so little attention -- I have highlighted the likes of Plainfield which only recently has been noticed by others. Ditto for the work by Hanse & Bahto created at a place called Essex County CC which is truly remarkable. There are other courses I have saluted for their timeless appeal.
In regards to opinions -- you aren't going to convince me on what I wrote in detailed response to you -- I was hoping you would have given it more thought and avoided the predictable stereotypical shrug of the shoulders. So be it. Back to the focus of this thead.
Final item -- I have Fisher's somewhere between #26 and #40 among my personal favorites in the USA. One would think that my assessment of the course was not even among my top 100 given what you have said. No matter. Thanks for you take -- lone wolf signing out. ;D
-
Chip,
A lot depends on DEC permitting.
-
Reclaiming original green pads really requires an elaborate process!
Do you have good pre-WWII aerials to guide you?
-
"Over the years excess topdressing material was dragged on to the collars and approaches, so in order to properly restore the original dimension we have had to remove the collar sod then physically remove the excess topdressing material by hand (in some areas in excess of 6”) then use the nursery sod to complete the expansion."
Donnie:
That particular item I look at somewhat like evolutionary sand kick build-up on the top of bunkers. I think sometimes it actually makes the greens play more interesting than it probably did originally. We expanded a number of our greens right over that topdressing material that had been dragged to the collars (that once was peripheral green space) that tended to create interesting greenspace rolls on the periphery. In some instances it tends to create a "counter-roll" that can be used to good playability effect such as getting pins near to those areas than otherwise as the ball won't roll off the green as easily with that counter roll to hold it but if it does anyway it creates a more interesting and challenging recovery than otherwise.
-
Donnie Beck,
Mt Ridge recently did a masterful job of reclaiming the putting surfaces back to their footpads.
You may want to contact the superintendent, Cliff Moore, to obtain info on their project.
-
Donnie said this as sort of a caption to the photo of the 3rd under its photograph on Post #76:
"The 3rd is a perfect example if you look at placement and angles of the fairway you will find that his use of the natural landform is absolutely brilliant. This could quite possibly be the best short par 4 in the country."
Chip and Donnie:
I would like to go back and really discuss the architectural and playability specifics and details of this hole. It is not a long one but Donnie may be right about what he says about it and I think the architectural reasons should be aired and explained.
For starters, there are a few specifics, architecturally, visually etc about this hole that make it pretty unique compared to other really great short par 4s. There also may be some specifics to its overall "engineering" that make it pretty unique both visually and playability-wise! Was Raynor even aware of ALL the ramifications and nuances of its over-all result? I can't imagine he wasn't but who will ever know? ;)
-
My favorite type of hole is the short par 4 and the the third at Fishers is one of the best.
The hole works perfectly on the site. The tee shot plays a bit uphill and the ideal line is determined by how much of the rough adjacent to the beach that you want to carry. There is a drop-off along the right side of the fairway but you don't want to miss left either as you can end up in the trees or tall rough. As you arrive in the fairway, you encounter one of the toughest short approach shots you'll ever have. The green is elevated above the fairway and is largely encircled by deep bunkers. All you see behind the green is open sky.
We were fortunate that there was not much wind on the day we played. With wind, it seems a must to have your tee shot end up where you can run the approach up between the bunkers. An aerial shot to that green is about as scary as it gets.
Following are a few photos. I apologize for the quality. I did not take any photos of the hole in the afternoon, apparently deluded into thinking that my morning photos turned out OK.
Here's an aerial view with the green on the right. Too bad you cannot see the contour of the land.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3aerial.jpg)
From the tee. Difficult to choose a good line.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3t.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3f.jpg)
The left side of the green.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3g.jpg)
The right side.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3gright.jpg)
The back of the green as seen from 4 tee.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3grearbunker.jpg)
Another look from 4.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3gfrom4t.jpg)
Kevin Pallier escapes.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s196/jmayhugh/fishers%20island/fi3gbunkerkp.jpg)
I wish I had more photos as mine don't do a good job encapsulating what a wonderful hole this is.
-
John
I am also a big fan of # 3 - both times I hit a decent drive with no more than a PW / SW in and still didn't get a par. It requires a precise a shot as you say with very good control and how many of our bunker shots went from one side to another ? ;D
3 through 5 was probably my favourite three hole stretch on the course...mind you there's plenty of good stretches throughout the layout.
I loved FI - the course was firm & fast the day we played it - with a wonderful setting and ambience.
-
I'm going to raise some hackles on this one, I'll bet. The real title I had in mind should be, "Is Fishers Island SLIGHTLY overrated?" but that wouldn't have gotten as much attention so I went with the more provocative one.
Chip, if anything, I think it's underrated if you analyze the holes independent of your preconceived notions of the names associated with the holes and your ideal version of a template hole.
First, I think Fishers is a magnificently beautiful, and wonderfully designed golf course and I could play there every day and still love it.
With the wind, I could play 54 every day and never tire of that golf course, it's spectacular in every way.
But the MacDonald/Raynor thread got me thinking about Piping Rock and The Creek versus Fishers. If you compare the pure architecture (admittedly, as I view it) and strip out the gorgeous ocean views at Fishers, does Fishers really deserve all the raving it gets that puts it so far ahead of the other two in the minds of almost everybody? Not in my opinion.
I disagree.
In some respects the architecture at Fisher's is vastly superior to PR and TC.
Take the Alps-Punchbowl 4th hole at Fisher's.
Does it have an equal ...... anywhere.
How much of your analysis is "maintainance" oriented ?
It isn't easy to move a lot of earth around, dig deeper bunkers and build more creative green complexes on a small, essentially private island located 12 miles offshore - especially in 1918. Erego, I think Piping Rock and The Creek OUGHT to be at least as good as Fishers - if not better.
I find the dramatic topography at Fisher's, combined with the lowland property at Fisher's to be a superior site, given what was produced.
I don't think difficulty with supply, construction efforts and logistics produce inferior architecture.
The way the holes were fit into the land at Fisher's is simply brilliant.
The best example I can think of is the Redan at each of the three (apologies to those on this site who haven't played them). It would have been, and would still be, a major undertaking to re-create the depth of the bunkers and pitch of the green at Fishers compared to Piping, Creek, National, Shinnecock, Somerset Hills (Tillinghast) and all the others that I haven't ever seen. At Fishers, if you dig down more than 3 feet, you hit salt water. To make a Redan with the same teeth and degree of difficulty as those mainland examples, the green would have had to be built UP a good five feet which then requires an elevated tee box - which would probably look stupid sitting there next to the first green.
This goes back to one of my original points, you're contexting the 2nd hole at Fisher's, on probably the lowest and flattest part of the land, with the 3rd at PR, where the green sits up high, fortress like. The Creek has no Redan par 3. It has a pseudo or hybrid redan at # 8, but ask yourself, which reverse redan green complex is superior, the 8th at TC or the 12th at FI ? The 12th at FI gets my vote every time.
The 1st at the Creek, a par 4, has a redan green, which I like.
But, you can't extract that which you like and ignore that which doesn't compare favorably with FI.
Are there some world class holes at Fishers Island? Of course there are - it's a Raynor. Biarritz comes to mind as the best I've ever seen and the Alps/Punchbowl combo is another mega-winner.
Agreed.
But, I think you're selling the FI version of the Redan and others short.
The 3rd is a fabulous Plateau hole. The Cape, the Short, Winthrop, Double Plateau, Eden, Knoll, Waterloo, and Home hole are all fabulous.
Are # 2, # 3 and # 4 at The Creek that special ?
# 17 ? # 18 ?
Now don't get me wrong, I love The Creek and Piping Rock, but to push Fisher's Island to the side, like a step-child, does a disservice to the inherent architecture on a special land form, forgetting about the views.
But does Fishers deserve its elevated stature on most radar screens versus Piping Rock and The Creek?
ABSOLUTELY.
As a golf PLACE, Fishers Island is hard to beat anywhere. As a golf COURSE, I think the other two are just as good (or better) - and they should be.
I disagree.
You've chosen to ignore the gaps in brilliant architecture at the other two courses.
Tell me, are # 4 and # 5 all world at PR ? Mediocre ?
How about the Alps and Knoll at PR.
How about 14, 15 and 16, are they all world holes, good holes or fair holes ?
Just because a stunningly gorgeous women has on a spectacular dress doesn't mean that she doesn't possess inate beauty.
You're too focused on the dress and have missed the beauty and merits of the design of the holes at Fisher's Island.
If I didn't know better I'd swear that TEPaul, that idiot savant, was advising you.
Go ahead, guys - take your shots at this heretic.
You should be burned at the architectural stake, or better yet, dangled off the dock at Fisher's Island as shark bait.
-
Pat:
I can't argue with your opinions as they qualify as "informed" (you've played all three courses) and you're directly addressing my questions rather than hiding behind other criteria.
Soooooo....I can't really argue other than to say
1) I agree with your questions about specific holes and the architectural gaps at The Creek and Piping Rock EXCEPT I think that #13 at PRC (Knoll) is really, really good.
2) Some of the "other" holes you think so highly of at FI are, in my opinion, good solid MacRaynor holes - which isn't damning them with faint praise, by the way.
3) I'm not creative enough to be a student of routings (I wouldn't know how to change one so I don't judge them). Thus, I can't take a position on your high praise of FI versus TC and PRC in that regard. Given what I know about your appreciation of golf architecture, I'll concede your kudo's on FI. However, could you expound on where PRC and/or The Creek might be lacking in that regard?
As I recall, your recent round(s) at Fishers Island was your first time there. Am I correct?
-
That third hole is a beauty and I just have one question. It has been quite a while since I played there but I seem to remember that the lower section that ran along the right side of the hole contained pretty long grass and was rather unplayable along its whole length (this coincides with the brown are in the aerial that John posted). I recall a set of green tee markers that were placed on the upper fairway as sort of a drop area.
It looks pretty cleaned up now. Am I mistaken?
Thanks
-
Pat:
I can't argue with your opinions as they qualify as "informed" (you've played all three courses) and you're directly addressing my questions rather than hiding behind other criteria.
Soooooo....I can't really argue other than to say
1) I agree with your questions about specific holes and the architectural gaps at The Creek and Piping Rock EXCEPT I think that #13 at PRC (Knoll) is really, really good.
Chip, I also like the Knoll hole PRC, but, the Knoll hole at FI is a world class "Knoll" hole. # 10 at FI is longer, with a much steeper fronting bank, usually plays into a prevailing wind and has a nice back to front slope to the putting surface.
I think the Knoll hole at PRC is "sportier", but, the Knoll hole at FI more demanding, and fun.
You can hit a long iron, hybrid or driver from the tee at PRC, I don't think you have that luxury at FI.
2) Some of the "other" holes you think so highly of at FI are, in my opinion, good solid MacRaynor holes - which isn't damning them with faint praise, by the way.
One of the things I really, really liked about FI was the "doubling" up effect.
The use of two concepts in one hole. The 4th hole is a perfect example, probably the BEST "Punchbowl" hole I've ever played, made even better when combined with the "Alps" feature.
The same for # 9, another "Alps" like hole that morphs into a double plateau, with the green right next to the water.
I found the approach into # 12 at FI more fun, more exciting than the approach into # 8 at TC, both reverse Redan's albeing # 12 is a par 4.
What's even MORE interesting is that Fishers Island didn't have one fairway bunker on the entire course until one was added many years later at # 9, and that bunker rarely comes into play, even from the black tees.
3) I'm not creative enough to be a student of routings (I wouldn't know how to change one so I don't judge them). Thus, I can't take a position on your high praise of FI versus TC and PRC in that regard.
Remember that FI was also a real estate development with lots flanking many holes whereas TC and PRC didn't need to worry about that issue.
And, what's really, really great about FI is that the architect was given the PRIME locations to put the golf course, whereas, if Fisher's was done today, the lots/homesites would get the prefered locations.
The routing at Fishers Island takes complete advantage of the terrain and views
Given what I know about your appreciation of golf architecture, I'll concede your kudo's on FI.
However, could you expound on where PRC and/or The Creek might be lacking in that regard?
Chip, I think we both love all three courses, and, I don't like to rank or order courses, I think all three are very, very, very special.
You know how much I love the 11th hole at The Creek.
I think it has the flexibility to be one of the greatest par 3's in all of golf.
If you look at how the holes at FI hug the coastline, either at the tee, fairway or green, or all three, incorporating that spectacular and ferocious hazard into play, you have to appreciate and admire the routing.
As I recall, your recent round(s) at Fishers Island was your first time there. Am I correct?
You are indeed, but, unlike that idiot savant, TEPaul, I don't need a seeing eye dog to point out the quality of the architecture and routing to me.
At Fisher's Island, it's self evident, even to the architecturally blind, like TEPaul.
What you should know is that Fisher's was mostly rock, requiring extensive blasting, drilling and carting prior to producing those magnificent undulating, sloped fairway.
One of the things I really liked about Fisher's Island was the lack of a flat lie.
-
Jim Kennedy,
I didn't recall seeing any tee markers, but, my drive was in the left side of the fairway.
I think, if you'll visit "Google Earth" it may answer your question.
I believe that there's a New York ordinance that restricts clearance of anything within 300 feet of a salt water body, and that might impact the conditions you cite.
-
Pat,
The same green markers were also at the beginning of the first fairway.
I wasn't over there on #3 either, ;) but we were looking for a ball over there (but only for a minute as it was pretty overgrown.
Could be a faulty memory on my part.
-
"or, god forbid, shagging their own balls...."
Jud:
That's the way I'd do it when I first learned to practice on the place next door that had about 20 acres of turf nursery. I'd take my bag of 100 balls hit them out there, go collect them, bring them back, hit 'em again, go collect them, hit 'em again and over and over again!
TEPaul,
I did the same thing, as did most of the better players.
My shag bag contained 120 balls, that way I could practice in units of 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 or 40.
I rarely hit units above 20, and if I did so it was usually with my more lofted clubs.
I also positioned the shag caddy at 10 yard increments and provided him with a wet towel.
He would drop the bag, which was the intended target, pick up each ball as it was hit, clean it and drop it into the bag.
Every so often I would cull through the bag replacing cut or damaged balls with replacements.
I still maintain a shag bag but don't get much chance to use it.
Caddies made the same hourly rate for shagging and many liked to do it since, on a hot day, it beat lugging a heavy bag around.
You may recall those big, leather bags which got pretty heavy when filled with balls, rain gear and other items.
The other GREAT thing about shagging was that the balls were the same ones you played with so you could really get a great feel for distance and moving the ball. Today, it's far different. When I first started to play golf, shagging was confined to or concentrated amongst the better players, whereas today, a far broader spectrum of players practice.
I also recall bringing clunkers to courses that didn't have decent ranges or range balls, just so that I could warm up prior to playing.
-
Matt Ward,
I get the sense that your analysis of golf courses is heavily weighted toward the degree of difficulty.
Sebonack over Fishers Island ? ? ?
Having played both from the back tees, Sebonack is far, far more difficult, but in my experience, far less fun.
Isn't the real test of a golf course, the ultimate evaluation, the degree of the golfer's desire for repeated play ?
Given the choice of playing Sebonack or Fishers Island every day for the rest of my life, clearly, for me, it's Fishers Island.
That doesn't mean that Sebonack isn't a great golf course in its absolute form, only that it's playing demands, day in and day out, lack the elements of fun and joy.
The same can be said of WFW or WFE, both great courses, but, given the choice of playing them every day for the rest of my life, Fishers Island again wins by a landslide.
And, I think there's a distinct reason for that.
There's a sportiness that's inherent in FI's design that's absent in the designs of WF and Sebonack.
I think, more than anything else, that that's one of, if not THE key to CBM/SR/CB courses, they all seem to possess that "sporty" element lacking in so many "championship" courses.
While WFW and Sebonack may be great "tests" of one's golfing skills, the examination they present lacks the humor and the joy found at FI.
I believe that Friar's Head, also a great test, to a degree, possesses the elements of humor and joy, which are components of "sportiness"
I could easily play Fishers Island every day, 36 in fact, for the rest of my life and never tire of it, it's flat out fun.
I can't say that about WFW/WFE and Sebonack, despite the fact that I think they're all great golf courses.
Having played from the back tees at FI recently, I hit every club in my bag, Driver, 3-wood, irons 2 thru L-Wedge and my putter.
I'd call that a thorough examination of my ability to skillfully use my golf clubs.
How many courses test every club in the bag, and make that test interesting, challenging and fun ?
Not many, but, FI is definitely one of them, and as such, it would go to my top 5 list if I kept such a list. ;D
-
Tom Paul,
In terms of pure architecture, I just slightly prefer the green complexes at Piping Rock. Maybe the construction budget was higher at Piping Rock - they just seem to have more to them.
Chip, I don't think you can go wrong with any preference on these three, but, I found the green complexes at FI to be thrilling.
# 2, # 3, # 4, # 5, # 6, # 7, # 8, # 10, # 11, # 12, # 16 and # 18 are pretty good.
Also, my experience with Fishers Island is that, much like National or TOC, a brisk wind is sort of required to bring out the best in the course. Piping Rock still plays pretty tough (for me) on a windless day.
I would say the same thing about Shinnecock, Merion and Pine Valley, as well - no wind required.
I understand what you mean, but, I look at it differently.
Fishers Island, NGLA and Seminole are great golf courses without the wind, but, with the wind they become exponentially better.
As for Shinnecock, like the others, the addition of the wind magnifies the greatness of the golf course, but, the inherent genius of the architecture exists without the wind.
As for individual holes, they all have wonderful examples: 4,5 (or more) at FI, #6 at The Creek is the single best golf hole on the entire plant Earth and #13 at Piping is one of neatest short par 4's I know - almost the equal of #8 at PV and/or #10 at Riviera. All three Biarritz holes are very strong (FI, TC and PR in that order) and all three Short holes are equally disappointing relative to National, in my opinion.
Chip, I think it's safe to say that relative to National, every short on the planet falls short.
I don't think falling short of NGLA's short automatically dooms a hole to mediocrity.
All three shorts at PR, TC and FI have the high tee, low green configuration.
TC has the least interesting green due to the removal of the horseshoe/donut.
PR's short may be too long.
The putting surface of FI's short is most interesting.
Like NGLA, FI's short benefits from the breezes which accompany play.
Interestingly, all three finishing holes are a tad underwhelming to me.
I think the 16th at TC is a spectacular hole.
# 17 is lacking the character in the green and # 18 has been criticized by many.
At FI, the 16th is a wonderful short.
# 17 may be a tad bland, but, # 18 is a wonderful finishing hole with a world class green, especially given the length of the approach.
The segmented green is spectacular.
That lower left quadrant, the upper left quadrant, the spine seperating the left and right side of the green.
AND, if I'm not mistaken, that green was originally a "skyline" green, which, may again be a skyline green, making the hole even more dramatic.
Imagine the unique nature of the visual on the approach on # 3 and # 10 now being replicated on # 18.
It's world class, especially when you factor in a head, or quartering wind.
I also love the 18th at PR, I think it's a wonderful par 5 finishing hole, but, # 17, as a short, isn't in the "head of class" category, as Westhampton's short would be. And, # 16 has the same degree of blandness that I find at # 17 at FI, a good hole, but not an outstanding hole.
Well, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
OK - your turn.
-
One of the other architectural and playing qualities I found at FI were the "rolled" edges of the putting surfaces that feed errant balls down to deep bunkers.
I've always loved that feature and have been victim to its diabolical intent at NGLA many times.
The punishment of the marginal or miscalculated shot is brilliant, and, that feature places a greater demand on having the proper angle of attack into the green.
What's all interconnected to this feature is the LOCATION OF THE HOLE, it's proximity to the edge of the putting surface.
When I played Fishers Island, on every green I visualized a myriad of hole locations and how they would effect/affect play of the hole.
It's my belief that if I could set the hole locations, not in diabolical positions, but in competitive positions, that the course could clearly show its teeth to the unwary golfer.
The golf course becomes exponentially more challenging as those hole locations are altered to enhance and increase the strategic value of well placed drives and the USE of one's MIND in planning their attack on the green.
AND, when you add in the element of the wind, the tactical challenge increases exponentially when the hole locations gravitate towarrd the perimeters or toward key internal features.
-
So, before this thread dies, I will observe that (I think) only three people on this thread have played all three courses - one of whom has been described by another as an "idiot savant". Everyone else was a FI disciple and Donnie Beck, whose intimate knowledge of Fishers is unquestionable, has played The Creek, but not Piping Rock.
However, the case has been made by one of the three (who played there recently) that Fishers Island has demonstrably better architecture on the greens and on the ground than either The Creek or Piping Rock. In fact, I interpret his several posts as a declaration that it isn't even all that close. I hadn't remembered getting the same impression and, after all, maybe I was so taken by the views that I forgot to pay attention to the golf course. I didn't think that was so but, perhaps.
On the other hand, maybe Pat Mucci was so taken by the beauty of Fishers Island that he succumbed to the sirens' song and is now unable to be analytical about the golf course on its own merits.
Either way, I guess I'll just have to get back there soon and re-examine my position. It's a tough job, but someone's got to do it.
-
So, before this thread dies, I will observe that (I think) only three people on this thread have played all three courses - one of whom has been described by another as an "idiot savant". Everyone else was a FI disciple and Donnie Beck, whose intimate knowledge of Fishers is unquestionable, has played The Creek, but not Piping Rock.
However, the case has been made by one of the three (who played there recently) that Fishers Island has demonstrably better architecture on the greens and on the ground than either The Creek or Piping Rock. In fact, I interpret his several posts as a declaration that it isn't even all that close. I hadn't remembered getting the same impression and, after all, maybe I was so taken by the views that I forgot to pay attention to the golf course. I didn't think that was so but, perhaps.
On the other hand, maybe Pat Mucci was so taken by the beauty of Fishers Island that he succumbed to the sirens' song and is now unable to be analytical about the golf course on its own merits.
Either way, I guess I'll just have to get back there soon and re-examine my position. It's a tough job, but someone's got to do it.
Chip
Well, if you need a partner let me know. FI looks to be a lovely course and I greatly appreciate this discussion you have led.
Cheers!
.
Ciao
-
Chip:
Since I guess I'm one of those three on here who has played all three courses I'm sorry I dropped the ball on you in trying to compare their architecture (I've been off and away on the road a lot in the last month).
I'll give it another shot but refresh my memory on what you responded to my question to you about what exactly you consider "architecture" to be----eg both the use of what is natural AND what is man-made or just pretty much just the latter?
I do have to say too that even though I have played all those three courses many times in my life at least one of them (ironically Piping my own original home club) it's been a pretty long time now.
Frankly, to do your question real justice I would probably need to take another very close look at the details of the architecture of Fishers and Piping but not Creek.
-
So, we all agree that Fisher's is a great place to spend a day on the golf course and has some very good to great holes and cool history. But is it overrated (#11 Golfweek (classic), #9 Golf Digest, Golf Magazine #20 U.S., #31 World)?
-
However, the case has been made by one of the three (who played there recently) that Fishers Island has demonstrably better architecture on the greens and on the ground than either The Creek or Piping Rock.
In fact, I interpret his several posts as a declaration that it isn't even all that close.
I hadn't remembered getting the same impression and, after all, maybe I was so taken by the views that I forgot to pay attention to the golf course. I didn't think that was so but, perhaps.
Chip, I can see how that could happen, especially if you were Tom Huckaby, ;D
On the other hand, maybe Pat Mucci was so taken by the beauty of Fishers Island that he succumbed to the sirens' song and is now unable to be analytical about the golf course on its own merits.
Unlike that idiot savant who requires his faithful guide dog "Coorshaw" to lead him around the course, I paid close personal attention to the holes and features at hand.
The views are spectacular, there's no doubt, but, the underlying architecture, as it was melded to the topography, is equally brilliant.
I think one of the pitfalls that many fall victim to are the "naming" of holes, especially when a hole's name is synonymous with the name of a "template" hole.
All too often some analyst immediately pigeon hole the hole's architect in the context of the "template" hole they're either familiar with, or, the most recognized "template" hole, or the "gold standard" template hole.
I think that fallacious analysis occurs at FI, starting with the 2nd hole, which I think is a wonderful hole.
However, it's doomed to comparison with the 4th at NGLA and the 3rd at Piping Rock, when the topography of # 2 at FI is so diametrically the opposite of that which is found at NGLA and PRC.
If, for example, the name of # 2 at FI was "Montauk" or "Eastward Ho", or "Dune", many would have a different perspective in their comparitive analysis. They wouldn't make the immediate comparison, though eventually, the component features would lead one to view # 2 as a faux or hybrid Redan, and not a "classical" Redan.
I really liked the 2nd hole, which, when you consider the prevailing winds, is brilliantly positioned and oriented.
Another factor which you must account for is the underlying soil conditions at FI.
Some of the golf course was/is pure rock as you ascend from # 2 green, whereas the opening and closing holes along with some mid-holes are so low that routine storms have the fairways well under salt water from the sea/sound.
You can't analzye the routing, holes and individual features without considering the effect of the wind, especially the prevailing winds.
So, while you may think I was staring off into those magnificent vistas, my focus was on the ground.
One of the things I really, really liked about FI was the undulating fairways and the uneven, even unusual lies.
I commented to one of the fellows I was playing with, that if the course was built today, the fairways would have been a lot flatter.
Those undulating fairways present an additional challenge, but, you might not have noticed them if you were looking out at the boats and lighthouses ;D
I was also enamored with the shaved, umbrella like perimeters of the greens, which fed errant balls down into large, deep bunkers, leaving the golfer blind of the putting surface in his attempt to recover. That feature and the wind combine to exacerbate an errant or poorly planned shot and punish it accordingly.
That feature is a design feature, BUT, without proper maintainance, it becomes a vestigial feature, depriving the golfer of a more complete experience, as the architect intended. Too many courses, in the name of "fairness" buffer and prevent that feature from becoming functional.
Fortunately, that doesn't occur at FI. They get it. They understand the intended architectural purpose and maintain it accordingly.
I think it's easy to overlook the quality and merits of the architecture and many of the subtle and not so subtle features.
If anything, the views can be distracting to the casual observer.
FI is like the gorgeous blond with a spectacular body, in a very revealing, very short dress with a very low top, who's rolling the dice in a Las Vegas Casino.
She has thousands of dollars on the table and needs a hard 10 to win an incredible amount.
As she's about to roll the dice, she pulls up her dress, takes off a white thong, holds the thong in her hand with her dress hiked over her waist, grabs and rolls the dice with the thong, yells, "YES, then bends way over the table with her gorgeous boobs falling out and her legs well off the ground, spread far apart, she grabs all her winnings, stuffs her boobs back into her dress, puts her thong back on, pulls her dress down and says, "thanks fellas" as she walks away. One guy standing at the table says, "what did she roll ?" The croupier says, " I have no idea, but, I thought she said 10"
I think the same thing happens at Fishers Island. Too many golfers are looking at the eye candy and never see what's important.
Fortunately for me, I saw EVERYTHING, and I mean everything, on that gorgeous blond.
The guy standing next to me was a real idiot, as all this was happening, he was looking at all of the gamblers around the table and asked, "does anyone have a light ?", as he put his cigarette to his lips, and that's how I met TEPaul.
Either way, I guess I'll just have to get back there soon and re-examine my position.
It's a tough job, but someone's got to do it.
I'd be happy to accompany you and that idiot savant and his guidedog to FI for a round or two, unfortunately, there are restrictions with respect to visitors and I don't know if the Captain of the ferry or Water Taxi allows Idiot-Savants on his boat.
-
So, we all agree that Fisher's is a great place to spend a day on the golf course and has some very good to great holes and cool history. But is it overrated (#11 Golfweek (classic), #9 Golf Digest, Golf Magazine #20 U.S., #31 World)?
No. ;D
-
Patrick:
With this constant idiot savant attribution of yours all you really need to concentrate on with the subject of golf course architecture is the savant part! ;)
-
That third hole is a beauty and I just have one question. It has been quite a while since I played there but I seem to remember that the lower section that ran along the right side of the hole contained pretty long grass and was rather unplayable along its whole length (this coincides with the brown are in the aerial that John posted). I recall a set of green tee markers that were placed on the upper fairway as sort of a drop area.
It looks pretty cleaned up now. Am I mistaken?
Thanks
Jim,
I took a look back at the scorecard and there is no such drop option indicated on it. I also looked back towards the tee from the area that you described and don't recall seeing anything either. I could have used a drop the first time around.
-
So, we all agree that Fisher's is a great place to spend a day on the golf course and has some very good to great holes and cool history. But is it overrated (#11 Golfweek (classic), #9 Golf Digest, Golf Magazine #20 U.S., #31 World)?
Jud
From what I've seen thus far on my trip FI certainly deserves to be right up there in a US Top15 style grouping
On a Doak scale - I'd give it a 9
-
John,
The reason I remember the 'drop' areas w/the green tee markers was due to a couple of older members bringing it to our attention after one of the guys in our group topped one into the hay, reloaded, and then hit again. This was on the first tee, but the warning was so sternly given that when the same guy hit one into the stuff on the right of #3 he just walked ahead and teed up at the green markers on that hole.
-
Jud Tigerman,
Although the title of my thread was designed to get people's attention, remember that my real question was "Is FI overrated vs. Piping Rock and The Creek (only)?"
I was trying to make an apples-to-apples comparison without venturing into the world of magazine rankings (except as a reference point).
Since you asked about the bigger picture, I have no answer as, after my personal Top 3, I can only rate courses in groups of 20. I'm not good enough to know where Pebble Beach "should" be except that it's definitely in my Top 20 despite several rather ordinary holes and an overrated 18th hole with a bunch of Stupid Trees. Is it #4? I don't know. Is it #20? I don't know. Is it behind or ahead of National in terms of pure architecture? Probably "behind" if I thought about it although they both have their pluses and minuses. How far behind? No idea. The same applies to Fishers Island. Other than Top 20, I don't know where to put it.
In case anybody cares, I am rather pleased with the results of my provocative title on this thread. Besides five pages of mostly thoughtful posts (or better) and a great set of pictures from Donnie Beck, this thread has also spawned two other threads with even MORE great photo's. Plus - an argument between Tom Paul and Pat Mucci.
It just doesn't get any better than that.
-
The green markers are for the very elderly and Jr golfers so they don't have to hit it over the forced carries.
-
Chip,
Despite their origins, I think all three are unique, in their routing, topography, hole and feature designs.
Are there similarities, sure, but, there are also substantive differences.
Would I be content to play each, solely, for the rest of my life ? Absolutely, I think they're all great.
But, I don't think FI is overrated in comparison to the other two.
I still think it's the best of the trio.
I'm very biased in favor of courses swept by the wind.
I think a course that enjoys the luxury of wind/s starts off inherently better than a course not subjected to wind/s
A hole that probably gets little in the way of accolades is # 6 at FI, but, I found it to be a fabulous par 5.
It's probably got more unusual, uncomfortable lies than any other par 5 I've played.
Sidehill, downhill and uphill lies, all on one hole, all combine to make this a terrific par 5
The tee shot is VERY demanding, as is the second shot and the approach shot.
Recoveries are also challenging, and once on that terrific putting surface, while you don't get the extreme contours and slope found on other greens, there's enough there to challenge anyone.
I also like the skyline effect of the green.
Conversely, I found # 15 a rather bland par 5 with a very interesting green and surrounds.
Remember, as originally designed and constructed, there's not a single fairway bunker on the golf course.
Think about that.
No fairway bunkering, yet the golf course is so well regarded, so challenging and so much fun.
That can only occur when the architect designs holes that blend brilliantly with the topography.
Which is what I think happened at FI.
How about "The Knoll" hole ?
Is that a great hole ?
Not a single bunker on the entire hole, yet, it's as challenging as you can get.
Just try playing the hole when the pin is up front, but, don't do it in a medal play round because you may never get to the 11th tee.
I've seen guys hit 3, 4 and 5 shots from just 30 yards short of that green.
Eventually they start laughing as the ball rolls down, once again, to provide them with another chance to hit the same shot, over and over again, until they get it right.
I've seen guys putt it from the back and middle of that green, off that green and down, 30 yards into the fairway.
That hole is SO unique, as are many of the holes.
I think you were too focused on the visuals beyond the golf course.
Were you playing with Tom Huckaby ?
-
"That third hole is a beauty and I just have one question. It has been quite a while since I played there but I seem to remember that the lower section that ran along the right side of the hole contained pretty long grass and was rather unplayable along its whole length."
Jim Kennedy:
That is a question (should something like reeds be kept up or taken down) I think should be turned into a separate thread! I think this particular question which has a huge influence on the visibility and play of FI's #3 is something that both can be, has been and very much still is roundly debated on a number of other very interesting and important holes.
Some great examples to add to FI's #2 are The Creek's #13 and #14 and Maidstone's #7 and most certainly #17.
It is actually a huge point and in the examples just given can pretty much make those particular holes seem almost like entirely different holes depending on whether things like reeds are up or down.
(By the way, I realize you were talking about FI's #3 but I am speaking of #2)
My experience has been that most interestingly golfers are just about equally divided in opinion and not just that they also tend to defend their opinions either way incredibly vociferously! ;)
It just may be the best example I know of that indicates and implies that a consensus of opinion in architecture doesn't really ever happen but that perhaps one should not even think to strive for it! I think the likes of Macdonald and Mackenzie truly understood this kind of thing when they wrote that (benefical) "controversy" was actually what should be strived for in golf course arhitecture!
-
TEPaul,
The outcome of the debate you reference is oftened determined by the regulatory authorities.
I believe that the 300 foot salt water buffer impacts FI.
I know that the reeds are an impediment on tee shots from the front tee on # 15.
They can impact visibility, ball flight and direction, thus altering the play of a hole and even the architecture of the hole..
Years ago I was critical of the second par 3 at Spanish Bay because reeds between the tee and green prevented you from not only seeing the green, but the fronting and flanking water hazard, thus despite seeing the flag, you didn't know if it was 15 feet from the left edge of the green or the right edge of the green, making an intelligent shot impossible.
I know another club that cut down the reeds that had grown to such height that they directly impeded ball flight off the tee.
A disgruntled member notified the authorities and a fine was levied against the club.
Clubs that allow or promote an area to become wetlands are forever at risk that they'll lose control of that area, thus negatively impacting the golf course and play of the golf course forever.
-
"TEPaul,
The outcome of the debate you reference is oftened determined by the regulatory authorities."
Pat:
Perhaps, but it would seem each course and example may be somewhat different in that way. I sure do know a few years ago Maidstone cut down the reeds around #6, #7 and #17 (clearly a very large and probably expensive undertaking on their part). I don't believe The Creek cut down their reeds around #13 and #14---I think they actually burned them down late in the year (which might not be all that kosher with the regulatory authorities but not because the club isn't allowed to touch that area and its reeds but because the authorities don't exactly like anybody in those areas BURNING UP any shit in such an extensive area)! And I believe I even know who did it and he knows I know he did it and if he doesn't treat me right in the future I'm gonna turn his ass in to ALL the AUTHORITIES!
On my farm we collect branches and all kinds of burnable stuff and such all year into the middle of a field and into what we call our "burn pile." Technically these days we are not supposed to burn stuff that extensive (that creates some serious smoke over a large area) but we do it anyway and generally in the winter.
I have never had the local police or fire department or township or anyone else actually come on my property and tell me not to do it but if I ever do I'm going to tell them I got permission to do it from a world class authority on the subject from New Jersey by the name of Patrick Mucci.
-
TEPaul,
I've already forwarded your response, posted above, to every regulatory authority within 150 miles of Happydale Farms.
I'll visit you on every other Sunday.
Is there anything in particular that you'd like me to bring you over the next 5 to 10 years ?
-
Matter of fact, Patrick, over 25 years ago I was burning our really massive "burn pile" in the middle of a big field one day in the middle of the winter. When I say it was cold I am not joshing you. I think the high that day was just over 0 and I was so damn cold I was practically standing in the conflagration!
AND THEN, to my total amazement I looked up and saw about 4-5 horses and cowboys riding right at me yelling and whooping and they didn't even have coats on. I thought I was halucinating.
They whooped and hollered on up to me and my burn pile and swung off those horses like some cowboys in Dodge City do with the rail in front of the barroom on a Friday night just after they got paid:
I think I said: "Am I hallucinating or are you guys real?" They said they were real alright and they were fucking freezing their asses off."
So I said: "Who the hell are you people and where did you come from?"
They told me they were with a horse trailer convoy up from the King Ranch in Texas to drop a load of horses off to a King Ranch component around Chadds Ford and the Brandywine. Apparently they had come a bit too far north in the horse trailer convoy or the cowboys were supposed to be staying on a farm in my area so they stopped the convoy at a bar on RTE 3 just over the hill from my farm, took enough horses off the trailers, went in and had a bunch of drinks etc. So they were just trying to find the farm they were staying at on their horses and by the way they sort of forgot their coats when they hitched up their horses and went in for a Texas load of drinks.
I recognized the farm they were supposed to be staying at around here so after they practically lit themselves on fire in my burn pile conflagration to get warm enough they swung up on their horses and whooped it outta here!
-
TE,
Many years ago, when we were in our early teens, we used to burn out an area deep in the woods every year, then dam it so that it made a great skating rink for us in the winter.
One year we decided to use gasoline as an accelerant.
We bought a lot of gasoline.
Then we walked and emptied the cans over the entire area, which took some time.
Then, we couldn't get a match lit because it was cold and we got some of them lit.
As more and more time went by, you could see the fumes in the air.
I remembered a story a friend of mine's father told, about how explosive and powerful gasoline was.
So I suggested, wrapping a cloth around a stick, soaking it in gasoline, lighting it, and throwing it into the cleared, gasoline soaked area from a safe distance. Some of the older kids made fun of my reluctance to get close to the soaked area.
I then told them what my friend's father had said.
When we threw that lighted stick into the area, it didn't light, it exploded.
The heat was intense.
Had anyone been standing closer, they would have been seriously burned.
I developed a healthy respect for unignited, standing gasoline that day.
From then on, we were more safety oriented when we burned the grass/weeds in Skunk's Pond
-
Don't worry about that incident Patrick, when I was a kid in Daytona Beach Florida and me and my friends were in that common pyromaniac stage (most kids back then got into with North Carolina "Blue Tip" matches) we set a hayfield on fire and to our horror it set a couple of residentiial apartment buildings on fire.
So what we did is just hie it on outta there early on, circle back on our bikes after a certain amount of time and then joined the crowd with the firemen and ask what in the hell happened here! ;)
You know, on a subject more apropos to FI I was looking at a History Channel program the other day entitled "The Force of Hurricanes." It was about the effects up the Northeast Coast of that remarkable hurricane of 1938. My God what a mess. Do you know how much damage it did to Fishers Island and the golf course? If you don't I bet Donnie Beck could supply us with some photographs of the results of it that would literally blow our socks off!
-
TEPaul,
On a serious note, I noticed several areas of weeds, where tees and greens were right next to them.
Today, those tees and greens couldn't be built, which, in my opinion is ridiculous.
I also noticed the invasive nature of those weeds.
Just go back to your 1938 picture of The Creek and you'll see that the area between # 13 and # 14 was sand.
Today, it's all tall reeds.
They should be removed, but, the environazis won't permit that.
The unbridled growth of reeds, to the degree that they block the lines of sight and impede ball flight is a serious problem.
Years ago, areas like that used to be burned out annually, as did many areas of rough at many older courses.
Today, that's no longer permitted and the play of the golf course suffers because of it.
The cost to achieve the same affect as the "burn out" is very high, and alternative methods are no where near as effective, especially when you factor in cost.
If Bandon Dunes was located in Long Island, how would the land have been cleared ?
Would the required permits be granted to clear the gorse ?
-
Patrick:
> "How about "The Knoll" hole ? (13-Piping Rock)
Is that a great hole ?
Not a single bunker on the entire hole, yet, it's as challenging as you can get"
when I went to Scotland to revisit the holes C B was so impressed with, prior to the Old Mac design work - one of the courses (holes) we visited was Scotscraig where the 4th hole was the inspiration for the Knoll hole.
The green was virtually identical as PR-13 but the green was set off at a pretty severe angle to the fairway. I think there is a drawing of the original in The Evangelist of Golf book.
The tee shot plays to a narrowing fairway - the longer you hit it, the narrower it gets and as I said the green sit off at an severe angle to the fairway center line.
I lobbied real hard to get it included on the Old Macdonald design but there was so much to pick from.
None of they Knoll hole built were anything like the Scotscraig 4thScotscraig 4th
-
George,
The 10th at Fishers Island is a difficult hole since it plays into a prevailing wind.
That green, sitting high atop the Knoll, is a real challenge, from 200 to 30 yards away.
On my next visit I'll study the surrounding topography to get a better feel for the degree of construction on the natural landform.
-
The other hole I'd like to discuss is the par 5, 6th hole, a par 5 without a single fairway bunker on it, that provides an incredible challenge, from tee to DZ to second shot LZ to green.
It's a brilliant use of the landform with the undulating, pitched fairway.
Other than on the tee and on the green, I don't think there's a flat lie on that fairway.
I'd like to know, of the people who played that hole, how many birdied it, parred it, or bogied it or worse.
It presents an incredible challenge without a single fairway bunker.
But, then again, there wasn't a single fairway bunker on the entire golf course when it opened..
-
Pat:
That one really is a challenging hole in some unusual ways. I don't think I remember another par 5 where the third shot (generally a wedge for me) was so inscrutable in ways I still haven't completely figured out.
-
TEPaul,
For me, while I had a relatively short shot into the green, I had a rather pronounced uphill lie.
The difficulty with the pronounced uphill lie is in gaging the distance to the hole, especially when the hole is cut toward the back or flanks of the putting surface.
I ended up hitting a 9-iron, but, it came up short of the hole, leaving me a long putt.
The other factor is the effect of the wind on that uphill, high trajectory shot.
It certainly complicates the decision making process and the execution of the shot.
At 520, I thought it played much longer due to the topography in the DZ and second shot LZ.
Certainly, one couldn't claim that the hole was a template or a replica.
It's a very unique golf hole, unlike any other I've seen.
And, it played differently from most, if not all of the other par 5's I've played, due mostly to the terrain and lies encountered.
It's quite unique, aside from the fact that there's NO fairway bunkering.