Cog Hill

[Michael_Choate]

The back page of today's Chicago Tribune sports section  contains a story entitled "Dubsdread gets rough reviews."
Mark Hensby is quoted as saying "The players are not happy with the way the course has come along the last few years and I think that's why they don't get quite as strong a field...a lot of guys are taking it off because it's not up to scratch."  I thought the comment was very interesting.  I was never in the group that thought Dubs was an "Open course" but what was expected to happen in the last few years?  What did the tour pros expect that didn't happen?  Hensby must be correct becuase the field has declined in quality IMO.  The course is pretty much the same as it was before the Western came in 1991 but for a new tee or two and a couple of less trees.  Some of us long time players would even say it is easier after they cleaned up certain areas like the 13th hole complex.  Perceptions seemed to change after the U.S. Amateur in 1997 when we were told by the USGA that the greens hold too much moisture and by and large are too big.  But they always did and always were.  Why did the course vault up in the top 100 a few years back only to fall out, I believe, in the latest?  What did the USGA orginally see and what has changed architectually to explain the "hockey stick" like rise and fall in the ratings? What needs to change for it to be an Open venue?  Is it as simple as make the greens smaller and firmer and remove a couple of trees?  

[A_Clay_Man]

Michael- There's no doubt Dubs is one of Chicagoland's best Public venues. However, that is not saying much. And since they removed the soft silica sand, the teeth of the course is no longer masticating. The sectioned and lobes that dominate the shape of the greens, are  actually quite good, but, without the penalty of the soft silica, their test is almost inconsequential.

As a whole, the course is challenging, but I don't believe it tests all aspects, or, requires much imagination to score well on.
 I for one, have and will always consider the second to be one of the poorest golf holes I've ever seen. While too many of the remaing holes are pedestrian in nature.

[Nate Golomb]

Having attended the Western Open on Thursday and touring the course, I was disappointed with Dubsdread, although I had nothing to compare it to from the past...Just another typical PGA Tour stop at a park, country club style venue. The course is over crowded with trees, sometimes penalizing a player for hitting the fairway (ie - #9), no single hole stood out as spectacular, exciting, or visually stunning, the course conditions were good but what PGA stop isn't these days?...

I did however enjoy the green complexes and the approach shots into the large, sloping, and protected greens. Course knowledge must play a large role because of the varying slopes on the greens adjacent to the bunkers. Sure, the greens are well protected by bunkers which cause the greens to look small and create interesting approach shots...but todays bunkers are maintained so well that they lose their flair. Thicker rough around the greens presents a greater challenge and variety because grass that long is far from consistent. The style of Dubsdread as a whole seems to be indicative to the direction the game and USGA is unfortunately heading...especially if Rees Jones once again comes in and the USGA considers Cog Hill for a US Open...

It would be nice to see the USGA step out of their comfort zone a little like the PGA of America did for last years PGA Championship at Whistling Straits...**SIGH** oh well, I'll continue to work on my 60* wedge from everywhere inside 80 yards...

~Nate (the new guy...)

[Michael_Choate]

I agree that changing the sand had a big impact.  One of the points raised in the article is that the tour players don't like the current sand.  They think they still get too many plugged lies.  If they had only played with the old silica sand they would really see what bad lies are all about.  I also agree that technology has taken away many of the difficult choices that one used to face.  

[Keith Williams]

Shivas (or anybody else who might know),

Are there any other courses around these days that use silica sand for their bunkers?  Where did Cog Hill's silica come from...imported or from a local quarry?

Thanks,

Keith.

[A_Clay_Man]

Shivas (or anybody else who might know),

Are there any other courses around these days that use silica sand for their bunkers?  Where did Cog Hill's silica come from...imported or from a local quarry?

Thanks,

Keith.

Joe was very proud of the sand he had delivered from Green Lake Wisconsin.

Shivas slightly over-states the percentage of balls that could/would plug in the sand, but it did happen, usually nearer the lips.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

To all Chicagolanders

Time will tell about Cog Hills chances for an Open. Isn't the USGA visiting Fazio's redo at Butler National? If the USGA says no to Butler, then I'm sure the insiders will tell Jemsek to go ahead with Rees and bypass Olympia Fields for another open.

Here's an article from the Sun Times posted on June 29:

www.suntimes.com/output/golf/cst-spt-west29.html


...Hosting the Cialis Western Open is a big deal for Cog Hill owner Frank Jemsek, but he hasn't given up on bringing the U.S. Open to the 72-hole Lemont complex.

Jemsek has been rebuffed by the U.S. Golf Association before, most notably in 1997 when Olympia Fields was awarded the 2003 U.S. Open. That decision was made after Cog Hill hosted the U.S. Amateur and Olympia Fields the U.S. Senior Open just a few weeks apart. The USGA has given no indication of returning to Olympia for any of its championships, and Cog Hill has none scheduled, either. The USGA has booked U.S. Open sites through 2012.

With Medinah booked for two PGA Championships and one Ryder Cup in the next seven years, Cog Hill is the best bet for the U.S. Open returning to Chicago, and Jemsek is taking steps to make that happen.


On Tuesday, he admitted having talks with Rees Jones, the course architect who has become known as ''the Open doctor'' for his work on courses that either want or have been awarded U.S. Opens. While Cog Hill has been well-received by the PGA Tour since 1991, the course would need alterations to fit the USGA's requirements for a U.S. Open site. Jemsek would need to hire a top architect to make changes on the course, and Jones would be his top choice.

''I'd like to get someone as good as him, but I've been in contact with him for a while,'' Jemsek said. ''I hope to get him to come. It'd be exciting to have him.''

Gauging Jones' interest has been difficult.

''I thought he was interested, but then he told me he thought [his hiring] might put Joey at risk with Dye Designs,'' Jemsek said. His son Joey is in his sixth year working with another world-famous course architect, Pete Dye. Jemsek told Jones that shouldn't be a concern...

[Greg Beaulieu]

There was a similar article posted at www.golfobserver.com  where they also noted comments from some tour pros that the greens are too bouncy but that also it is inconsistent. Also, complaints about the over-treeing have been rebuffed by the Jemseks as their father Joe planted many of the offending trees and they do not want them removed. The bunker sand remains an issue as stated above, with pros complaining about too many buried lies.

I wonder if the Western plans to stay at Cog Hill. I always was impressed with Butler National watching it on TV years ago, and a city the size of Chicago must have many other suitable venues for a tour stop. Dubsdread was interesting the first few years, but I find watching it now that the holes have a tiresome similarity and no real distinction in most cases.

[Paul Richards]

I have read here that Dubsdread has taken a real beating.

That being said, it is still, perhaps, the second-best completely PUBLIC access course, behind Bethpage Black, that I have ever seen.

Shivas mentions the silica sand.  It was amazing.  A real ball-buster.  I have mentioned on many previous threads how they took all the 'teeth' out of the course when the Western Open came to town here.  It used to be a really hard course.  No longer.  Because PGA standards require perfect bunkers, perfect greens, perfect fairways - a lot has changed.  And for the worse, I might add.

They cleaned out all the brush along the edges, removed the 'impossible' white sand, and, for all intents and purposes, made the course much easier.

Sad.

That being said, Greg mentions:
>I wonder if the Western plans to stay at Cog Hill.

I wonder also.  It's hard to beat 46,000 fans on a Sunday there.  However, Butler is probably a better test.  But, they too are gunning for an Open, apparently.

In the '60's, the Western rotated between Beverly, Olympia Fields, Medinah, etc.  Personally, now that these courses have gotten their act together, through either restoration or renovation, I would LOVE to see the Western go back to a rotation.

I think the pro's would appreciate seeing something different every few years, and the fans would as well.

No more:
> Dubsdread was interesting the first few years, but I find watching it now that the holes have a tiresome similarity and no real distinction in most cases.

 

[tlavin]

To Shiv and the other silica sand-ophiles:

I think it is a bit silly to suggest that the bunkers were "designed" specifically for the use of a certain type of sand.  I'm no architect, but I'm guessing that the shape, size and location of the bunkers has absolutely nothing to do with the type of sand that is chosen for a Midwestern golf course that does not have natural sand available (i.e. Dunes Club or any other sand based plot of land).  

I think it is the height of romanticism and masochistic retrospection to think that the teeth of this golf course were removed when they took that stupid sand out.  The removal of the sand was the best thing that ever happened to Dubsdread, because its presence was a visible, dominant and overwhelming way to "trick up" the course and make it punitively difficult.  To me, there is nothing strategic about a type of sand that creates a high percentage of fried lies on "normal" shots that enter a bunker.  

Maybe they could put iceplant in every bunker.  Or maybe they could put little ponds in every bunker.  How about pea gravel instead of sand?  Boy, that would be difficult!  We could all brag about the fact that we couldn't break 125 on that course on a good day!

I'll agree that it is a little galling that there is a "tour spec" for the depth of sand in bunkers (at least that's what I've been told), but that is a far different matter than wishing that bunkers could be filled with material that is not designed for use on a golf course.

[erichunter]

I never played Cog with the silica sand.  It is interesting though that Cog removed it to appease the TOUR.  The pros are lukewarm at best with the course.  Also, the USGA put a boatload of sand into the bunkers at #2 for this year's Open and seem intent on re-establishing bunkers as hazards.  If Cog really wants to host an Open perhaps they should quit hosting the Western so the players won't gripe about the course; revert to the silica sand to make the USGA happy; hire Rees Jones to "toughen" other parts of the course.
Sometimes, it may be better for courses not to host a regular TOUR stop if they want to host a major.  When a professional arrives at a major they usually expect some "unfairness," but with a regular TOUR event they better not plug in the bunkers.

[A_Clay_Man]

If Meeks made VN remove some trees inorder to get the course playable for the seniors, I wonder how many would have to be pruned for Dubs to get the open?

In the real scheme of things, if Cog Hill couldn't get it when Joe was on the USGA board, I doubt they have enough pull as hiers. Anybody?

Terry, Taking a clue form Nicklaus's evolution, his summary was that he needed to listen to the owners requests better. How they wanted the course to play. If there was ever an owner who was more proud of an un-natural material, it was Joe Jemseck about that sand.

Plus, some greens shapes and sizes, and I believe some bunkers, were tweaked in 90' for the arrival of the boys in 91'.