News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« on: July 25, 2005, 03:41:46 PM »
Any comments on this course?

Bob

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2005, 03:49:42 PM »
Bob:

Is this the new Nicklaus course in Truckee?

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2005, 03:52:54 PM »
I was given a review of Old Greenwood in person by one of our esteemed posters (and confirmed separately by his significant other) that the course is (as might be wont to say) "putrid".  Severe site and severe course, trying to attract a membership of people who will have a difficult time enjoying themselves.

Seemingly not the "gentler" Nicklaus that has been prevalent in recent years.  Maybe the site didn't allow for it.

But that's just my secondhand review....

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2005, 04:07:44 PM »
Bob,

      I just played Old Greenwood last month (The day after the great Truckee earthquake of 2005). The course is in great shape and the setting is beautiful.  

      I thought the course was very good, I'd give it a 6 on the Doak scale. Some excellent short par 4's, good variety on the par 3's and interesting par 5's.  It has uphill holes, downhill holes, some risk reward stuff.  It plays shorter because of the altitude.  Its only $20 more than Coyote Moon.  

      Its not a very walkable course and cart paths are mandatory.

      I guess I didn't find the site that severe, I consider Wolf Run to be a severe course.  As for 'putrid' obviously they hang around at much better golf courses than I.   :)
« Last Edit: July 25, 2005, 04:28:30 PM by Craig Edgmand »

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2005, 09:51:05 PM »
     I thought the course was very good, I'd give it a 6 on the Doak scale. Some excellent short par 4's, good variety on the par 3's and interesting par 5's.  It has uphill holes, downhill holes, some risk reward stuff.  It plays shorter because of the altitude.  Its only $20 more than Coyote Moon.  

      Its not a very walkable course and cart paths are mandatory.


I played Old Greenwood today and its not putrid.  Furthermore, its complelety walkable, almost dead flat except for the 18th hole.  I walked it with a pull cart in 90 degree weather and barely worked up a sweat.

As for the course, its a tough test from the blue tees (6944 yards) and has some interesting holes.  You can really see where Jack put in some strategic options and to the credit of the Nicklaus organization, they still require proper angles and directional strategy.  I believe Jack as a former player still requires some strategy.  

The course does have some flaws, mainly the mounding and just poor shaping around some of the greens.  They got really lazy with the surface drainage, forming bowls for drainage around many of the greens.  There are a number of lakes, a few which don't look natural and their is a wide difference in the yardage from the whites 6457, to the blue 6944 and the blacks 7518.  They really needed to add another set of tees.


McCloskey

Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2005, 10:45:45 PM »
Scott
May I suggest that you don't pay any further attention to the person (s) that gave you the critique of Old Greenwood.
First of all, the site was not severe at all.  In fact, it is pretty flat.   It those people think the course is "putrid", they have absolutely no clue concerning golf or golf architecture.   How would they describe some really, really bad golf courses?
I have played the course and it is in fantastic condition and the terrain is gently rolling.   I thought the green complexes were quite interesting and the course very playable.
Craig's critique is much more accurate, without question.

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2005, 12:48:58 AM »
I just got off the phone with the guy (who apparently has "absolutely no clue concerning golf or golf architecture") to confirm what I remembered about his review.  I remembered incorrectly about the severe site part.  The rest I did not remember incorrectly.  But that's just one person's opinion.

He said he may chime in to elaborate a little.


Gib_Papazian

Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2005, 01:54:17 AM »
McCloskey,

Correct that the golf course is not severe in terms of site. I will ignore your accusatory drivel regarding my architectural sensibilities. I am a ghost at best on GCA these days and although I do not have the time to chime in, my taste is not diminished.

That stated, my patience with arrogant idiots definitely has.

Old Greenwood is a decent golf course for a membership of low handicappers who buy into the Nicklaus philosophy of aerial approaches and slender greens guarded in front by deep bunkers.

The problem is that the majority of the people on the golf course are middle handicappers who can no more carry and stop a 4-iron (with a skinny opening between bunkers) to an elevated green than I can whistle a one-iron to a tucked pin at the edge of the drink.

The topography is similar to Lahontan - right across the meadow. Lahontan is a wonderfully conceived golf course that is enjoyable for everyone. There are OPTIONS on most every approach, and the mounding and greensite conceptions are varied and blend beautifully into the surrounds.

Old Greenwood is forced, indulgent and lacking in surprise, whimsy or visual attraction. If it was not surrounded by the beautiful Sierras it would be another one of Jack's faceless, forgetable exercises in housing prostitution. It is putrid. Not in and of itself, but as another lost opportunity, sacrificed at the altar of a "name architect" who mailed it in and flushed twice.

To compare this antiseptic examination favorably to Coyote Moon is frankly an indictment of your basic sanity  - and if you have been mistakenly appointed to a rating panel I suggest you resign and relocate to a foreign country - preferably one without golf courses.

THE POINT OF GOLF IS FUN. Old Greenwood is not fun unless you are a stick. We played behind this foursome of two charming elderly couples. By the 12th hole, they were expelling brain fluid from the savage beating they were absorbing, suffering from Jack's latest bilious exercise in pompous machisimo.

They had bought into the housing hustle as a "retirement lifestyle" yet could barely finish at least six of the holes. If you cannot run the ball up SOMEWHERE, FROM SOME ANGLE, how does Winston and Agnes Havershire play the course well into their dotage?

Our pace was six hours. The Marshal (player assistant) suggested our foursome, playing two balls each, ought to "slow up a bit because we were pressing the group in front."

It was not their fault, really. Not everybody can play like Huntley at Arnie Palmer's age . . . . get it?

I know the world was sobbing during the Nicklaus love-fest at St. Andrews and I ought to tread more lightly on a legend . . . . so I'll admit Old Greenwood is not as horrible as Pasadera.

But, now that we know he is capable of genius (see Mayacama), it makes this offering even more egregious.

If left to his own devices at Sebonac - i.e. without the guiding hand of Doak - a course like this would find *even* Jack hanging from the yard arm of one of the yachts off Bulls Head Bay - 18 majors or not.

In a case like that, investors want more than a name. They want something special enough to hold up its head in the toughest neighborhood this side of Pebble Beach.

Best of luck to them . . . . glad it is not my checkbook handing over a couple million in fees.

End of Spew.

P.S. The Redhead thought it sucked.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2005, 11:01:37 AM by Gib Papazian »

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2005, 10:15:37 AM »
Yeeeyowwiee! :o
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2005, 10:22:50 AM »
So there! It sucked! ;D
LOCK HIM UP!!!

John Keenan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2005, 10:55:14 AM »
Gib

Great to see you posting again. I have missed your insights and views.

BTW I have heard the same about Old Greenwood from two friend who played it earlier this summer  

Curious as to others views on golf in the Sierra's in General Edgewood and Incline as well as the many courses in the Reno/Carson area. Will this become a summer hot bed of golf and good design?
The things a man has heard and seen are threads of life, and if he pulls them carefully from the confused distaff of memory, any who will can weave them into whatever garments of belief please them best.

McCloskey

Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2005, 12:55:36 PM »
I don't know where to start with  slanted, incorrect diatribe.   You should have just said you don't like Nicklaus work, and saved all the verbage/garbage.
To start with you emphasized that one cannot run the ball on the green FROM ANY ANGLE ANYWHERE.   I will not go through the entire course and show what an ignorant statement of fact that is, but I will just point out that one can play the first hole entirely with a putter on the ground if so desired.    
Your comment about Sebonack with Jack being led  by the "guiding hand of Doak", says all I need to know about your preconceptions.   I can't believe that you think Winston and Agnes would fare any better on any Doak design.
Since I didn't make any reference to Coyote Moon, but yet you attributed a comparison to me, I will assume that you were not referring to me with your "arrogant idiot" comment, but to the person that actually made the comparison.   CM is a nice tract of land with a pretty but awful golf course.   I can see why you apparently like it.    We obviously have different tastes, but it doesn't mean that it needs to result in name calling.   So I will refrain from stooping to that level to make my point.   You have made yours, and I will keep your predictable slant in my mind when reading your posts.

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2005, 01:45:37 PM »

Any course that took 6 hours to play would piss me off also.

Our pace of play was 4 hrs 20 mins, after a front nine of  2 hrs.  I played with 2 elderly gentlemen with high handicaps who are not in Bob Huntleys league but they somehow seemed to enjoy themselves.

I also am not Bob Huntley's league (golf or otherwise) but I was able to score fairly well and managed to enjoy myself.  

We played from the 6400 yard tees and the course seemed to play short.

What the heck do I know though, I actually liked the Dragon so much I played it twice and I know how much Gib loved that course.    ;D

Viva la Difference!!

Gib_Papazian

Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2005, 11:12:43 PM »
Mc - whoever,

Since you are such an erudite savant, please enlighten us plebians as to why Coyote Moon is "awful" and Old Greenwood has architectual merit.

Conditioning is not a reason. Idiots who drink *Bud Tallboys* give that as a rationale for greatness. I was told you belong to several prestigious clubs, so that excuse is not valid.

Knock yourself out. I am waiting.

BTW, if you think my opinion, after playing some 28 Nicklaus courses, is based upon bias and not experience, I invite a debate on that subject also.

Hey, Doak has designed only a fraction of the courses as Jack. Let's take a top five of each and have a chat . . . . .

Okay, unfair. That is why we handicaps in our game.

It might be a more fair match to square off with the best five from "Team Jack" vs. The worst five from Raynor. . . . . .

ooops, Westhampton - virually unknown - is still better than every "Jack track" I have seen but Mayacama.

Okay, maybe the best of Jack vs. the best of Rees. . . . . . That is like trying to compare which disco song is the least offensive. ;)
« Last Edit: July 31, 2005, 12:14:20 AM by Gib Papazian »

guesst

Re:Old Greenwood...Lake Tahoe
« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2005, 04:13:38 AM »
So there! It sucked! ;D

Craig, dear man . . . thank you for that vote of confidence.  Scott speaks the truth; I did not like it, although "sucked" is Gib's term, not mine.  My adjectives of choice would be "predictable," "boring," and "long."  I freely admit that my dislike was undoubtedly acerbated by the pace of play, which was more a dirge than a jig.  In fact, it was as dull as three or four dirges.  Played Adagio, with a D.C. al Coda.

But, more than this, I did not like the many forced carries, the too-many lakes which IMHO didn't fit the land, or the repetition of several of the green complexes.  

For obvious reasons, I prefer a ground game, and there were many holes where this simply wasn't an option.

We had a Monotonous Plenty of time to sit and study the course, and I found myself saying several times, "Didn't we see this same hole four holes back . . .?"  

I had other complaints, as well, but Glib's rhetoric is so much more entertaining than mine, I think I'll just prod him a bit.   :-*

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back