Strategy at The Loop

[Tim Passalacqua]

I haven't heard enough about this golf course.  I love the concept.  How challenging was it to build in strategy to both courses?  I would imagine it is much more difficult with greens and fairways accepting shots from different directions.  So for those of your that have played it, how is the strategy with bunkers, land forms, and angles?  i just want to learn a little more about this place!

[Tom_Doak]

Tim:


I'll let your question linger for a bit before I try to respond, and see what anyone else has to say.


I haven't had too much feedback on the "strategy" of the Red and Black courses yet.  I think most people are still just trying to get their brains around how it works in both directions.  The concept makes it tough to remember all the holes (and which belong to which course), much less remember the strategy behind them.

[Steve Lang]

   Well one thing, last year we played the Red and you could pretty much ignore or not be afraid of the rough and still find your ball in there and get it out..  after another season of growth that probably won't work as well..


     
 


 

 
... and when in doubt just play to front of green

[John Kirk]

I played the course forward and backward once each, so I have limited experience.  However, I believe The Loop possesses a significant complement of strategic decision making for the repeat player in both directions.  Among the decisions a player will make include enhancing the angle of approach by favoring one side of a fairway, learning where to miss based on hole location, and the occasional go/no-go decision on short par 4s and par 5s.  The course also features good grass for bounce and roll, which may influence shot trajectory.

The Loop lacks some of the distinctive framing of holes, enhanced by the use of natural land forms and landmarks, that make some of Tom's courses so beautiful from the tee.  This must be by necessity, as the course must work equally well in both directions.  But for the most part, the important strategic elements of golf remain, though the visual cues may not be as obvious.

In addition, I found my stay at Forest Dunes to be very pleasant, with good food and comfortable lodging in a peaceful, natural environment.  The original course is a more traditional modern challenge, with many strategic choices and a nice variety of golf holes. 

[Rich Goodale]

First strategic decision.  We're the Fugawies.

[Mike Schott]

Like John, I've payed it in both directions. But one play is not nearly enough to learn the strategies. I agree with John 100%. If you miss the green with your approach, miss it in the right place. It also takes time to learn how to use your short game. You can run the ball up or take the high route depending on where you miss. But if you choose to stay on the ground, watch for the numerous slopes.

[Peter Pallotta]

John - you know I value your opinion and respect your analytical skills, so an honest question:

Since you understand *why* The Loop lacks some of Tom's distinctive framing of holes via natural land forms and landmarks, how much if at all do you personally 'downgrade' this course compared to some of Tom's more famously beautiful/striking courses?

You have played in a lot of places and on a lot of top flight courses, and you are a low handicapper -- so your perspective (so different from my own) would be valuable and interesting:

In the context of the whole package that quality golf courses offer/provide, including shot making options and challenges, to you personally how important, relatively speaking, are the land-forms and landmarks and visually arresting framing?

Thanks

Peter

[Andy Johnson]

I played the course both ways last year and thoroughly enjoyed it. The golf course has a ton of strategy and if kept properly firm and fast presents a ton of options and promotes the ground game around the greens.


The greens dictate the strategy of the hole. Depending on pin locations the ideal place to approach from changes drastically. Also, I thought Tom did a good job of pinching fairways where the longer player hits the ball to make them think twice about pulling out driver.


I am excited to go back, I would suggest allotting enough time to play each course on the loop twice. I think its a course that will reveal itself more and more every time around. Also the green complexes can make holes play so dramatically different dependent on the pins that I regret not getting to see another days position.


Frankly, I would skip FD, just not really my cup of tea.


I am planning to go up there as soon as the weather breaks, need to go see Black Forest. I hope it finds the right hands. Speaking of is there any update on the attempt to sell it?

[Steve Lang]

   Andy,


As much as i liked the Loop and its wide open spaces, subtle character, and challenging green complexes, there is no reason to forego playing the Forest Dunes course if you've made the journey there, i'd characterize that as foolish advice.  If so, in regard to Black Forest then, you probably won't like it... which would be too bad. 

At the start of last summer things at BF were a bit stressed, but by Sept they had made some significant improvements, hopefully 2017 will bring more of the same.

[John Kirk]

John - you know I value your opinion and respect your analytical skills, so an honest question:

Since you understand *why* The Loop lacks some of Tom's distinctive framing of holes via natural land forms and landmarks, how much if at all do you personally 'downgrade' this course compared to some of Tom's more famously beautiful/striking courses?

You have played in a lot of places and on a lot of top flight courses, and you are a low handicapper -- so your perspective (so different from my own) would be valuable and interesting:

In the context of the whole package that quality golf courses offer/provide, including shot making options and challenges, to you personally how important, relatively speaking, are the land-forms and landmarks and visually arresting framing?

Thanks

Peter

Hi Peter,

I'm reluctant, but I'll say a few words. 

In a recent thread, I said that the walk in the park comprised a significant majority of my overall enjoyment of golf.  Let's say 60-70% as an estimate.

After I played The Loop the last day, driving down to see Stoatin Brae in Kellogg's territory, I thought to myself, "Well, it seems like the course is about a Doak 6 in both directions.  I wonder if Tom will give it a 6 or a 7 in the (CG) book."  Tom graded the course as a 7.

Some of Tom's courses are remarkably beautiful.  Part of that beauty is seeing your ball in flight and on the ground as it moves.  The Loop does not possess the kind of topography which gives the inspiring medium or long range backdrops.  It's pretty flat, maybe only 50-75 feet of overall elevation change.  But it's sandy, and the ball will roll well there.  I feel sort of unqualified to comment on the "shot quality" or "shot values", because I have a small sample size to choose from.  It's possible that after a number of rounds, The Loop will prove to be a course that features great shot making.  But because of the two-way nature of the course, there are limitations to some visual aspects of golf there.  There will be a higher percentage of shots where a player cannot watch the shot in its entirety.

You can see the course on Google Maps.  It's a good way to remember things.  Really nice place, very pleasant environment to play golf.  It is a fairly easy walk, moderately long but gentle.  The course was very young last year, and its appearance and condition will improve the next few years.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Forest+Dunes+Golf+Club/@44.5927877,-84.5379783,2347m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x88206a11b536e8bd:0x2244cbe9c357ab0e!8m2!3d44.5918914!4d-84.5294158?hl=en

What was the question?  Oh yeah.  I don't know if I "downgrade" this course; it's more that I upgrade courses that are beautiful, and that make for interesting golf shot viewing.  Rock Creek, Stone Eagle, and Pacific Dunes are built on land that possess great natural beauty.  Gotta go.

[Tom_Doak]

After I played The Loop the last day, driving down to see Stoatin Brae in Kellogg's territory, I thought to myself, "Well, it seems like the course is about a Doak 6 in both directions.  I wonder if Tom will give it a 6 or a 7 in the (CG) book."  Tom graded the course as a 7.

One of my former colleagues, a math major, said she didn't know how to rate the course.  As she put it, "what is 6 + 6 ?  For some people it would only be a 6, perhaps for others a 12." 


Now that I've played it some more, I feel like I've shorted it at 7, leaving too many points on the table for "beauty" [or, the "walk in the park"].  If the true test of a course is how inspired you are to go back out and play it again, The Loop must be pretty good.

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks John, and Tom - much appreciated.
I really don't know anything about these matters, i.e. what's a 10 or 8 or 6 etc; but JK explained his pov well, at it is a pov that Tom seems to be aligned with, ie giving it a 7.
But I must admit that I still don't understand it; one day I will have to play a number of 7s and 8s and 9s and even 10s to see if I then can.
I just can't intuit at this point how architects who know - and have proven over and over again - what makes for challenging and varied and fun golf courses and rounds of golf can sometimes create an outstanding/can't miss course and sometimes 'only' a very good one.
Yes, the land/site - I get it....but only in theory.
Peter
 

[Ally Mcintosh]

I've a hunch that I might like The Loop a lot, precisely because of its lack of visual framing and markers. It seems more British perhaps, less flashy.

[Mike Schott]

After I played The Loop the last day, driving down to see Stoatin Brae in Kellogg's territory, I thought to myself, "Well, it seems like the course is about a Doak 6 in both directions.  I wonder if Tom will give it a 6 or a 7 in the (CG) book."  Tom graded the course as a 7.

One of my former colleagues, a math major, said she didn't know how to rate the course.  As she put it, "what is 6 + 6 ?  For some people it would only be a 6, perhaps for others a 12." 


Now that I've played it some more, I feel like I've shorted it at 7, leaving too many points on the table for "beauty" [or, the "walk in the park"].  If the true test of a course is how inspired you are to go back out and play it again, The Loop must be pretty good.

Definitely inspired to play it again and again Tom. The myriad options in all facets of the golf game lend so much interest. No it's not much to look at but I can't say that thought ever entered my mind over my 2 rounds. I could drop a ball short of many of the greens and try different shots for hours. Fun is the one word I would use.

[Adam_Messix]

My guess is that there will be few people that play The Loop very often to where they can figure out how to play individual holes, but I think strategy works two fold on any course. 

First of all, there's the strategy of playing the course as a whole.  In The Loop's case, the rotations are so different in the sequence of holes that you have to be mentally ready to play if you want to score well.  The Black rotation starts out long and rather difficult where pars are a good score and very few good birdie opportunities early on.  I think if you can get through 6 at even par or one over you have a pretty good chance of a good round because there are birdie chances coming.  In contrast, the Red course gives you a chance early with the difficult holes coming in so even though basically all you see is the front slope on the approach to 1 you really do need to attack the early holes on the red and make birdies because the finish is tough. 

In terms of individual holes within the rotations, On the Black I think your tee shot down the left of 3 and 14 is preferable whereas the right side seemed to be the best side to approach 10 and 13 and if the hole is cut in the front of 8 it is wise to play it 25 feet past because the down slope makes it really tough to get it close.  On the red, the two really noticeable shots were that I thought the best way to approach 9 is to try to carry the bunkers on the left and attacking the back hole location on 14 in the dell is dangerous. 

The Loop is excellent stuff and both courses are fun to play.

[Tim Passalacqua]

Thank you for the replies.  I am excited to see this course this summer.  I get the feeling it will take several plays to understand where to position your ball.  To see a reversible course that plays well both ways is amazing.  Obviously, this is a one of a kind and I can't wait to see it.

[Brett Hochstein]

Regarding the visuals (or lack thereof), I happened to enjoy the sort of lack of definition.


In general, the playing corridors are connected fields of short fescue without flashy bunkered borders.  It is maintained grass, then native.  There is almost no "framing" to speak of.  In my opinion, this creates a need for the golfer to have sharper focus on where they ought to play their shots, and thus adds to the mental challenge. 


What the visuals also do is sell the golf course as a natural entity.  As opposed to a typical course where bunkers, fairway lines, tree planting, and shaping dictate a "feel" and way to play the hole, The Loop just sits there asks you "well, what should I do here?"  It doesn't feel created or forced.  Even on some of the more naturally gifted properties of the world's great courses, golf holes often feel "designed," which I think detracts from them feeling as if they are truly natural.  The Loop doesn't really have that issue, just like a place like the organically-arranged Old Course also doesn't.


And a note on the land in general: there is a lot more movement to the property than I expected, and where there wasn't, there were some of the more clever and challenging greens/surrounds.  The overall "feel" of the landscape is something I really love as well.  The mix of open and contained space, the lack of understory to the trees, and the range of color and texture in the native all make for a landscape pretty unique to the region, which is normally just smothered in pretty dense forest.  I especially enjoyed it on the middle day I was there, which was gray, misty, and calm.  The setting of The Loop is probably it's most underrated quality.   

[Steve Lang]

   if there were some topo maps for the de minimus potato chip greens it'd help some strategize, but ruin the fun and adventure

[Peter Pallotta]

I keep looking and reading and thinking, and the more I do the more I think Tom's right in drawing a parallel to the Old Course. There because of the 'open endedness' of the design (which *can* be played backwards), here with the *intended* and built in two way playability, what you have in both places is 'pure' strategy, for lack of a better word, ie architecture stripped down to its essentials, but in a context where adding anything to the essential actually diminishes instead of enhancing the design. But such is the power of today's tastes and demands for extra- architectural elements (which for dark age courses we disparage as eye candy) that even the architect and his fellow afficiandos give it 6s and 7s. Ironic that experienced golfers and astute gca buffs will travel far and play different tees throughout a round and praise to the skies the unstructured quality of the sheep ranch, when all the while the epitome of freedom golf is right here, to be had for a fraction of the cost.
Peter

[BCrosby]

The Loop plays more like the Old Course than any other American course I've played.


Bob

[Jim Franklin]

I played it once in both directions. Loved it and can't wait to play it again. 7 is too low IMHO. It is at least an 8 and possibly higher. I need to get back there soon.