Shoreacres vs. Skokie

[bill_k]

I was intrigued by the thread several weeks ago which contained some heated exchanges about which deserves to be rated higher and why. Never having played both-and being a huge Raynor fan-I thought the people on here who were raving about Skokie must be out of their minds. Shoreacres has always been mentioned as one of Raynor's most inspired efforts! How could Skokie even compare? Well, I decided to see for myself what all the fuss was about and arranged to play both on the same day last week. I thought I would share a few observations:
-Shoreacres is every bit as beautiful as I had hoped. The setting of the clubhouse on a bluff overlooking Lake Michigan is unsurpassed. The pro shop and locker room facilities reminded me a bit of Yeamans Hall.
-I do not understand the argument about the first three holes being weak. With the new tee across the road #1 is 515 yards. Not terribly long, but how many of you out there can hit driver-3 iron out of the gate-especially since there is nowhere to warm up? True, #2 was no more than 2-iron-wedge,but again, how many people flush their first wedge shot of the day? And finally #3-I hit driver but hit it to the left side and could not see where to play my EXTREMELY delicate pitch (I am guessing it is a Leven Hole?). I do not remember #'s 7 and 8 at Merion being any more difficult than #'s 2 and 3 at SA but I have never heard anyone refer to THEM as weak. If you think #3 at SA is weak, I would imagine 80% of the holes at Merion seem pedestrian!
-I'm no expert, but if you do not think SA is an example of a masterful routing-PUT THE CRACK PIPE DOWN!
-Speaking of Merion, has anyone ever noticed the similarities(forgetting about yardage) between #12 and #13 at SA and #17 and #18 at Merion. I got goose bumps standing on #13 tee when I realized this.
-The ravine holes were all breathtaking.
-The green complex at #17 might be one of the scariest around when the pin is behind the bunker front left.
-If there was one hole at SA which disappointed me I would have top say it was the Redan #14, which almost seems like an afterthought compared to the versions at Chicago GC and CC of Charleston.
- For some reason, all of the Chicago parkland courses look the same to me. Bob O', Beverly, Ravisloe... you could drop me on the front nine at any of these tracks and I could not tell you which one I was on (perhaps a slight exaggeration but not far from reality) and I was expecting more of the same from Skokie. However, I was thrilled and amazed by Skokie.
-Almost immediately, I was struck by the dramatic green complexes. While without a great deal of interior undulation, the greens blend seamlessly with the bold and dramatic bunkering.
-I played with a very knowledgable longtime member who also sat on the Club's board for many years-He pointed out the Langford/Moreau holes and how they had evolved with the renovation. I remember the Ross holes as being the most difficult on the course (#'s 8 and 18 are both ballbusters!) My host even pointed out a handful of old tee boxes he said were original to the Bendelow routing-I remember one which I believe sat in the woods with trees growing out of it on the 6th hole facing across the present fairway!
-I found Skokie to be every bit as thrilling as SA, but in its own way. It is a solid, solid test of golf and deserves any accolades it receives.
-I can see both sides of the argument in the previous thread-but I think with a little thought you can see the merits in each course. If I wanted to hold a US Open qualifier or a State AM Skokie would be my pick. However, if I had to pick only one course to play for the rest of my life I would not hesitate to choose SA over Skokie.

[bill_k]

Oh yeah,
   Possibly the two most laughable practice facilities in the midwest when compared to the quality of the courses.

[A_Clay_Man]

BillK- Well thoughtout respectful analysis. As for openers that ease one into their round, I would add that it is integral to the flow of a great course. Have you made it up to Lawsonia?I suppose golf has followed rock and roll as needing to wow from the first note but from my perspective practice facilities are only part of the experience, not the golf course.

[Scott_Burroughs]

I almost did the same as Bill last month, playing Shoreacres and Skokie 2 days apart.  I also feel the same as Bill for the most part.  #1 at SA is a bit of a warmup hole, but I liked #2 and #3 quite nicely.  They have perhaps the most elevation change/rolling features of any fairways on the course.  Being Chicago, when there is fairway, it's usually pretty flat.  That's the biggest drawback, IMO, of SA is the dead flatness of a lot of the land.  Same could be said for any of the 4 area courses I played.

#10 is the Road Hole and is friggin' hard, as it should be.

Also liked Skokie, though I feel that #18 is just a killer par 4, not an easy par 5 (with a tough green).

I liked the bunkering, which is very SA/Raynoresque -also like Yeamans Hall (fairway bunkering mostly).

#8 is a hole that Ross liked enough to not touch, the green was so tough (and Ross-like!).  #7 preceding it is a little, uh, "quirky."  Need to hit high fade tee shot over the trees, otherwise, it's a 3-wood tee shot on a par 5, like #11 is also.  I've never been big on non-driver/lay-up tee shots on par 5's.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Shivas,

Could be part of it.    But truthfully, the correct line of attack being straight at (and over) the trees is not right, IMO.  O/W, it's a 3-wood.

With your moon ball tee shots, you must love that tee shot.

[bill_k]

I suppose the one thing that really surprised and excited me was the comparison between #'s 12 and 13 at SA and #'s 17 and 18 at Merion. Has anyone played both and agree?

[David Wigler]

SA is better! Shivas is wrong! Tom Doak agrees! (No analysis added since I have never played Skokie)

[Paul Richards]

My two cents, as I played them both recently within the span of one week:

Shoreacres is a wonderful course, but after Prichard's restoration, Skokie gets the nod.

Skokie is a better challenge, is more scenic and it has more memorable holes.  

Also, importantly, it photographs better.

That being said, it is like being asked "would you like me to hand you $1,000,000 or $1,000,001" - either is awesome!!!

[Paul Richards]

I should have said, "My two cents, for what it's worth"....
 

[Will E]

Paul,
How do you think Beverly compares vs. Shoreacres and Skokie?

- Prichard spent a few hours at Barton, let's keep our fingers crossed!

[T_MacWood]

Dave/Shivas
How would a superficial view of the lake benefit Shoreacres? The property in land is more interesting. And the course is confined to T shaped site, with the clubhouse at the bottom of the T nearest the lake.

You can't see Lake Michigan at Crystal Downs (or least you couldn't when I last played it), I don't recall being disappointed in the routing as I looked out over the lake from the CD clubhouse. Did MacKenzie fail in your view?

There are homes (big homes) along the entire lakeshore at SA (and Crystal D.for that matter). Unless you know something I don't, it doesn't appear the lake was available for the golf course. With plenty of interesting land inland they made the right choice.  Shoreacres is one of the most clever routings I've ever encountered. I'm not aware of any old Chicago course that utilizes the lake - why is that?

[T_MacWood]

Dave/Shivas
“The routing of SA is great. But not because of the land that 1, 18, 9 and the left side of 10 sit on, that's for sure. There's better land on the property than that.”

Exactly, and you would prefer Raynor use more of that flat uninteresting land to get view of the lake. The property is 100 yards wide at the lake, at the most, and basically flat. Sky line green?…don’t you need some elevation change to make an appealing skyline green? Short par-3?… a very short par-3 and on extremely flat land (a nice view, prehaps). Where do you place the clubhouse, and which holes do you sacrifice on that very tight property?

I suspect there is a very good reason why there are no golf holes in Chicago on Lake Michigan…look into it for us.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tom,

Imagine the Biarritz like at Fishers Island bordering the lake over a creek inlet perhaps:

[T_MacWood]

A 100 yard long Biarritz over totally flat land...no thank you.

The Biarritz at FI is over an interesting depression/inlet and is 200+ yards.

[A_Clay_Man]

Perhaps one reason the lake isn't used effectively is the fact that the lakefront moves and has changed it's location thoughout history. Knowing that, how close do you wanna get? I guess Pete shoulda visted Chicago's North side before agreeing to Ocean Trails.

One course that is older and uses the lake views, is Waveland. Certainly, being in close proximity to a large natural body of water, while golfing, can be quite spiritual. Maybe thats because we are all, approx. 85% comprised of the stuff.

[TEPaul]

Shoreacres and Skokie and also Beverly--have all of these courses had or are in the midst of having Ron Prichard do restoration work on them? I think I'm certain that Ron did the restoration on Skokie--but what about Shoreaces?

On the drive home from Pittsburgh yesterday I called Ron just to say hello. Of course with these architects and their cell phones it's pretty funny because you never know where they may be when they answer. Ron said he was at Exxmoor and would be at two other clubs out there during the day. I think he said Exxmoor had huge potential but I thought he also mentioned Skokie, Shoreacres and Beverly.

I believe I remember hearing from a number of people that Ron had done a really terrific restoration job at Skokie. Did he also work on those others? It would seem that in Chicago, at least, Ron's work has been highly received and no one need be concerned that he's ruining bunkering out there and all over the Midwest, as rpurd claimed he was doing all over the Northeast, and particularly at Morris County! (A golf course that Ron never worked on, by the way)!  

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tom M,

When you said 100 yards wide, I was thinking the other direction (100 yards inland) and the available shoreline was bigger than that.

For disclosure, I've played the course, but didn't make it to the clubhouse or shoreline.

[T_MacWood]

The Biarritz at FI in the picture is parallel to the sea (as was the original).

What is the appeal of a Biarritz perpendicular to the lake over flat ground? Where do you put the clubhouse and what holes do you sacrafice on that tight property?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tom,

I thought I had it explained correctly in my last post.  I assumed you meant the land was 100 yards wide INLAND (towards the clubhouse) and MUCH LONGER along the shoreline, so a full-length Biarritz, like the one shown for FI, could be built PARALLEL to the shoreline.   I now understand that it is 100 yards of shoreline ONLY.

[Scratch_Nathan]

Bill -

Loved your write up.  Thanks for the insights and info.

[SL_Solow]

Tom Paul;  Ron Pritchard did a fabulous job at Skokie,imho.  He is working at Beverly and the plans and initial work look great.  I understand he has been hired by Lakeshore and I know he was hired, in conjunction with Dave Esler, at Evanston.  I do not believe he was involved at Shoreacres.  My recollection is that Tom Doak and/or one of his colleagues were involved in the work there.  Additionally, appropos of Shivas' question, Lakeshore has a significant amount of lakefront property, none of which was used for the golf course.  It is devoted to the main clubhouse, tennis courts and a pool.  However there is a steep drop down to the beach.

[TEPaul]

The Biarritz at Fishers Island is just another good example of the interchangeablility of available architectural features to basically accomplish the same purpose. The shoreline to the right of FI's #5 is a great natural feature. On other inland Biarritz's such as Piping Rock, Westhampton, Fox Chapel et al the lack of  natural features was compensated for by the more common enormous "coffin" bunker formations on both the right and the left.

The best example of a Biarritz where the coffin bunkering on either side (to take the place of a natural feature) was not necessary was The Lido's amazing 234yd #8 that was hard up against the beach on the right and a waste-like area on the left.

Another good example of the interchangeablity of architectural features (either natural or man-made) is the large deep bunker behind NGLA's #7 or Piping's #8 that takes the place of the road on TOC's #17.

The Creek Club's truly amazing Biarritz (80 yds of greenspace depth) forwent a man-made archtiectural feature on either side (bunkering) because the entire green is itself an island (in water).

All great examples of the interchangeability of architectural features from the natural to the man-made to accomplish the same basic purpose of strategy and playability.

[Paul Richards]

Tom:

As Shel mentioned, Prichard did Skokie and is currently doing Beverly, Exmoor and Lake Shore.  Tom Doak has been in to consult with Shoreacres to return it to its original foundations and also has added a few new tees (which fit in quite well).

Shooter:

Prichard's work at Skokie was magnificent and I truly believe Skokie merits inclusion on the top 100 lists, especially the GolfWeek top 100 Classic course list.

That being said, Beverly has better terrain, better variety of holes and is, underneath, a better test of golf than Skokie.  With the front nine of restoration practically complete, I can tell you for a fact that Beverly is going to be awesome when it grows in!!