News:

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


Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Butler National update
« on: April 29, 2005, 09:29:56 AM »
This interesting article appeared in today's Chicago Tribune.



--------------------------------------------------
BUTLER CHANGES COULD COME OFF COURSE


Ed Sherman
Published April 29, 2005



Butler National already was more golf course than most players could handle.

The track carried a scary rating of 76.6 from the back tees. Even from the up tees, 18 holes at Butler is a humbling, if not debilitating, experience.

So it is a bit disheartening to see the course currently filled with bulldozers and workers bent on making Butler even harder. Don't they know we've suffered enough out there?

The crews are implementing modifications from architect Tom Fazio to modernize and toughen the Oak Brook course. When Butler reopens in June, it will play to a par 71 at nearly 7,500 yards from the tips.

Yet the biggest change might come off the course. The renovations have sparked talk that Butler will consider eliminating its all-male membership policy to enable women to join. The move would allow the club once again to host pro tournaments. The club's eyes could be on the biggest one of all: the U.S. Open.

While nobody is talking publicly, it seems certain the club will have some internal discussions about the membership issue. There is a feeling that with its prime location, along with the quality of the course, Butler could be the next Open site in the area.

Butler had the Western Open from 1974 through 1990, annually earning a reputation for being one of hardest courses on the PGA Tour. Fazio, who designed the course with his uncle George in 1972, contends the course is worthy of a major.

"Certainly it can now," Fazio said. "Today's players will look at it differently. With the renovations being done, it's ready for anything."

Fazio, though, says the mandate from the club didn't include anything about prepping the course for major tournaments.

"The goal of the club was, `How do we keep Butler as one of the premier courses in the area?' The club wanted to make sure it wasn't left behind," Fazio said.

Butler lost the Western in the wake of the Shoal Creek controversy at the 1990 PGA Championship. Back then, the major governing bodies in the United States decided they would not have a tournament at a club that had exclusionary membership policies. Butler opted to remain an exclusive men's club, forcing the Western move to Cog Hill.

Unlike another all-male club, Augusta National, where women can play the course, women are not allowed on the grounds at Butler.

According to head professional Bruce Patterson, the course's latest changes don't foreshadow Butler's desire to re-enter the tournament arena, which would require the club to alter its membership policies. He said the revisions stemmed from the club's decision to replace the grass on the greens.

"Nothing was stated from the standpoint of changing the bylaws," said Patterson, who was designated to speak on behalf of the club. "When we closed the course [to redo the greens], the opportunity existed to put it back to where it was in the 1970s [before the technology boom]. That's the position of the board."

Despite the public pronouncements, sources familiar with Butler maintain there is a faction in the club itching to show off its course on a big stage. Butler was ranked 35th in Golf Digest's latest review of the country's top 100 courses. That figures to go up after reviewers see the latest renovations.

They include pushing back several tees to accommodate the modern power game. The par-5 15th now plays to 630 yards, up from 585 yards, and includes two new dramatic bunkers around the green. Butler also redid many of the traps, filling them with white sand that really makes the holes pop.

"For the value we got, it feels like a completely different golf course," Patterson said.

United States Golf Association officials will be in town in August for the Walker Cup at Chicago Golf Club in Wheaton. They are expected to make a short side trip over to Oak Brook to take a look at Butler.

With the changes, Butler should meet the Open's requirements from a difficulty standpoint. In 1976, Al Geiberger won the Western with a 4-over-par 288. A year later, par was 288, a score normally seen at an Open.

While Butler's setup was softened a bit in response to complaints, players still thought it was a supreme test. The average score during the Western's 16-year run at Butler was a stout 74.59.

"What jumps out for me is we didn't play everything from the back tees," said Mark McCumber, who won two Westerns at Butler. "I can't imagine what it would be like if we played the [par-4] 10th all the way back. It was one of the hardest courses on tour."

McCumber thinks it would be a terrific Open course.

"It could have had the Open even without the extra length," McCumber said. "I know the game has changed, but the course played tough without any 4-inch rough. It's a great shotmaker course. It tests every aspect of your game."

The USGA wants to bring the Open to Chicago on a regular basis, but the area is limited when it comes to venues. Medinah is locked up with the PGA Championship in 2006 and the Ryder Cup in 2012.

Olympia Fields got many positive marks for staging the 2003 Open. However, the club's location in the far south suburbs remains a negative.

Butler, though, could give the USGA an alternative. For starters, its location is ideal. Centrally located in west suburban Oak Brook, the club is easy to access from all parts of the city. The area also is well-stocked with hotels, something Olympia Fields lacked.

Finally, the USGA would look more favorably on dealing with DuPage County.

"The USGA would be hard-pressed to find a better spot in Chicago," one local golf official said.

The next available Open is 2012, although it seems more likely the tournament won't return to Chicago until 2015 at the earliest. Until then, Butler also could make a bid to host one of the PGA Tour's World Golf Championships events.

If Butler did get back into the tournament business, the Western would be eager to return. Nothing against Cog Hill, but Butler's location is hard to beat. However, nothing will happen until Butler resolves its membership issue. Even if a group of members that supports bringing in women, it won't be an easy task convincing those who want to keep the status quo.

There's an old motto in club circles that says it "takes an act of God just to remove a tree." So authoring a complete revolution within Butler might be a daunting task.

Advocates for change are sure to stress that Butler originally was built to be a tournament course. In fact, founder Paul Butler had to be convinced to go with an all-male membership.

You don't toughen an already difficult world-class course just to inflict more pain on the members. It should be done to test the game's best players.

The process might have been started by a desire to replace the greens. It could lead to bigger and better things for Butler National and golf in the Chicago area.

----------

esherman@tribune,com
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2005, 09:33:05 AM »
As a caddie at the 1981 Western Open at Butler, I have fond memories of the course.

Having played it a number of times over the years, I have always been very impressed by the course and its difficulties.

I have commented a number of times on this site that with a little TLC, this course could host a US Open tomorrow - if the policies were changed.

Tree overgrowth and tired and shallow bunkers, as well as lost green space and tired teeing grounds all were to be found there recently.

With the Fazio renovation at hand, I will be excited to see this course that is Open-worthy.

And if the club is ready to address its policies in order to secure the Open, then more power to it.

 ;) :)
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Mike_Cirba

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2005, 09:47:44 AM »
"Butler also redid many of the traps, filling them with white sand that really makes the holes pop."

I've never played Butler but I hope that this isn't a selling point.


mikes1160

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2005, 11:05:17 AM »
Shivas,

I totally agree in regards to Mr. Sherman - and where the DuPage county reference comes from is anyone's guess. However, I'm mystified why you don't think Butler would have a chance at the Open? (if they do, indeed, change their membership policy) The USGA would love to come back to Chicago, given the right conditions.  And given the PGA's love-in with Medinah (PGA Championship '99, Ryder Cup '12), it would seem Butler would have the inside track.

Paul - what was your home course? I caddied at Butterfield C.C. in the late seventies..........was '81 the wash out where they had to use Oak Brook G.C. for a nine?

Mike_Cirba

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2005, 11:25:45 AM »
Shiv,

The only thing I'd question is why Butler brougth Tom Fazio in to extend the course to 7500 yards plus and filled all of their bunkers with glaring white sand to make the holes "pop" if they weren't seeking someone's favor.

Isn't the course tough enough for the members?

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2005, 12:18:07 PM »
Shiv; I wish you would stop holding back and let us know how you really feel.  Suppressing emotions can be harmful.  As to the Dupage County remark, I suspect it stems from the previously reported difficulties encountered by the USGA in dealing with the Cook County authorities when the US Open was at Olympia Fields.  Its just another shot at Cook County and assumes different treatment elsewhere.

mikes1160

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2005, 12:22:41 PM »
Shivas,

Actually, the furthermost northern point of Downers Grove - right next to the WCFL towers, within walking distance of the old Midwest Golf Club........getting back to Butler, well, it would be a George AND Tom first.......tell me this: why is it not a U.S. Open course, compared to, say,  your beloved Medinah  ;)

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2005, 12:43:56 PM »
Mike:

>Paul - what was your home course? I caddied at Butterfield C.C. in the late seventies..........was '81 the wash out where they had to use Oak Brook G.C. for a nine?


I grew up caddying at the Beverly Country Club and was fortunate enough to get the honor of caddying at the 1981 Western at Butler, the one where Ed Fiori sunk about a 100-foot putt on 18 to win.


You can read my writeup of Beverly at "My Home Course" - the link is:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/POLSTERS_POLL.html


Cheers!




"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

erichunter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2005, 01:14:23 PM »
'87 was the year of biblical rain that forced 9 holes to be played at Oak Brook CC and 9 at Butler.  

Reading the story it sounds like Patterson or other members wouldn't go on record about having an interest in hosting an Open.  I'm not journalistically trained but it would be a more legitimate claim by Sherman if he at least had an anonymous quote hinting as much.  

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2005, 01:17:29 PM »
Shivas

>Of course you think Butler could get an open.  I say not a chance.  First of all, the course is not a US Open course.  

>Remind me again, exactly how many Tom Fazio courses have held the Open?

The answer to your question is, none to date.

This could easily change with a creative renovation by Tom on this spectacular course.

As I've said, the bunkering has gotten worn out, the greens and tees needed some work, and the trees have gotten WAY overgrown.  Just addressing those problems, IMHO, leaves you with an Open-worthy venue.

Underneath the aforementioned 'problems', it is that strong of a test.

"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2005, 09:51:10 PM »
Shivas

You may be right.

But, somehow, I think the USGA is looking for a Midwestern site.

Olympia is a great course, but no matter what any of us thinks, it just came off wrong in '03.

Unfortunately, I'm doubtful they will give OFCC another chance.

That opens the door to Butler, IMHO.


"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Matt_Ward

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2005, 12:30:35 AM »
I've played Butler twice over the years and just wanted to ask a quick question to those in the know from Chi town area ...

Is Butler more noted for the toughness or the architecture?

I have my feelings but wanted to see the answer from those who have played it multiple times.

Thanks ...

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2005, 09:14:06 AM »
Matt;  toughness without a doubt.  Rarely any comment about architectural issues.  But in all fairness, its not often that many courses have architectural comments from the mainstream; the usual focus is on difficulty.  However, your point is well taken.

erichunter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2005, 11:33:13 AM »
When the Western was played there, the super was Oscar Miles (I think).

A_Clay_Man

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2005, 11:39:52 AM »
If Harbour Town was the seminal work for Pete Dye and the modern era, Butler Nat'l maybe the ultimate example of just how far difficulty advocates, can and will go, while still remaing a recognizable artistic rendering of a golf course. I'd assume Phil Blackmar is all over this style, and or it's principles. ;)
 
The setting and flow of the course was rather amazing, especially since I had golfed next door only once, and considered OakBrook to be mostly a concrete jungle.


Matt_Ward

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2005, 11:40:28 AM »
Agreed / re: the conditioning of the course. Simply impeccable stuff from the two times I played it.

If toughness is the criteria then can someone tell me what makes Medinah #3 so special and unique from a strictly architectural component when compared to BN?

I like a number of holes at BN -- I also believe the 18th is a vastly underappreciated closing hole despite all the naysayers who can't handle its clear challenges.

Matt_Ward

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #16 on: April 30, 2005, 02:13:33 PM »
Shivas:

Nuff of thin-skin-itis / re: Medinah. I simply asked a serious question -- you can answer it or bypass it. That's your call.

If BN is cited for difficulty and little architectural qualities I just wanted to see how the two courses compare from those who have played them a number of times.

Nothing more -- nothing less.

P.S. Be curious as to how BN stays so high on the ratings meter when compared to such layouts as Skokie and Beverly, to name just two.

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #17 on: April 30, 2005, 02:42:44 PM »
Shivas

It's Errie Ball and he's in the Illinois Golf Hall of Fame as a professional golfer.

Matt

There is architectural merit to Butler, not just toughness.  However, one of the main reasons it has always done so well on the GD lists is that Butler does so well on the first two categories:

>>> 1. Shot Values. How well does the course pose risks and rewards and equally test length, accuracy and finesse?

>>> 2. Resistance to Scoring. How difficult, while still being fair, is the course for a scratch player from the back tees?



Beverly from the tips is quite a test, but Butler is just damn hard.  Skokie isn't in nearly the same category for toughness.

"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Matt_Ward

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #18 on: April 30, 2005, 11:43:58 PM »
Shivas:

No, you're not thin skin regarding Medinah -- no -- not the least. ::)

I asked a straightforward question and you tapdanced around it and made me the issue -- nothing like the proverbial end run around.

I seriously asked a question that would reflect a bit more info than bluster. Keep up the usual form.

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #19 on: May 01, 2005, 07:31:09 AM »
Shivas:

Nuff of thin-skin-itis / re: Medinah. I simply asked a serious question -- you can answer it or bypass it. That's your call.

If BN is cited for difficulty and little architectural qualities I just wanted to see how the two courses compare from those who have played them a number of times.
   

Nothing more -- nothing less.

P.S. Be curious as to how BN stays so high on the ratings meter when compared to such layouts as Skokie and Beverly, to name just two.


Matt:

   Having previously lived in the Chicago area for over 13 years some time back and haing played at least a dozen rounds on both, I feel qualified to step up and answer this.

   Neither course is what most of us would describe as "an architectural gem." Toughness (resistance to scoring) and Shot Values are the abundant themes of both. Medinah has a few things that differentiate it from Butler in a meaningful way and make it a better all-around course for many reasons;

1) Medinah has natural elevation changes. From the semi-bilnd tee shot on it's first hole to the uphill 2nd shot on 16 and the drop-shot value on 17, the shifts in elevation add a dimension that is near absent (save for the downhill 1st tee shot, slightly uphill approach to 10, slightly downhill13th and the slightly elevated tee on 18) at Butler. Any elevation at Butler is neither dramatic nor, in most cases, natural. In fact, very little pre-shot thinking there (other than 10 perhaps) includes any elevation adjustment.
   Medinah also has considerable & natural "heaving & canting" of the fairways, leaving sidehill lies to be either eliminated by ball-striking precision or anticipated by lazy shot-making. Butler doesn't have any of that. This is a key difference that seperates them and gives Medinah's architecture more notice and playability!

2) Butler has much less variety to it's movement and routing. Each hole is long, tough (usually dogleged) and posesses a "Baatan death march" like characteristic. Other than it's solid par 3's, most of the rest of the course maintains that feel. Medinah also practices some forms of repetition, with less obviousness and more subtlety. Medinah #3 has a flow derived from it's routing that adds a little rhythm and step of pace absent down in Oak Brook. It's variety of par 4's and 5's have a discernable, even if slight, edge over Butlers.

3) Both courses have too many trees. Both have moments of hardwood claustrophobia. Butler feels somewhat more open and it's landing areas wider, but that proves to be an optical illusion as it's dogleg corners are often populated with willows and other dense woods that are only 10% air at best. The oaks and hardwoods at Medinah appear much meatier and act more "jail-like" but are evenly edged and define the shot lanes instead of interfering with them like Butler(especially the stupid trunk found in the middle of 18, an otherwise good closing-hole).

4) Neither course fails to remind the golfer of his (hers at Medinah?) grind or difficulty of posting a good score, yet Medinah will yield better chances to feel rewarded than Butler.
The omnipresent water hazards at Butler easily overwhelm those delivered by Lake Katijama (sp?) and the views found at Butler will never stimulate any golfer, save for those hungry for a Big Mac. Medinah does have (once you get past the southern edged holes) some "walk-in-the-park" feeling that will never be found down in corporate dominated Oak Brook.

5)  I'd also offer up the fact that Butler's greens are no less treacherous (they are quite fast with moderate slope), but Medinah's are more heavily-sloped and thus more able to be used to shape approachs that might bear more rewards (i.e using "backboards" to pull the ball back to middle-to-front pins).

6) Finally, I'd handily give Butler the nod for consistency of suberb conditioning. I don't know this for sure, but suspect it gets much less play than #3 and it's membership expects immaculate maintenance. Medinah's membership is vastly larger than Butler's and although it has 2 other courses to accomodate that difference, just the density of the trees and their larger canopy's make it hard to give it's fairways and greens the adequate sun and exposure they deserve (at least that was the case 6 yrs ago when I last played both Chicago tests).

In a pick of 10 rounds, I'd give Medinah the 6.5-3.5 nod. I should admit to some little bias here for it's #17 is the site of my second ace, and my first round in the 70's from the tips (on my 35th B'day) continues to stand as one of my top-twenty golfing experiences.

Matt.....Hope that helps define the difference in both for you :D
« Last Edit: May 01, 2005, 08:56:48 AM by Steve Lapper »
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

A_Clay_Man

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #20 on: May 01, 2005, 02:10:49 PM »
Steve Lapper- That was a great summation. While I only toured Medinah your descriptions are just as I remember.

What I'd like to know is how Dubbs even enters into the scene? It is pedestrian compared to those two. Idn't it?

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2005, 02:55:22 PM »

Steve:

Fine analysis.



Adam:

Dubs enters this eqaution partly on the strength that it is about $125,000 less than Butler and $80,000 less than Medinah to 'join'.

Dubs is a fantastic course.  In fact, I've said it before, it is the second best truly public-access course in the country.

It's big, it feels like a classic course because of all of the oaks everywhere - and they are everywhere, but just not as overpowering as those at Medinah.

It is also a championship test.  In my book, it ranks just a notch below Medinah and, if the renovations are what I am hoping they will be, just a bit below Butler as well.




"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

A_Clay_Man

Re:Butler National update
« Reply #22 on: May 01, 2005, 03:09:20 PM »
Paul, Obviously I have a completely different take on what constitiues a great golf course. The initiation fee never entered into my evaluation, nor did the mighty oaks. Well maybe the oaks did, but they certainly are not one of the positive aspects to #4.
I can name quite a few better modern public access courses than Dubbs, IMO.
Blackwolf Run, Wild Horse, The Rawls, Pinon Hills, Black Mesa, Olympic course at Gold Mountain, Stevinson Ranch All the newer Monterey courses, and those are just the ones I've golfed and can think of off the top of my head.

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #23 on: May 01, 2005, 04:18:49 PM »
Good analysis, Steve.  Lake Katayama?  Nakajima?  I think you've got Japanese golfers on the brain... ;)

It's Kadijah, which is probably Arabic for "reload". ;D

Shivas,

 Thanks for the kudos..I'm not sure I have "anything on the brain" save for for those things best left unmentioned on GCA.

Doesn't "Kadijah" also mean no swimming!! ;)
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Butler National update
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2005, 04:24:25 PM »
Adam

> can name quite a few better modern public access courses than Dubbs, IMO. Blackwolf Run, Wild Horse, The Rawls, Pinon Hills, Black Mesa, Olympic course at Gold Mountain, Stevinson Ranch All the newer Monterey courses


Blackwolf Run is indeed spectacular, but that is a resort course, not a daily-fee, as is Dubs.

The rest I can't say 'yeah' or 'nay' as I haven't seen the others you mentioned.

However, of the over-600 courses I have seen, Dubs is still the second-best daily-fee course, IMHO.

 ;)
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back