Oak Hill East: Why no respect?

« **on:** January 04, 2006, 06:40:59 PM »

This has probably discussed before, but I daresay that it has not been discussed at length by someone who has as much experience with the East course as myself. What is it really? I know there are four Fazio holes, none of which I particularily like, but many of best courses have just as many (or more) weak holes (read: not so great holes). Many people also argue that there are too many trees. I was under the impression that Pine Valley had a few trees too many.

In short, what aspects of the East course make it so unworthy of praise? What does one have to do to get architecture scholars to understand this course??

« **Reply #1 on:** January 04, 2006, 06:55:26 PM »

JNC:

The first thing that leaps to mind was the inane desire to bring in George / Tom Fazio and basically create their "own version" of what Oak Hill should be. I guess it wasn't bad enough for Inverness to have such a botched job.

The second thing that comes to mind is the profusion and interference with all the trees. The place is a great example of clutter overtaking the nature of what the design is about. Keep in mind this, the club takes PRIDE in proclaiming how a previous member suggested the proliferation of trees you find today.

I have had the pleasure in attending various national events at Oak Hill East including the '80 PGA, the '89 US Open, the Ryder Cup Matches, the US Amateur and the PGA from a few seasons back. I've also had the opportunity to play both layouts at Oak Hill and I concur with Doak's assessment about the sister course. The course doesn't have any unique aspects that would elevate into the elite upper echelon with the likes of Oakmont, Shinnecock, Winged Foot and Olympic / Lake, to name just for.

I have always wondered what thebig fan fare is with the ar-5 13th -- the hole simply takes the driver out of the hands of the big hitters and is nothing more than a long par-5 that causes more yawns than interest for me. The real gem of a hole is the par-4 14th which is one of the best short holes you can play. I watched the event during the Ryder Cup matches and it was a real treat. Oak Hill East needs more of what the 14th provides and less of the overly predictable parkland characteristics that are part of its nature now.

I see Oak Hill East in the category with Baltusrol Lower -- a famed layout but lacking any real architetcural merits that cause the pulse to quicken. How the layout merits a top 30-40 position nationwide has always had me scratching my head.

Please don't think that I am in any way dissing the marvelous membership that supports its club in a truly first rate manner. Nor the qualities of Craig Harmon who is a pro's pro.

P.S. In my assessment of NY courses -- Oak Hill East would not even sniff the top ten.

« **Reply #2 on:** January 04, 2006, 06:58:08 PM »

It's actually not even worthy of the top course in Rochester, in my view. That honor would go to Monroe GC.

By the way, Oak Hill-West is much more interesting than the East - more character and shots.

« **Reply #3 on:** January 04, 2006, 07:10:35 PM »

Matt and Brad,

This question may be worthy of its own thread, but both of your posts brought it to the front of my mind.

Do high expectations of a course prior to ever seeing it make it likely to leave underwhelmed? Does this underwhelmed feeling (bad first impression) have a chance to redeem itself upon future visits?

I played Oak Hill twice in the late 90's and left thinking it might have been the best driving test I had ever played. I have no clue what holes the Fazio's worked on, and I agree the 13th is not that great, but saying that course lacks character seems a bit harsh. I don't think it compares to WF and have not played Oakmont, but any negative posts about Oak Hill seem a bit stretched.

« **Reply #4 on:** January 04, 2006, 08:18:06 PM »

Oak Hill East is challenging but I struggle with the authenticity and memorability in the sets of par threes and par fives. Thegreens good but are certainly not nearly as interesting as the brilliant greens on Ross hidden gems like Brookside( Ohio) Springfield(Ohio) or Grosse Ile (Michigan) Moreover, i believe DJ Ross built numerous short par fours with better terrain as well as more strategic interest than Oak hills 330 yd 14th.The 10th at White Bear Yacht and Longmeadow's splendid fifth are but two examples.Finally I find the arduous finish at Oak Hill much less engaging for all levels of golfers than very interesting closing quartets at Plainfield , Seminole, and Winchester. Ive been fortunate to experience dozens of Ross courses over the past 25 years and in my opinion, such unlisted (top 100) Ross courses such as Metacomet,the Orchards,Hyde Park and Roaring Gap are much more architecturally significant than Oak Hill East because of their variety of holes nad the manner in which Ross masterfully routing such holes over rugged land. Just in comparing Oak Hill to Longmeadow I dont believe that any par five at Oak Hill comes close to Longmeadow's third or that any consecutive par fours at Oak Hill East have the charming strength of Longmeadows ravine-laced eighth and ninth

« **Reply #5 on:** January 04, 2006, 09:36:39 PM »

Brad Klein:
Saying Monroe is the best course in Rochester is totally ridiculous. I would not put in my Rochester top five ahead of OH E and W, CC of Rochester, Mill Creek, Brook Lea, and Cobblestone Creek on any qualification other than maintenance, which is superior to any of those mentioned above. I did a quick match play to see how it matches up to Oak Hill East:
1. Oak Hill 1up, as Monroe's starting hole is horrid, and Oak Hill's a classic.

2. AS. Monroe's has a good greensite, and OHCC's is one of my least favorite on either course at the Hill.

3. OH 1 up. Indifferent short par five for Monroe has nothing on Oak Hill's third, a great long par three with a small green set on a ridgeline. The key to a par three with a small green is lots of recovery options, and you have everything here from a short bunker shot, long bunker shot, put up the slope in front of the green, tricky chip shot, lob, pitch, anything.

4. OH 1 up. I love Monroe's fourth hole (Geo Thomas has a diagram of it in his book), but OH's fourth presents so many options as a par five. One can play from the right tee and a face the option of a heroic carry over two deep corner bunkers and OB, or one can play from the left tee and face a beautiful straigthaway short par five. The green surrounds are again key, as the bunkers short right keep the golfer honest with a fairway wood. The green itself is amazing with a simple little tier in the back center of the green that affects every put on the green.

5. and 6. Both are fantastic holes at Monroe and easily win over Fazio's failures at 5 and 6. Monroe moves 1 up.

7. I love Monroe's greensites, and this might be my favorite, but it only garners a halve with the seventh at OHCC. A classic drive into a stream valley may be narrow, but strategy abounds, as the club/line is different every day off the tee. the second shot may not be as exciting, but one must seek to keep the ball below the hole, often by running the ball up the narrow gap in front of the green. The green itself is totally frustrating, and one of the two most underrated on the course. Monroe stays 1 up.

8. This is where OH takes control. This short hole at Monroe is fun, but 8 at OH is an awesome long four, perfectly routing, which again has varying strategy. A person who has played the course many time learns where to best aim the ball off the tee to consistently set up the approach shot. AS.

9. Ross makes a valiant effort to create a fun par five by pushing up the green. Very cool, but OH's ninth is way better in terms of terrain (totally unique), driving hazards (the hollow on the right is death, and it defines the tee shot. The spine down the middle makes the tee shot all the more interesting). OH 1 up.

10. Good getaway hole at Monroe, nothing more. OH's tenth is THE best hole on the course, and it never gets respect. The drive is the toughest on the course, with the bunker to the left representing the best line, as anything right of it will kick down towards the creek. The green, like the fourth, is dominated by a crown in the middle, and approach shots to both the front and back must be thought out very carefully. Oak Hill almost deserves two holes for this one, but it goes 2 up.

11. OH 3 up. OH has a very cool greensite, and Monroe's green has been altered from the original, and it isn't a great hole to begin with.

12. The Leaning Oak and greensite make the twelfth at OH, a very tough short four. Monroe's 12th is the worst hole on the course. OH 4 up.

13. Sorry, but all those who said OH's 13th is overrated are dead wrong, but I will address this later in my post. OH wins easily over a good par three at Monroe to send OH 5 up.

14. Monroe's 14th is a cool greensite for a short five, but overall the hole is essentially defenseless, while the 14th at OH remains a classic for all, a tough short four for the members, with a wicked and unusual greensite, while it was an excellent risk reward for the pros. A variety of scores are possible here, and it was the hole at the 2003 PGA that Shaun Micheel made a six on. OH 6 up.

15. Monroe's charge is too little, too late, and defintely wins here, with OH's 15th being the worst on either course. OH 5 up.

16. Love the routing of Monroe's 16th, a great long par three with a slanted green. It beats out OH's underrated sixteenth easily. OH 4 up.

17. The seventeenth is a tricky one, with Monroe possessing a very unique, almost Raynorlike greensite, but Oak Hill takes the prize. This hole can play well at 460 or 500, with the terrain again defining the tee shot and providing the strategy. A plethora bunkers defines the second shot, but it is the green that is the stunner. It is of the double plateau variety, but the green deceptively runs from front to back, forcing the golfer to again think hard about the approach shot. This and 10 weigh in as the best on the course, and 17 beats the 17th at Monroe. OH 5 up.

18. Monroe wins hands down on this one OH 4 up.

So there you have it. You may say that OH has too much alteration, but I hate to point out the Monroe has three doozies of its own. Taken as a set, Monroe wins the threes easily, OH wins the fives easily, and wins the fours pretty easily as well. Not a chance that Monroe is better than Oak Hill's East.

Mark Chalfant:
I hasten to wonder if you skipped the par fives at OH. Agreed, the par threes are on the weak side, but the par fives are as varied and diverse as one could hope. The fourth offers elasticity and interest on both the tee shot and at the green. The thriteenth is one of the best long par fives in the world, never a slog, and will be explain shortly. Finally, the seventeenth is a great half-par hole, with a vexing tee shot (that can't be said for many par fives), wild second shot, and one of the best greens I have ever seen.

I have only played one of the courses you listed, Orchards, and I must say I didn't think it was within two notches of OH East. True, I loved the fuzzy edging on the bunkering, but a couple of the greens were not original, and a few were just plain boring. It also had too many mundane medium length two-shotters (1, 8, 12, 15) and the par threes on the back were unexciting. As far as Ross courses go, I put OH E and W, Monroe (yes, I do like a lot at Monroe), CC of Rochester, Brook Lea, Teugega, and CC of Buffalo ahead of the Orchards.

JES, Matt, et al:
I can't believe what I'm hearing about the 13th. For a long three shotter, it can't be matched in maintaining interest throughout the entire hole. Sure, the tee shot pulls the driver out of the long hitter's hands, but no on is gonna reach it anyway. Despite the shorter club off the tee, one still must learn where to place the drive in the rolling fairway.

From there, the strategy begins in earnest. Will the player take out an iron and lay it up, leaving a long, semiblind third? Will he take out a fairway medal, bringing the fairway bunkers into play? If so, one must either attempt to carry the bunkers, beautifully cut out of the hillside, leaving a short pitch for the third, or he will chicken out to the left, which leaves an approach that must contend with giant oaks. A

As for the greensite, it has to be one of the single best in the WORLD. It is set in a giant bowl, with the Hill of Fame lining either side. There is about 40 yards of tightly-mown turf in front on the green, presenting more vexing short game options. The green itself, although not totally original, has the best of both worlds: subtle and outrageous. The right side of the green is severely sloped from back to front, as well as from right to left, and any putt from anywhere is a nightmare. The left side is more subtle, but is hard to make anything outside of two feet here. Did I mention the green is surrounded by six bunkers?
I know of no other par five with so much interest from tee to green

« **Reply #6 on:** January 04, 2006, 09:50:07 PM »

Quote from: JNC_Lyon on January 04, 2006, 09:36:39 PM

I know of no other par five with so much interest from tee to green

I'm on your side about Oka Hill in general, but can you admit a bit of bias with this statement? While your words reminded me of some very fine attributes to the 13th, there might be one or two with a bit more interest.

« **Reply #7 on:** January 04, 2006, 10:03:17 PM »

Of course there is bias in that statement! How could there not be, with it being my home course? I have played the hole a great many times, and I just think there is so much going on, so much unique stuff involved. I'm sure if I got to know more courses, I would rank a little ways down the list. I will say though, walking on the crisp turf at dusk some thirty yards shy of that green, down in the bowl, there aren;t many places I'd rather be playing golf.

« **Reply #8 on:** January 05, 2006, 10:29:48 AM »

JNC:

With all due respect -- and I emphasize the word respect -- how can you possibly playdown the comments of outsiders -- particularly when you solicit their comments with the posting of this thread and given your own admission you are member of the club itself ?

Don't you think you might have the least bit of partiality to the course ?

Another thing -- if you truly believe the par-5 13th is some sort of all-world par-5 then I believe you need to get down to the Westchester and Long Island area because there are number of holes that far surpass what you believe the 13th provides. Yes, it's a good hole but not in the upper tier of such holes from the many courses I have personally played in the Empire State.

You said, "I know of no other par five with so much interest from tee to green."

Frankly, you need to see / play a good bit more in New York State.

Take for example -- the 4th at Bethpage Black. Easily beyond the qualities of the 13th at Oak Hill / East in my book. That's just one example -- the 16th at Shinnecock Hills is another that leaps off the page. I can provide a number of others.

JNC -- again, with all due respect -- there are a number of clubs in the greater NYC area that outshine Oak Hill / East from the standpoint of pure architecture. I do give credit for the club in hosting events and no doubt the resulting publicity has given the East Course a bit more exposure. But, let's not confuse hosting majors with architectural excellence.

You also glossed over the inane connection the club made with the Fazios. They screwed up the course -- you would think clubs would have learned from the abortion that was created with the work they did at Inverness.

You still also have the tree issue. As I said in my initial response it's actually quite amusing that the club itself celebrates the profusion of trees that have INFESTED the playing angles of the course. No doubt you are quite correct about PV having too many treees but Oak Hill / East is not exactly the poster child for using the buzz saw appropriately.

JESII:

How it is that my opinions of the course and the bulk of others I have personally played is, to use your words, "a bit stretched?"

I have seen the top echelon of other clubs that are in the unofficial American rota (e.g. Shinnecock, Winged Foot / West, Oakmont, Olympic / Lake, to name just four) and they are easily beyond the likes of Oak Hill / East. I didn't say the course was worthless -- I simply opined that it's current position in being in the top 50 in the USA is way overrated and simply comes from the sheer exposure that comes in hosting so many major events. I also said the club is to be congratulated for the community support it has fostered with such events. However, as I said to JNC -- hosting majors and having architectural pedigree of the highest sort -- is night and day IMHO.

The driving dexterity you saluted is merely the constant repetition of the bowling alley type. You are pressed because of the trees that overwhelm the property and frankly choke the very qualities that Ross envisioned.

I look at each course I play simply in terms of the architectural elements that are there. I don't place expectations because I know from personal history that nothing can equate to what you personally experience and often times pre-hype of a layout can be wrong on both
sides -- whether it be too high or too low. I also don't give brownie points because a facility hosted an event. I do make it a point to return to facilities and personally play them when I hear that extensive improvements have been made (e.g. Oakmont, Winged Foot, etc, etc).

JesII, keep this in mind, New York State is the most competitive state in the country in the category for private clubs. The bar is THAT high for good reason. Place Oak Hill / East in the Westchester / Long Island area and it would simply lose a considerable part of its luster that it gains by being in an area of the state where it can shine without all the ensuring competition. If you read the comments Tom Doak provided on Cherry Hills in Confidential Guide -- especially the last sentence -- you will find my exact sentiments on Oak Hill / East as it relates to the other more noteworthy layouts in New York State.

« **Reply #9 on:** January 05, 2006, 03:21:49 PM »

Matt:

Notice how I didn't even mention the majors Oak Hill has hosted in my post as part of the course's greatness. For me, that has no significance whatsoever in terms of course quality.

Again, I already addressed the Fazio issue in my posts. The stuff he did to 5, 6, and 15 (which were supposedly three neat holes in their original state) certainly detracts from the golf course, but I try to think of a course that remains unchanged, and there aren't many. That still doesn't excuse what they did on those three holes (they also altered 18, but it is still a solid finisher). But I think you are missing 85% of the course by focusing on those three holes. It isn't just you, it is every publication I've seen with a description of Oak Hill, which is more a description of the club's history, and all of the pictures are of the Fazio holes. George Peper's Grand Slam Golf described the course. What was his featured hole?? Number six, one of the worst holes at the facility. Just too bad, George Peper, yourself, and others can't focus on the greatness of the course that actually there, not what should be there.

The tree issue is a sticky one, and I certainly don't agree with increased proliferation of trees, or the celebration of it. I will say that the course has sveral magnificant sets of trees. If only they could be highlghted by cutting sown the duds.

« **Reply #10 on:** January 05, 2006, 07:56:09 PM »

JNC:

I hear what you say but still urge you to sample / play a good range of other NY State private clubs. You yourself even admitted your lacking in this regard.

Oak Hill / East has a mega tree problem. The club, as you well know, goes out of its way in celebrating the tenacity of a past member who erroneously believed that the inclusion of such trees would be to the benefit of the design.

How wrong he was indeed.

P.S. I will say this though -- I do agree with Hogan' assessment of the opening hole -- it's a good one and suffers no fools. The problem is that there are few holes of architectural uniqueness in my book like the 1st and 14th, to name just two.

« **Reply #11 on:** January 05, 2006, 08:02:45 PM »

Matt,

Just curious--when did you last visit/play Oak Hill East?

Happy New Year,

« **Reply #12 on:** January 05, 2006, 08:33:49 PM »

John,

Does Oak Hill East suffer from redeisgned Fazio holes? I thought that while they didn't fit as well as the others and the green complexes sort of stuck out as different, their play did offer strategy & challenge.

Have not played West, but many have stated it's a great, fun course.

Matt - No way are there 10 courses better than Oak Hill East in NY. I'll give you 4 definites that are better than it:

NGLA
Shinney
Bethpage Black
Friars Head

And I'll throw a few in w/ the same breath:
Winged Foot
Quaker Ridge
Maidstone

But no way is it lower than these and three others.

« **Reply #13 on:** January 05, 2006, 10:11:05 PM »

Matt:

Take a look at how numbers 3, 4, 9, 10, and 17 are designed, to name just five of my favorite architecturally superior holes, and I think you will find four holes of architectural uniqueness. I will say this, if #10 was the starting hole, it would be remembered as one of the course's best, as it is THE toughest hole to start on that I have played. I think Jack Nicklaus said of the 1st at ANGC, "I would pick any hole on the golf course to start on--except this one." I think this applies well to #10, which has so much unique and difficult choices and challenges that the golfer needs to be well into his round to play it well.

I do agree that John R. Williams was wrong, and I have sarcastically christened the first hole after his namesake, as he is misrepresented as a profit of great golf

I just wish publications would focus on the excellent architecture, and not on the trees!

« **Reply #14 on:** January 05, 2006, 11:40:03 PM »

Doug:

I played Oak Hill / East during media day prior to the PGA Championship. I have played the course roughly 4-5 times over the years and usually just before the major events that have been played there.

Doug -- I've always played the tips and have seen the full teeth of the layout prior to these events.

Happy New Year too !!!

JNC:

When you say focus on the architecture but not the trees -- the point you either ignore or gloss completely over -- is that the TREES OBSCURE WHAT IS THERE TO START WITH. I hope you understand my caps in the previous sentence is meant to serve as a reminder -- again -- that the essence of Oak Hill / East has long embraced the profusion of trees that engulf the property. Let's see a major tree clearing program -- akin to the minimum that Oakmont and Winged Foot / West accomplished before running the gums about the so-called greatness of the course.

Let me also point out that the par-5's I previously mentioned -- the 4th at Bethpage Black and the 16th at Shinnecock run rings around the 13th at Oak Hill / East.

JNC, I'll say this again -- you do admit your limited personal playing experience with the elite private courses in New York State. You also have a mega conflict of interest because of your membership connection. Frankly, members see their own courses like their own children. I can appreciate your love for your course -- but you candidly have to admit the clear bias involved.

John F:

Olde Kinderhook (Albany area) is a better layout than Oak Hill / East IMHO.

John, c'mon let's get real -- Winged Foot / West is miles beyond. To equate the two together is a sure sign to me of your personal amnesia -- no disrespect intended. A case can also be made for the West's sister course -- the East.

Let me also point the qualities of Fenway -- also in Westchester. The Tillie layout is indeed a supreme example of first rate architecture.

You're correct on the others ...

Shinnecock
NGLA
Friar's Head
Bethpage Black

Quaker Ridge and Maidstone have unique characteristics although I will personally concede that I am not a big fan of these two.

With me falling asleep at the key board I'll return to this thread and be happy to banter about other gems in NY State that often get dissed for a host of reasons.

« **Reply #15 on:** January 06, 2006, 09:51:29 AM »

In terms of being interesting to play For All Golfers (including
golfers with 6- 25 hcp) there are probably over a dozen classical routings in NY state that are challenging yet more fun to play than Oak Hill East

« **Reply #16 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:00:29 AM »

I personally consider these better designs than the East Course

Garden City
CC of Troy
Wykagyl
Fenway
Fishers Island
Huntington

Deepdale
Winged Foot East
Sleepy Hollow
Engineers
CC of Buffalo
Whippoorwill

« **Reply #17 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:05:41 AM »

Quote from: mark chalfant on January 06, 2006, 09:51:29 AM

in terms of being interesting to play For All Golfers(6-25 hcp) there well over a dozen classical routings that are more fun to play that OHE

I didn;t realize my 0 handicap eliminated me from the realm of being a golfer.

Taking that statement to its fullest extent, the same could be said about Bethpage, WFW and any other highly challenging golf courses.

Matt,

I have no interest in a ranking argument, and will not be pulled into one but, to say Oak Hill would not sniff the top ten in NY state "is a bit stretched". The course my not offer the intimate charms many of the courses in the metro NYC area do (I could agree with that) but charm cannot be the only factor in determining a great golf course. Sure their are alot of trees, hundreds could go over night and noone would notice, but the shot demands are as high at Oak Hill East as just about anywhere else you could find. That is its strength, and that is why it's ranked as it is. I do also agree that hosting majors effects the ranking of a course upwardly, but like I said, I'm not interested in discussing rankings.

« **Reply #18 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:20:01 AM »

JESII:

Let's start AGAIN shall we. You said any "negative" comments on Oak Hill by me were a "bit stretched." I answered that quite completely in subsequent replies. Oak Hill / East benefits from a desire to host major championships and in having a large supportive membership / surrounding community. The inherent architectural elements -- my main argument -- is that the course, while certainly good, doesn't merit the elite placement either in the top 50 nationally or among the top ten in New York State.

Frankly, you have entered the rankings argument whether you want to or not simply by claiming my assessment of the course (e.g. top ten) is out-of-bounds ("a bit stretched'), according to you. I have to ask you this -- have you really played a wide smattering of the elite private clubs in New York State? A number of them fly below-the-radar because they will never host a major event which often times is the sole reason my certain clubs receive the stature they do.

Now, with your latest reply you go off half-cocked with the insertion of the word "charm." I never said the word "charm" --I simply spoke about the cumulative architectural elements that other New York State private courses have in abundance over Oak Hill / East. Please speak to the specifics rather than the creation of your terms which I never offered.

There's not denying the resistance to scoring lies at the forefront in what Oak Hill / East is about. It's simply that few of the holes there actually distinguish themselves in the area of architectural uniqueness IMHO. I mentioned the nature of the 1st and I most certainly like the par-4 14th which is one of the best short Ross holes I've ever played.

Let me also point out that rankings are part and parcel of what really drives so many 19th hole discussions. You poo-poo it but frankly Oak Hill / East has been able to maintain its position in the past because of the events that have been held there and far less with the modifications that have been made to the course simply to "toughen" it for big time events.

The club needs to hop on town to Home Depot and promptly buy all the chainsaws they can get. The tree situation should not be celebrated -- as the club does now -- but to be removed in a very clear and deliberate attempt to return to the days when playing angles were not so obscured as they are today.

« **Reply #19 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:23:53 AM »

Hey Jim dont accuse Matt Ward being a CHARM- Centered
rater, it aint respectful

« **Reply #20 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:32:52 AM »

Charm and challenge dont have to bemutually exclusive,take Rolling Green, Spring Mill ,and HVCC. I certainly would not
accept any hole at Oak Hill in exchange for:

RG 9,12,14

HVCC 7 10,11

Phila CC 3.5.,16,17

« **Reply #21 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:40:50 AM »

Matt,

Thank you for putting IMHO in that post.

Jim

« **Reply #22 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:44:38 AM »

Mark

I guess I agree about the charm/challenge balance. They can certainly live together, but many of the very great courses in and around NYC (or Philly, or Boston etc...) have grown to lack a certain challenge to the top players, and that is one of the factors, along with charm, in determining a courses value to me.

« **Reply #23 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:51:12 AM »

Jim, which par 3 at Oak H do you prefer to the 5th or 15th at
Phila CC?

which par 4 at Oak hill do you prefer to the 17th at
Phila cc

which par 5 at Oak Hill is better that # 3 at Spring Mill ?

« **Reply #24 on:** January 06, 2006, 10:59:40 AM »

Quote from: mark chalfant on January 06, 2006, 10:51:12 AM

Jim, which par 3 at Oak H do you prefer to the 5th or 15th at
Phila CC?
Number 3

which par 4 at Oak hill do you prefer to the 17th at
Phila cc
Numbers 1, 9, 10, 17, 18. I may not prefer tham to #17 at PCC, but certainly in the same class.

which par 5 at Oak Hill is better that # 3 at Spring Mill ?
I'm not in love with the green on #3 at PCC so I'd easily put the 4th and 13th in the same class.

News:

JNC Lyon

Matt_Ward

Brad Klein

JESII

mark chalfant

JNC Lyon

JESII

JNC Lyon

Matt_Ward

JNC Lyon

Matt_Ward

Doug Wright

John Foley

JNC Lyon

Matt_Ward

mark chalfant

mark chalfant

JESII

Matt_Ward

mark chalfant

mark chalfant

JESII

JESII

mark chalfant

JESII