I played it 1 time probably 8 to 10 years ago. Can't remember much about it except that I'd never want to play it again.

Insanely penal, from what I remember. Over the top.

Anthony,  

I would play The Shattuck 3-4 times per year while I was in grad school at UNH.  The course is quite penal but I don't think any more so than other mountain courses.  There is enough width in spots, but you sure do not want to stray too far from the fairways. Some forced carries, but you need to go in with the correct mindset from the beginning.

Loved 3,4,6, and 12-14 or the Devils Triangle which is great use of the swamp/wetlands on the course.  I'm sure The Shattuck gets knocks because of conditioning and how remote it is as well.  Its also not a classic type of design.  

I hope to make it up there again soon, as its always worth the trip for me.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the guy who designed was a first timer... I have yardage book with info somewhere around the house, so I'll check. Then again so was George Crump. I think the average architect would run away screaming from this site. Can you imagine doing all that tree clearing in middle of black fly season? Nice.

I am pretty sure it is a Brian Silva design, but don't think it was his first.

I just re-located from CT, but I have several co-workers there that make a "Shattuck run" to play 36 holes up there every year.  I only made it up there once, and it started sleeting part way through the round.  I think I lost 9 balls on the first 7 holes, and I remember it being extremely penal.  I think the slope is in the 140s.

I think it is the 5th hole that plays over 600 yards.  The hole has over a 200 yard carry from the blue tees with no bail out area.  If you make it to the fairway, you are faced with trouble on both sides of the fairway.  The creek that runs down the entire length of the left side cuts in front of the green to challenge your approach.  My recollection of the green is that it is remarkably small (the guys always joke that it is the size of a cubicle at the office.)  The stone face base of a rock wall comes into play if you hit the ball over the green.

The 12th is a 200 yard par 3 that is all carry over water to a shallow green

5th Tee Shot



View of the approach from the left side



5th Green



12th Hole

I like The Shattuck much better than any course of its genre, the modern course built in the middle of too many wetlands.  That's mainly because it's far more natural than most similar courses:  there is very little awkward mounding or banking to keep balls on the playing surface, very little out-of-place over-manicured rough (mainly b/c there's not much rough at all, except on a few front nine holes around the clubhouse), and a lot of natural landforms put to dramatic use (the natural island green 14th, the plateau green site on the short par 4 17th, and the tee shot curving around a hole on the mid-length par 5 6th).  Of course, building a natural course amidst a bunch of wetlands necessarily produces a very penal course, and all the detractors are right -- The Shattuck is way too penal to play on a regular basis unless you're a 5 or better.  Even though it's only 6,750 yards from the tips, the slope is 153.  I thought that the most penal, and worst, hole was the par 4 8th, where the landing area, with marsh on one side and dense woods on the other, can't be wider than 30 yards -- including rough.

Still, I think there are a lot of really good and interesting holes out there, especially on the back nine.  It's interesting to hear people who seem to like minimalism in most contexts criticize The Shattuck for its severity when there wasn't really another option for how to build an interesting course on the site.  Perhaps the argument is that minimalism works for create sites, a la Sand Hills or Pacific Dunes, but that given a beautiful piece of wetland-studded forest not terribly well suited for golf one should give up on being minimalist or natural and blast the hell out of it. I don't buy it:  I'd much rather lose a few balls playing The Shattuck than play a sterilized, anti-naturalized, less penal version of the same thing.  For the well-travelled New Englanders out there, I think that alternative is something like Townsend Ridge or Sky Meadow, both of which put me to sleep.

Finally, I think The Shattuck is interesting as a case study of Silva's work, indicative of his ability to build different courses that look nothing like each other but work on the site.  I agree with Anthony Butler's original comment that it probably made little sense to try to build a course there at all -- but given that they did, I don't think another "look" or approach could have worked better than the one Silva took.  But it's completely different from Red Tail, or Black Creek, or Stow, or anything else he's done.  That kind of adaptability would put him right at the top of my list if I wanted to pick an architect to build a mid-budget course on less-than-ideal land.

Jay,
   You make some interesting points regarding Silva working with land there. I don't remember anything contrived (i.e. manmade) at Shattuck. As you guys have said it probably wasn't the best place to build a golf course. BTW, do you think the course is penal from all the tees or just the back tees?

Tim,
   What is it about Shattuck that your coworkers like so much that they go there annually?

Anthony,
   You haven't given us 7 holes yet. What is your handicap BTW? I presume it is rather low to enjoy what everyone else seems to feel is a very penal course.

I don't think the course is much more penal from the back tees than it would be from the middle tees (though I only played it from the back, so I'm not sure).  There were only two shots where the added distance significantly increased the penal nature of the hole (the forced carry off the tee on the par 5 5th, and the carry on the par 3 12th).  

Regarding the individual holes, here is my assessment.  I couldn't quite get to Anthony's 7 great holes, but I do think there are four great holes, five more pretty damn good holes, a couple of really interesting but flawed holes, five boring holes, and two actively bad holes.

Great:
11 - reminds me a bit of a shorter, par 4 version of the 13th at Augusta: a drive flirting with the hazard down the right side on the tee sets up a MUCH easier second shot across the creek to the neatly canted green.
14 - I think this hole has to be my favorite island green hole in the world, because it's the only island green I've seen that doesn't look artificial.  The green looks much smaller than it is, which I like, and it's severely contoured in the middle, so that if you hit to the wrong part of the green the putt is nasty.
15 - excellent lay-up-or-go-for-it dilemma on the par 5 second shot, with a really nice green sited naturally into the edge of the pond fronting it, contoured to make the chip shot if you go for and bail out on the "safe" side very difficult.
17 - fantastic natural shelf green for a short par 4; very interesting problem of where to hit the layup if you don't go for it, with problems of blindness, angle, and lie to think about; also an interesting problem of where to aim if you do go for it, with a rocky hillside above the right edge of the green and a sharp drop on the left side of the green.

Pretty damn good:
4, 13 - two short cape par 4s, which I think suffer a bit from their similarity; I imagine most people will like 13 better because it's reachable and more scenic, but I like 4 better because there's more going on around the green to reward a well-placed tee shot.
6 - I love the gambling tee shot on the par 5, but there's a bit too much going on in the landing area for an aggressive tee shot given that the shot is blind, and I didn't think the approach was that interesting.
12 - long carry par 3, which I like b/c the green is tiny with space to miss long leaving a pretty terrifying shot -- but one that's much better than being wet.  But the green doesn't really look like it "fits" as well as some of the others, and the hole is awfully hard for high handicappers.
16 - neat solution to an uphill par 4, lots of character, great green made very tricky b/c it's built into the hillside.


Good and bad at the same time:
5 - I love the green site, wedged tightly between a creek short and rock formation long.  I appreciate that it's a true three shot par 5 where you have to think about where you want to be for the third shot while standing on the tee.  But think the hole's a bit too narrow considering it's length, when the narrowness is unnecessary (there's extra space on the sides that could have been grassed in but wasn't, unlike at most other holes).  I also think there's too much going on in the first and second shot landing areas, when the real interest of the hole is third shot; keep the hole uncluttered at first, so people can focus on playing the hole backwards.
10 - a beautiful natural hole, with a sharp drop off the cliff awkwardly placed right where a long drive would end up.  I'm very glad Silva built this hole: it's original and interesting, fantastically natural and great to look at.  But it's not a great golf hole.


Neutral to bad:
2, 3, 9, 18 - just not that interesting.
7 is a little more interesting, but still not that memorable to me.

Bad:
1 - awkward layup tee shot is a terrible way to start the round.
8 - way too narrow in the landing zone.

Yes, the old Mount Crotched GC changed to Tory Pines GC and know know as Crotched Mountain Golf Resort where I believe two of the holes are still Ross is very close by in Francestown, NH.

Neutral to bad:
2, 3, 9, 18 - just not that interesting.
7 is a little more interesting, but still not that memorable to me.

Bad:
1 - awkward layup tee shot is a terrible way to start the round.
8 - way too narrow in the landing zone.

I would agree with everything here except 3. I like this hole, although it would be better without the depression on the left. That would give you more options on the tee shot. I don't find it too narrow off the 8th tee– maybe I've just been lucky to hit the fairway each time I've played it...

The first is only a halfway decent hole from the back tee. It's 400 yds downhill from the blacks, but due to the creek crossing, forces you to hit a 160+ yd approach, which if you play from the middle tees, means you can hit your tee shot 215 max. Not good.

In answer to your question, Ed, my h'cap fluctuates between a 3 and a 6. Growing up at NSW, I learned to hit it straight... my short game is my weak link... Shattuck is not a scramblers course though. You're either putting or dropping another one.

The lowest I have shot from the blacks there was an 80 with two lost balls. Felt like a 74.

Tim,
    Sounds plausible. I suppose there is some beer drinking involved.

Anthony,
   I'm looking forward to seeing your home course next spring.

Ed -

Since I am one of the co-workers to whom Tim refers, I'll try to answer the why question.  We got started going because one of our group loved ridiculously hard courses and wanted to try it.  He got his challenging course (although, he is a bit of a "distance snob" and would like it to have been longer).  I personally like it for two reasons: it is memorable (whether it's good memories or bad memories) and it is a good mental challenge in addition to its physical challenge.  I tend to be a bit wild off the tee, so I have to approach rounds there with the understanding that I'm going to make some big numbers.  Plus, there is pressure on almost every shot that if you miss it it will cost you a ball and penalty strokes.  So for me, it is an opportunity to face my demons, if you will, and I don't necessarily need to shoot a great score (which is good because the best round I've seen there was by a 2 handicap who shot 83) to feel I played well.  This is part of the reason I insist on playing the back tees (though the starter always asks the question of if we know what we're getting ourselves into)...if I played from shorter tees I could play a lot less club off several of the tees, thus cutting down on my variability.  I do also like the quiet setting.

As far as the architecture, one can certainly argue whether the course should have been built there to start.  The bunkering could also use more imagination.  However, I enjoy playing a hole like 5 (600 yards, postage stamp green just over water) even though it is a bit ridiculous.  I really like the stretch from 10 - 15, and it is that stretch of the course that brings me back.  10 and 11 are long par 4's that require one to hit driver and hit it accurately.  On these holes, you have a little more room to miss to keep from losing a ball, but you can easily put yourself in a position to have to lay up instead of going for the green in regulation (actually, in some instances it is more strategic to play these as 3-shot holes to take double-bogey or worse out of play).  12 and 14 are good par 3's...1) there are a good mix as one is 200 yards and the other is 160, 2) the long one has plenty of bail room while the short one requires more precision, and 3) good shots are rewarded on each as 2 is a feasible score.  13 is a good "how much do I want to cut off" hole where I've hit everything from 3-wood to 6-iron off of that tee.  15 is a double-dogleg par 5 where one can use varying strategies.  I will say, the tee shot on one is not good for a first shot of the day.

I wouldn't play there everyday, which is the real problem with the course as a business, but it isn't a bad place to spend a day, particularly in fall when the leaves are turning.

I think there's a point with virtually unplayable courses like Shattuck where it's possible to over-analyze. The proper response to the assignment should have been "no."

So the new campaign to drive traffic to the Shattuck:

            "We were stupid enough to build it.
           Surely, you're dumb enough to play it."