Last week I had a chance to play Stone Ridge GC, a public course located just outside of Mpls/St.Paul. The course was designed by Bobby Weed and opened in 2000.

Golfweek has this as the #4 public access course in the state. I’m guessing much of this ranking is due to a very impressive set of green complexes.  Nearly every green features very closely mown chipping areas around the circumference of the green.  I should also add that the vast majority of the greens allow (or dare I say, encourage) a run-up shot. The last time I saw a course with this many options from the fairway, I was overseas. Very cool.

Overall Yardage – 6992 tips; 73.3/132

Here are a few pics/comments:

#4 (575y)
Unless it’s playing downwind, this is a true 3-shotter.  Even if you hammer a drive, the second shot is generally from a downhill lie to an elevated, well-bunkered green cut into the side of a large hill.  There’s a ~20 foot-deep bunker front right, and a closely mown area front left.  The very front left of this green is a false front - my playing partner remarked that the last time he played the course, three of his four playing partners putted off the front of the green and down the hill.  Reminds me of an incident I witnessed on the first at Sand Hills.

#4 from lay-up distance( ~100y):


#4 front:



#6 (401y)
A mid-length par 4 featuring a tamed-down Biarritz green.  I hit what I thought was a great approach from 100y to a front pin, but my SW landed 5y beyond the pin on the downslope of the trench, and bounded 25y to the back of the green.  Resulted in a 3-putt.  Some very interesting and subtle contours at the front of this green.

View of the front/middle of #6 green.  The line of play is from the right.



#7  (168y)
The yardage book describes #7 as “..a replica of the original Redan…” but it’s a poor imitation at that.   Nevertheless, the green is interesting with a severe false front.  The back half of this very deep green (56y) is slightly sloped away from the line of play.  It’s tough convincing yourself to take enough club to reach the back of the green because the front of the green appears so close.

This pic of #7 is taken from #6 green.



#11 (502y)
This short par 5 is seemingly a sure birdie, with its short length and wide fairway.  But a severely contoured green and nasty, deep, middle center greenside bunker make the last 60y of this hole very demanding.  The green, whose long axis lies perpendicular to the line of play, has very different right and left elevations. The lower, right half is only ~20y deep.  Within the left side, there is a severe back to front contour, with several smaller areas defined by internal ridges.  To a back left pin I hit a 5i approach short into the middle greenside bunker, then blasted just over the green, only 15 ft behind the hole, but impossibly downhill.  My chip ran off the front and I failed to get up and down.  Was licking my chops on the approach, anticipating eagle or sure birdie and walked away with double.  Boy, was I chapped.

#11 tee.  The barn on the left is ~225y from the black tees.  The locals try and hit an extra tee ball through the open door.  


#11 from 200y out.



#13 (330y)
For the long bombers, a driveable par 4 (from the whites it's a more tempting 278y).  I remember it playing uphill, though the pic below seems to flatten things out.  If you come up short with an attempt to drive the green, the hillside in front of the green is severly sloped, with misplayed tee balls rolling back into one of the pot bunkers or long rough.  The approach from the bunkers/rough is completely blind.  The safe play is an iron to the wide part of the fairway to the left, leaving ~125 in or a 3w over the second bunker from the left.  From here, you are left with the option of a run-up second or, if the wind is not blowing, a flip wedge to this narrow, 24y deep green.  I really liked the “smallness” of this green, compared to the previous hole, which is 44y deep.

The green is located above the 4th and 5th pot bunkers from the left - you can make out two people standing near/on the green.


#13 green:



#16 (237y)
A meaty par three featuring a very contoured green.   The beauty of this hole is that you can hit a low draw to a left pin without having to try a heroic shot over the bunkers.  The green is large enough to accept a long iron, or even 3w or driver if played into the prevailing wind.




#18 (473y)
Although this pic does not do it justice, the middle right portion of this green is dramatically raised - Talladega style -  relative to the middle and left.  This allows a draw played to the right front of the green to feed to the lower, back tier.  Because the back portion of this green is lower than the front, trying to fly the ball to a back pin can easily result in a 3rd from the rough behind the green.

In this view of #18 green, nearly all of the lower, back half of the green is hidden from view.


How have others found the course?  I can imagine that when the wind blows and the fairways are running fast, it can be a real treat.  Unfortunately, on this day, I think the super left the sprinklers running all night  

Played it once, really like it.  Good pics.

JA-
Any ideas why the course does not get more attention?

Because it's in the outer suburbs of St. Paul, Minnesota?

Here's my quick (all I have time for) take on StoneRidge -- having played it half a dozen times:

It has a bunch of good holes. It's clearly among the best collections of golf holes among public courses in the Twin Cities. The greens and surrounds are challenging and fun. There are a lot of extended-duration shots at StoneRidge; it's a course where a bounce-and-roll player will have a lot to see, and that's a very good thing.

But, for me: As a golf *course*, or as a golf *place*, it's lacking that ineffable something I want. Call it "charm," maybe. It's kind of loud on the front side (from the noise of the interstate), and the back side is not very much fun to walk -- which means that I've never felt the Ernie Banks urge ("Let's play two") there.

Micheal - thanks for highlighting one of my favorites in the Twin Cities.  I like it better than Windsong, which many on here rave about and I think is a good course.

Dan might be right about "charm" but if this were in Ireland, he would not even think about it.    

Some other comments:

Historically the course has played very firm and fast.  It was softer the last time I played it and I do not know if the conditioning has changed or the weather was wrong at that time.

You are right that the wind has a huge effect on the difficulty of the course.  Nonetheless, it is very playable in high winds.

They made an interesting routing decision.  The course returns to the clubhouse after the 8th hole rather than the 9th.  It was a wise choice because of the relative amount of land available.

I really enjoy the first hole  It is around 330 but plays downhill with a green sloping away slightly.  With a 3 wood or less, you have a real wide fairway, with the choice of a blind approach over bunkers on the left side and a visible shot if you play to the right near trees, bunkers and ob.  With a driver, the green can be driven absent a headwind, but the opening to do so is probably around 15 yards wide.  One needs to make an interesting decision on the opening tee shot.  A unique opening hole where you are irritated if you do not make 3.  

The redan 7th is an interesting hole, but I think it would be better at 180 yards rather than 140-150.  The low hook is not really needed from the shorter yardage.  I wonder if they were crowded out of adding length and compromised the hole a bit for safety.

The 13th does play uphill but is more driveable than the yardage suggests.  We usually play from the 6800 yard tees and I can drive it.  I would guess it is about a 260 yard shot straight at the green.  It has to be perfect however, and the tendency is to bail out left.  What may not be obvious from the picture is that there is a 1-2 foot hump at the opening shown on the picture that makes a pitch real difficult when the pin is behind it.  

Because pictures flatten contours, the 16th green is very undulating and very large.  It is a great concept for a long par three, because if you hit it on the right area, you have an easy birdie putt.  If you hit an indifferent shot, you need a great putt or chip to make par.

I appreciate your description of the 18th hole.  It is really fun to run a shot to the back left pin position and it took me quite a while before realizing that was the way to try and get back there.  I generally find long par fours a chore and just another reminder that I am not that good, but this one I always look forward to and provides for entertainment when bets are on the line.

Quote from: Jason Topp on August 10, 2006, 11:47:37 AM

Dan might be right about "charm" but if this were in Ireland, he would not even think about it.    

If this were in Ireland, and the roar of the surf replaced the whine of the truckers (and the overmatched berms were sand dunes), I'd like it better. You're right about that!

. . .

Did you agree with my comment about walking the back 9?

Dan:  

(Note the ellipses I inserted to maintain my journalistic integrity)

I've never noticed the car noise.  I'm sure that is due to my laser like focus on my game.  

You are correct that walking the back is a bit of a chore, although its not that bad - 12-13 is probably 100 yards, 13-14 is about the same but through a dry ravine, 16-17 is a long hike.  Other than that, the green to tee walks could not be much shorter.  

I have usually taken a cart however, because it is included in the price.  We used to go play 36 at 5:00 pm until someone there decided that twilight rate did not mean "all you can get in," but rather "up to 18 holes."  I have not been back in the last year and a half.

I really enjoyed the course when I played it a few years ago.

I only played it once, so I would need more exposure to it to be critical.  When I played that time with Dan, I came away saying that I enjoyed my first taste of Weed.  

I felt there were some strong influences from Weed's exposure to Pete Dye.  When I stood on 18 tee, I mentioned to Dan that I felt very strongly that it could be a hole you'd find at Blackwolf Run, Meadows course.  

The walk was a bit taxing on the back side, but not overwhelming.  We played on a twighlight rate for somewhere around $50, and I felt it was a fee I'd pay again because it was worth it.  I see that is up to 69 on their web site, and 79 reg rate now.  That is about what I'd say it is worth.

The course has enough interesting design, that I think several rounds would be in order to begin to fully enjoy all that is there.

I'm inclined to agree with Doug that StoneRidge's high ranking among Twin Cities public courses does not speak that highly for our daily fee courses as a group.

It competes with Troy Burn (Lehman-Hurdzan-Fry in Hudson, Wis., just across the river), The Wilds (Weiskopf-Moorish in the southwest suburbs of Mpls.) Rush Creek (Fought & Cupp) in the western burbs, and maybe Edinburgh (Robert Trent Jones, Jr.) in the north suburbs.

Of those, I'd rank them this way:

1. Rush Creek
2. Troy Burn
3. The Wilds
4. StoneRidge
5. Edinburgh

I've played StoneRidge a dozen times and I like the course, but there are elements on almost every hole that tend to keep me from loving it.

On #1, I've never been tempted to hit driver because of the OB right and the pinching rough and bunkers left, so it's a long-iron layup and wedge every time.

#2 -- A tad too long for me to try reaching the green in two, but even if I were long enough to give it a go, the elevated green wouldn't hold a shot with anything less lofted than a five-iron -- so it's always driver, five-iron, wedge.

#3 -- Again, if I were a longer hitter it would be fun to challenge the cross bunker the juts in from the right, but the smart, safe play is to lay up in front of it (going around it to the left can leave you a nine iron into the green, but it also brings the waste areas on the left -- or that cross bunker -- into play. So it's usually a 3-wood layup, then a blind 8-iron to a very narrow green that falls off on both sides and in front.

#4 -- Another par 5 I can't reach in two shots -- even my two best shots, because the green is steeply elevated and will funnel anything even a foot short of the putting surface back down to to the fairway some 30 feet below the putting surface. So it's driver, mid-iron layup to a plateau in the fairway and a nine-iron into the gren.

#5 -- A great hole, really, but it almost always plays into the wind, requiring a big drive and then a two-iron or three-wood approach shot. The green is open in front, however, so if you can muster some roll, you can get it on.

I'll probably add to this later, but there are similar issues with most of the remaining holes. StoneRidge really makes you work, and as much as I enjoy the invididual challenge of each hole, I usually find myself pretty worn out by the end of the round.

Michael,

I played it once a couple years back with Dan Kelly, Rick Shefchik and some other guy I can't remember (inside joke... )

And a good one, too! Uff-dah! (another inside joke, aimed in the same direction)

I'm bumping this thread because it got me hankering to play StoneRidge again, so I played there Saturday with my wife. Since the last time I was there, they have cut down quite a bit of the thigh-high native grass that lined some of the holes -- even though the fairways are very generous, it still makes the course more playable, and given the windy nature of the location and the elevated greens, I think it's an improvement.

But they still haven't softened the one hole that really needs it -- the par-5 4th:



Note the unfinished, half-sand, half-weed hillside to the left of and behind the shallow green in the above photo (the fairway approach is from the left in this photo; the photographer was standing in front of and to the right of the green). I made a 9 here Saturday, and here's how: a truly wonderful drive down the left side of the fairway into a quartering wind, a great 5-iron layup to 90 yards, and a sand wedge that apparently was not affected by the wind, carrying ten yards over the green into a depression in the ghastly junk on the hillside. From there I gouged one to the back fringe, and hit (what I thought was) a delicate chip to the extreme front pin placement, only to see it begin to trickle ever so slowly to the front edge of the green and then roll all the way down the slope to the fairway 20 yards below. From there I hit a reasonably good flop shot from a tight fairway lie back onto the green, and three-putted for a nine.

I think greens complexes like this are twice as penal as they need to be. You've got all the difficulty you need here with the gaping front bunker and the severe fall-off in front of the green. Why screw the golfer who prudently attempts to avoid being short? If my sand wedge third shot had been short, I would have been where my fifth shot ended up, and I still could have easily made a 7. As it was I took what I thought was the safer course, risking being a bit long. But long on this green is even worse.

I humbly suggest that regular rough be grown on the hillside behind greens like this. It wouldn't look as neat, but the hole would still be plenty difficult.

I still like the course, on balance. I'll try to get back there again this year -- now I feel it owes me one.

I played Edinburgh USA Friday.  Please don't give people the impression Twin Cities golf is so awful that it places in the Top 15 Metro area daily fee courses.  Love the facility... DESPISE the course.

#1 - poor landing area for the tee shot
#3 - ditto, forces a layup
#4 - What is this piece of mess?
#5 - okay concept, just too busy in the fairway
#10 - shuts fairway right in landing area
#11 - looks okay, but awkward shape to fairway again
#18 - If it weren't for #4, would be a candidate for worst hole I've ever seen

The entire golf course is an example of how to negate the advantage of being a long hitter because it forces one to nibble away.  It punishes shots the entire way.  Actually worked for most of the LPGA because it let them play to their length, but anyone with any length out there was shut completely because they immediately had to play back.  Michelle McGann a 3-iron on #18?  Great idea.

I find some of the "ordinary" courses better than bigger name courses.  I question Keller, but certainly Meadowbrook and Hiawatha qualify as solid municipal courses.  I enjoy places like Fox Hollow.  Not sure if it qualifies as a daily-fee - I've always played it in their events and don't know if you can just call and pay a green fee - but Owatonna is as good as anything mentioned that I've played.  (Haven't seen Troy Burne.)

Regardless, Stone Ridge is pretty dang good.

Michael,

They re-did Nos. 14 and 15 at Rush Creek before it hosted the 2004 USGA APL. 14 is a pretty hard hole now and is 470 from the back. It plays right of where it was previously.  I thought the previous No. 15 was fine. It's a similar hole now (the green complex is in about the same spot) and is 184 from the back.

Here's my take on the public courses in town. I have not, however, played StoneRidge. I need to do it, just haven't had the chance.

1. Troy Burne
2. Legends
3. Rush Creek
4. Chaska Town Course

After that it all kind of blends together for me.

Rick:

I just played the Legends in an outing on Monday.  I think holes 2-4 are real interesting but other than that, I do not think much of the course design, particularly at its price. I'm too tired to figure out why right now.