News:

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


Tommy_Naccarato

Angeles National
« on: September 29, 2006, 11:46:41 PM »
On what was a quite obviously beautiful afternoon and evening, played here with a fellow GCA'er and while the shaping was just so-so, the rest of the course was quite fun with some really good strategies and some interesting greens.

The builders and the developers went out to Rustic Canyon several times to try to emulate and other then some claustraphic holes, the course seems to embrace a lot of those qualities. Now if they could have studied some shaping and other detail work, it might have been something to shake a stick at.

I would play here again, no problem. Had a good day and enjoyed the company.













Thomas_Brown

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2006, 01:03:07 AM »
Tommy - you're killing me!
Photos don't look very Nicklaus to me.

Joe Perches

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2006, 01:35:58 AM »
Photos don't look very Nicklaus to me.

Steve not Jack.  ANGC is not bad, not bad at all.  The greens aren't detailed as well as other courses, but I happily play there occasionally.  Good movement in the fairways, good routing well suited to site, walkable, spoilt a bit by the proximity of the freeway, but ANGC is much more than I expected.  I'm even much more surprised that our GCA consigliere and KP planner extraordinaire T Naccarato apparently hadn't played Angeles before.

Greenskeeper ANGC review
Greenskeeper ANGC pictures

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2006, 01:47:17 AM »
Tommy - this wasnt your first time out there, was it?

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the course.  Is it better than most new courses in the area? Damn right it is...blows Tierra Whybother entirely off the map...but at the same time I just didn't see all that much there.  To me, it seemed to be a course that valued one thing and one thing only - long, straight tee shots.  Once you find yourself in the fairway, the big greens (which I thought were mostly unremarkable) were pretty easy to figure out and approach.

One of the things that makes a course like Rustic so much of a challenge is the way that the collars and surrounds actually meld themselves into the putting surfaces, like the fall-off to the right of 12...ANGC looks like they tried to emulate some of those ideas without really grasping the whole concept.

I don't remember the course hole-by-hole as it's been nearly a year since I played (played with Marcus Allen, no less) but the thing that I thought lacked more than anything else there was the fun factor...once you figure out how to get inside of 175 yards and have a look at the green, then the course drops to it's knees.

So pretty much, I think that it's better than most new courses out there around this area, and with the flood channels criss-crossing the land I am not certain that you could have avoided the long narrow "corridors" (really more like ridges or ribbons than corridors) that place such a premium on the tee ball.  What bugs me is that this premium on the tee ball does not necessarily have to mean that the course lets up from the fairway into the green, and I think it does.

Rustic 9 ANGC 1 out of 10 plays, and only because I like variety even if only to the tune of 10 percent.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2006, 01:49:21 AM by Ryan Simper »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2006, 02:48:56 AM »
I was telling the GCA'er who played with me that I had actually been avoiding going out there for some time. I didn't have a problem with the course at all. Is it better then Rustic? No way. Not even close! But it's no slouch in terms of getting you to play certain shots; variety, which to me is also important. Memorability.....well we can't all be perfect now! Still the course isn't all that bad, and I suggest another play.

One of the huge problems is restraint in shaping. There is just too much artificial movement for it's own good, but the thing is it isn't over the top. Not like Buenaventura circa 1924.  The bunkers are placed in interesting locations and you have to give this cubbie bear credit for trying to do something Nicklaus doesn't normall do.

I thought the Redan #3 was a very good hole. On the downside, #17 is a complete disaster.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2006, 02:52:40 AM by Tommy Naccarato »

Mark Arata

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2006, 11:26:51 AM »
I got to play the front 9 of this course about 2 years ago in January, during the 40 days of rain you had out there, the back nine was washed out.....

The redan hole was very good, and I think the 7th or 8th hole had a neat greensite right up against the canyon.... The 9 holes we got to play were fun, but by no means should it be mentioned in the same breath as Rustic........

They were working out of a temp trailer when I was there last, have they build a clubhouse yet?

New Orleans, proud to swim home...........

rjsimper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2006, 02:41:11 PM »
They were working out of a temp trailer when I was there last, have they build a clubhouse yet?


Not as of February....haven't been back since...but the temp setup they have is impressive as far as temp setups go

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2006, 02:46:29 PM »
where is the course exactly?
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2006, 07:12:38 PM »
Ryan is right. The temp set-up as far as trailers go is pretty cool. You really don't feel like your in a trailer, so much as you feel like your in a 60's style muni clubhouse, but its really nicely maintained. A great hot dog too! (mine was without the bun!)

Honestly, I think they dont need the big clubhouse. BUt they'll do somewhat good with it for weddings and conferences, IF you want that kind of business.

I think like many of the courses damaged by rain, they are recouping monies lost due to the flooding by properly waiting to build the clubhouse which looks like it will be nice, but over-built. It's understanable though. They are going for a higher clientele from the valley and take great pride in the celebrities that play the course regularly.

David,
Although you can see it right off of the freeway, it's sort of odd on how to exactly get to it.

Coming from San Marcos, I would say your best bet would be come straight up the 15 to the 210, going past Pasadena into the Verdugo Hills and get off at Sunland Blvd. You make a right, go up just past the Ralph's market and make a left on Foothill Blvd. You'll follow that for about a mile and your there.

If your coming from the 5, take it to the Glendale Freeway (2) to the 210 and follow the same directions from there.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2006, 07:15:05 PM by Tommy Naccarato »

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2006, 07:22:14 PM »
Outstanding photographs.
Tommy you are a most excellent photographer.
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2006, 07:39:00 PM »
Thanks Mike, but I have to admit that I had to do some slight (very slight) adjustments in Photoshop! That little Canon of mine, while limited on a lot of things like wider lenses and bigger pixels then the the 3.2 it has, it still cpatures a decent image.

BTW, I thought of you while I was out there. This property had a series of creek beds and other stuff that reminded of our routing conversation we had. They did the obvious stuff, (typical carries) and in some respects, could have probably gotten better out of it. Still it was some fun golf.

Evan Fleisher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2006, 09:26:09 AM »
Nice ass pic!  I'd recognize it anywhere...don't ask me how I know!  :o 8) ??? ::)
Born Rochester, MN. Grew up Miami, FL. Live Cleveland, OH. Handicap 13.2. Have 26 & 23 year old girls and wife of 29 years. I'm a Senior Supply Chain Business Analyst for Vitamix. Diehard walker, but tolerate cart riders! Love to travel, always have my sticks with me. Mollydooker for life!

Brian Noser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2006, 10:19:52 AM »
I must say I enjoyed ANGC as well. It was a fun course to play but you better hit it long and straight.  The reason ryan does not like it.... ;D. I to like the concept behind 3. I do not remember to much about the routing I just remember liking the course. It is worth a look-see in my mind.. my favorite hole is was 16, I think Par 5 with some cross bunkers to negotiate with a raised green.

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2006, 11:52:32 AM »
I used to live right up the road from the course and it was scheduled to be built more than ten years ago but was held up due to an endangered "weed". No kidding. Funny how when the money finally got into the right hands everyone forgot about the weeds.
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

PjW

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2006, 03:09:05 PM »
I worked on the entitlement process in the 90's to get the project approved.  It did take over 10 years for the approval process.  The 'weed' as mentioned was the 'spine flower'.  It has protected areas around the site as well as the developer had to shell out many $1,000s of dollars to buy like habitat to mitigate the flower.  The project had over 300 conditions of approval that had to be addressed in the design and construction.  This golf course is routed and designed to accomidate all 300 plus of these conditions.  The Nicklaus design folks were really restricted on what they could do handcuffed to some extent.  That the project was evern built only goes to the ability of the developer to stay in the game to get the approvals.

Phil 8)

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2006, 03:23:02 PM »
Nice pics.....and who is that in the picture?  Nice finish!

Evan Fleisher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2006, 11:23:40 AM »
Nice pics.....and who is that in the picture?  Nice finish!

One of my Midwestern bretheren from the Twin Cities (initials JS)...who has recently watched his boys get whomped by the A's...
Born Rochester, MN. Grew up Miami, FL. Live Cleveland, OH. Handicap 13.2. Have 26 & 23 year old girls and wife of 29 years. I'm a Senior Supply Chain Business Analyst for Vitamix. Diehard walker, but tolerate cart riders! Love to travel, always have my sticks with me. Mollydooker for life!

Glenn Spencer

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2006, 03:23:32 PM »
Nice pics.....and who is that in the picture?  Nice finish!

One of my Midwestern bretheren from the Twin Cities (initials JS)...who has recently watched his boys get whomped by the A's...

I have only spoken with Tommy on the phone for a few enjoyable moments, but I must say that I didn't think that marvelous finishing position matched his voice. ;D

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Angeles National
« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2006, 12:03:40 PM »
Glen, I wish it did! As much as my changle of eating habits have enchanced my golf swing, I can only wish for that kind of finish! The image is of Evan's "friend."  ;)

Phil,
Thought of you while playikng out here, remmbering many of our threads  and emails of the past regarding the site. Wasn't it originally going to be called Red Hook? (or something like that)

Joe Perches

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Angeles National
« Reply #19 on: October 07, 2006, 08:55:55 PM »
Wasn't it originally going to be called Red Hook? (or something like that)

According to this article http://www.golftodaymagazine.com/0502feb/angeles.htm, other early names were:

Los Angeles International Golf Club
Red Tail Golf Club
Canyon Trails Golf Club

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back