Matt

I'm not a bomber and I don't play from the tips.I play blue or green(if I'm with a higher handicapper) or sometimes a mix of the two  at Lederach. Those centerline bunkers come into play for me. That's why I like the course. It's so different than the usual.

I agree that 9 green can be impossible.

Mike

It would help if we knew what local courses you have played. If you're limiting your next trip to publics, then certainly Lederach should be in the mix.

Kyle:

Let's start again shall we.

The 10th hole is supposed to be a dog-leg left but the reality suggests otherwise. Going hard left doesn't hurt one iota. The carry isn't that scary and what's the penalty -- a little high grass if you catch the worst of lies.

Let me enlighten you Kyle -- I will take whatever the architect / course provides. If I can rattle the cages of a hole by being aggressive I will go for it when the percentages are tilted my way.

No doubt other golfers will play the 10th in a different manner. I factor that into my equation when I rate a course because people on this site -- a few for sure -- have not ever gotten it into their thick heads that I can understand those limitations.

Let me remind you -- you asked ME what I THOUGH about the holes #10 through #14. I answered you for ME -- you didn't ask me about Joe Sixpack and his merry band of golfers.

Kyle, when you talk about your "decked driver" you see I don't factor into the calculation that people will hit ground balls or shots akin to them. When players play bad it doesn't really matter what the architecture can do or not to -- the player himself / herself simply self destructs.

I simply opined that the cross bunker could have worked a bit deeper down the fairway or Moran could have followed th etechnique that Doak employed at the 3rd at Pac Dunes with the dual center point fairway bunkers.

You asked me about #2, #10 and #12 and I simply wrote how I played those hole in the conditions that were present THAT DAY (my emphasis added). If conditions change to dictate a different playing method for me on a return visit I would say no less.

My short game was fine when I played. The greens do take some getting used to because of the mounds and the way they fall off to different directions. In fact, I believe I will score better the next time just from the local knowledge gained the first time around.

Total score for the day was 75 with three-three putts including one on the 9th.

Mike C:

Beg to differ with you on the course being overpowered. The layout played extremely S-L-O-W yesterday and with running fairways the approach shots would be shortened considerably -- most notably on the par-5 holes.

Of course, the layout could allow the greens to get really swift in excess of 9 on the Stimp and then all bets are off -- but that type of outcome would influence the weaker player more so than the stronger / better one.

Couple of quick comments on the distances you mentioned -- if the golfer has the prevailing south / southwest wind the distances on #2, #6, #8  & #12 all play downwind. One other thing the "uphill" nature you mention on #6 is at best very slighty. On #12 you are hitting from a very elevated tee which allows for a greater distance gain.

Of all the tee shots I faced yesterday the one on #17 presented the most challenge because the wind was about 2-3 clubs strength in your face.

Steve:

The issue with the 9th is that the total number of practical pinnable areas is quite small. I think the back left would be great because you can work your shot to take advantage of the slope.

There's no tougher pin than the one I saw yesterday -- placed on the top of the right moung -- it's easier landing a 747 on an aircraft carrier than keeping a ball there.

The 9th is V-E-R-Y close to being where the clowns and windmills are included for the hoot.

Matt,

In stating that the grass bunker on 12 needed to be moved and that the left side of 10 needed to be defended you based an architectural change that would most likely affect everyone playing the course (Matt Ward and Joe Sixpack and his merry band of golfers included, at some point) on how you played the course on that day. I did ask for you sentiment on the features as they played for you, not how you would change them. You offered how you would change them anyway and I questioned those changes and their reasoning. No reason for vitriol.

Not sure on what I need enlightening.

For the record, my decked driver was hit very well and was not a ground ball at all - I curled it around the grass bunker with a fade only to see it catch the very top. Needed to take it further left.

75 with three three-putts? Good round - which greens did you miss?

Matt,

The carry over the rough grass bunkering on the left of 10 is 262 yards.   Unless I'm playing straight downwind, I can't carry a ball that far.  

I went left the other day and my ball ended up in a rough lie way above my feet.   That caused me to pull the second shot (I'm lefty remember) about 50 feet right of the left hand hole location.

Not draconian certainly, but worthy of consideration.  Plus, a shot down the left means a direct bunker carry to most hole locations.

I wouldn't try that again unless I was downwind.


The first time I played 12, I hit my best drive of the day.  From there, I hit driver off the fairway and screamed a low one (into a little breeze) that clipped the top of the grass bunker and got just beyond.  

If that isn't in play for 90% of golfers, I'd be most surprised.

Matt

I agree that back left on 9green would be a good hole location. That's where I was on Sunday. Unfortunately, the hole was back right and just about impossible to get close.

My possible solution for 9green is expansion.

  Had a great time playing with the GCS outing last Friday. Was also fortunate to play with Kelly. It was great to have him talk about the various holes as we played. One qustion I forgot to ask Kelly during the day. What was the intended audience, publlic, semi-private or private?

  While playing Kelly challenged our group to tell him which green was "Road hole" inspired. I never did tell him my guess. I'll take a shot now and say #8.

 

Mike C:

The issue for me on #10 is that the junk that is THERE NOW is not imposing to stop me -- and likely others -- from completely ignoring the fairway option WAY OUT TO THE RIGHT.

Mike, the faulty premise of 90-degree dog-legs or those with angles close to it -- is that it either forces you to play to one spot -- and only to one spot -- if it's a true turning hole (see #13 at Lederach as one clear example) or it turns in a given direction and there is nothing to prevent strong players from cutting the hole off at-will.

That's why dog-legs have little value -- I see holes at Winged Foot / West (with turning points in the 25-45 degree area) as being better shotmaking requirements because then the player must slide his tee shot accordingly to one side or the other.

Mike -- I've seen you play and no doubt you hit the ball beyond what the average player does. That wasn't my point. The carry distances you and I mentioned aren't that imposing for those with serious above average length (and I am not suggesting the Jason Zuback types of this planet). Now, I do concede, as I stated previously, that certain holes -- when the wind is whipping in one's face (see #17 in my previous posts) was quite daunting for the carry. But the situation at Lederach could have been advanced a good bit in understanding what technology and strong players can do. If you examine the top courses in the USA -- especially those that have been upgraded / restored, call it what one will, they have re-positioned bunkers to deal with the kind of situations I present. In sum -- these bunkers are in play for the people who should be held in check -- in a number of instances at Lederach the challenge of the bunkers doesn't affect people like me or close to me in distance.

Mike -- I played the course when it was as S-L-O-W as it could play. If the course really takes root with firm and fast down the line the added roll will only shorten the course even more so for me and others of similar type. That's why I favor bunkers -- not in every instances mind you -- that mandate carries of 300+ yards. This would especially be the case on par-5 type holes where players of length have a disproportionate advantage over shorter hitters and should earn their potential lower scores beyond just hitting it long.

Tell you what -- I understand the psyche of the longer hitter better than many on this site. I understand what concerns me when I play and what techniques architects can implement that will corral me but at the same time will not unduly effect the player who doesn't hit it that far. I mentioned as an example the techniques that Doak and Proctor & Axland did respectively with Pac Dunes and Wild Horse, both outstanding public courses.

The idea that handling issues for the stronger player is not worth the effort because they constitute such a small percentage of play is rubbish. The great courses are able to handle all types of play -- Lederach still is a joy to play and I look forward to returning soon.

Kyle:

I hear what you say regarding the limits on how you can hit a ball. Tell you what would have been neat -- on #10 the single placement of a pot bunker arond 280 yards off the tee on the angle I took off the tee would have me thinking very long and hard about going that direction. Right now there's no penalty of consequence for me.

What's amusing is that I am advocating means to tackle the longer hitter while others, including you, seem to defend the present layout as being bulletproof in the teeing areas.

Kyle -- let me say this with emphasis -- players of any serious length ARE ALWAYS looking to take advantage of any opportunity to MAX OUT the strenth they possess. Unless there was BLOWING HAY down that side -- I would play it over and over and over again. Got it.

Gang, how does Lederach compare to Inniscrone?  If in Philadelphia, is one clearly a better choice?

(PS Matt, you have yet again given short shrift to PA's finest public offering  )

I mentioned this a little ways back and wondered how people would view the ending holes on each side playing to the opposite green -- for example -- you tee off #9 and play to #18 green and at #18 you play to #9 green.

Don't know if criss-crossing is ever done in America but if memory serves I can remember instances of that across the pond.

If such a situation were done would the "new" way of playing the holes make them tougher, easier, etc, etc ?

Thanks ...

Kyle --

I actually believe the 9th would play easier because the approach would have the green servive more as a backstop instead of the angle you face from the traditional approach.

The approach to the 18th from the 9th fairway, I believe, would be a tad more demanding as the green falls away in front and to the far sides.

If you do it -- make sure no one is in the way.

Dan --

Hold the phone amigo.

I gave the course a Doak 6 -- the same as Cirba and a few others.

I simply opined on a few items of concern -- but you need to re-read the entire comments I made. I highlighted quite a few of the holes as being well done and even said the design by Moran is a step beyond what he has done to date.

Regarding Pennsy public golf -- frankly until Lederach and Morgan Hill entered the scene it was really one of the worst in the nation when you consider the pedigree of the private side of the aisle.

In regards to if the course was in NJ would my opinions be different? Not the least -- I would like to see the course mature and to see how the ground game will be incorporated. That feature is missing now because of the newness of the turf. If the course were in the Garden State it would be a prime contender for top five status -- again -- when the ground game option is factored into the entire equation.

I agree about the par 3s.  The variety is outstanding.

I especially liked #16.

FWIW, a guy with whom I work didn't like the course because he is a pure walking-only golfer.  I respect his opinion, but I think he's losing out on a great venue.  

The other course he's had a similar complaint about was Rees Jones' Tattersal in West Chester.    He actually compared the two courses, which I thought was silly because the two courses couldn't be more different.  (Keep in mind that my friend is an actuary, which makes him a little loopy  )

Dan and Kyle liked the par 3's, as did I. When was the last time you played a newer course that didn't have a par 3
with a steep elevation drop--ie one where a tee shot literally "sticks" when it touches down? I don't remember
one here.

 Matt,  


    I agree with your PA/NJ assessment. What does that say about the willingness of Lederach's developers to go with such a bold course?