[Bryan Izatt]

Tom,

I asked him a similar question yesterday, no answer so far.  Beats me what he's trying to say.

[Matt_Ward]

Tom Doak:

I've played all three courses and from what I saw and experienced Vista Verde offer far fewer redundant elements in the manner in which the holes are presented.

Great routings avoid at all costs sameness or repetitive shot making requirements. You are constantly forced to play a wider range of shots and the variety is constantly there to keep the player from having the edge in terms of playing such shots previously.

Tom, let's be clear, some properties are better than others and even when you have great properties it's the final results of how such properties are used that can make the difference for me.

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

Okay, I guess that's what the GOLF DIGEST system would call "Design Variety".

Much of it does come from how the holes are routed -- lengths of holes and use of sideslopes and such -- while other parts are based on the architect's placement of hazards.

I tend to think of the routing as how the course explores the property and how it uses certain natural features.  I guess a routing could be excellent from that point of view, yet not so good from yours.

[Peter Pallotta]

You are constantly forced to play a wider range of shots and the variety is constantly there to keep the player from having the edge in terms of playing such shots previously.

Matt
I've not played any of the three, but since you reference VV here, can you provide more details/some examples of what you mean? Is it a matter of VV requiring "every shot in the bag"? If so, how does it accomplish this and/or how does this "play out" over the course of a round?

I ask because, on the courses I tend to play, and as just an average golfer, I find that a regularly-flighted driver (give or take a bit) and a regularly-flighted 7 iron (give or take a bit) seems to get me through much of what I face through 18 holes, except on the Par 5s, where there's maybe a hybrid thrown in, or a run-up shot. I know that my experience may not be at all indicative (maybe the courses I tend to play are not the best or most interesting), but that's the context in which I'm asking.

Thanks
Peter

[Jason Topp]

Jason,

I agree.

As a matter of interest, were you able to extract yourself from the wash?  I don't remember if it was red staked.  If it wasn't it could well end up requiring an unplyable lie as well as being difficult to get out of.  Struck me as a harsh penalty.  If it was red staked, then not so bad.

I was able to extract myself.  Even though it turned out ok, I probably should have taken advantage of the red stakes.  (Dumb decision #2 - notice a pattern here?)

[Matt_Ward]

Tom D:

I agree with you in terms of the interplay of a land's natural features. They should clearly be brought into the equation.

Allow me to go a bit beyond that -- I see superior routings as one that maximize all the internal elements that a particular site can offer -- e.g., wind direction is calculated into the mixture so that a course doesn't play simply "easy" or "hard" because a certain wind direction is blowing. In addition, you have a golf aspect that creates a myriad of different shots throughout the round. In so many ways a quality routing is like a first rate baseball pitcher. The quality pitcher can throw different pitches for strikes at whatever the count is -- and has command of their velocity and can locate pitches throughout the plate area. In sum -- a superior routed golf course prevents complacency from developing with the player and keeps that same player guessing with each new situation encountered.

Peter:

I agree with your take. Candidly, too many courses don't provide beyond an average design level in terms of their overall uniqueness / complexity. Golf is a game of shots and holes. The best courses are the ones that call upon the widest dexterity of skills for shots to be made in an 18-hole round. In addition, it behooves a quality design to have 18 holes that provide for a complete test in which repetitive situations are kept to a minimum.

A superior routing does what Doak mentioned -- it encompassses all the natural features of a given site and at the same time, I believe, it also doesn't allow for a sameness that detracts from the time spent there.

I grew up on muni golf courses and clearly these type of courses are often, as they should be, simply matter-of-fact courses meant more for seasonal enjoyment than architectural uniqueness. No doubt these courses may offer what you described as your per usual shotmaking situations.

[wsmorrison]

Desert golf just does not appeal to me at all.  I'm sure there's some excellent architecture in the mix that I will miss, however I do not have any desire whatsoever to visit these areas for golf.  Other activities in these areas might be of interest (hiking, backpacking, etc) but golf sure isn't one of them.  Does anyone else feel this way?  Presumably not among those that are checking out this thread.  I keep trying to be open minded but come to the same conclusion no matter how much I read these threads and check out the photos.  

[Daryl David]

Wayne,
I think part of the appeal for golfers is the weather factor.  It is a huge positive for those that battle the elements all year to be able to play in sometimes perfect conditions that are very predictable.  Dry warm weather in the winter allows a lot of players to overlook architectual merit.  It is just so damn good to be out playing in January!  

I have been playing desert golf for about 25 years and am very particular about where I play.  So many desert layouts are uninspiring and I pretty much avoid them.  Maybe that is why I am more bullish than some, as I just don't play the courses that would dissappoint me.

[wsmorrison]

Thank you, David.  No doubt your points are likely a big part of the reason desert golf is attractive.  The weather has to be the reason courses in Florida have tended to get a pass over the years.  Being particular is always a good idea.  I just cannot imagine a dedicated trip for golf to the desert, although I am mad about southwestern cuisine!

[John Foley]

Wayne,

You've got to go to Arizona. The weather is fantastic (unless you love the humid Philly summers!!) other than the brutal heat waves, 105 in AZ is waaaayy more tollerable than 90/90 in the mid-atlantic.

As for the golf, It's just something about the long views to the distant mountains, the rock strewn landscape the majestic Saguaro's that just hits me. I've been getting there for work a few times a year for awhile and I can't get enough. Every time I try and see some of the desert architecture and am never disapointed. WeKoPa is a definite must play.

The other great thing about it is hiking in the desert. There are a tremendous number of trails in the area up into the mountains, in the flat washes and elsewhere. You get scenery that is just so starkly different than what we here in the NE/Mid-atlantic see. I highly recomend spending a day at Saguaro National Park outside Tucson. Truly a special place.

Your a fan of the Southwestern Cuisine, well you know where it was invented!! Some great places in AZ. The big names places and the hole - in the wall where the locals eat. Unreal. Had a local person takes in  Tucson to where the locals eat for lunch, it was tremendous.

You can have Florida, given the choice I'd head to the desert every time!!

[Ryan Farrow]

Matt, I think a key point you are overlooking here is VV is in the process of lining its fairways with new homes. I have seen the GIS maps from the county website. I highly doubt that the architect was given free reign to layout the most interesting 18 hole golf courses. Hole corridors and spacing get very precise when it comes down to this kind of development. Do you know something we don't? If not I would be very skeptical calling VV a great routing. I will let you know what I really think tomorrow.  

[wsmorrison]

John,

Except for Indian Creek and a few others, I wouldn't take Florida.  My mindset is not based on any experience, but I just don't see what would sway me to AZ at any time over other locations.  I play golf all year round as long as there's no snow and I don't mind 90/90 as long as there's plenty of water.  I don't stiffen up, that's for sure.  The majestic mountains and fascinating terrain would be a lot more interesting to me with a backpack and tent.  It just isn't golf to me playing on green corridors between desert scrub.  My sense of naturalism is showing  

[Peter Pallotta]

Wayne,
I can't see myself making it a dedicated golf destination either. It's not because I don't think there's wonderful courses/architecture there; and it's not IN SPITE of the great scenery and surrounds, it's BECAUSE of it.

A few years ago I drove across America, through many states. Though I was on a tight deadline and couldn't stop for long anywhere, the scenery and topography - and the variety of it all - was just lovely. But nothing prepared me for (or has stuck with me so strongly as) New Mexico and Arizona. It was breathtaking - as all the posters here and anyone who lives there I'm sure would agree. I know it's the romantic in me, but the next time I get there I want only to roam that scenery on the back of a horse. I just have to learn to ride a horse, and lose my ubiquitous sports jacket.

Peter      

[Bryan Izatt]

Wayne,

Agree on the hiking aspect.  My wife and I alternate golf days with hiking days. Endless opportunities for hiking.  We did different trails in Squaw Peak, in the centre of Phoenix, this time.



The food is good and varied.  Better than FL in my opinion.

I'm not sure I understand your aversion to desert golf.  Is it the unnatural look?  Or the enforced target golf?  It's not really different from heavily forested courses in the northeast, except the vegetation is different.  The golf holes are golf holes like anywhere else.  I think you're missing an opportunity.  

[Jim Nugent]

Desert golf just does not appeal to me at all.  I'm sure there's some excellent architecture in the mix that I will miss, however I do not have any desire whatsoever to visit these areas for golf.  Other activities in these areas might be of interest (hiking, backpacking, etc) but golf sure isn't one of them.  Does anyone else feel this way?  Presumably not among those that are checking out this thread.  I keep trying to be open minded but come to the same conclusion no matter how much I read these threads and check out the photos.  

Wayne, I had the sense, maybe wrong, that Pine Valley was an original "desert" type course.  i.e. islands of fairways and greens in a sea of sand.  No?

[Ryan Farrow]

Bryan, I hope you hiked Camelback.

[Bryan Izatt]

Ryan,

No.  We were only there 5 days, and we had to fit in the golf too.     Maybe next time, although there seems to be endless possibilities.

[Bryan Izatt]

Tom D:

I agree with you in terms of the interplay of a land's natural features. They should clearly be brought into the equation.

Allow me to go a bit beyond that -- I see superior routings as one that maximize all the internal elements that a particular site can offer -- e.g., wind direction is calculated into the mixture so that a course doesn't play simply "easy" or "hard" because a certain wind direction is blowing. In addition, you have a golf aspect that creates a myriad of different shots throughout the round.

Peter:

I agree with your take. Candidly, too many courses don't provide beyond an average design level in terms of their overall uniqueness / complexity. Golf is a game of shots and holes. The best courses are the ones that call upon the widest dexterity of skills for shots to be made in an 18-hole round. In addition, it behooves a quality design to have 18 holes that provide for a complete test in which repetitive situations are kept to a minimum.

A superior routing does what Doak mentioned -- it encompassses all the natural features of a given site and at the same time, I believe, it also doesn't allow for a sameness that detracts from the time spent there.

Given this understanding of your meaning of routing, I'm not sure I'd agree that VV is the best of the three.  Even around diversity and routing there are pros and cons to each, with no clear winner IMHO.  To compare just the two VV and WKPS, following is my assessment.

The VV property is more gently sloping, while parts of WKPS are more abruptly up and down, even within a hole (six for instance).  C&C have used the ups and downs within holes very nicely I think.  Kavanaugh had less opportunity on his property to show that skill.

In terms of the directions of the routing hole to hole and the impact of wind on that, I think the two are pretty much of a wash.  VV is a large counter-clockwise loop on the front, and then out and back (with 3 holes at right angles to the out and back) on the back nine.  At WKPS the general layout is out and back on both the front and back nines, but there is a 90 or 180* change in direction from hole to hole on the majority of the course.  It was fairly windy when I played both courses and I did notice the wind direction was changing from hole to hole.  I doubt that either course would be more susceptible to one wind direction or another.

As for variety of shots, testing the whole bag and your skills, that's a tough one.

VV no doubt presented more recovery options around the greens than did WKPS.  Lots of closely mown run-offs.

There wasn't much to choose between the courses in the mix of holes in the routing.  My only complaint would be that C&C put two long 4's back to back at 12 and 13.

VV had two longish and two shortish par 3's.  The last one was dull.  WKPS had two shortish par 3's on the front and 2 longish ones on the back side.  The first one was kind of dullish.  I don't see a huge difference in shot values on the par 3's between the two courses.

VV had 2 very long par 5's (600 yds) and two medium length.  WKPS had one very long par and one short par 5 on the front along with one medium par 5 on the back.  Given that I have to play most par 5's as three shoters there isn't much to pick between the variety of shots on the medium or very long par 5's.  WKPS gets a small step up by offering one short par 5 that I could reach - the 8th.

On the par 4's WKPS had four long to very long ones.  VV only three.  VV had two shortish par 4's and one was reachable for me.  WKPS had 4 shortish par 4's but none of them was reachable and all encouraged me to hit iron off the tee.  That got a little repetitive.  One up for VV for me.

VV had many more holes with centreline bunkers - that got a little repetitive.  WKPS had some, but fewer.than VV.

WKPS had a few blind tee shots and one fortress green.  An advantage if you like those features and shot requirements.

VV frequently had a fairway bunkering approach that placed bunkers on one side of the fairway at a distance that I could safely drive up to.  On the other side of the fairway was a bunker at a distance that I probably could carry and achieve a better line to the green.  Good concept, but perhaps a little too reptitively done.

WKPS had more varied uphill, downhill and sidehill lies in the fairways.

So all in all, pros and cons each way.  I can't pick a clear winner on diversity or routing in your definition.  You can.  Peace be with you.

[Andy Troeger]

Just played Saguaro yesterday after seeing Vista Verde in January. I'd recommend either one to anyone heading to the area, both are very strong layouts.

Saguaro was the best of the 3 Coore/Crenshaw courses I have seen IMO (Warren and TSN)--it had the most interesting land with the other two being generally very flat. Much has already been said on Saguaro by those who are more articulate on the subject than I, but I would agree that its a strong new design.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Wayne,

As a Flynn maven, a visit to Red Lawrence's Desert Forest is a must. One of the great courses and golf clubs in the country. While you're there, you can play 3 nearby C&C courses, Vista Verde,travel to Globe and enjoy the Superstition Mountain scenery and play Apache Stronghold  and even play Engh's new Blackstone in Peoria so that your horizons can be expanded. Plus, the food is excellent. I suggest Roaring Fork in Scottsdale.

Steve

[Andy Troeger]

Andy

I thought Saguaro reminded me of Friar's Head in the desert.  IT is better than TSN.

Interesting, I did see some attributes of both Warren and TSN (although more Warren I thought despite the desert settings). Hopefully I'll see Friar's Head someday to see if I make the same connection!

One thing that I find interesting especially considering the love of width and options here is why Desert Forest seems to get a pass for its very narrow driving corridors. It was by far the hardest driving course I've seen in the desert and while I don't mind that (I love Wolf Run), I thought it was VERY different from Vista Verde and Saguaro.  Its also very different from most of the other GCA favorites that I've seen in other locations.  Just curious...

[redanman]

Desert Forest just happens to have one of the best sets of green complexes ANYWHERE. Yes, the narrow crowned fairways are too unidimensional for my tastes.

[Matt_Ward]

The issue between Vista Verde and Saguaro boils down to which of the two courses has the most CONSISTENT presentation of varied holes and which uses its property to the fullest capacity.

In my mind, Vista Verde is the better of the two. Despite the chatter about future housing -- the issue from what I saw and played -- is that Vista Verde was able to capture terrain that will clearly keep the elements of a first rate routing and varied holes at the forefront.

Saguaro is far from being one of C&C better courses of those I have played. No doubt the moment you reach the 11th tee all the way to the end the quality and variety of the holes does improve greatly.

If one were just to take the nature of what Ken Kavanaugh did with the greens at Vista Verde I am quite confident that if someone played both courses and was not told who did the designs -- it's likely many more would saty Vista Verde was the product of C&C than Kavanaugh. Each of the greens at Vista Verde is well crafted and does provide a morwe thoughtful and challenging element -- especially in the approach perspective.

One other element that is completely lost or simply forgotten in the discussion of Vista Verde -- the need to work tee shots to favorable locations and the intersection of fairway bunkers that do have meaning throughout one's round. Saguaro allows the bold swing but far too little is challenged off the tee as what one encounters at Vista Verde. Kavanaugh smartly makes the player work the tee shot -- power alone doesn't suffice. There's room to take the less aggressive posture but you cannot simply stand on any hole at Vista Verde without having you mind challenged -- from start to finish. Saguaro does offer this element -- but it's far too less and really only commences in overdrive upon reaching the 11th tee.

Last point -- there's plenty of first rate golf options in the AZ area. The issue becomes one of personal familarity and not just opining from pictures and third hand accounts. Of course, some people will always opt for steak and leave the Mexican food on the side. There loss indeed.

[Bryan Izatt]

The issue between Vista Verde and Saguaro boils down to which of the two courses has the most CONSISTENT presentation of varied holes and which uses its property to the fullest capacity.

Matt, could you clarify how VV is more consistent in its presentation of varied holes?  Are you suggesting that the first 10 at Saguaro are not varied, since you seem to like 11 in?  In what way?  Compared to each other? Compared to other C&C holes?

I don't understand what you mean by using the property to its fullest capacity?  Is this suggesting that C&C could have found better, more varied holes on the property?  If so, where?

In my mind, Vista Verde is the better of the two. Despite the chatter about future housing -- the issue from what I saw and played -- is that Vista Verde was able to capture terrain that will clearly keep the elements of a first rate routing and varied holes at the forefront.

Forgive me if I missed something here, but the terrain at VV looked to me to be a gently sloping hill side for about as far as I could see.  Although I certainly didn't survey the total property it looked like they could have built the course course further from the road or further east or west just as easily.  What features did you see in the land they "captured" for the course that you think led to an outstanding routing?

Saguaro is far from being one of C&C better courses of those I have played. No doubt the moment you reach the 11th tee all the way to the end the quality and variety of the holes does improve greatly.

If one were just to take the nature of what Ken Kavanaugh did with the greens at Vista Verde I am quite confident that if someone played both courses and was not told who did the designs -- it's likely many more would saty Vista Verde was the product of C&C than Kavanaugh. Each of the greens at Vista Verde is well crafted and does provide a morwe thoughtful and challenging element -- especially in the approach perspective.

Yes, I've noted that the green complexes are good.  More Rossian I would think than C&Cian.

One other element that is completely lost or simply forgotten in the discussion of Vista Verde -- the need to work tee shots to favorable locations and the intersection of fairway bunkers that do have meaning throughout one's round. Saguaro allows the bold swing but far too little is challenged off the tee as what one encounters at Vista Verde. Kavanaugh smartly makes the player work the tee shot -- power alone doesn't suffice. There's room to take the less aggressive posture but you cannot simply stand on any hole at Vista Verde without having you mind challenged -- from start to finish. Saguaro does offer this element -- but it's far too less and really only commences in overdrive upon reaching the 11th tee.

I don't think I missed or forgot that element at VV.  Check my comments in the posts above.  I agree the bunkering and washes makes you think, at least on first playing, but I disagree that power wouldn't suffice.  Many holes have a bunker on one side that was marginally carriable by me.  Long hitters I think would have a field day flying most every one of them.  No need to work the ball in that case.

Last point -- there's plenty of first rate golf options in the AZ area. The issue becomes one of personal familarity and not just opining from pictures and third hand accounts. Of course, some people will always opt for steak and leave the Mexican food on the side. There loss indeed.

I assume this point is aimed at others.  I'm opining from experience.  And, I had the Mexican food too (at Los Olivos)  

[Matt_Ward]

Bryan:

Suffice to say this -- I have played a fair representation of different C&C layouts and frankly what I see at Saguaro is not among the top tier ones I've played. The first 11 holes are simply OK in my book -- like I said -- if you took someone to both courses and made sure no information was told to the players on what designer did what course I think most find Vista Verde the more compelling and complete course.

Too many people here on GCA simply chase "designer" courses like designer clothes. The Ken Kavanaugh brand name is simply not that high on the chic radar screen. A pity for those who limit themselves.

I've explained my rationale on Vista Verde more than a few times. You can check out other threads in which I spelled out the details I mentioned. Look, I'm not interested in changing minds -- I liked the course a good bit and would play there in a NY minute.

Bryan -- when you say long hitters can fly the bunkers at Vista Verde with ease -- I think you should understand that I played the course from the tips -- can hit the ball a reasonable ways and didn't find your conclusion to be 100% true. Yes, there are holes where the longer hitter can take some liberties but Kavanaugh is not allowing such transgressions to be carried forward without the execution behind them.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()