Doak zeros....

« **Reply #25 on:** November 13, 2007, 05:43:11 PM »

Quote from: cary lichtenstein on November 13, 2007, 05:31:22 PM

My defn of a 0 would be any course where I walked off after 9 holes bored to death, and I can think of about about a dozen or so.

Sorry Cary,

Those are 1's

That being said, a 0 might be less boring only because you are thinking to yourself "what the hell??"

« **Reply #26 on:** November 13, 2007, 05:53:27 PM »

Quote from: Tony_Muldoon on November 13, 2007, 05:23:04 PM

It's been too long since I reminded the group of the only -4 (Doak Scale) course I've encountered.

Not only would Trump be embarrassed by the excesses of the rock feature behind the 65 yard wide single green; he would have gagged at the thought that the "second richest man in Wales" would have given the money to build such a course with no drainage whatsoever in his homeland.

The only natural feature left on this course are the gates to Hades, adjacent to the long cart path back from the 18th.

Yes the prize goes to

The Wales National course at The Vale Hotel.

http://www.vale-hotel.com/golf/walesnational.html

Tony

The Vale could definitely qualify for a zero, but there has been some changes since I was there last. Could it be slightly better now?

« **Reply #27 on:** November 13, 2007, 05:59:53 PM »

0-A course so contrived and unnatural that it may poison your mind, which I cannot recommend under any circumstances. Reserved for courses that wasted ridiculous sums of money in their construction, and probably shouldn’t have been built in the first place.

Broadmoor South (fortunately NLE, NKA "The Mountain Course" ). Exquisitely bad, and probably wasted a lot of $$ in construction. This Palmer/Seay course basically slid down the mountain into disuse. I understand it has been totally redone by Nicklaus Design and is now The Mountain Course, which I haven't played.

I mentioned recently that I thought Eagle Vail is a Doak 0. Looking at the definition, maybe not since I'm not sure they spent a ridiculous sum of money there. Plus the opening tee shot off the side of the hill is pretty fun. OK give it a Doak 0.5

I've played a lot of other contrived and unnatural courses but they don't meet the Doak 0 definition literally.

« **Reply #28 on:** November 13, 2007, 05:59:53 PM »

Quote from: Padraig Dooley on November 13, 2007, 05:53:27 PM

Quote from: Tony_Muldoon on November 13, 2007, 05:23:04 PM
It's been too long since I reminded the group of the only -4 (Doak Scale) course I've encountered.

Not only would Trump be embarrassed by the excesses of the rock feature behind the 65 yard wide single green; he would have gagged at the thought that the "second richest man in Wales" would have given the money to build such a course with no drainage whatsoever in his homeland.

The only natural feature left on this course are the gates to Hades, adjacent to the long cart path back from the 18th.

Yes the prize goes to

The Wales National course at The Vale Hotel.

http://www.vale-hotel.com/golf/walesnational.html

Tony

The Vale could definitely qualify for a zero, but there has been some changes since I was there last. Could it be slightly better now?

It defies the imagination that it could possibly get worse

(NB I've referred it on here at least 3x, and it just goes to show - you do get kinder with age.)

« **Reply #29 on:** November 13, 2007, 06:03:06 PM »

Tony

I've a few friends who are based there, I'll ask them about it.

There's always a chance that it could be worse!

« **Reply #30 on:** November 13, 2007, 06:16:08 PM »

Actually Shivas, they flipped the 9s back this year -- Weekly Challenge Tour officials told the manager that we wouldn't play there unless we could play the back 9 first. They're switched on the score cards but not, as of our May tournament, on their website.

It should also be noted that Seven Bridges won a number of awards for its stormwater retention design. Back when I was in high school, there were 36 flat, back and forth holes on this site. The new course has a housing devpt. encroaching on what has once again become the back 9, and it is indeed ridiculous. But, if you can't get a hybrid into a narrow landing area after playing 9 holes, it's your own fault. The course is far from a zero by any stretch of the imagination. . .

« **Reply #31 on:** November 13, 2007, 06:22:17 PM »

The China Creek Course at Newcastle near Seattle. Wow.

« **Reply #32 on:** November 13, 2007, 06:56:24 PM »

Sean - you can't imply for a moment that Old Head is a zero! No serious golf course evaluator would ever suggest this. It is a high candidate for "Dumb Blond" awards but to suggest that there are few courses worse than it in the world(an implied requirement of a Doak "0") is laughable. JC

« **Reply #33 on:** November 13, 2007, 07:29:36 PM »

Furry Creek GC on the road from Vancouver, BC up to Whistler has gotta be a Doak 0!

« **Reply #34 on:** November 13, 2007, 08:06:40 PM »

Quote from: Mike Sweeney on November 13, 2007, 05:42:55 PM

Quote from: MPCirba on November 13, 2007, 04:15:28 PM

2) ShoreGate - courtesy of Ron Fream/David Dale

Mike,

Come on, no way this is a Doak 0. I understand your disappointment with the course, but it has grown on me the 2-3 times that I have played it since my first round where I too was disappointed.

Are you saying that you prefer it over the up to a tee box and down to a fairway and up to a green and drive back up to a tee box golf course that is Pine Hills?

I play SG with my brother-in-law probably every other summer. He loves the place and his home course is Aronimink.

Even Tom Doak's rating of Stone Harbor as a 0 is contrived (same as Stone Harbor GC ).

Mike,

Please read this definition again;

0-A course so contrived and unnatural that it may poison your mind, which I cannot recommend under any circumstances. Reserved for courses that wasted ridiculous sums of money in their construction, and probably shouldn’t have been built in the first place.

Bingo.

« **Reply #35 on:** November 13, 2007, 08:24:10 PM »

Mike C,

I read the "0" scale before, I posted! I think you are taking over Matt Ward's hyperbole. What is your Doak scale rating on Pine Hills?

10 rounds, how would you split between between Pine Hills and Shore Gate?

Father John Kavanaugh is watching so please, direct honest answers are required!

PS. Since I don't think you have played Stone Harbor yet, you are probably disqualified from identifying zeros!

« **Reply #36 on:** November 13, 2007, 08:47:00 PM »

Stone Harbor is an easy one. Think the phrase "Golf Architortue: was coined there...

But I played it once 15 years ago, I hear they changed it, filled in the island jaws bunkers, etc.

Do they still have the Adidas logo bunkers?

« **Reply #37 on:** November 13, 2007, 09:12:05 PM »

Silvertip in Canada is a zero -- it pains me to think about it.

« **Reply #38 on:** November 13, 2007, 09:25:32 PM »

Quote from: Mike Sweeney on November 13, 2007, 08:24:10 PM

Mike C,

I read the "0" scale before, I posted! I think you are taking over Matt Ward's hyperbole. What is your Doak scale rating on Pine Hills?

10 rounds, how would you split between between Pine Hills and Shore Gate?

Mike,

What kind of choice is that? Why, it's worse than choosing between Scylla and Charybdis...worse than choosing between Bobby Vinton and Wayne Newton....worse than choosing between a night of passion with Rosie O'Donnell or a night of passion with Vincent "Don Vito" Margera...worse than having to run a mini-marathon on the 12-miles of cart paths that take you from the first tee to the 18th green at Country Club of THE Poconos At Big Ridge...

And yes, somehow I've managed to never play Stone Harbor, but I want to...a lot.

If one is to know true greatness, one also needs to know exactly how bad the alternatives are, and that is where some of these courses we're discussing really come to the fore!

« **Reply #39 on:** November 13, 2007, 09:38:24 PM »

I don't know if these are 0's in the truest sense as defined by TD, but I think they are pretty darn close.

Shorecliffs-in all fairness, it has had some landslides that have destroyed some of the course, but even if it hadn't, I don't know if it would've made a difference. There literally is only one hole that is decent, the 13th.

Lake San Marcos- I may be unfair in this assesment because there are a couple of holes that are halfway good, but there are some that are just plain terrible and offensive.

Fullerton GC- It's been years since playing it, and thank god...

Temeku Hills- absolutely no soul to the course whatsoever....

Menifee Lakes- see above.

Carmel Mountain Ranch- it's been butchered because of housing and people complaining of their homes being hit by errant tee shots. There are a couple of decent holes, but there are alot of bad ones.

Center City, Oceanside-a home made job by the owner. The guy unfortunately didn't have the kind of ground that Fownes, Leeds, Crump and Wilson had. Then again, if he did, I'm not sure he would've known what to do with it.

« **Reply #40 on:** November 13, 2007, 09:50:49 PM »

Quote from: MPCirba on November 13, 2007, 09:25:32 PM

If one is to know true greatness, one also needs to know exactly how bad the alternatives are, and that is where some of these courses we're discussing really come to the fore!

I know you have played way more courses than me, but you probably don't have this certificate from Mahogany Run in St. Thomas:

"Mahogany Run’s Signature 13th, 14th and 15th holes are known as The Devil’s Triangle. Golfers who play all three without a penalty stroke are awarded a special “I Survived The Devil’s Triangle” certificate from the Club’s Pro Shop."

Only the cruise ship crowd would pay for a golf course that advertises penalty strokes.

By the way, The Jans may have it beat, but Newton Commonwealth, MA (the worst Ross in the world?) may be a bigger shooting gallary.

« **Reply #41 on:** November 13, 2007, 09:58:19 PM »

Oh Mike...don't get me started on BAD, BAD, BAD golf courses...I might be here typing for the next 30 days.

Someday look up Cruz Farm in Farmingdale, NJ, and let's discuss that solid collection of holes!

However, I do think that the Doak "0" is truly reserved for those courses that sanctimoniously and pretentiously try for "greatness" out of the box, and not the low-budget, amateurishly-designed, we-know-we-suck courses that are such a part of my overall resume.

In that regard, Pine Hill is an interesting choice on your part.

I wouldn't think of it in quite those dire terms, but looking at it on the pretentiousness meter, and those early advertisements playing up the Pine Valley connection, it sure is in the running!

« **Reply #42 on:** November 13, 2007, 10:18:15 PM »

Quote from: Doug Wright on November 13, 2007, 05:59:53 PM

0-A course so contrived and unnatural that it may poison your mind, which I cannot recommend under any circumstances. Reserved for courses that wasted ridiculous sums of money in their construction, and probably shouldn’t have been built in the first place.

Broadmoor South (fortunately NLE, NKA "The Mountain Course" ). Exquisitely bad, and probably wasted a lot of $$ in construction. This Palmer/Seay course basically slid down the mountain into disuse. I understand it has been totally redone by Nicklaus Design and is now The Mountain Course, which I haven't played.

Doug,
The new Mountain Course is certainly no Doak 0. Its not near the quality of the East (did not play the West) but its above average now certainly.

« **Reply #43 on:** November 13, 2007, 11:02:24 PM »

I believe he gave Tam O'Shanter in Brookville, NY a score of 0
There are a couple of other clubs nearby that would be great candiates for such a score.

« **Reply #44 on:** November 13, 2007, 11:08:30 PM »

My guess is that Tom would give a 0 (or less) to a course he played as a kid (and I played when he was jsuta gleam in his father's eye), Hubbard Heights in Stamford, CT. They've changed the name now to protect the innocent, but do you know something--I loved that dog track, and not only because it was just about the only place within 25 miles to play for someone not a part of the country club scene.

Doak Zero's are perfect 10's when the alternative is no golf.

« **Reply #45 on:** November 13, 2007, 11:40:58 PM »

Rich: Hubbard Heights (E. Gaynor Brennan today) was a 1 on the Doak scale -- a very basic course with clear architectural malpractice and/or poor maintenance. You had to really make a mess to get a 0.

I had to go back and look up the zeroes again; it's been a long time. When the book was published, GOLFWEEK's review spent an inordinate amount of time focusing on the zeroes -- there isn't even a list in the book, you really have to search through and find them as I just did -- and trashing the book for being so harsh. They even had a guy go to Stone Harbor and write a good review of it to show how wrong I was!

The zeroes were as follows:

Stone Harbor, NJ (since changed considerably)
Kiln Creek, VA (every hole built up ten feet in the air on fill to get rid of dirt from a development)
Renaissance Park, NC (since closed I think, landfill special)
Heather Glen, SC (third nine)
Atlanta National, GA (since changed considerably)
Terradyne, KS
Karsten Course at ASU, AZ
Cypress GC, CA (since plowed under)
Hokkaido GC (Lion course), Japan (I wonder if it's been abandoned)

I think I'll let Shivas defend me on whether the reviews were justified, considering the track record since then.

The list above is from my 1994 edition. There might have been 1-2 more in the 1996 version that I saw in between. There were also a handful of other courses rated "0-5" which meant they were close to a 0 for me but that others would not find them so objectionable.

I did think the attention paid to the zeroes was overkill. There were less than ten of them out of 800 courses in the book, and I didn't highlight them at all.

« **Reply #46 on:** November 13, 2007, 11:42:59 PM »

Oh, I do remember one more from the 1996 edition -- the third nine at Port Ludlow in Washington. A resort course pretty much unplayable for anybody over a 15-handicap due to many forced carries over wetlands at the bottom of hills.

« **Reply #47 on:** November 14, 2007, 01:01:11 AM »

Tom

Thanks for giving Hubbard Heights a 1. It shows that you have a heart...

As for Cypress GC, if you check out Barney's latest thread regarding building golf courses on top of cemetaries, you will see that only 9 were plowed under and 9 remain (and at a very respectable 6.900 yards for two loops, too!).

I played there a couple of times in the late 70's early 80's and it was not at all bad, IMHO. Sure, searching for lost balls amongst the gravestones was not everybody's cup of tea, but the architecture was OK, and the experience unique. I'd give it a Doak 3.

Rich

PS--for those who do not know, Colma, CA, where "The Other" Cypress is located, was a town incorporated specifically to serve as the graveyard for San Francisco after the spread of disease from corpses following the 1906 earthquake was seen to be intolerable. 73% of the land in the town consists of cemetaries. Perfect fodder for Barney's golf course development dreams....

« **Reply #48 on:** November 14, 2007, 06:08:01 AM »

Quote from: Richard Farnsworth Goodale on November 14, 2007, 01:01:11 AM

Tom

Thanks for giving Hubbard Heights a 1. It shows that you have a heart...

I have to say that HH is at least a 2, and it can't touch Newton Commonweath on the Doak 0 scale.

The power lines and industrial waste surrounding ASU Karston was pretty bad, but I don't remember the course being that bad?

Mike C,

My Pine Hill - Shore Gate split would be 2-8.

« **Reply #49 on:** November 14, 2007, 06:21:38 AM »

Technically speaking is a Doak 0 a course where you drive 100 miles to go play and once there you refuse to get outta your car in the parking lot?

Sean Arble:

I sure don't think Old Head is remotely close to a Doak 0 but I hear you about a golf course being on that remarkable and anthropologically important land. I still can't imagine how they got the permission to put a golf course on Old Head.

But as a site Old Head is about a Doak 15 to me---eg I'd drive 150 miles just to see Old Head itself. When I did get there I had some pretty interesting conversations with some Aereans who lived there about 5,000 years ago. One of them told me he was pretty sure he shot a 72 just a couple of nights before.

News:

Kalen Braley

Padraig Dooley

Doug Wright

Tony_Muldoon

Padraig Dooley

Mark Smolens

Sean Leary

Jonathan Cummings

Mike Erdmann

Mike_Cirba

Mike Sweeney

Bill Brightly

Mike Nuzzo

Mike_Cirba

David Stamm

Mike Sweeney

Mike_Cirba

Andy Troeger

Robert Mercer Deruntz

Rich Goodale

Tom_Doak

Tom_Doak

Rich Goodale

Mike Sweeney

TEPaul