News:

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


Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2007, 02:30:40 PM »
Kyle, if you had 174 to the middle, you'd be either on the upper tier in front of the bunker, or in front of the bunker on the right, past the fairway into the rough.

I was standing on the shaggy stuff just past and right of the central fairway bunker with the ball 12 inches below my feet just barely on the short grass.

The was a marker within a few paces of my lie.

Does that help? Was it 194? I REALLY don't think it was, but I'm not going to argue the point. I completely concede.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #26 on: November 19, 2007, 02:34:57 PM »
Interesting to note how Darkhorse hasn't come up once in this discussion of better courses in the Sacramento area.

Wasn't in the best of shapes when I visited not too long ago + homes going up ridiculously close to the tee boxes, fairways, and greens ... yet still a fun and demanding test with some brutal greens.
“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #27 on: November 19, 2007, 02:43:11 PM »
Interesting to note how Darkhorse hasn't come up once in this discussion of better courses in the Sacramento area.

Wasn't in the best of shapes when I visited not too long ago + homes going up ridiculously close to the tee boxes, fairways, and greens ... yet still a fun and demanding test with some brutal greens.

Agreed. Conditions and encroachment get worse with every visit, but it is a good course.

Still, it's not exactly in the Sacramento area, depending on ytour parameters. Roseville residents would visit frequently but Auburn is a long way from Elk Grove...
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Jed Peters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2007, 02:56:19 PM »
Kyle:

Whatever the yardage, that's a bomb!

Patrick:

Darkhorse was/is a great routing. However, the lack of money, conditioning, poor soil base, stupid housing, and remoteness hurt it.

Morgan Creek is a better golf course anyhow, IMHO.

Morgan Creek, in my opinion, is the best in the sacramento/san joaquin valley and foothills, aside from Stevinson.

When you venture into the Bay Area, there are a TON better courses.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2007, 03:10:34 PM »
Kyle:

Whatever the yardage, that's a bomb!

Patrick:

Darkhorse was/is a great routing. However, the lack of money, conditioning, poor soil base, stupid housing, and remoteness hurt it.

Morgan Creek is a better golf course anyhow, IMHO.

Morgan Creek, in my opinion, is the best in the sacramento/san joaquin valley and foothills, aside from Stevinson.

When you venture into the Bay Area, there are a TON better courses.

Jed,
I have my days. I actually pulled a new Taylormade Tour Black out of my bag for that shot (higher launch). My dad was ribbing me until I called my shot and nailed it. Conversely, I couldn't hit an iron to save my life on Saturday.

My mechanics come and go. I'll bomb it one week and then barely crack 250 the next. Ditto with directional control. In other words: golf.

Regarding Darkhorse, I think its remoteness would elevate its status in my eyes if they didn't build the houses so frickin' close to the course. It seemed like a secret retreat when it first opened, and it played very firm. Now its waterlogged. I played there in a light rain a few years ago and water was actually causing the turf to bubble up about 18 inches high.

What are your thoughts on Apple Mountain?

 
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Jed Peters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2007, 03:22:50 PM »
What are your thoughts on Apple Mountain?

Never played it.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #31 on: November 19, 2007, 03:30:07 PM »
What are your thoughts on Apple Mountain?

Never played it.

It's short (Par 70), tight and quirky, but it is also very beautiful and fun. Certainly a few goof ball holes up there, but it is worth a look-see if you're ever near Placerville.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #32 on: November 19, 2007, 04:24:28 PM »
I would give Stevinson a 6 on the Doak scale, played it once about 8 years ago and have not recommended it to anyone and have not had any reason to return. Considering what they had to work with it was a good job, but nothing worth going out of the way for.
Morgan Creek would be a 7. Definitely the toughest course in the Sacramento area and by far the most interesting greens within a 100 miles. Not as good a site as Granite Bay, or as much charm as Rancho Murieta North when compared to private courses nearby, but well done considering the limitations placed on the site by real estate and environmental restrictions.

Is Rancho Murreita North the Palmer course or the Robinson course? Didn't it host the Seniors a while back?
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #33 on: November 19, 2007, 06:19:08 PM »
Kyle - which one were you?  Blue UnderArmour shirt?
"... and I liked the guy ..."

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #34 on: November 19, 2007, 06:19:53 PM »
Kyle,
Rancho Murieta North is an original Bert Stamps design that was tweaked by Palmer prior to the Senior tour stop there. No parallel fairways, many many old oak trees. Still my favorite in Sacto for privates. South course is Robinson, not great but a good second course.
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #35 on: November 19, 2007, 08:17:20 PM »
Kyle - which one were you?  Blue UnderArmour shirt?

And the rediculous faux cowboy hat...

Sorry. I tried to introduce myself to everyone. You had the white shirt? Left the presentation a bit early?
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #36 on: November 19, 2007, 08:23:34 PM »
What were the thoughts on MC's par 3's?

I thought they were the weak links, if the course has any. Though they are generally stronger than most other 1-shotters around Sacramento, I didn't think they stood up to the quality of the par 5's or 4's in variety or uniqueness.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Jed Peters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #37 on: November 19, 2007, 08:28:49 PM »
Kyle:

I agree.

I think that the par 3s ARE the weakest....they all seem to play the same!

I'd much rather have something like 13 green play a lot lower down in that valley and a lot longer (like 230 from the back instead of 202) and then have a short iron par 3 (like maybe number 3 from the blue/white tees at 145ish) but a super wild green?

I've always thought the par 3s (which are all pretty strong holes....) as a collective are the "weakest" points of the course, primarily because they're all (relatively) the same!

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #38 on: November 19, 2007, 08:30:48 PM »
Yep, I was the old guy with gray hair.  We were the last group off and our match ran extra holes so we missed the introductions and handshakes ...
« Last Edit: November 19, 2007, 08:31:26 PM by Mike Benham »
"... and I liked the guy ..."

JohnV

Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #39 on: November 20, 2007, 04:00:31 PM »
First I'd like to thank Jed for setting up a great day.  The course and the food were excellent.  Also thanks to Kyle for coming out and for the book.

I also enjoyed my playing partners, especially hearing some of the interesting tradeoffs that happened during the construction from Mark.

I enjoyed Morgan Creek very much.  I have to agree that the par 3s were probably the weakest link.  We played the Gold tees and I hit 3 6-irons and a 7-iron, although it should have been 2 of each.  More variety would have been very nice.  I didn't get a scorecard and haven't examined the yardage book to see if there was a greater variety from other tees.

I thought the par 5s were all excellent (at least the first 3 since I didn't really play 15).  Every shot was interesting, even the layups.

In general the greens and their surrounds had a lot of character with some being fairly unique.  #1 and #2 come immediately too mind.  The large ridge down the right of 1 and the humpback on #2 were definitely things you don't see often.

Some of the shaping was a little severe, especially on the front 9, but not so much that it put me off.

The comments from earlier that the course was too tough seemed misguided to me.  I definitely didn't score well, but that was because my swing got way out of whack for about 6 holes.  I hit terrible shots and got punished.  I think the course should be pretty playable although definitely not easy for the average mid (15-20) handicap golfer.

Of the courses others have mentioned, I've only seen Stevinson Ranch and it has been a couple of years.  I think I like MC a little better because the greens were more interesting.

I haven't seen Poppy Ridge yet, but I've had a number of people tell me it was intended to be a heathland course as was Morgan Creek.  Any comparisons?

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #40 on: November 20, 2007, 06:52:53 PM »
I haven't seen Poppy Ridge yet, but I've had a number of people tell me it was intended to be a heathland course as was Morgan Creek.  Any comparisons?

No comparison. I like Poppy Ridge. It has a very good routing for each of the 3 nines. However, it is does not offer the width, options, or fun factor found at Morgan Creek IMHO.

Poppy Ridge demands that you hit it very long and professionally straight of of the tee to avoid the thick fescue bordering every hole. Also, while most of the greens are open in the front at PR, the conditions are much softer than at MC. Thus, every green at PR needs to be hit on the fly, and the greens are mostly tiered and blase with bunkers protecting the sides and rear. The par 3s all have bunkers or lakes protecting the front of the green as well (read: target golf).

MC and PR are very different animals and I tink MC definitely stands out more from its Nor Cal competiters in quality and uniqueness.

I believe you're a NCGA guy, right? Be proud of the Poppy courses, and definitely try to get to PR when you're in the area (and let me know if you want to meet up -- I'm 5 minutes away), but don't make a special trip.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #41 on: November 21, 2007, 05:48:40 PM »
Let's steer away from Poppy Ridge in this discussion ...  :P


Individually, the par-3s at MC were very challenging and yes, the distance similarities may detract from the total package.

Likewise, the lack of a short par-4 (at least from the back tees) may be deemed as a shortcoming.

I am convinced that if you played MC regularly, you would be a better golfer because of it.


Ps:  Matt Cohn started this thread, where is his comments on Morgan Creek?
« Last Edit: November 21, 2007, 05:53:33 PM by Mike Benham »
"... and I liked the guy ..."

JohnV

Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #42 on: November 21, 2007, 08:23:47 PM »

I am convinced that if you played MC regularly, you would be a better golfer because of it.


If I played regularly anywhere I'd be a better golfer. >:(

Dan King

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #43 on: November 21, 2007, 08:50:48 PM »
John Vander Borght writes:
I haven't seen Poppy Ridge yet, but I've had a number of people tell me it was intended to be a heathland course as was Morgan Creek.  Any comparisons?

Up until I saw The Ranch, Poppy Ridge for me was the definitive Tom Doak 0. I only played it once, media day before it opened, but I thought it was shameful for the NCGA to have such a course built. It is a resort course, that demands the use of carts -- and it didn't have to be that way. All I remember is driving past perfectly good tees to play some far away hole. It is cart-ball on land that didn't need to be cart-ball.

I'm sorry I missed Morgan Creek. Hopefully some future time I can get out to see the course, being a big fan of Stevinson Ranch.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
Talking about golf is always boring. (Playing golf can be interesting, but not the part where you try to hit the little ball; only the part where you drive the cart.)
 --Dave Barry

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #44 on: November 21, 2007, 09:47:15 PM »
John Vander Borght writes:
I haven't seen Poppy Ridge yet, but I've had a number of people tell me it was intended to be a heathland course as was Morgan Creek.  Any comparisons?

Up until I saw The Ranch, Poppy Ridge for me was the definitive Tom Doak 0. I only played it once, media day before it opened, but I thought it was shameful for the NCGA to have such a course built. It is a resort course, that demands the use of carts -- and it didn't have to be that way. All I remember is driving past perfectly good tees to play some far away hole. It is cart-ball on land that didn't need to be cart-ball.

I'm sorry I missed Morgan Creek. Hopefully some future time I can get out to see the course, being a big fan of Stevinson Ranch.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
Talking about golf is always boring. (Playing golf can be interesting, but not the part where you try to hit the little ball; only the part where you drive the cart.)
 --Dave Barry

A Doak 0 definitely seems more than overly harsh to me. I'd give it a 4.5. Just because a course isn't walking friendly doesn't mean it entirely lacks merit in my book. I've walked the course and almost all of the tough hikes are between holes rather than within them. There are quite a few quality holes. I think the course lacks variety more than anything. None of the holes bore me individually.

But I'll refrain from further PR comment in this thread, per Mike's request.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #45 on: December 02, 2007, 02:06:34 PM »
A big belated thank you for Jed for organizing our get together at his club. It was a very enjoyable day, made even better by the presence of Kyle Phillips and Mark Thawley who were kind enough to talk to us after our round about the course and their design work. To see the passion and enthusiasm Kyle and Mark show for what they do bodes well for the future of golf course architecture. Jed also did a great job of arranging a nice spread of food for us while we were visiting with each  other and listening to the presentation.

For those interested in seeing what I am talking about as I go through the holes, check out the club's website www.morgancreekclub.com. There is a hole by hole description with images.

  Right off the top I would put this course in the Doak 6-7 range. For better golfers I think you could go 7, and maybe even 8. IMO it is a course that will definitely test your game, and as Mike Benham  pointed out, regular play at Morgan Creek would certainly improve your golf game.
   The positives  of the course were: a good test of golf that keeps  you on your toes all the way around. In the areas where the land had some movement to it, I felt Kyle  and his team used it well. The bunkering was deep enough and visually imposing enough to earn your respect. The greens were generally pretty interesting, although at times my general sense was the shaping of some of the greens didn't have much to do with the approach shot in terms of being more receptive to a better angle or type of shot. The stretch of holes from 13-18 was really good. I'll get into the individual holes later. Interestingly after the course was built the nines were flipped, which I felt gave the course a better finish in its current set up, however it makes the start on the first two holes pretty demanding. There is no easing your way into your round here, you have to be ready to golf your ball right off the 1st tee.
   For me the biggest drawback to the course was the aesthetic of the "shelves" that were built in all over the place. Functionally I don't think they affect most golfers in 15 handicap range down, but I think a foozler would have a LONG day trying to play this course. I would think these shelves also add to maintenance costs, but I could be wrong about that since I didn't ask specifically. Jed would likely have a better idea.
More to come.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2007, 02:29:12 PM by ed_getka »
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #46 on: December 02, 2007, 03:42:36 PM »
One more positive about the course is the number of "blindish" shots that the course introduces on your way around that make it hard to commit to some shots. The shots are rarely totally blind, but you often find yourself wishing you could see a little bit more of what you are trying  to do. I have only golfed here once so I don't know if  that feeling persists in subsequent rounds. The other course I am thinking of that does this is Kingsley Club, and in that case the sense of unease on certain shots never goes away, at least not yet. :)

My thoughts are based on playing the blue tees, 6585 yds.

#1 par 5 522 yds
    You stand up on the tee, and it is obvious you don't want to miss right as there is a riparian area over there that is OB. You see a bunker off to the left, but there isn't a good sense that there  is much fairway in between those two hazards. Then there is an area in between the first  and second shot landing areas that  is short rough (I'm guessing  for surface drainage down into the pond on the left?) that seemed odd to me. Also in the second shot landing area (for mortals like me) there is a built up shelf/ridge,  but it wasn't clear  to me what the point of it was, as one side/level didn't seem to give an advantage over the other. As the green sits in line with the hole, coming in from the left is obviously the preferred line, and there is already water all the way up the left, so I don't know why they bothered with that ridge/shelf. Unless it is to deflect balls further right to a worse angle for those who try to play safely away from the water.
  The green is essentially a rectangle, and what was interesting is the entire right side, from the front to the back, is a slope from right down into the center of the green. Essentially a "bank", but I couldn't figure out why it was there, unless it was to make getting up and down from the right side more difficult.
   Fortunately this a par 5 to start, so you can manage par without perfect shots, unlike the next hole.

#2 par 4  424yds
    A very visually intimidating tee shot that seems to offer a very narrow landing  area, and there is water all down the left (water is generally on left on this course with one exception that I can think of). It was interesting in the post-round talk how many guys pointed out how much room there  was to drive the ball, because as a 10  handicap I didn't feel like there was a lot of room. Driving the ball  is the weakest area of my game so that may explain my perception.
   Out in the landing area there is some of that shelving I spoke of and a bunker complex on the right, and the water I mentioned before, so again the tee shot seems very tight. This could be some nice visual trickery on Kyle's part. The mounding that the bunkering is built in to rises up from the natural ground level and obscures your view of what is between you and the hole when you have about 200 yards left. I could see some reeds so I knew there was some amount of wetland area up there and hitting out of the rough it got into my head enough that I laid up rather than bringing a big number into play. In the last 50  yards there was another shelving area (these shelves are generally 2-3 feet high). The slope from one level to another with these shelves is kept at short rough height so you want to be careful in messing with these features.
   The green was guarded by flanking bunkers, and the first half gentle  rose up before falling away to the back. A very cool green, but perhaps a bit too demanding for this length of hole IMO. Play your approach conservatively to any pin past center and putting up and over will be testy. Get aggressive and try to fly your ball back to the pin and most likely you are going to have  your shot land on the downslope and bound through the back of the green.
   A very demanding hole, that I think worked better as an 11th hole than as the current 2nd.

#3 par 3  approx.160 yards
   Lots of visual distractions here with the bunker front right getting most of your attention. There are some grass bunkers and shelving short of the green, with some fairway length grass in front of the green also. The hazards seem disproportionately difficult for a weaker golfer who is the only one likely to get into them given how far short of the green they are. A front right pin, with the guarding  bunker, must really be tough. This green also generally had some interesting contours.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2007, 05:15:20 PM by ed_getka »
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #47 on: December 02, 2007, 05:36:07 PM »
#4 par 4  316yds
    An awkward par 4. Not really driveable by anyone, and yet it seems weird to lay back off the tee to leave a full wedge/short iron in. I don't understand why they didn't leave at least a narrow strip to run a ball through for someone who wants to take a gamble. As it currently is the green sits shallow to an approach from the fairway, while a long drive out to the left that can carry the fairway bunker will be rewarded with a pitch into an open green. The problem is you would need to drive the ball close to 300 yards to take advantage of that opening. The green is well-protected, as it should be with a short iron approach IMO. There is a depression in the front center of the green which makes hitting your approach to the proper segment  of the green important if you don't want to 3-putt.

#5 par 5   553yds
    An interesting hole off the tee, wetlands down the left and trees off to the right, on a hole that generally plays straightaway. The second shot is complicated by a bunker and huge tree in the landing area, for those wanting to get a better angle in to the green. However, there really doesn't seem to be a better angle from the right given the way the bunker protects the left portion of the green that is a plateau up behind the bunker. The green  is sort of a sideways Biarritz, but the swale is much wider than you normally see, so it is more like wide depression between two plateaus. The shot to the left plateau looked just as hard as from anywhere  else in the fairway, given that the plateau is pretty much flat there isn't an angle that  would make that part of the green more receptive. I couldn't figure out the right side of the green at all. It is unprotected and I'm not sure what the strategy is there. There is some more of the terracing/shelving in the last hundred yards down the right side, but again, I'm not sure why it was put there. Overall a testing hole, but I'm just not sure what they were trying to do there.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #48 on: December 02, 2007, 07:02:51 PM »
It was fun playing with you that day, Mr. Ed. We'll have to get together again for some golf in the tri-valley.

As for your comments...


#1 par 5 522 yds
 Also in the second shot landing area (for mortals like me) there is a built up shelf/ridge,  but it wasn't clear  to me what the point of it was, as one side/level didn't seem to give an advantage over the other. As the green sits in line with the hole, coming in from the left is obviously the preferred line, and there is already water all the way up the left, so I don't know why they bothered with that ridge/shelf. Unless it is to deflect balls further right to a worse angle for those who try to play safely away from the water.
  The green is essentially a rectangle, and what was interesting is the entire right side, from the front to the back, is a slope from right down into the center of the green. Essentially a "bank", but I couldn't figure out why it was there, unless it was to make getting up and down from the right side more difficult.


In my first playing of the course (August 2004), the shelf separating the lower left and upper right fairway was steeper and covered with thick rough, whereas now it is much softer and and the grass is short. I also seem to recall the the shelf was further to the right originally, such that the left side was a wider landing area and allowed those who successfully challenged the left-hand water hazard an easier approach angled away from said water hazard. The slope on the right side of the green might thus have been intended to assist players in stopping a long, 2nd shot approach from the left side of the fairway.


I look forward to the rest of your commentary.
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:So, Morgan Creek - how's about it?
« Reply #49 on: December 02, 2007, 07:45:44 PM »
Kyle,
   Thanks for the feedback. It was a pleasure to get in a round with you and your father. As for the Mr Ed thing, are you saying I'm old and that is a sign of respect, OR are you saying I look like a horse? ;)

#6 par 4  382 yards (Joel posted a picture of the hole on this thread)
   Essentially a straightaway par 4 uphill all the way. The photo Joel posted gives a different perspective (from higher up) than what you see  from the tee, such that this is a tee shot into rising land that makes you a little uncomfortable off the tee because you can't see all that stuff that Joel's picture shows. You can see the left side fairway bunkering. Interestingly the guidebook encourages you to flirt with the left fairway bunkers for a better angle, when in reality, because the green is bunkered front left that is not the best  angle to come in. It may give you  a better lie, I don't remember.

#7 par 3  171 yards
Pretty basic par 3, slightly uphill, water right. Bailout left away from water leaves a good short game test. Back right pin must be an absolute bear to get anywhere near. Contour to the left, bunker behind, water right, GULP!!!
   One thing I was thinking of is that Kyle and his guys must have used a fair amount of visual deception that I haven't figured out yet, because there were many times during the course of the round where I didn't club according to the yardage.
    As others have stated the par 3's are not the strong suit of the course,  but that doesn't mean they aren't difficult. All of them had a least one killer pin position that could be used for tournaments.

#8 par 4  390yds
   My kind of golf hole. Wide off the tee, BUT bailout right and your approach is blind up over a rise. Take the aggressive line to the left and you have a wide open shot at it, not to mention your ball will go further down the left side as it won't run out of fairway.
    One interesting thing I noticed on this hole (after my approach from the light rough was a flier that airmailed the green) was  the mounding between the cartpath  and the green. The green sits in a sort of amphitheatre, and over the back of that the ground goes down, but then it goes back up again before the cartpath. Thus I had a downhill lie to try to pitch back to the green off. This could be coincidence or it could be because the archie wanted to hide the cartpath.
    This hole had the shelf short of the green on a diagonal and I liked the use of it here as it seemed to tie into the green complex well.

#9 par 4   379yds
   A nice dogleg left around water. The dogleg turns pretty sharply at about 210 out I would say. This forces you to lay back off the tee if you don't feel up to cutting over the water or shaping a draw to take advantage of the slope of the fairway. Somewhat like #13 Augusta I suppose, now that I'm thinking about it. Definitely a daunting tee shot if you want to get to position "A". Then on the approach you have a shot in to one of the most interesting greens on the course. Quite a small green, but some very interesting internal contour, and a smallish green that presents a variety of short-game demands depending on which side you miss on. The green sits like a diamond to you which I think makes it seem even smaller. An excellent hole IMO with nice risk reward options going on.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back