North Carolina Magazine's Top 100 Courses for 2004

« **Reply #50 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:27:18 PM »

Brian Gracely,

Funny thing you asked....Kris Spence planned to use me for tree management; however, he didn't get the job.... and therefore....I didn't get to help. Surely, tree management will be an integral part Richard Mandell's master plan.

« **Reply #51 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:28:55 PM »

Hunter Freeman - I appreciate your willingness to take another look. You will not be disappointed.

I've played way too many rounds here in the past where we slogged it around, but that's just a feature of the soils we have here, that red clay stuff that soaks up the water rather than perking. We keep adding more drainage, and that's helping. As for the greens, we rebuilt them because they were done wrong the first time. Over the past couple of years, they've been as good as anything, even hanging in there during the summers when everyone else's roots are gone.

If ever you are in the area, I'd be happy to tee it up with you here.

« **Reply #52 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:35:33 PM »

I don't know what the work at RCC entails. Last I spoke with Rich he mentioned that they weren't touching the greens for the time being...but apparently they are not the greens Ross had envisioned. I heard they did acquire some land, so I would guess that a new driving range is on the drawing board, and hopefully some tree management too. that course has great shot values right now, but some of the corridors are extremely narrow.

« **Reply #53 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:40:24 PM »

David - I live in Raleigh, so I'm always in the area.

Just schedule wise it's very tough for me to find time to play casual golf now. Maybe when the days get a little longer I can get up there during the week.

FWIW, I wasn't trying to be overly critical, just stating my 'amateur' opinion. I think the fact that I've only seen the course about 3 times plays into that opinion too. I have seen other places like Duke, River Landing, Pine Needles, Mid Pines etc etc much more often, so I have better memories of those places. Nostalgia goes a long way for me.

I'm not a rater of any kind, but feel free to wine and dine me if you think it will change my mind!

« **Reply #54 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:41:58 PM »

I'm heading to Pinehurst for the first time in 2 weeks, and wanted opinions on a few courses that we are playing.

Pinehurst #2, Tobacco Road and the rest of the usual suspects are not happening on this trip.

We may be returning in the fall to play #2 and others.

We will be playing all our rounds at National (Nicklaus) and Mid South (Palmer?). Any info. good or bad would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Doug

« **Reply #55 on:** March 15, 2004, 04:48:55 PM »

Doug:

Have not played Mid South but I am experienced with the National. I find it very difficult - its opening holes 1-5, while not excessively long, require very precise shots. The people I played with always told me that there is plenty of room off of the tee, but that the approach shots are difficult. Gosh, I still thought some tee shots were difficult (#4 really comes to mind).

I still enjoyed National, but not as much as Pine Needles or Mid Pines. I have heard that Mid South has put some money into the club, maybe others can elaborate further.

Enjoy! IMO, all golf on Midland Road is fun.

Pete

« **Reply #56 on:** March 15, 2004, 05:33:24 PM »

Hunter,

The one thing I've never heard mention is that the greens would be changed at RCC. They were re-built in 1995-96 to improve drainage, regain size and be up to both USGA specs and Ross Society blueprints. They will have to be redone in a few years for maintenance, but I've never heard they needed to be changed.

Hunter & Dunlop,

I'm curious where you think there needs to be tree-removal or that the trees are encroaching on the width of the course? I can fully appreciate that alot of the yound trees that have been randomly planted in open areas should never have been planted, but they currently don't impact play. And if you look at the aerials from the 50s, there are less trees now than back then (thanks to the hurricanes). So I'm really curious where you think removal needs to happen for playability vs. some places for asthetics (ie. trying to create some skyine greens at #4 or #6.

...actually, now that I think about it, some trees should come down behind the #13 green as we can't get grass to grow over all the roots. And you probably think the large tree behind #12 should come down as it's killing the turf, but that's going to be a minor battle with the membership (although it's a vote of 1 now)

« **Reply #57 on:** March 15, 2004, 06:03:05 PM »

Brian - I was just relaying what Rich told me - that the greens were not what Ross had intended. Take that however you will, you may want to speak with Rich directly to get a more detailed explanation.

As far as trees, I'd need to see a course layout again to get the hole numbers right.I don't really remember some holes, but here's a first effort....I'd start with some tree management along the left side of #1 in the second fairway. The some down the right side of #2, or do something to make the ponds more visable there. The right side of #5 to open up that tee shot a little. Left side of #6 (long par 3 right?)near the tee.

I can't really picture 7 or 8 right now, 9 seemed ok. To my recollection most of the back 9 seemed OK from a players perspective. I don't really remember 12 & 13 though. 15 seems a little claustrophobic and some of the left side of 16 might be opened up if it would allow you to see the green from the tee.

I think the greens are fantastic, for the record, and I'm looking forward to the NC Am qualifier there this summer.

« **Reply #58 on:** March 15, 2004, 06:23:28 PM »

Brian Gracely,

Tree management involves much more than strategic width issues. It involves creating site-lines and sweeping vistas between holes, exposing specimen hardwoods by getting rid of impinging undersory trees and underbrush, removing backdrops to create visual width and depth, removing the secondary trees that clutter areas outside the established tree-lines as well. All this before you even get to agronomic issues of sunlight exposure. Then balance it with saftey issues and now you're truly talking about integrating trees with golf.

Countless courses today need to lose a bunch of trees, and I cannot imagine that RCC is an exception. It has been said that I would have a "field day" there. I do not remember any specifics, as I have not visited in a while, but for starters, the saplings in the photographs, which Scott Burroughs posted, need to be trimmed right at the base.

« **Reply #59 on:** March 15, 2004, 07:50:31 PM »

I have played in excess of 100 golf courses in North Carolina over the past 15 years. There are some really questionable calls on the list.

Pinehurst # 2 and # 7 are ranked appropriately. #8 and # 4 are shaky at best. The Cardinal at CCNC is a very weak pick, the Player course at Pinewild is not worthy of the top 25 in the Pinehurst area.

Wade Hamption is the best Fazio in the State. Old North is a near second but not that near. Forest Creek is way better than # 8 or # 4.

Missing from the list, in my opinion, is Highlands Country Club and Hendersonville Country Club. Charlotte is an amalgam of many works, lacks character and frankly while being a pleasant layout seems somewhat schizophrenc from an architectural point of view. In the Charlotte area I like Carolina Golf and CC.

Eagle Point is dramatic and well laid out. The proximity to the ocean makes the wind conditions a bit more essential than most courses in the State.

I think that it can be said that if you design a bad golf course in North Carolina, no one will play it. There are just sooooo many good ones.

« **Reply #60 on:** March 15, 2004, 08:41:24 PM »

Hunter & Dunlop,

Now I really want to get you guys out to RCC to do some photo-shop magic!! And show some of the cart-paths removed.

I don't completely agree with Hunter's assessment, but I appreciate his input. For example:

I agree that the right-side of #2 could be more open to expose the green and tempt the player to take a direct path. But I'm not sure they could expose more than the 1st pond without moving alot of land and potentially creating drainage issues.

I disagree with removing trees on #5, as it's one of the few holes (along with #16) that truly force you to hit a non-straight shot off the tee. Thinning the trees might offer some glimpse of the green, but wouldn't changing the playing angles.

Your comment about the left of #6 is interesting, because we were looking at alternative tee-box angles (left of existing tee) to create some variety from #3 tee-shot. Pushing the tee-box about 5-7 yards left would make an interesting shot that would need to clear the front-left bunker and bring the left-to-right slope of the green more into play.

« **Reply #61 on:** March 15, 2004, 08:49:16 PM »

Hunter - you'll get neither wining (or should I say whining) nor dining. You get to come to your own conclusions. When we get closer to summer, come on over.

« **Reply #62 on:** March 15, 2004, 09:20:23 PM »

Brian - I haven't seen Ralwigh in about 2 years, so my recollection is a little faint. SO Don't take all ym suggestions too seriously. They were based on pictures in my mind, nothing concrete.

I can see how exposing the 2nd pond on 2 could creat a lot of work. But in my mind that hole needs something, not exactly sure what, but seems like it's very deceiving from the tee, and without local knowledge there is no real way to know what hazards lay ahead. That's not a bad thing, but from aplayers perspective it's a little annoying. Anyway, I think you suggestion for 6 would be good. I just remember a couple tree limbs on the left side maybe about 50 yards off the back tee that really created some problems for me. I don't like the idea of a dogleg par 3. The limbs prevented the golfer from hitting anything other than a right to left shot.

« **Reply #63 on:** March 15, 2004, 11:32:44 PM »

Brian,

Step 1 for my idea for tree management at RCC would start with removing every single tree under 10 years old. This type of tree can be seen in the 2nd pic I posted.

Step 2 is whatever Dunlop suggests!

« **Reply #64 on:** March 16, 2004, 02:31:45 AM »

Doug-
I'll try to help you out here...I've played National twice, and Mid-South once, 2 years ago, when it was called Plantation Golf Club.

National is, by and large, a very difficult track. People in the area seem to hold it in high regard, and it commands a higher green fee than most...

There are some very good holes IMHO (5,10,18) and some bad holes (1 and 2 are poor opening holes...when you play 1, youll see what I mean...they would make a great 16,17 combo, but not 1,2)

It's a decently fun course, though the greens are clearly early Nicklaus (i.e. HUGE elephants buried here and there, tiers that make certain pins absolutely unputtable if you get on the wrong side...) It's generally forgiving off the tee, for a sandhills course...

Mid-South was 2 years ago, so I'm stretching to remember...but from what I do remember, the course took a few holes to get started, but it made interesting use, I thought, of a pond/lake both on the front and back nine. The conditioning was suspect when I played, but again, new ownership, now private, I'd imagine it's better. The layout, other than the few holes that ran around the lake, reminded me of the Carolina club, and almost scream Palmer...its a decent track, and one that I would play again, but in this class, I'd run over to Legacy half the time and play one of these two the other half...

For the $$ it costs to play National, you can play Mid-Pines, cant you?

How bout Tot Hill Farm? Strantz design- from what I hear, less polished than Tobacco - quirky, fun, and if you like TR, then the locals say you'll like Tot Hill too...

« **Reply #65 on:** March 16, 2004, 08:12:34 AM »

A few years back I was playing at National with three of my buddies. We finished a morning round and sat for lunch. Suddenly there was quite a stir. Jack Nicklaus and three of his associates were on the first tee. Our group decided to watch Nicklaus play rather than play again. Jack was quite amenable and off we went.

Nicklaus had not played National since the opening of the course in 1989. As he approached a number of the greens he shook his head. He mumbled that he had forgotten how severe the greens were.

National is one of the best layouts on one of the best pieces of property in Pinehurst. It has wonderful elevation changes and great balance. The holes are challenging and compliment each other very well. The greens are at best problematical.

As an example, the # 4 hole is a 550 yard par five that plays down a substantial slope with water to the right of the driving area. The bunkering that starts about 110 yards from the green forces the player to lay up the second shot. The green is on a perch which may well be the highest point of the property. Unfortunately, the green is only 10-15 paces deep.
This means that the player must craft a shot from 120-160 yards to a blind green up a two club slope to attain the surface. The green is not accepting of the shot and most balls end up in collection areas behind the green. If the player is short the ball finishes well below the surface (15 feet) and presents a terribly difficult approach.

There are numerous other examples of this on the course. In many cases the surface is hidden from the player and the green has run off areas that cannot be seen. While the shots into these greens are only blind once, the situation is frustrating.

I feel that if National were to blow up and rebuild about six of their surfaces the course would leapfrog a number of others on the NC list.

« **Reply #66 on:** March 16, 2004, 08:14:47 AM »

Quote from: Ryan Simper on March 16, 2004, 02:31:45 AM

How bout Tot Hill Farm? Strantz design- from what I hear, less polished than Tobacco - quirky, fun, and if you like TR, then the locals say you'll like Tot Hill too...

I say NOT to Tot.

First off it is quite a drive from the Pinehurst area (an hour I would imagine although I would come to Tot from another direction so I have not done the drive from Pinehurst directly). Secondly "less polished" is an understatement. THF I think is Strantz finally reaching the limits of what anyone (even someone who loves his work in the past including TR) would think is reasonable. It just got too crazy in places.

I think I recently read where they lost some greens (washed out) or something and that for a year or so they would be combining a couple holes to make some kind of a par 6 or something. I may be completely off base here, but I thought I heard something like that. I would appreciate anyone who knows any more about this.

« **Reply #67 on:** March 16, 2004, 08:43:33 AM »

As to Tot Hill, there were articles in the area indicating that, due to wash out of three greens after flooding last fall, a par 7 finisher would be built. According to an article in an issue of Triad Golf last fall (www.triadgolf.com) "a unique par-7 is planned for the re-aligned 18th hole."

Also, "Cox and Knowles contend the new greens, when finished, will be more player-friendly than originally. The 11th green, a downhill par-3, will be raised. . . . The 13th, previously a 4-tiered par-3, will have the front portion elevated, providing an expanded landing area, reducing it to a puttable 3 tiers. The lower, right portion of the green for the par-5 16th hole will be raised and played as fringe, while the flat surface to the left will be made part of the green."

"If he was enthusiastic about the overall plan, he was downright giddy at the prospect of the par-7 finishing hole. It will be 825 yards from the back tees.... It will start at the original 16th tees, play across the 17th fairway, and uphill to the regular 18th green. “It will be a great par-7 finishing hole and one players will enjoy and remember,” he added.

"will play to a par of 74 over the full 18"

“'This is not in any way hollow rhetoric or undue optimism when I say Tot Hill will be a better, fairer and more enjoyable golf course when our repairs are made,'” reminded Knowles."

I haven't seen it since the changes were reported/made. The course website does not show the par 7, but notes the three new greens are open.

« **Reply #68 on:** March 16, 2004, 09:29:16 AM »

Ohh this is even more interesting than I had imagined.

This may be worthy of a return trip to see the changes first hand. I have not been there since it opened. Maybe some indepth "Archi-torture" study is warrented. Or maybe since some of the greens seem to be being softened as well it may be getting more playable.

I am a little confused though if the 16th, 17th, and 18th all seem to be being combined to make this par 7 hole, will the course then only have 16 holes? Or are they adding something else that I have missed?

« **Reply #69 on:** March 16, 2004, 09:37:59 AM »

Earlier in the thread it was mentioned that the ranking system might be flawed. I ran across something I found interesting
that said the course that finished third in the "Best New Course" category only had 12 raters play there. Now, I am not
a rater, but that sounds very low to me. Can a dozen people
playing a course really judge it fairly? I'm sure #2 and Old North
State got quite a bit more raters out than that.

« **Reply #70 on:** March 16, 2004, 11:38:41 AM »

Quote from: Allan_Long on March 16, 2004, 09:37:59 AM

Earlier in the thread it was mentioned that the ranking system might be flawed. I ran across something I found interesting
that said the course that finished third in the "Best New Course" category only had 12 raters play there. Now, I am not
a rater, but that sounds very low to me. Can a dozen people
playing a course really judge it fairly? I'm sure #2 and Old North
State got quite a bit more raters out than that.

Allan: I probably shouldn't speak for the panelists out there, but there were only 3 "new" courses to vote for last year, and this 3rd course is in the far reaches of the state (near Kitty Hawk on the Outer Banks). The other 2 new courses are relatively easy to access in the center of the state. If you look at the list in general, the Outer Banks receives very little attention (e.g. Currituck and Nags Head did not make the list while many Wilmington-area courses did).

Pete

« **Reply #71 on:** March 16, 2004, 12:41:26 PM »

Michael- that's an interesting story about National!

Tot is a bit away, that's true, and I have never seen the place, so I bow to those who have actually played there...

I'm going to be in Pinehurst next week...linup includes Old North State, Pine Needles, Duke, Governers, CCNC, #8, Maples at Woodlake, and perhaps either Southern Pines or Tobacco Road (likely the latter)

One thing of GREAT note this time of year is the conditioning of the courses, and who overseeds and who doesnt...

Mid-South(Plantation) overseeded the fairways when I was there...National does NOT overseed (at least they havent in the last 2 years) or they use some grass that gets patchy in later March...either way, it's not a lushland...

Hey, I shot 77 at National, so I like the place

Then again, the first time I saw it I shot 89...oy!

« **Reply #72 on:** March 16, 2004, 01:06:59 PM »

Let me be the second to say no to Tot Hill. Both times I played, at least 3 pin positions were within feet of the big boulders. Some of the holes are quite enjoyable and the course is very scenic, but I can't get past the bounces off the boulders surrounding the green. I thought Tobacco Road was much more fun. Also, some of the greens are over the top. When I last played 8 (old 17) the pin was on the lower tier. It was physically impossible to stop the ball on the lower tier if you were on the middle or upper tier - after I putted out I nudged a ball off the middle tier and it rolled off the false front 40 yards from the green. Maybe the greens are kept slower now, I haven't played it since the greens were washed out.

My last correspondence from Eddie Cox (golf director) said that the 3 greens are now fixed and the course is back to its original configuration. (Well not original, they still have the nines switched around).

Pete

« **Reply #73 on:** March 16, 2004, 01:21:16 PM »

Can others who have played both THF and TR chime in on differences/why TR is held so much higher?

« **Reply #74 on:** March 16, 2004, 01:27:02 PM »

Having played both, I would say the TR is vastly the superior course of the two, and I doubt anyone would argue otherwise. It is a great piece of property, which THF isn't, and a true work of art, IMHO.

I must say that I think THF suffers only in comparison to TR, though. I thoroughly enjoyed THF and though I agree that some of the boulders could have been removed (especially on #10!) the site is rather in keeping with the terrain of the area.
As a value for the $ it costs, and as a unique sort of course, I would never tell anyone to stay away from THF. It just isn't worth a detour to play if your in the Piedmont area in the way that TR is.

News:

Dunlop_White

David_Madison

FREEMAHC

FREEMAHC

DPL11

Pete Buczkowski

Brian_Gracely

FREEMAHC

Dunlop_White

michael j fay

Brian_Gracely

David_Madison

FREEMAHC

Scott_Burroughs

rjsimper

michael j fay

Daryl "Turboe" Boe

Greg Holland

Daryl "Turboe" Boe

Allan Long

Pete Buczkowski

rjsimper

Pete Buczkowski

rjsimper

A.G._Crockett