So what's the deal with Erin Hills?

« **Reply #50 on:** September 19, 2006, 10:51:08 PM »

Paul:

You're correct about Olympia Fields -- Furyk won at -8; Leaney at -5; two at -1, and four at even. I have heard about criticisms of USGA set-up as you described; still, hard to think USGA wanted to have 53 rounds under par in first two rounds (among those who made the cut). It did toughen in the final two days -- 15 under-par rounds Sat. and only six on Sun. Still, it ranks as one of the easier US Open venues of recent vintage based on final score and number of total rounds under par.

Everything I've read about Shinny '04 suggested the USGA had it right on the edge of perfection (firm and fast) for the first three rounds, and then they "lost it" on the last day (even Mickelson thought this). I still remember watching Andy North talking Sat. night on ESPN -- with huge winds nearly blowing him off the set -- wondering how much the course would firm up Sunday and whether it would go over the edge. And much of the problem centered on just one or two holes and pin placements, not the entirety of the course itself.

As for Carnoustie, I walked the entire course a few days before the '99 Open there, and had never seen a tougher set-up. I thought it bordered on the ridiculous -- incredibly tight fairways for a links, really high rough not that far from the fairway, and nearly 7,400 yards (pre-ProV1 distance explosion, I think), necessitating driver on most holes, and thus making fairways even tighter and rough more in play. Walking with a number of fairly informed golf folks that day, the consensus was that -- with any kind of typical Open weather -- the winning score would be @ +10. I was amazed it was only +6, and the weather in fact did hold off -- it was mild re. wind in '99. I much preferred the fast and firm conditions of Sandwich a few years back, when Curtis won at -1.

« **Reply #51 on:** September 19, 2006, 11:04:32 PM »

Quote from: Phil McDade on September 19, 2006, 10:51:08 PM

Everything I've read about Shinny '04 suggested the USGA had it right on the edge of perfection (firm and fast) for the first three rounds, and then they "lost it" on the last day (even Mickelson thought this).

Wonder if Goosen would agree....

Quote from: Phil McDade on September 19, 2006, 10:51:08 PM

I much preferred the fast and firm conditions of Sandwich a few years back, when Curtis won at -1.

I was starting to think I was the only one that enjoyed Sandwich.

Paul R -

I don't think the USGA would consider EH a Chicago course, as much as a Midwestern public facility, something they would presumably have interest in.

« **Reply #52 on:** September 19, 2006, 11:15:15 PM »

George:

I doubt Goosen did -- one of the most amazing non-Tiger putting performances I've seen.

Still, isn't it a little silly to be hand-watering greens (for some two-somes, but not for others) on the final day of the USGA's most important tournament of the year?

I thought Sandwich '03 was just superlative -- fast, firm and very tough. Perhaps Curtis is proving this year it wasn't really a fluke.

« **Reply #53 on:** September 22, 2006, 07:24:58 AM »

Having just played Erin, and having spoken with at least a dozen who have played – from Gold Digest and Golfweek Raters, to club professionals to high-handicappers, the following is an analysis of Erin Hills.

First off, Erin Hills is a BIG golf course with lots of land (600 acres or so) and lots of room to manuever. The new clubhouse is due to be completed soon and it will have about 8 rooms for rental. Some 32 other rooms are to be built nearby, so this will be a destination resort, albeit with just one golf course.

For the record, I have been as low as a 6 handicap in the past ten years, but am currently a 13. I played from the blue tees with my ‘regular’ ball (7112 yards) and generally played a second ball with hickory shafts from the green tees( 6544 yards) with my playing partners. On average, I hit at least 1.5 drives per hole. I lost 12 balls – 9 of my Pro V1’s and 3 that I found along the way. My very generous USGA handicap score was a 95 – probably a bit too low, but based on my ‘better’ of a modern club and a hickory, this is what I turned in.

To note – if you hit it in the fescue, you can kiss your ball goodbye. There is almost no chance of finding a ball hit off of the fairway/ first cut. The biggest issue facing Erin Hills is that they have to widen the corridors – the length and green sites will make it hard for the better player, the weaker player who cannot hit it straight will get killed. Simply put, the playing corridors are much too narrow for a public course, hence the suggestion above by Ralph that:

>> The thick mix of natural with fescue for the deep rough is going to allow them to perfect the six hour round.

Unfortunately, this may, indeed, be the truth.

So the first thing that needs to occur here is that the fescue be cut further back - real far back in some places. If they ever land a tournament, it’s easier to make the corridors smaller for that event.

A great example of the tightness occurs at the par 4 fourth – we measured the fairway at 24 yards in the driving area, with 10 yards of rough on either side until you reach fescue. This is a 417-yarder, from an elevated tee, to a fairway that is about US Open width down below. Also, with any kind of wind, this hole demands an absolutely perfectly struck shot. Most players don’t find this type of golf stimulating. For instance, today I played my home course, Beverly, with about the same type of skill and only lost one ball to O.B. and none throughout the rest of play. Usually it is hard for me NOT to finish with the ball I started with. That, to me, is fun.

----------

My biggest fear is that because the course was opened before it should have been – i.e. there are lots of ‘rough’ spots - that Erin is already gaining a bad reputation and people won’t come back for a second visit. This is a destination course, so a bad ‘first-impression’ is gonna really hurt.

The better way to handle this would have been to open play only to ‘invitation’ – sorta like they do at the Sheep Ranch in Bandon. That way they could have gotten feedback from a variety of players, and built up a mystique before play to the general public began. Of course, hindsight is 20/20.

Having spoken to many who have played here, many find this course ‘quirky’ – to those used to Augusta-style greenery and parkland-style courses, this won’t suffice. But those who have been schooled in the great course of the British Isles and Ireland will realize what a gem this is. Think of North Berwick, Lahinch and Prestwick – all with a collection of quirky holes – yet, overall, are wonderful, interesting and fun courses to play. Most Americans who haven’t played overseas won’t ‘get it’ and that’s sad.

There are shots that reminded me of Crystal Downs, of Shinnecock, of Kingsley Club, and of the great links courses of Europe. Each had a place here. However, I’m afraid, at this point, that the conditioning and the narrow corridors are what will stick in people’s minds instead of the great holes and fantastic greens.

This will be one of the country’s great courses – mark my words – perhaps rising into the top 25 on Golfweeks Modern list.

A final caveat – perhaps the staff should spend a little time educating the first-time players as to just what they are trying to accomplish at Erin Hills. Give everyone a yardage book and explain the intention of this golf course. This will go a long ways toward helping people ‘get it.’

« **Reply #54 on:** September 22, 2006, 07:25:54 AM »

Here's my take on the course, hole-by-hole:

#1 –(574 FROM THE BLUES)

Standing on the first tee, the tee seems to point you to the right, even though this is a 90-degree dogleg, right to left. These tees need to be oriented better so that the first shot of the day is better defined. As you can imagine, I hit my first shot right. It musta missed the first cut by 2 feet, but it was not findable. I then hit a hickory shot that found fairway, so I played that ball. The starter said that there was ’30 yards of fairway’ to the right of the fairway trap on the upper fairway. I hit towards that area with a 5-wood. Another lost ball. This area needs to cleaned out and widened considerably since it is so blind. Based on where I thought I would be, I dropped and hit a rescue club to the right of the first green. Luckily, it found rough, just missing more fescue. This green will accept run-up shots, although it does slope away from right to left, making it unlikely that anything BUT a run-up shot will suffice. The green has some interest, mostly in the right to left movement, but wouldn’t be considered ‘large’ for a 655-yard hole.

I merely am pointing out my shots here to emphasize that the corridors need to be widened. If there is ever a tournament here, of course, the fairways can be narrowed. But for day-in and day-out public play, the width of the course, as it is today, will make this a 6-hour death march.

#2 - (333)

A very interesting short four par. You need to hit your tee shot over a hill blindly as far left as possible to see the green on your approach. A ‘safe’ shot right leaves you with a blind second to an amazingly small green. The green is just under 2000 s.f. and is relatively flat, although it is atop a ‘glacial dome’, so the chances of hitting it over the green, back-and-forth, are a realistic probability.

I found this hole both interesting and charming. Others are apt to disagree.

#3 – (451)

First of the really spectacular holes. This is longish, but because the tee-shot is downhill, not brutal hole, despite the advertised length. It sets up beautifully and appealingly to the eye from the tee. The approach is uphill, over a bunker, but doesn’t seem as long as the yardage would allow. Then you get to the green – what a green! Two levels, with the left side (the trouble side) higher than the right. So bail out to the right, but face a putt that is gonna move a couple feet to the left side pin placement.

Great hole.

#4 – (372)

Mentioned above, this is a tight driving hole to a ‘kettle green’. Because it is a shortish hole, an iron or fairway wood can be used from the elevated tee. However, because when you are up above the fairway so high, shots tend to disperse to a greater degree, especially if there is any wind, which, apparently, can quite often be the case here. IF you reach the fairway with your drive, the second shot is pretty easy, as the green tends to be forgiving although it does have some break to it.

#5 - (443)

A pretty strong four par. Again, you can’t miss the fairway or first cut, or your ball is lost. The second shot played a bit uphill but the green was very interesting. This would be a good hole to watch a tournament at as the green is surrounded by a hill that makes a natural ampitheater.

#6 - (188) –

This, to me, was the least memorable of the three par holes, which, overall, I found to be above-average. The hole plays uphill to a green that is saddle-shaped and falls away from the golfer, so it’s hard to get a perspective from the tee. A bunker short right will catch a weak shot. Many will claim this to be a ‘blind tee shot’. Sort of a let-down after the first five holes.

#7 – (184)

Modeled after ‘The Dell’ at Lahinch, the interesting part is NOT that you are hitting over a big hill, but that you are hitting over a rock at ground level DOWN to a green hidden below. The first time you see it, it is actually pretty strange as you are hitting at a spot level to you. The green is angled - left is closer to the tee than right.

Overall, an excellent hole and really fun to pass the ‘Whitten Rock’ – a painted white rock – to see where your shot landed. This hole will be skipped in competitions, apparently, as American golfers don’t appreciate holes like this.

#8 – (472)

With the prevailing wind into your face, and the length of this four par, the fairway should be WAY more generous than it is currently. There is a bail-out area that should be made way more generous. Another lost ball and the air pops out of your personal scoring balloon. This hole was the first one that our group thought just wasn’t memorable in any way – other than the too-narrow landing area.

#9 – (450)

A semi-blind tee shot, to an area that bends to the left. The green set on the plateau looks impressive, but when you think of the length of this hole, even though it is usually down-wind, a run-up shot should be allowed or even called for. But here it’s not possible. This hole is another negative hole.

Additionally, in the original routing, this would have been #18. I am SOOO glad they changed the nines as this would not have been a memorable way to finish your round here at Erin.

#9A – bye hole – (157)

During tournaments, this will replace the blind ‘Dell’ hole, so will play as #9.

This is, perhaps, the single most spectacular ‘looking’ hole. It wasn’t open yet, but we looked it over from the tee and all around the green. The green is set amidst a handful of nasty-looking bunkers and the smallish green angles from close on the left to farther away on the right. The only thing we questioned was the yardage book showed the green closer to the rear bunkers. With the green at its present size, we questioned how many pin positions exist on this smallish green. If it expands to where the picture shows, then it makes a really interesting green.

A really memorable hole. I only wish it replaced #6 instead of #7 ….

« **Reply #55 on:** September 22, 2006, 07:26:06 AM »

#10 – (624)

This is a really difficult hole to get a handle on. On the one hand you have to respect it for its length and the thought of a Biarritz par-five hole. On the other hand, it is too reminiscent of the crummy par 5 on the back nine at Tralee. It seems to go on forever and each shot is blind and uphill. There is a view on your tee shot, but it is still uphill and unless you hit your second shot to inside of about 150 (difficult to do at this length!), each of your three (or more!) shots is blind or semi-blind. By the third blind shot, you’ve had enough for one hole! Then you get to the green.

The Biarritz is a great theory, but this version needs a bit of work. The front portion looks as if it will have maybe one pin position as it falls away on all sides a bit. Others I spoke with doubted even my ‘one-pin’ theory. The middle, or low section, will probably be the pin position for most days. That’s ok, and it even holds some interest, but it’s not likely the intention of the architects.

Meanwhile, that back position is unpinnable. All sides fall away at the back, especially at the very back edge of it, as it falls into an abyss. The concensus is that a pin on the back portion is a joke, even at the slower green speeds that are in current use. Under tournament conditions – forget about it.

Some earth should be moved to make the front and, especially, the back positions hold some pinnable slots (as Jeff mentioned above).

#11 – (315)

Now things get REALLY interesting at Erin.

This is a really excellent short four par. It sets up really well from the tee and you see the green set amidst a sea of bunkers a little above you. The tee shot is down a bit and the green – spectacular! This green has a bunch of movement to it and really makes for some interest. The right greenside bunker came under some scrutiny by a member of my group and he approve of it overwhelmingly. This is a really good hole.

#12 – (432)

While the tee shot is semi-blind (and the opposite of #2), when you find the fairway, your approach shot will be to a saddle-green, cut in between two hills, with a bunker making you think twice before you play off of the right side. The fairway is like the back-nine five par at Bandon Dunes in that the fairway has lots of natural rolls to it. The green is a semi-punchbowl and holds a lot of interest. Strong hole.

#13 – (193)

A pretty good three par that plays pretty level, it has a lot of appeal to the eye. The bunkers left are nasty and there’s a swale on the left of the green that will funnel shots mis-hit just a bit left. The green is much longer than wide.

#14 – (588)

A really eclectic and interesting five-par. People either love it or hate it. Hit your drive to the right of the fairway pot bunker and have a go at it. Play safe to the left and it’s a three-shotter. If you are right, your second must carry over the steep-faced false-front of this really interesting green. It also must carry a ‘sea of fescue’ to reach the green. Risk and reward shot definitely. This is also one of the most flowing greens on the course.

#15 – (345)

This is reminiscent of #14 at Bandon Trails or #17 at Crystal Downs or a handful of other holes that Bradley Klein once described as “drive-able par fours that are un-hittable in two shots.”

This hole just looks spectacular from the tee. It sets up from right to left, with a big old oak sort of blocking your view of the green from the tee. Since it’s in the middle of fescue, the oak shouldn’t be in play, but it is visually stimulating. The hole plays a bit down and then up to an ‘extremely undulating green’. This is one of the most fun greens as there’s a big spine in the middle, so you have to hit your approach to the correct side of the spine. This hole is a blast!

#16 – (172)

This green is in a natural kettle, so it plays much like a punch bowl. What fun! But everything doesn’t necessarily funnel to the middle as the green pitches pretty much from back to front. Also, there is a hidden pot hole in front of the green that screws with your depth perception. A very good three par.

#17 – (445)

This tee shot is very demanding, but is still one of the least memorable tee shots. It’s pretty blind and everything moves from right to left, so you want to hit your tee shot as close as possible to the right edge of the fairway. The second shot is interesting as a drumlin (?) or spine must be played over. If you are way right, your shot is open, but anywhere left of that you have a blind approach over this hill. It is a very interesting use of the land and I applaud it. Once on the green, this is one of the flatter versions and you can actually roll the ball onto this green.

#18 – (614)

In a way, this finisher reminded me of Royal County Down’s, before the recent addition of 25 bunkers. Perhaps I’m just remembering the spire in the background of the ninth there, but with Holy Hill in the background of this version, something struck a chord with one of my favorite courses on earth, and that’s a real positive.

This is a long, taut closing hole with the tee shot not being especially memorable, but it gets more interesting on the second as a big bunker left awaits, the fairway cants from right to left and there’s a pot-bunker right where I wanted to hit my 5-wood. I suppose that this green is reachable in two by some players since it plays downwind of the prevailing wind. The third shot plays uphill to a green defended in front by some pretty deep bunkers. The green is also very undulating as it sits sentinel, sort of like the 18th at Medinah, but this one cants from right to left more. Back left is dead and short is also. A really good closing hole that will leave you wanting to get to the bar as soon as you can.

« **Reply #56 on:** September 22, 2006, 09:04:23 AM »

Paul:

Did you really think the set of putting surfaces was in any way comparable to Crystal Downs, Shinnecock, or The Kingsley Club, to which you compared the course?

« **Reply #57 on:** September 22, 2006, 09:49:56 AM »

Paul, You lost a dozen balls because the corridors are too narrow, and consider it to be top 25 modern?

I salute you for being able to distinguish between the eventual rating and your game.

You went from a six to a 13? Is everything alright?

« **Reply #58 on:** September 22, 2006, 10:16:02 AM »

I'm looking forward to further discussion of Erin Hills once more GCA wackos get a chance to play it. Its nice to have an interesting new course open that isn't universally panned or praised. I'm guessing its being public may grease the wheels of an honest evaluation and more open discourse here on the discussion group. I'm looking forward to (hopefully) playing it next year and comparing my thoughts with others here.

Cheers,
Brad

« **Reply #59 on:** September 22, 2006, 04:21:02 PM »

Tom

>Did you really think the set of putting surfaces was in any way comparable

Actually, what I was describing was the overall look and fell of the course, not necessarily the putting surfaces. But these greens are pretty darned good.

Adam:

>I salute you for being able to distinguish between the eventual rating and your game.

Thanks. Unfortunately, I think I am in the minority on this one. Too many people link their performance to how they feel about a course.

>You went from a six to a 13? Is everything alright?

I was a 6 about 8 or 9 years ago, generally played to an 8 or 9 for the interim and in the last two years, having two kids, building a house, etc etc has caused the upward spike.

I am confident that I can get back to the 8 or 9 range in a few years.

I hope.

« **Reply #60 on:** September 22, 2006, 10:45:08 PM »

Paul - 12 balls? - I'll admit to a width bias after reading Shackelford's thoughts on what Rustic Canyon's design goals were.

Ron Whitten - If Hoylake was Royal OB, what is Erin's moniker?

Have you played a more penal course off of the tee?
How many balls did you lose at Black Sheep or Bandon Trails?

What did Evan Fleischer think of Erin?

« **Reply #61 on:** September 23, 2006, 12:43:44 AM »

Paul, Thanks for that great course description.

To everyone else. I didn't think it was that terribly hard off the tee. Blind yes, but not impossible. Wide enough to catch a stray right or left. But long is a must.

One of the other difficulties of this course are the elevation of the greens so that many run up shots just don't get there.

« **Reply #62 on:** September 23, 2006, 01:49:21 PM »

Paul,
Thanks for the feedback. It is certainly intriguing to read all the various viewpoints of EH.
It sounds like the course is pretty good in general, and some improvements can be made to make it even better. Is there anything out there that just can't be made better in your opinion?
It sounds like the attempt at the Biarritz green will need to be modified. It also seems like an odd choice of green for a hole that is mostly blind and uphill.

« **Reply #63 on:** October 01, 2006, 09:45:09 PM »

>Have you played a more penal course off of the tee?

Only one or two.

>How many balls did you lose at Black Sheep or Bandon Trails?

Black Sheep - only one or two on my first two go-arounds.
Bandon Trails - also, only one or two on two rounds there as well.

In total, about 6 holes worth at Erin....

« **Reply #64 on:** October 02, 2006, 11:47:55 AM »

Paul:

Can you give me some perspective -- what courses (by name) would you place ahead of Erin Hills that you have personally played ?

Last question -- do you believe the facility opened too soon ?

Thanks ...

« **Reply #65 on:** October 02, 2006, 03:28:47 PM »

Matt

To answer your second question, I answered that, yes, they did open too soon. Find the part with the reference to the Sheep Ranch.

As far as modern courses that I liked better? A short list includes the three at Bandon, Whistling Straits, the River Course at Kohler, the Ocean Course at Kiaweh, Arcadia Bluffs are a few that come to mind.

Hope that helps.

« **Reply #66 on:** October 02, 2006, 03:51:40 PM »

The scorecard, course map and individual hole maps and hole descriptions have been posted on the EH website. The hole description are accessed from the scorecard page listed below.

http://www.erinhills.com/scorecard.html

« **Reply #67 on:** October 02, 2006, 04:06:16 PM »

Paul

I will be at Erin Hills on Sunday so I will find out for myself soon enough - however-

Your description of the course had a lot of visuals, a lot of hit your ball where it can be found and at all costs and very little if anything in the way of strategies, charm or options.

To my mind this does not seem like a description of a Top 25 Modern golf course (now or ever).

You said at the end "A really good closing hole that will leave you wanting to get to the bar as soon as you can." - I love Pat Mucci's statement that with all great courses you want to head on back to the first tee again after finishing 18. I buy into that criteria as well.

Did you really like Erin Hills more then The Kingsley Club and if so why?

« **Reply #68 on:** October 02, 2006, 04:39:03 PM »

The scorecard linked above shows the 'official' back tees of 7824 yards, where all 4 par 5's are minimum of 615 yards and there are 2 par 4's over 500. When you click on each individual hole from the course map, you get to see the 'stretched all-the-way back' tees (kinda like Kiawah Ocean's tippy tips of just under 8000 yards).

Erin Hills' tippy tips tops out at 8264 yards (>4000 each side), where all 4 par 5's are 650+ and 5 par 4's are 509+ (one, #8, is 535 into the prevailing wind), and 3 of the 4 par 3's are 221+.

Matt W., are you salivating?

« **Reply #69 on:** October 02, 2006, 04:54:27 PM »

Scott:

Appreciate the info -- I may need to extend the length of my driver now before playing there !

Maybe buy 2 drivers !!!

To be fair -- as you rightly mentioned -- give credit to Pete Dye and The Ocean Course at Kiawah for including such an "extended" tee on a number of holes there -- it just seems Erin Hills has taken that situation to the nnnnnnnnth degree.

Paul:

Does narrowness / rough play too much of a role at the course. For example, I really enjoy the Dunluce Course at Royal Portrush but I found the desire to have hay-like rough just off the main fairways to be a bit disconcerting since the qualities of the overall design don't need the help of man's hand with such an intrusion on so many holes.

I may be emphasizing just a bit too fine a point on what you posted. Can you elaborate on whether or nor the narrow nature adds versatility or impedes it when playing.

Have to piggyback on what Geoff mentioned -- Kingsley Club is truly a marvelous design -- you see it thaaaat far ahead ?

Thanks ...

« **Reply #70 on:** October 02, 2006, 04:59:15 PM »

those 8200 yard tees are there ONLY if the distance that the golf ball is hit by top players continues to increase, thereby necessitating their use

in other words, one cannot play the course from those tees at this time

« **Reply #71 on:** October 02, 2006, 09:03:36 PM »

I played the course from the "green tees" I think which were one up from the back and I think around 7100 yards....I appreciated the course, found the course enjoyable and understood that it would mature as would any. And I am a fat 54 year old that walked and carried my bag....I will play it again....I have also played Kingsley and I can appreciate Kingsley but I think EH is more of a test for the good player.......the thing that will make Erin Hills good as it goes along will be the WIND.....JMO

« **Reply #72 on:** October 02, 2006, 09:26:49 PM »

Geoff

>You said at the end. "A really good closing hole that will leave you wanting to get to the bar as soon as you can."

I can only assume you are talking to another Paul...........

« **Reply #73 on:** October 02, 2006, 09:34:25 PM »

Quote from: Paul Richards on September 22, 2006, 07:26:06 AM

#18 – (614)
A really good closing hole that will leave you wanting to get to the bar as soon as you can.

Paul

This was your quote about ending a round at Erin Hills. I replied that my idea of a great course was one where you wanted to get back to the first tee rather then anesthetizing yourself in the bar.

I'm really looking forward to Sunday and playing it for myself. I'd still like to hear your comparison with Kingsley which I think might be the most under rated new course in the US.

Mike - Thanks for your take on Erin Hills. Do you think Erin Hills or Kingsley Club is better for regular play and for the "average member"?

« **Reply #74 on:** October 02, 2006, 10:19:38 PM »

Geoff

You're correct! I just reread what I wrote. I edited this so many times and changed things again and again and due to a problem with my computer, my original unedited version is the one that (finally) made it on!

Read what you want into it, but it was meant as a positive - get to the bar to tip back a few, review and reply the round over a few cold ones, and then head back out to the first tee to do it again - but better this time!

News:

Phil McDade

George Pazin

Phil McDade

Paul Richards

Paul Richards

Paul Richards

Tom_Doak

Adam Clayman

Brad Swanson

Paul Richards

Thomas_Brown

Ryan Heiman

ed_getka

Paul Richards

Matt_Ward

Paul Richards

Dan Moore

Geoffrey Childs

Scott_Burroughs

Matt_Ward

PThomas

Mike_Young

Paul Richards

Geoffrey Childs

Paul Richards