Kemper Lakes vs Rustic Canyon

[JakaB]

Shivas said on an earlier thread that Kemper was better than Rustic.....what is wrong with the boy.   Is there even the slightest chance that he could be right.....being only a virtual fan of Rustic and having played Kemper I just don't see how it is so.....say it ain't so Shivas...say it ain't so..

[John_Conley]

My guess is that Kemper Lakes will always lead in the race of "Majors Held".  Does that make it better??

[Tom_Doak]

Kemper Lakes is better than Rustic Canyon, in all the same ways that Medinah is better than the Old Course at St. Andrews.  [And it has an even bigger advantage in water hazards!]

However, neither of the former two is really comparable to either of the latter two.

[Jeff Goldman]

I wondered about that too, because sorry to say shivas is full of it on this one.  Kemper is the usual manufactured CCFAD, made difficult with lots of water.  I doubt anyone would spend 20 minutes on any tee at Kemper discussing how to play a certain hole the way we did at KPIII on the par-3 on the back nine (17?) where if you land just short of the green over the gunk it rolls to the back.  With a pin up front, nobody figured out how to play it.  I now think the play is to hit it pretty far left of the green and let it roll down towards the front of the green, but I am open to suggestion.  Nothing remotely like this at Kemper or any of the other Chicago public courses Shivas mentioned.  

Jeff Goldman

[Matt_Ward]

Someone has got to be kidding big time -- Kemper Lakes!!! If shivas said this seriously then I know there is some extra space in the rubber room!

Kemper got the PGA because of its location and some serious $$$ being spread around. It is as close to quality architecture when held up against RC as Ozzie Osbourne is to Frank Sinatra in the singing department!

The best thing I can remember about Kemper Lakes was the decision making a few players were having -- I believe Greg Norman among them -- to take the shortcut at #18 and see if it could be driven from the boomerrang tee.

To paraphrase Andy Warhol -- Kemper has had its 15 minutes of fame.

[Jeff Goldman]

Kapow!!    Ok bad call on my part with the CCFAD reference.  Besides, I don't think linear, I'm a tax lawyer.

Anyways, Shivas, what do you have to think about at Kemper?  Or Glen Club (besides what scotch to drink afterward) or even Cog?  Even me, hacking it around RC, was thinking about what kind of shot to play, and where (my linear 6 iron from 225 on 18 was almost all world).

The thing really bad about RC is that it was built in the middle of a large condo project for things without shoulders.  Yikes.

[JakaB]

Shivas,

What if all the Lakes at Kemper will filled in and replaced with "killer rough" like shown on the thread "A rough question"....and also...why the hell have you let that thread stand.   We are talking about 380 yd holes for Gods sake....can't anyone hit a hundred yd wedge from a bad lie anymore.....or are all the purist so into length now they won't even play the x-less ProV...oh and just out of curiousity...How many balls do you think Marc's group would lose at Kemper....+ or - 15..

Just to note....I think the high cost of balls may have influenced the archtitectural ratings of many on this site....strategy eguals wide equals one ball rounds.....cheaper than a bag boy taking a dump..

[Jeff Goldman]

Ok, now that the election is over, I'll try again.  Shivas, better, or harder??

[Michael Moore]

Shivas Schmidt -

I like your thinking and prose style.

Aren't you going to blast Mr. Goldman for his twenty minute pre-shot routine?

[George Pazin]

I think comparisons like this are great - they let you know where someone stands a lot clearer than just about anything else, and they let you know whose advice you should follow with regard to where you should play.

[Mike Hendren]

Why would one play a "terrible" golf course 50 times?

Mike

[JakaB]

Mike,

Cary has some serious Jack and when I lived in Chicago I couldn't afford to play Kemper.....that was 50 rounds the quassi did not have to see the Barney.   I bet I played North Chicago 20 times and it was terrible..

[cary lichtenstein]

I played it 50 times because our group liked to play it 5 times per year over 10 years and I was dumb enuf to play each time.

Once you meet me, you'll understand...

[Jeff Goldman]

Michael Moore,

It's an eighteen minute preshot routine, buddy.   And I am not opposed to nice looking (or topless if they want to be) cart girls, but RC is still better than Kemper, a 5 in TCG.  more people.  How are they doing on going private by the way?  ($40k initiation).

Anyways, accepting what you say, Kemper asks the same question  - go for it or not.  RC asks you to decide HOW to go for it as well as whether to.  On that shot on 18, I basically almost putted it 220.  Kemper, its either a perfect high spinner (a shot I don't have), or play safe.  

[Matt_Ward]

Dave:

You must be sniffing the heavy duty glue if you think Ole Blue Eyes was overrated.

Dave -- it's time to take off the pro-Chicago jacket and face some serious facts. The Chi town area has plenty of mid-level courses but there are very few you would jump on the plane and say, "I've got to play there right NOW."

You're right Dave let's forget the scutlebug stuff -- let's talk architecture -- straight up between the two courses. Where's the greatness in Kemper Lakes? Shall we play the shot over and around the lake how many times during the round? I mean how artfully created   are the greens at Kemper Lakes? They are so big the planes could land on them if they overrun O'Hare or Midway.

Dave -- I love the "maybe" reference you link to Kemper and then with the other well done designs -- ahem -- SFGC and Seminole.  Dave -- hello! Anybody home? There is no "maybe" involved in the linkages you are claiming.

Kemper Lakes was one of the worst choices that PGA made for its championship -- I'll put PGA National in August slightly ahead of it.

Dave -- the best thing about Kemper Lakes is the meet'n greet people on the staff. The rest is just high end CCFAD all the way. If you love that kind of golf more power to you -- you can be sure that Ward will not be battling for any tee times in this lifetime or the hereafter.

Rustic Canyon provides a fun level that Kemper Lakes doesn't remotely approach. How bout you play the back nine for the total picture of the course before commenting? Dave -- I don't doubt RC has its own issues but the detailing and fun aspect are certainly present. No doubt there are better overall courses but throwing forward Kemper Lakes is really silly and frankly I thought you had a better sense of golf than what your throwing forward to the masses this time around.

Like I said at the outset -- how bout passing around the glue ...

[SL_Solow]

I have played Rustic Canyon once.  I have played Kemper Lakes at least 20 times, often as part of charity outings which changes the cost structure.   Thus I am far more familiar with Kemper than I am with Rustic.  Nevertheless, I feel I can make some comparisons.  First, Kemper is not a "bad" golf course.  It is challenging, not over planted, and possesses a pretty good set of greens.  It does suffer from some significant weaknesses.  It is over reliant on water as the primary hazard on the course.  When the wind is blowing, a common occurrence, the ability of a player to make choices and/or to recover from mistakes is significantly curtailed due to the prevalence of water as the primary hazard.  The choices which Shivas references are usually choices between laying - up or going for it.  Not the most complex of choices nor the most stimulating for my tastes.  There are exceptions, e.g. the tee shot on 17.  While the course is not overtreed on most holes, it lacks width, although not to an extreme degree.  But , for me, the biggest weakness in the course is its totally manufactured" look."  The course has been around since the 70's and you can still see where the bulldozers were at work.  For anyone whose ideal golf course looks like the architect simply "found" the course waiting to be built Kemper falls far short.  In summary, Kemper is a well maintained, difficult test of golf which requires a variety of shots.  It is  a good golf course with an overabundance of water hazards.  Even putting aside one's personal views on CCFADs, I find the architecture lacking in (for want of a better term) soul.  Rustic Canyon is an entirely different experience.  Again, I leave aside the external trappings and speak broadly to the architecture and its impact on the playing experience.  RC emphasizes width and, if properly maintained, is built to allow the ground game.  This is the antithesis of Kemper's requirement of an aerial game on almost every hole.  The difference in the shaping of the bunkers and greens is significant and gives Rustic a much more natural look.  I agree with Shivas that Rustic plays much shorter and as a result many of the "choices" created by the architecture may disappear for the long hitter.  I think that is true for a lot of course, just as choices for long hitters on courses with real length are lost for shorter hitters who have to strain to reach greens.  Perhaps this could be the topic of another thread; the difficulty of creating meanigful choices for players of differing lengths on the same course.   But notwithstanding this "weakness", I found Rustic to be a much more interesting course to play as well as a more natural setting for golf.  By my standards, that makes it "better."  I am better able to discuss individual holes at Kemper due to my greater familiarity and would be happy to do so any time.

[erichunter]

No matter how hard you try, you just can't build Scotland in a canyon outside Los Angeles.  

Great line.  

But you can also say that you can't build a "natural looking" course surrounded by office buildings and man made lakes.

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

What are the varieties of shots that Kemper forces you to play? Hooks and slices around trees? Where do you have the option of hitting a running shot? Even on holes with opening (or more accurately, partial openings) the two times I played the course it was way to soft to warrant running a shot.

Surely the lakes make up for the uninspired land - except for 11 and 12, but they just create the demand to play the same high shot. I would imagine that if a good player who hit a cut all day long played Kemper they would never be forced to consider a draw, unless behind the trees.

If Rustic plays firm, like it has when I have played it, there are shots that you simply could not get close by playing cuts all day.

Furthermore, over the pin on 11 is only challenging because you are either in a bunker or rough trying not to pitch it into the water. Where is the interest and option in that? Missing Rustic's greens leaves options from metal woods to putters and they can be just as punishing without making you drop out of a hazard.

Leaving aside the CCFAD or the housing that borders 4 at Rustic (neither of which have ever factored into my thoughts of the place), they are different. However, Kemper requires much less strategy, unless laying up, pitching out or going for the green with a high shot are the definitions. Rustic does provide strategy, in abundance.

Dave also said; "I've got 60 yards into yet another par 4 and I'm dead fricking downwind". Which par fours are you referring to? If you had 60 yards into number two after a 397 yard drive, I would sure hope that you would be able to drive three and 7, both under 330 and that sums up the par fours on the front, which I believe were the ones you said you played. Taking it to the back nine, I can only think of one hole that would yield a 60-yard wedge shot (other than the diminutive 12th - which is 340 down canyon - and that is the 16th, which while playing downhill (and yes down canyon) would still require 420 yards to set that up. So I am not really sure where the 60-yard shot factors in at all, especially as a means to dispel the options.

Lastly, with regards to the 150-yard shot into a three club wind at Rustic, you do not have to throw up in the air, but can play a knock-down or bump and run, which is a lot harder to say about Kemper.

[SL_Solow]

Shivas;  work must really be out of control this week, the stridency meter is redlining.  I already conceded your principal point; Kemper is a good golf course.  But your suggestion that golf courses which dictate a player's shot selection and place a primary emphasis on difficulty are a higher form of the architectural art than those which emphasize choice and allow different ways of scoring is not as evident to me as it appears to be to you.  While I certainly lack your length (at least on the tee ball) I'm not exactly a hack so don't try to make this a "good" player vs. "lesser" player issue.  It appears to me that the lawyer in you has taken control and the effort to make your case has overwhelmed your better judgment.  Since neither one of us has a paying client in this dispute, we can afford to reason this one out without the partisanship that our profession requires.  One final point; I really don't care nor do I think its relevant what the majority of golfers prefer.  You are probably right; the majority would pick Kemper over Rustic.  The majority would probably pick Kemper over The Old Course as well.  I don't think you will argue that Kemper is better than the Old Course even though the Old Course is very wide, emphasizes options, calls for the ground game.  The comparison is of course unfair, the Old Course is one of a kind.  But the point is that criticism of any art form is designed to critically evaluate work and perhaps even educate those who have less interest and/or expertise.  To suggest that the critic is out of touch with general opinion does not reflect on the critic's judgment unless that judgment is intended to reflect on the likely popularity of the work as opposed to its excellence.  Finally, on a less relevant note, which of the crooners were better than Sinatra?  If you think he was only a crooner, listen to the recordings the mature Sinatra made with Billy May and Count Basie in the mid 50's to early 60's (when I was a mere lad) and tell me how many crooners swung like that.  But for my money, I'll take Joe Williams.

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Dave,
The aerial game is strategic; it just loses it strategy when you have to play 18 holes with it.

My point was -Kemper does not allow you to play different trajectories. Rustic gives you those options. As you yourself pointed out; "throw something way the hell up in the air and hope the wind doesn't affect it too much" and that option exists too.

My point remains, Kemper does not afford those three options. Interesting you relate Rustic to Scotland, I think Rustic presents the options that are present in links golf among the best of any course in the U.S.

With regards to your water hazard recap, I do not know which of those seven hazards you break down to four. However, 5 of the 7 in my estimation are forced carries, and 4 and seven play alongside and force the golfer to play over them from the sides of the fairway closest to the water. You also left out other holes where water exists, but I understand that the better player probably does not bring those into play.

With regards to the lost ball in the deep hay, were you referring to Rustic? Does not ring true there for me.

I am not sure how you define fairly serious golfers, but that would seem who is lining up to fill Rustic daily. Doesn't Kemper make their living on the outings that SL Solow referred to? How many "serious golfers" are lining up to play Kemper on a regular basis? I played it one Saturday morning in season and it was empty - not sure that is reflective of every Saturday, but I cannot imagine Rustic faces that.

Lastly, is the ultimate admission in failure of a golf hole not to plant trees beside the 18th tee to block the short route home, only after you realize it can be done? At least with the risk-reward option the hole had some character.

[SL_Solow]

Ben; in fairness to Kemper, it is held in high regard in the area and is generally very full.  Its effort to go private under a new owner may have caused some regulars to go elsewhere.  Shivas, if the reason the average player would pick TOC over Kemper is for the reputation and the playing characteristics you made my argument for the irrelevancy of that opinion in evaluating the merits of architecture as opposed to the economic feasability of a project.  How do you think Kemper would rate for the "average" player against your beloved Rye?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Dave,
Softness is manteience, but I would bet that given the forced carries and fronting hazards, Nugent's intention was not to allow the running shot in. If you hit all those running shots, I assume they must have been mishits, because why someone of your length would be approaching holes less than 410 yards on the ground - I do not understand. Plus, given the softness that you conceded and the ability of the great soils to drain, I cannot imagine those shots can be played often. Mentioning the running shot on 17th is a bit misleading for anyone who knows that it is forced carry and that most good players. I asked a Nationwide player in 2002 about and he said he would never play a draw through that tight a gap when he could throw a cut up in the air.


To your point about Rustic's requiring a draw to get to some of the pins, I like that strategy. However, I played Kemper with a "great" player and do not remember him having trouble hit cuts into those greens. But assuming you are correct and a fade equals a bogey, the same is true at Rustic, I was just outlining a point you felt Rustic lacked.

Comparing 11 at KL to 12 at AN is a little misleading. One is a short iron par three and the other is a medium-length par five. AN also has a front bunker, which is less punishing than the wood retaining wall. Assuming any "good" player could reach the green in two shots, after say a 300-yard drive, I would say that the chances to flirt with the water are diminished from 235 yards, rather than 155 yards, but again if I give you that point - for comparison. From over the green at AN, the bunker is below the putting surface, with green and bunker before the water. The bunker at KL is above the right portion and has a narrow sliver of green with the aforementioned wall of death on the other side. So the comparison really does not make sense to me.

To your stupid shots point. I do not think they are my worst option or I would not take them. I guess I feel more comfortable playing a low running shot into the wind than to "just throw something way the hell up in the air and hope the wind doesn't affect it too much". I like the running shot in the UK too, but perhaps it is stupid there as well.

The point of speaking of the average player, they might have 60 yards left on 3 and 12, but no where else on the course - so that point still does not make sense.

To the question about hitting into the hay, I actually asked; With regards to the lost ball in the deep hay, were you referring to Rustic?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Ben; in fairness to Kemper, it is held in high regard in the area and is generally very full.  Its effort to go private under a new owner may have caused some regulars to go elsewhere.

Thank you for clearing that up, as I said, I have only been twice.

[John_Conley]

Shiv has already commented, but led me add...

Matt Ward, are you NUCKING FUTS (to borrow from Dickie Roberts)?

Frank Sinatra was the tops in his field as a balladeer/crooner.  There may have been other Tony Bennets in his league, but none clearly better.

Ozzy Osbourne is without question among an elite group of rock vocalists.  Robert Plante, Ozzy, the guy who sang Hole Hearted and then was given a look as the 3rd lead vocalist for Van Halen, that dude from the supergroup that did Owner of a Lonely Heart, and probably not more than one or two others.

All aboard, just crank Crazy Train if you need to be reminded how brilliant the vocal stylings of Mr. Osbourne were before he lost his mind and his voice.  Purely tremendous.

[JakaB]

Shivas,

Davis Love Roth....my God man I'm surprised you don't have Jon Bon Jovi on your list....This post has been modified due to its nearing the line of good taste..