Casa de Campo

[Jeff Goldman]

Since none of the other adventureres from the trip to what I have been calling "the land well-guarded" has seen fit to say anything, let me be the first to thank Ben for his organization of a terrific trip, Ran for playing the hickories and reminded us of the joy of moving the ball right to left, Jon (and Kelly) for his skill in negotiating a golf cart on a 45 minute drive in the dark to an Italian restaurant, and Mike for his interesting bar technique.

No thanks to Adam, however, who became the inaugeral winner of the eponymous "Clayman" award for inviting someone uninviting to sit down with us in the bar, spilling and breaking a bottle Presidente, and then escaping into the night, leaving Ran to ask the invitee (aka "her girthness"), "so what did you think of the strategic elements of the courses?"  

Adam also wins the "surf's up" award for chunking it onto the beach on the 5th hole at Teeth of the Dog, and then running to hit the ball before the waves came up and washed it away.  Unfortunately, Memo, our helpful caddie, snatched the ball away to save it from the waves just before Adam got there.  2-shot penalty.

I believe that The Teeth of the Dog grew on each of us with repeated play.  At first, it seemed a little underwhelming.  It is essentially flat and most noted that the ocean holes appeared to be missing certain strategic elements because there was no reward for hugging close to the water.  On several holes the best angle was away from the water, while risking the water often brought an approach shot with a tree or greenside bunker in the way.

However, with repeated playings (or more Presidentes) the course got better and better.  The best of the bunch may have been the great 8th hole, where the dangerous play along the water gave a clear view of the green and the option of using a slope on the right to get the ball close with the pin in front.  And the par-3s were outstanding, including a "short" with a green surrounded by sand, deeper than the Short at Yale (which these days is admittedly not saying much).

As to the others, the private La Romana CC had a lot of movement in the fairways and green contours, but Dye Fore was not great, though it had great views of jungle and river far below the course.  The thought I had was "Welcome to the course at Jurassic Park."  It also may be the widest course I have ever seen.  In fact, it (and Teeth to some extent) is a sort of "reverse St. Andrews" because you could hit the ball right all day without getting into much trouble.  I did and didn't.

I can safely say a grand time was had by all, and I know Ran and Ben will be posting pictures and a review of the course.

Jeff Goldman

[ed_getka]

Jeff,
   Thanks for the report. Given your lukewarm review, what are the attributes of the course, other than aesthetics that have garnered so much acclaim for Teeth of the Dog over the years?
    I suppose the weather was a bit nicer than Chicago, eh?

[Jonathan Cummings]

I'm not sure I've ever read a review where I agree with everything said, but I do with Jeff's post.  Well done Jeff.  I hope your trip home was better then ours.  Ours was a nightmare!

JC

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

JC,
I hope it was not that bad, mine was tiring.

JG,
What a great recap!

I had a wonderful time and the mix of Presidentes and Pina Colodas really make the memory even more special...

I am on a subsequent trip, but I will post my pictures next week!

Thanks again to everyone for a wonderful trip.

I cannot wait for next year!

[ed_getka]

Ben,
  Are the memories special, or cloudy?  Whats on tap for next year, inquiring minds want to know.

[peter_p]

I'm planning on TOC in reverse.

[Bryan Izatt]

I believe that The Teeth of the Dog grew on each of us with repeated play.  At first, it seemed a little underwhelming.  It is essentially flat and most noted that the ocean holes appeared to be missing certain strategic elements because there was no reward for hugging close to the water.  On several holes the best angle was away from the water, while risking the water often brought an approach shot with a tree or greenside bunker in the way.
Jeff Goldman

Sounds like a TOC experience for you - it too being a little underwhelming the first time it is played.  Perhaps the subtleties grew on you with repeated playings.  I find it hard to believe that the 7 ocean holes would be underwhelming the first time round, though.  You guys are a tough crowd.

Could you expand on the lack of strategic elements on the ocean holes.  I assume you are referring to the par 4's; the three par 3's on the ocean leave little room for other than hugging the ocean and hitting the green.

For the par 4's, it seemed to me that the 6th was certainly safer if played away from the ocean, but it left a long, long shot to the green.  Hugging the ocean wasn't much of an option either since the carry was too great for most I would guess.  The left side of the fairway provided a much shorter second shot than going right.  I don't recall being blocked by trees, and the trap was reasonably short of the green, iirc.

The eighth, as you noted is best played along the dangerous left ocean side, although there is certainly a green-side bunker to contend with from that side.  The right side seemed to me to be the more difficult shot to the green.

The 15th may well be better played away from the ocean to take the ocean more out of play on the second; playing right along the ocean makes for a shorter second shot, albeit over bunkers and a cliff (aw, it's just a funner shot from the right).

The 17th is shorter, and more dangerous, played along the ocean but the second shot is less intimidating without the ocean appearing to be right behind the green, and you can play down the length of the green.  I don't recall any bunkers or trees down the right.  There is certainly trouble and a longer second shot if you go too far left.  

Apart from the 6th, the bailouts away from the ocean were pretty tight too as I remember it.

[Keith Durrant]

Here's a few additional thoughts from my one round there earlier this year:

The caddies, mine was called Rolando, were excellent, liked a good cigar and could read almost every putt exactly.

It would be difficult to find a more visually intimidating set of par threes, anywhere.

The greens seemed one of the striking aspects and relatively small, especially when they were split into two levels or sections. In addition the swales and grass bunkers around the greens left very difficult up and downs.

The fact that the routing was designed to include ocean holes on both nines was a plus.

We finished on the front nine, coming down the ocean holes, with the sun setting over the sea, Presidente in hand. Perfect.

This was my first round on a Dye course, how does it compare to others?

[Jim_Coleman]

      I'm a big fan of Dye Fore.  Indeed, I think the locals (of which I'm one for ten weeks) prefer it.  (Maybe because it's new).
    I think it's most striking architectural feature is how many (most?) of the greens sit at an angle to the wide fairways.  Unless you're on the correct side of the fairway, you actually have very little green to shoot at, even though the greens are huge.  
     On #1, you should be left (unless you can reach); on #2, you must be right (although there are huge bunkers on the right side); on #3, a fade is almost required); on #'4 and 5, a bailout to the right leaves a very long approach hitting at the river; #6 prefers a draw (although it's a brutal par 3 for anyone); #'s 7 & 8 must be approached from the right; and #9's a bear.  Similar analysis on the back, especially # 14 ( a short par 4 that can be driven by long hitters who challenge the gorge on the left but otherwise must be played from the right - avoiding two large bunkers - like #2) and #18, which must be approached from the way right.
     I'm always amused by those who say, "The course isn't much, but for the views."  As I said to Wayne Morrison, who made this observation, "But for the ceiling, the Systine Chapel is just another church."  In my opinion, a very important part of the memorability of a course are the views (whether at Casa, Pebble, Augusta, Banff or PV), and I wonder whether other architects would have delivered the views Dye delivered.  Dye Fore is certainly an unusual course.  (How may 7,800 yard courses have two drivable - for the big boys - par fours?)  But it's a lot of fun to play, and it's incredible to see.
    If there's better winter golf anywhere (combination of golf and weather) I'd like to know where.  I think Casa de Campo has three great courses (including La Romana CC) and one good one (Links).  And another one's coming.  

[PThomas]

Jim-  is Pete Doing the next one??

and is the D Republic where that big development with 3 Nicklaus courses is being built, do you know?

[Jim_Coleman]

   Yes, Pete is doing the next one.  Nine holes are ready for planting; the other (and last) nine are a while away.  The almost-ready nine is located below Altos (adjacent to the front nine of Dye Fore and LRCC; the last nine will be above Altos, adjacent to the back nine of Dye Fore.
    I understand that the multi-billion dollar Nicklaus project (Capcana) is progressing very slowly.  I'm not sure of it's present status.

[Jeff Goldman]

Jim Coleman,

Excellent thoughts.  It sounds like I missed the fact that Dye Fore does a great job of challenging good players while allowing the rest of us to get it around pretty good.  It does have a very low slope rating (odd since I thought that the R&A governs there), and, I (13-14 hdcp) was able to fade the ball all day without missing a fairway, then get it on or near the green and get par of bogey (my round was 8 pars and 10 bogies).  I hope one of the others will pipe in on the course.

The Teeth of the Dog did get better with every playing.  Possibly I sounded too negative - I've always thought that if you point out a few negatives, the experience was really good, while if you say, "well, the scenery was great", hit the door.  The course was outstanding, but at 34 or something in the world, it should be, no?.  It did seem to me that the only ocean par 4 where risking the ocean gave a better shot was 8.  A few of the non-ocean par-4s also seemed to give a better angle or second shot if you hit it away from trouble.  We all commented on this.  Again, I played to the safe sides all day long without much thinking (except on , and never got into big trouble around the greens.  However, it is also true that I did not have many really good birdie putts (unlike Dye Fore, where I had several, missing them all).  

Possibly both courses are terrific examples of letting resort golfers get it around well and challenging better golfers who want to shoot par.  Again, I hope the others will pipe in.

I forgot to mention that La Romana Country Club was also very fun.  It seemed to have far more fairway movement and big green contours, (a result of later earthmoving ability?).

All in all, a stunning place.

Jeff

[T_MacWood]

I think one of the reasons Casa de Campo takes a bit of time to appreciate has to do with its historic comarison to Pebble Beach. Pebble Beach is in a totally different class based upon its size and scale. CdC is much smaller and more intimate, in fact the one thing that stands out about the course is the way it melds with and to the sea. The sea and the golf course are tightly interwover, as compared to Pebble Beach or Whistling Straits or even CPC where there is a dramatic demarcation.

CdC is a very good golf course, but I still prefer The Golf Club...TGC is IMO superior architectrually and strategically.

[A_Clay_Man]

Im completely offended by any reference to my un-couth(sp) behavior. This an architecture website for crying out loud.

Besides, what everybody really wants to know is who won the Matt AWard?

As intimated, the golf was secondary to the marvelous native peoples attitude and demeanor. Learning subsequently, that it was their manual labor that built the course, over thirty years ago, only adds to the appreciation & memories.

The evident anti-strategy that Jeff mentioned, isn't so astonishing, considering the time period it was built. Can you say penal school? Or, was Pete just being constantly counter-intuitive?

Looking at the art, I thought some of the old school elements were re-freshing.(isn't that sad)Specifically, the proximity of tee to green, at the start, and waiting until the fifth for the first one-shot test. And what a test it is! On the butt puckkerer scale, only the 17th at Sawgrass grabs more on the sphynctometer. The routing of the the ocean holes in both directions cleary was a key preproduction factor and made it special.

Comparisons to Pebble can't help but enter your brain. Especially since boith courses best holes have the number Ocho on them. The cragginess of the coastal look, and, the smallish greens, are however not enough to make-up for the lack of better topography. Pebble still reigns supreme, IMO, but not a bad effort for a farmboy from the mid-west.

Personally I saw one lost opportunity for a great three shoter along the coast.  By placing the 15th greensite where the 16th teeing ground lies, could have been one of the all time greatest(and lowest in feet above sea level) skyline greens on the planet.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Teeth of the Dog was one of the original World Atlas of Golf courses (Cajuiles, as it seemed then to be called).  It dropped out (not during one of my spells as editor, consultant or whatever) and the original artwork is lost.  We wondered about reinstating it in the revision that is currently underway.  For one reason or another we didn't, but a] should we have and b] should we in the future?

[JNC Lyon]

From reading the World Atlas of Golf and watching the SWWOG match there, how has the fifth hole changed? It seems it was original set back from the ocean, but the green in the Shell's match was nearly an island in the surf. Help please?

[Jim_Coleman]

    I've been going to Casa de Campo since 1985, and it really hasn't changed since then (other than regrassing #5 and 8 greens with paspalum after Hurricane George).  I'm told that before hurricane David (I'm not sure what year) the fifth hole was around 200 yards long, with the tee back and out in the sea more.  The green was also different.  I think that's what's pictured in the old World Atlas of Golf.  #15 tee was also different - also out in the sea (in the rock cropping to the right of the present tee) with a hole dropping down to the water in the middle of the tee.  You can still see the remnants of an old wall where the old tee was.  There was a rumor floating around that the old #15 tee would be restored, but nothing happened.
   As for the old #5 design, from what I've seen of the old picture, the present one is a far better hole.  Adam's description does it justice.  It's a really good hole, made better by the fact that it's the player's first meeting with the sea - pretty exciting.  I think Tom Doak called the par threes here the best set in the world.

[Jeff Goldman]

A couple other thoughts.  First, 5 used to have a big tree near the front right of the green, which I understand was lost in the storm.  You can see it in the WWOG episode, and it seems intimidating.  Second, Pete Dye says in his book that the eighth green was rebuilt to its present location nearer the ocean in 1973.  We saw an alternate green on the hole, which we all thought was used when the regular one was under water, but after reading about the change, I wonder if that was the original.  There is an alternate green on another ocean hole as well, but I can't remember which.

[A_Clay_Man]

Jeff- It was #5.
Fascinating about the 8th being re-done. I thought it the best, especially the way it was below grade from the right, and almost level, from the left side of the fairrway. The back right scoop-out long was Perhaps one of Pete's first forms of "gotcha's" ??

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Teeth of the Dog was one of the original World Atlas of Golf courses (Cajuiles, as it seemed then to be called).  It dropped out (not during one of my spells as editor, consultant or whatever) and the original artwork is lost.  We wondered about reinstating it in the revision that is currently underway.  For one reason or another we didn't, but a] should we have and b] should we in the future?

Mark,
The short answer is yes, you should have included it.

Not only because it is the best Caribbean course, but because it is better than most of Dye's work.

[Will E]

I'm really surprised that you guys aren't raving about Teeth of the Dog.
Of course I understand Jeff needs a tougher course to be challenged.
Come on Ben, tell me what I missed.
Perhaps I missed something, or things have changed; I can't think of many places I rather play. I have a tough time believing that there are 32 places better.

[Paul Richards]

Shooter

I am raving.

Teeth of the Dog is something VERY special.

Sorta like the ILLINI!!!!

[Mark Brown]

If you don't think The Teeth of the Dog is an excellent and enjoyable course then you have been brain-washed by GCA. I don't think we want to be overwhelmed when we're playing golf.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I have played Dye Fore several times and think it may be one of the most important courses built in the last 20 years from an architectural point of view.  I didn't play well this past time because of poor driving (I hit every fairway, but in poor locations).  My wife who is a 120+ shooter had 2 birdies and was in play on all but 3 holes--2 skulled approaches.  This is as good as it gets in architecture.  During non-Open periods, Shinnnecock has the same effect on players.  Most importantly, she actually commented how different the course played for us--she understood what was going on architecturally.  

[cary lichtenstein]

I'm going back to Casa De Campo this month for the 4th time, especially to play the new To Dye Fore Course.

I always loved the course.

Some of Pete's work over the years is over the top, but recent work like Whistling Straits shows what a genius this man is.